Home    General Stuff    General Chat
#1

9/11 Mastermind On Trial

Archive: 56 posts

So the alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, will be put to trial, along with 4 other men.


What are your thoughts on this?



As a New Yorker, I personally think he should be castrated till he bleeds to death. More pain more gain. Make this *bleep* pay for what he's done. But that's just me.		2009-11-23 23:08:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

If it really is him, then i just guess death penalty by the usual painless injection.

Making him bleed to his death is Unconstitutional		2009-11-23 23:24:00

Author:
Snrm
Posts: 6419

There is also the chair. Don't they still use the chair? Most people just opt for the shot, I thought.2009-11-23 23:25:00

Author:
dandygandy2704
Posts: 1002

Making him bleed to his death is Unconstitutional
So is bombing an Important Trade center.

BURN HIM AT THE STAKE		2009-11-23 23:26:00

Author:
TheMarvelousHat
Posts: 542

Alright, this is already going too far. No more gruesome depictions of death - try to keep things PG.2009-11-23 23:47:00

Author:
ConfusedCartman
Posts: 3729

Sorry . I'll delete that.2009-11-23 23:50:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

What!? What are you guys SAYING!? Where is your sense of Constitution!?

Sure, they've all committed HORRIBLE crimes, with thousands dead, and I hate them as much as the next guy, but should we sink to their level? No! Remember back in 1770, when the Boston Massacre occurred, everyone was against a fair trial for the British soldiers responsible. But John Adams, a founding father, defended their rights in the court, and we should follow his example today, trusting that the American Justice System decides a proper, un-cruel, and usual punishment parallel to his actions.		2009-11-23 23:53:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

What!? What are you guys SAYING!? Where is your sense of Constitution!?

Sure, they've all committed HORRIBLE crimes, with thousands dead, and I hate them as much as the next guy, but should we sink to their level? No! Remember back in 1770, when the Boston Massacre occurred, everyone was against a fair trial for the British soldiers responsible. But John Adams, a founding father, defended their rights in the court, and we should follow his example today, trusting that the American Justice System decides a proper, un-cruel, and usual punishment parallel to his actions.
But, execution is legal in New York.

There is no way they are not getting killed in some way. And even if for some reason they give them life in jail someone in jail would definitely kill them, unless they are put in solitary confinement.		2009-11-24 00:26:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

But, execution is legal in New York.

Their is no way they are not getting killed in some way. And even if for some reason they give them life in jail someone in jail would definitely kill them, unless they are put in solitary confinement.

I'm not saying execution is out of the question. But what you mentioned about castration and bleeding to death, or any of the stuff the clowns above mentioned (Besides Gandy and Snrm).... well, THAT'S what I'm referring to.		2009-11-24 00:28:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

I'm not saying execution is out of the question. But what you mentioned about castration and bleeding to death, or any of the stuff the clowns above mentioned (Besides Gandy and Snrm).... well, THAT'S what I'm referring to.
Yes, well I was just kidding (sorta ).

Saddam Hussein got the noose and so should these guys (Hussein was put on trial too). All I'm saying.		2009-11-24 00:32:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

If you weren't being serious then you're right.2009-11-24 00:33:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

What they did was bad but still all i have to say is

The 8th Ammendment		2009-11-24 01:32:00

Author:
Snrm
Posts: 6419

I guess that rules out cutting off their- /mod snipe

I say they put them in an electric chair, and wait about an hour before they electrocute him, so he waits and waits and waits for themselves to die. Or just hang them. I just hope they die.		2009-11-24 02:25:00

Author:
chezhead
Posts: 1063

What they did was bad
Biggest understatement of the year ^		2009-11-24 02:36:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

Make it as painful as possible and use all the torture methods. Sense depravation, waterboarding, make it hurt. Then slot them.2009-11-24 04:25:00

Author:
ePsil0n
Posts: 23

Yes, show him that you're better people by killing him...



Besides he is not proven guilty yet.		2009-11-24 10:37:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

Alright, try not to be so morbid, guys. It's obvious that what happened on 9/11 is without a doubt the single-most terrorizing thing each American has witnessed. That said, it goes without saying that - provided the accused is found guilty - the punishment will fit the crime and will fall well within the bounds of what's been deemed "Constitutional".

However, I always wonder what rights these accused actually have. I mean, they obviously have basic human rights; I'm not contesting that and my curiosity is pure wonderment. I mean, why do the supposed plotters of 9/11 deserve a fair trial other than to make sure they truly are guilty? It's just aways really interesting to think that they may have committed the most horrible atrocities I - and I'm sure it's the same for most of you - have seen to date and they're still protected by our Constitution. Go figure.

