Kalid Sheikh Mohammed

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 15 2007, 12:37 PM) [snapback]406222[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 15 2007, 12:43 PM) [snapback]406233[/snapback]</div>

Sweet, save the Panda's!!!! :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 15 2007, 03:17 PM) [snapback]406206[/snapback]</div>

Well, there you have it. You place your trust in the most secretive administration since Nixon's. You place your trust in the administration that lied to get us into this war, that has done more to gut our civil liberties than any other, destroy our foreign relations, change the laws to protect their actions, do more to convince terrorists that we are as evil as they say we are, etc., etc..

Bush, Rove and Cheney would salivate at the thought of a country full of people who think like you.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larisa-alexa...al_b_43503.html
Where is Waldo, err, Khalid Sheik Mohammed?
Larisa Alexandrovna

We cannot see him or hear him, but we are told that he is at Gitmo, confessing in person.
The reason we cannot see or hear him? Something having to do with national security we are told, although that too is also classified.
I cannot believe most of this, frankly. In order to do that, I would have to deny even my most basic ability to reason. I have no idea what is going on here, but I am unwilling to be played like a fool by an administration that continues to play politics with everything sacred to this nation.
Frankly, I find this all very suspect and as cynical as this sounds, very well orchestrated possibly to divert attention from numerous colliding scandals.
Even if there is some legal or moral claim that this suspect is not entitled to a fair trial, am I as an American to also be denied justice? Do I not have the right to witness, even at a distance, the confession of a man who claims to have orchestrated the murder of my friends and neighbors? Is this justice when neither the suspect nor the victim are given a voice or legal recourse? Mirrors reflecting mirrors.

MJ here...As I was driving home last night and heard this news the above questions were the exact ones which immediately came to mind. Can't find your old friend Osama Bin Laden for 6 long years? (suspicious) Got scandal? Kill 2 birds with one stone. My BS antennas are buzzing! I can't be played for a fool continually and not become mightily suspicious. If it walks like a duck...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 15 2007, 01:43 PM) [snapback]406233[/snapback]</div>

Careful - this is starting to sound like some medical experiments about 60 years ago. :blink:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MegansPrius @ Mar 15 2007, 10:03 AM) [snapback]406162[/snapback]</div>

I have a different take on it. He's bragging.

He views all that he has done as good, part of the struggle, and he is a powerful warrior in the cause. I could see him saying "It is regrettable that some women and children had to die, but if the evil ones were not doing what they are, the women and children would not be at risk. In the struggle to get them to capitulate, we must show them that by their actions none of their women or children are safe. Only then will they turn from their ways, and accept Sharia law and submit to Allah. God is great."

There was other physical evidence on his computer, including chat sessions with some of the 9/11 conspirators, pictures of some of the attackers such as Atta, named targets, etc. Most of his confessed acts are carefully worded, and when you read them, he's not saying he was the mastermind of them all, but was involved in them all. Probably was, as he was the #2 guy.

As to his fate, since he is not a civilian, he should not be tried in a civilian court. He is an enemy combatant, engaged in a war he declared on us, and the military justice system is the proper venue for him. It is a fair and respectable justice system. The civilized world cannot offer him the same rights and privileges we accord uniformed military men, and repatriate him. Because he is not a representative of a government, even the sanction of a war crimes tribunal or a crimes against humanity tribunal is not appropriate. His execution or life imprisonment within the military justice system is sufficient.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ZenCruiser @ Mar 15 2007, 01:37 PM) [snapback]406269[/snapback]</div>

Which lie are you speaking about? Oh you mean the one about WMD's! That lie? The same one Clinton copped to and all the countries in the entire world including Saddam's own Generals? As well all the members of Congress. How is that a lie? Do you call your weatherman a liar when he forecasts rain and none comes?


The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

Wildkow

 

I heard he confessed to inventing the banjo.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 16 2007, 02:42 AM) [snapback]406648[/snapback]</div>

Wow. Lots of time on your hands, I see.

If the person who types the most wins, you win. I see only losers: our dead and maimed troops, their families, the innocent Iraqi's killed and maimed and their families, our economy, etc. etc..

The lie? He had no WMDs. Simple fact. I could produce as many quotes that support what I believe, also, but it would clearly be a waste of my time, and would risk carpal tunnel disease and the death of my keyboard and mouse batteries.

Complete, blind trust in this administration is a clear break with reality.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bill Merchant @ Mar 16 2007, 03:21 AM) [snapback]406660[/snapback]</div>

Bastard. Okay, he SHOULD be put to death.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bill Merchant @ Mar 16 2007, 02:21 AM) [snapback]406660[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ZenCruiser @ Mar 16 2007, 09:34 AM) [snapback]406729[/snapback]</div>

It could be worse. He could have invented the accordion!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Mar 16 2007, 10:48 AM) [snapback]406737[/snapback]</div>

No, no, no, you're confusing him with the Polkafascists!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 16 2007, 10:58 AM) [snapback]406745[/snapback]</div>

Yes, I assumed you (and one or two others) would take it that way. You're right, every single Iraqi who has died was guilty. And we killed them all, none were killed by the insurgents. You saw through my thinly veiled comment to the truth of it all.

War is good for the economy - that very small but powerful part of the economy that benefits from war. Can't speak for you, but I don't happen to be in that small part, don't want to be, so I'm not a real big fan of it. It's also got that nasty downside, you know, the dead and maimed. I will admit it lowers our national unemployment rates - I wonder why that could be?

I can support my argument, but to what end? Literally hundreds of quotes and references are cited weekly, perhaps even daily on this forum, repeatedly, ad nauseum - but if they're on the side opposing your and your little cadres' viewpoint, they are summarily dismissed. Even the pointing out of this repitition is dismissed.

Having a debate with you is like trying to pick up nickels with my butt. It's just about impossible, but if successful, turns out not to be worth the effort, after all.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ZenCruiser @ Mar 16 2007, 10:22 AM) [snapback]406755[/snapback]</div>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ZenCruiser @ Mar 16 2007, 10:22 AM) [snapback]406755[/snapback]</div>

Wow. I don't think I've ever heard anyone capture the nature of "debate" with dbermanmd quite so accurately. Well done.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ZenCruiser @ Mar 16 2007, 11:22 AM) [snapback]406755[/snapback]</div>

LOL

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 15 2007, 10:19 PM) [snapback]406641[/snapback]</div>

A fair and respectable justice system affords the accused the opportunity to be represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was not permitted to have legal counsel at the probable cause hearing. He was only allowed to have a military "personal representative" to assist in preparing his case.

Los Angeles Times - Secret hearings for top 9/11 suspects