As I said, I believe in America and what it means to be an American. The upholding of the Constitution is beyond critical and that means that even the scum that helped bring about so much horror, pain, and sorrow still deserve a fair trial.

It is also worthy of note that my research says that New York does not support capital punishment as of 2004 (decision of 2004 held up in 2007). Just food for thought...		2009-11-24 12:12:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

However, I always wonder what rights these accused actually have. I mean, they obviously have basic human rights; I'm not contesting that and my curiosity is pure wonderment. I mean, why do the supposed plotters of 9/11 deserve a fair trial other than to make sure they truly are guilty? It's just aways really interesting to think that they may have committed the most horrible atrocities I - and I'm sure it's the same for most of you - have seen to date and they're still protected by our Constitution. Go figure.

It's called rule of law. Sets a just civilization apart from barbarism.		2009-11-24 12:30:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

It's called rule of law. Sets a just civilization apart from barbarism.

You're absolutely right and - please keep in mind - that I merely find it ironic rather than inconceivable. It's just good luck for the accused that we try to be as thorough as possible in concern to the law...		2009-11-24 13:30:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

well...i ESPECIALLY hate them because they practically started 2 wars...

afghanistan:to find the main terrorist

iraq:really for their oil...bs bush excused it by saying there were terrorists there...well NOW there are idiot!


...so yeah...besides the fact that a realitive died because of 9/11


but even though...they still deserve a fair trial,i mean...remember "advanced interrogation"? if we torture them...*shudders*...we might make the problem bigger!		2009-11-24 15:44:00

Author:
theswweet
Posts: 2468

However, I always wonder what rights these accused actually have. I mean, they obviously have basic human rights; I'm not contesting that and my curiosity is pure wonderment. I mean, why do the supposed plotters of 9/11 deserve a fair trial other than to make sure they truly are guilty? It's just aways really interesting to think that they may have committed the most horrible atrocities I - and I'm sure it's the same for most of you - have seen to date and they're still protected by our Constitution. Go figure.

Well they can always send them to Guantanamo Bay, there are no laws there (meaning torture isn't illegal).



It is also worthy of note that my research says that New York does not support capital punishment as of 2004 (decision of 2004 held up in 2007). Just food for thought...
Really? I could swear there was still capital punishment over here. I wonder who changed that law.		2009-11-24 18:47:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

How about they just put them out in public and throw tomatoes, oranges, and some vegetables (along with the dramatic MW2 ending knife throwing) and do it all midevil style! 2009-11-25 18:45:00

Author:
CyberSora
Posts: 5551

Are we having a serious discussion here or not? I mean, I just want to make sure you're not all just thick in the head or something :kz:

In all honesty, you guys have ot understand, it's not about legality, it's about morality. If we submit them to torture or we go ahead and put them in a place where it's legal; sure, go ahead and do it, but it isn't RIGHT because we stoop to their level and then soon we won't be any better than them.		2009-11-26 00:53:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

Are we having a serious discussion here or not? I mean, I just want to make sure you're not all just thick in the head or something :kz:

In all honesty, you guys have ot understand, it's not about legality, it's about morality. If we submit them to torture or we go ahead and put them in a place where it's legal; sure, go ahead and do it, but it isn't RIGHT because we stoop to their level and then soon we won't be any better than them.
The killing of 2 thousand innocent civilians is not equal to the torture of a few terrorists who killed 2 thousand innocent civilians. Therefore we are not "stooping to their level".		2009-11-26 01:06:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

I know how it sounds. It seems I'm defending them. Do not get me wrong. When I refer to stooping to their level, I mean starting to work they way they do..... torture, unfair trials, or no trials at all. They will probably get executed anyways, and I'm glad, but darn, guys, torture, or anything inhumane for that matter, is out of the question. When it comes to humanity we can't afford to fight fire with fire.2009-11-26 01:34:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

In my honest opinion, the Obama Administration is making a huge mistake in trying these TERRORISTS in CIVIL court. I mean what the junk, they are TERRORISTS, NOT CIVILIANS, give them a military Tribunal, convict them, and dispose of them, if this was under the Bush Admin, they wouldn't even hesitate on a Military Tribunal...2009-11-26 06:39:00

Author:
zeldarocks
Posts: 120

I know how it sounds. It seems I'm defending them. Do not get me wrong. When I refer to stooping to their level, I mean starting to work they way they do..... torture, unfair trials, or no trials at all. They will probably get executed anyways, and I'm glad, but darn, guys, torture, or anything inhumane for that matter, is out of the question. When it comes to humanity we can't afford to fight fire with fire.

I agree with Astro.
I'm generally against execution anyway so i think anyone still has the right to a fair trial no matter how messed up they are.
For the amount of people that suffered from 9/11 execution wouldn't bother me too much, assuming he definatly is the person behind it all, but anything inhumane is always out of the picture.		2009-11-26 08:10:00

Author:
Dexiro
Posts: 2100

Thank you Dexiro and Astrosimi for getting some sense into this thread.2009-11-26 14:06:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

I know how it sounds. It seems I'm defending them. Do not get me wrong. When I refer to stooping to their level, I mean starting to work they way they do..... torture, unfair trials, or no trials at all. They will probably get executed anyways, and I'm glad, but darn, guys, torture, or anything inhumane for that matter, is out of the question. When it comes to humanity we can't afford to fight fire with fire.
Well if they don't get hung like Saddam they will probably be sent to Guantanamo Bay, not some New York jail.

And anything can happen over there, seeing as it's not part of America and the Constitution is not valid there.

Also consider this; they are not American citizens, why do they have to be given our rights?

I'm not saying having a trial isn't a good thing, cause it is, I'm just saying don't stick our rights in with them just because the trial is in America.

They'd probably be shot on site in whatever country they lived in.


assuming he definatly is the person behind it all, but anything inhumane is always out of the picture.
They interrogated him in Gitmo, and he is said to have confessed to numerous plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

So if that is true, then yes this is probably the guy.		2009-11-26 15:32:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

Well if they don't get hung like Saddam they will probably be sent to Guantanamo Bay, not some New York jail.

And anything can happen over there, seeing as it's not part of America and the Constitution is not valid there.

I'm afraid that's not true. The US government just chooses to ignore their own laws as well as the human rights and international law.


Also consider this; they are not American citizens, why do they have to be given our rights?

I'm not saying having a trial isn't a good thing, cause it is, I'm just saying don't stick our rights in with them just because the trial is in America.
They are imprisoned in America. By what other rules should they be judged?


They'd probably be shot on site in whatever country they lived in.
Are you so sure about that?


They interrogated him in Gitmo, and he is said to have confessed to numerous plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

So if that is true, then yes this is probably the guy.
Yes, and we all know how interrogations work in Guantanmo...		2009-11-26 17:49:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

In my honest opinion, the Obama Administration is making a huge mistake in trying these TERRORISTS in CIVIL court. I mean what the junk, they are TERRORISTS, NOT CIVILIANS, give them a military Tribunal, convict them, and dispose of them, if this was under the Bush Admin, they wouldn't even hesitate on a Military Tribunal...

Your argumentation here is so blank-mindedly stupid it took me a few minutes to actually get my mind together here.

1.It's criminal court, not civilian court.
2.Criminal court allows for a fair trial, which the US CONSTITUTION agrees is something that should be extended to all humans, no matter their crimes.
3.Dispose? Dude, you need to use better wording. They deserve a proper punishment for their actions, not thrown away willy-nilly.
4. Yes, the Bush Admin wouldn't hesitate on a Military Tribunal, but that isn't necessarily a good thing, now is it?		2009-11-26 18:42:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

1. I'm well aware, I should've chosen my words more carefully.
2. Prime example of pre-9/11 mentality, they are not criminals in the traiditional sense, they are Terrorists.
3. By dispose, I meant give them death, again should've chosen my words more carefully
4. The Bush Admin kept us safe for 8 years, you should re-evaluate your sentiment.		2009-11-26 23:22:00

Author:
zeldarocks
Posts: 120

Bamboo up the ***. Works like a charm. 2009-11-27 00:04:00

Author:
TheTrooper
Posts: 6

Ok, screw this. This honestly not going anywhere serious.2009-11-27 01:31:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

It would tarnish our record if we did not give him a fair trial. If he is the real guy, may justice be served. If not, I wouldn't be surprised.2009-11-27 02:23:00

Author:
Code1337
Posts: 3476

No offence but i really expected better from a forum like this. I always thought a lot of you would be been more open-minded and sensitive towards other people.

No matter what someone's done they still go through the same emotions that we would if we were in the same position. I don't think punishment should ever be as simple as "they get what's coming to them" or just killing them mindlessly.

It's also a lot more complicated than you're making out, it's easily possible that this guy wasn't the real mastermind, infact there's probably tons of people who are just as responsible for it. What if we get a line of people lieing and taking hits for the people who really were behind it, should we just kill them off one by one?

I can almost guess the upcoming responses to this ??		2009-11-27 02:36:00

Author:
Dexiro
Posts: 2100

Is it wrong to expect people would want to torture someone who killed 3,000+ people?

Even if he's not the real mastermind, he should either die or be jailed for life nonetheless. These are terrorists... I don't know what seems to make them tick, but they live only to kill innocent people in order to get what they want. They shouldn't be tortured, but I personally think the death penalty is exactly what they deserve.		2009-11-27 02:45:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

2. Prime example of pre-9/11 mentality, they are not criminals in the traiditional sense, they are Terrorists.

Terrorists who commit crimes, therefore are criminals.
4. The Bush Admin kept us safe for 8 years, you should re-evaluate your sentiment.

I lol'd.
Responses in red.



No matter what someone's done they still go through the same emotions that we would if we were in the same position. I don't think punishment should ever be as simple as "they get what's coming to them" or just killing them mindlessly.

I agree. . although. . sociopaths (which this guy probably is) do not have any emotions (why they are able to kill with no remorse), and therefore do not go through the same emotions that we would (as they have none). They might be like "crap, they got me", but they still have no remorse towards what they have done, and who they have killed.

It's also a lot more complicated than you're making out, it's easily possible that this guy wasn't the real mastermind, infact there's probably tons of people who are just as responsible for it. What if we get a line of people lieing and taking hits for the people who really were behind it, should we just kill them off one by one?

Again, I agree, and that is why this guy is in fact going to court - you can never be so sure in this world. But if he is in fact the guy, then he should get the highest form of punishment that a court can justifiably give out. And I doubt the confession it was said that he gave, was just him saying "I plotted 9/11. ." - it was more likely him describing the whole plot before, during, and after the attack in detail. If he did in fact confess, and he confesses again in court (in detail, not just a simple "Yes".), then that seems like some pretty good proof.


Responses in red (again).		2009-11-27 02:47:00

Author:
ChristmasJew
Posts: 431

What!? What are you guys SAYING!? Where is your sense of Constitution!?

Sure, they've all committed HORRIBLE crimes, with thousands dead, and I hate them as much as the next guy, but should we sink to their level? No! Remember back in 1770, when the Boston Massacre occurred, everyone was against a fair trial for the British soldiers responsible. But John Adams, a founding father, defended their rights in the court, and we should follow his example today, trusting that the American Justice System decides a proper, un-cruel, and usual punishment parallel to his actions.

The constitution is WRONG!

The only way to prevent crime is to make criminals fear the consequences of their actions. I don't think a serial killer will fear jail much. He has to sit in a room all day?!? OH NOES! He only has a small TV and a library? Poor guy!

Murderers should be made an example of. There's no easier way to break a man than pure, relentless, raw torture. Public torture, that is. I'm sorry, but there's no fairness when it comes to murder except when the punishment is death and humiliation afterwords. That is if the murder is intentional, of course.		2009-11-27 03:01:00

Author:
qrtda235566
Posts: 3664

Even if he's not the real mastermind, he should either die or be jailed for life nonetheless. These are terrorists... I don't know what seems to make them tick, but they live only to kill innocent people in order to get what they want.


I think there's a gap in your understanding of terrorists.

There's a massive amount of indoctrination and fear that go into conditioning someone to be as extreme as terrorists.
The way you put it is like 1000's of people have just randomly of their own will decided that killing people is a good idea. They aren't bad people they were made to be bad people, and i'm pretty sure these people could be helped if they're taken away from the source of it.
I think it'd be much more sensible to try to help them in confinement than to just get rid of them, potentially there's still some human qualities in there somewhere.

It's an extremely similar story to Nazi Germany. After learning about it in detail i'm seriously not suprised those people did what they did the amount of fear and indoctrination was immense. They weren't necessarily bad people, it was just one psycho controlling them.		2009-11-27 03:02:00

Author:
Dexiro
Posts: 2100

[...]The only way to prevent crime is to make criminals fear the consequences of their actions.[...]

Gang wars. Criminals routinely run the risk of being killed, tortured or maimed for being in the business. If they aren't afraid of what opposing criminals might do to them, I don't think they'll give a second thought to what the courts could do. The more extreme terrorists also don't seem to be particularly fearful of death.

"Keeping the population in check through fear" just doesn't sound like a proper form of government to me.

I also don't know of any court that has never sentenced an innocent man, so I would be wary of giving them the power to make irreversible acts. Believing that the law or the government is infallible is a dangerous fallacy.		2009-11-27 03:26:00

Author:
Gilgamesh
Posts: 2536

Also, KSM and the rest of those nutbags already stated that they were going to plead not guilty so they could use the Court System in order to propagandize their sick and twisted ideology, as well as to incriminate the Bush Admin and America; it's going to be a circus

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/23/807389/-KSM-to-plead-not-guilty - I hate using Liberal sources, but this is the best I could find in terms of an actual article from a "reputable" source		2009-11-27 06:16:00

Author:
zeldarocks
Posts: 120

I must say, if the crime involves killing 100+ people, torture and/or cruel punishments would be fine on my watch.2009-11-27 21:39:00

Author:
chezhead
Posts: 1063

Terrorists literally believe that to go to heaven with "Allah", they have to kill.2009-11-27 21:47:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Depends on the terrorists.

In any case a death sentence for someone who believes in martyrdom isn't really the most terrible punishment there is, especially if it's his enemies that see to his death.		2009-11-27 22:24:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

I know this isn't english news but I thought It'd be in the newspapers but it doesn't seem to be...?2009-11-28 18:08:00

Author:
Boomy
Posts: 3701

I must say, if the crime involves killing 100+ people, torture and/or cruel punishments would be fine on my watch.

It's not moral. Eye for eye isn't acceptable here... oir anywhere for that matter. Sure, they DESERVE it, but is it RIGHT to give them what they DESERVE?		2009-11-28 19:26:00

Author:
Astrosimi
Posts: 2046

do we really want to stoop to their level? they did a extremely horrific thing, but does that mean we are allowed to do a extremely horrific thing back? No it does not. If that were the case, then surely we are murderers too? if we start killing everyone who kills another that makes us as bad as them, Alpha males rush in guns blazing kill everyone. whereas betas, they come in they think it through then come to a reasonable decision.

if it were up to me they should get 10 years for everyone they killed in a maximum security prison. But in this case seen as its almost inevitable they will die, they should have the painless execution. Not the gruesomest or the scariest.		2009-11-28 21:32:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Revenge achieves nothing.2009-12-01 23:19:00

Author:
GuyWithNoEyes
Posts: 1100

Revenge achieves nothing.

Nothing ever achieves nothing. All of our "achievements" mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. We all mean nothing. And when we're all dead nothing will really change. Some people need closure, and I don't think that means letting a mass murderer get away with what he did. I think someone could kill a million people and we would never be able to come to an appropriate punishment because we don't know what it's like to die. We're all clueless on how he should be punished. Including me. Especially me.

I've heard the quote "an eye for an eye makes the world blind" but I don't buy it. If you know you'll die if you murder, then you probably won't. If you do murder but you don't care if you die...well, you're dead. If you say that death isn't an appropriate punishment than what would you suggest for a punishment?		2009-12-01 23:41:00

Author:
qrtda235566
Posts: 3664

If you know you'll die if you murder, then you probably won't.

This has worked fantastically well the last few hundred years I have to say. There are virtually no murderers around these days.

Life long imprisonment would be better and as I said previously especially so if you believe in martyrdom.		2009-12-02 12:13:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

This thread is spiraling into the atypical capital punishment controversy discussion. Get it on track or let me know if I need to lock it.2009-12-02 14:33:00

Author:
supersickie
Posts: 1366

This has worked fantastically well the last few hundred years I have to say. There are virtually no murderers around these days.

Life long imprisonment would be better and as I said previously especially so if you believe in martyrdom.

You forgot the sentence after that where I say "If you do murder but you don't care if you die...well, you're dead."

There's no real way to punish a man who feels no remorse for killing tons of people. I think it's best just to get rid of him.		2009-12-02 20:30:00

Author:
qrtda235566
Posts: 3664

Thing is though they do care, because that means they go to heaven and have done a good deed. If someone welcomes death do you kill him and grant his wish or do you keep him alive for as long as possible.

What a morbid topic this has become...		2009-12-02 21:43:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193

Making him bleed to his death is Unconstitutional

how is it?		2009-12-02 22:22:00

Author:
deboerdave
Posts: 384

How is it?

See 8th Amendment


Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Furthermore:

In Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U.S. 130 (1878), the Supreme Court commented that drawing and quartering, public dissecting, burning alive, or disemboweling would constitute cruel and unusual punishment regardless of the crime

EDIT: I messed this up. Sorry, Syron; was trying to quote you...		2009-12-02 23:25:00

Author:
Syroc
Posts: 3193


LBPCentral Archive Statistics
Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz
Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.