If bin Laden is found, he'll be killed, Holder says

[cory777]

Source: The Washington Post

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Holder: If bin Laden found, he'll be killed

Osama bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom," Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told House members at a hearing Tuesday.

"Let's deal with the reality here," Holder said in response to questions from Rep. John Culberson (R-Tex.). "The reality is, we will be reading Miranda rights to a corpse."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/16/AR2010031603753.html

[Rhiannon12866]

1. Is that what George Bush* was afraid of?!

He didn't seem to have much of a problem with the death penalty in Texas. x(

[Wizard777]

5. Both Bush's are more afraid of bin Laden talking than Saddam.

[Rhiannon12866]

44. That's very true.

But both of them were once US allies under Reagan and Bush Sr.

[No Elephants]

8. Saddam was arrested, not assassinated.

[Pharaoh]

10. not tried in an American court though

Then he was hung.

[Rhiannon12866]

45. What I meant was that Bush* said he was "not concerned" about bin Laden...

He totally dropped the ball on that one, after pledging to get him "dead or alive," just after 9/11.

[lib2DaBone]

2. Eric Holder took a stand on something? Must be a mis-print....

[No Elephants]

9. Did he take a stand on the rule of law, though?

[saigon68]

47. Another thug butt boy shooting off his mouth

Just like Cheney, except for Holder there's no DRAFT to Dodge.

[warm regards]

3. Well, that should be pretty easy since he is already dead.

[Wizard777]

Typical disposal of CIA asset.

[Wizard777]

4. Typical disposal of CIA asset.

[elocs]

6. Rather disingenuous since it is highly likely bin Laden has been dead for years.

That is the reason they will be reading Miranda rights to a corpse. It makes for good theater though. Bush thought it did too, until it didn't matter to him anymore either since he was sure bin Laden was dead.

[yurbud]

50. to a frozen corpse--they just have to find the right freezer

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Reminds me of Hoover's program of justice regarding gangsters in the Thirties.

[formercia]

15. Little Gangsters

Big Gangsters were his close friends.

Just a little street theater for the unwashed masses.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

11. Very theatrical, if not very professional

Unless he's aspiring to be a mob lawyer.

:hi:

[Daemonaquila]

12. I'm thinking impeachment for Holder...

He has made several statements like this when questioned. Seriously, what business does the Attorney General have declaring that he won't ever need to make a prosecutorial decision because they'd just kill the guy? Even if it wasn't inappropriate, he can't speak for what the military would do if they miraculously found bin Laden alive. Similarly, the Attorney General has no business reassuring neo-cons that even if a terrorism suspect is tried and found not guilty, hey, don't worry, they're not going to be released. The only answer, Mr. Holder, is "YES - we proudly DO take the risk of setting a terrorist free when we prosecute. YES, we do take that risk seriously, and we will lead in the fight against extraordinary renditions, torture, and other illegal tactics that endanger our ability to prosecute successfully. Congressman, this is the United States of America, the Constitution is still the law of the land, and we take our responsibility in enforcing that law very, very seriously. You also took an oath of office to defend the Constitution - we invite you to join us in doing your duty, or to resign your office if you feel that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are the higher powers."

[CTyankee]

29. I was under the impression that we've had a death warrant signed for him since Clinton

was in office. That is, if he is still alive.

[NorthCarolina]

13. Osama Bin Laden is already dead.

"Benazir Bhutto, who was killed in a suicide attack at the end of 2007 stated in November 2007 that the Osama bin Laden, the head of the international terrorist network al-Qaida, had been killed. Bhutto claimed that she even knew the man who had killed the prime suspect of 9/11 terrorist attacks in the USA. According to Bhutto’s words, Bin Laden was killed by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh – one of those convicted of kidnapping and killing U.S. journalist Daniel Pearl."

[Peace Patriot]

14. That's about what I would expect from an A.G. who defended Chiquita's 4,000 murders of union leaders

and members on Chiquita farms in Colombia (1). Some defended Holder on that by saying that everybody has a right to a lawyer, even corporate fucks who pay death squads to take care of their labor problems. If that is so, I can't think of anybody who needs a lawyer more than Osama bin Laden, if he is still alive and if he is caught--tens of thousands of U.S. slaughtered innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan later. Are we a nation of laws or not?

And what about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & brethren? They killed far, far more innocent people than OBL is alleged to have killed--on thin evidence, if you look at it objectively, whereas the case against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & brethren would be a slam dunk at a Nuremberg II trial.

But what is perhaps more important here than our chief law enforcement officer's double standard for war criminals and his pissing on the Constitution, the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous other laws and treaties, is WHY he felt compelled to imitate Bush Jr.'s fake bluster at Congressional hearing.

"The reality is, we will be reading Miranda rights to a corpse." Jeez. What is going on that would prompt a U.S. A.G. to make such an uncivilized statement? Killing thousands of union leaders and members, and killing tens of thousands of innocent people in fake pursuit of what may be a dead Al Q leader, is one thing; bragging about how you shoot first and ask questions later is quite another--in this 'Brave New World' of bloody-handed U.S. hypocrisy. I thought talking with your dick was a Bushwhack speciality. How come our Democratic A.G. is doing it now?

I presume that the Washington Psst (i.e., the CIA) is reporting his statements and framing the story accurately, since I gather that this hearing was public and was recorded (correct?). They are an extremely unreliable news source, except for knowing what the CIA wants you to know and how it wants you to think. Every line must be vetted. Every headline questioned. Every bit of content must be considered psyops/disinformation until proven otherwise. But, given that they probably wouldn't misquote or mis-frame an A.G. (especially if it was recorded), I'm assuming that the story is essentially correct. My first thought about the question, 'why would our Democratic A.G. say this?', is that he or Obama has been bullied into a corner in some way.

A parallel, on an issue that I follow closely--Latin America--would be first term senator Jim De Mint (Puke SC--an all Diebold touchscreen state) bullying Obama and Clinton on the rightwing military coup in Honduras, and bragging about having done so. (He bragged that he forced them to support the coup by holding up all of their ambassador and other appointments in Latin America.) How do Pukes in Congress get power like this? They represent the few (if we could verify their election by anybody); Obama represents the many (also not verifiable in 49 of the 50 states (2)--but it's an educated guess that he was, in truth, elected--probably by a bigger margin than we know). So how do the Pukes in Congress corner the Democrats in the Obama administration into imitating Bush Jr. at his worst? And is that what happened here--with these horrendously lawless statements by the Attorney General?

--------------------------------------

(1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/lawyer-for-chiquita-in-co_b_141919.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/murillo11192008.html
http://www.cipcol.org/?p=703

(2) (New York was still resisting private, corporate 'TRADE SECRET' voting systems, and was still using the old, reliable and virtually unriggable lever machines in 2008. So that state's vote counts in 2008 are the only ones that can be, and were, proven. New York recently caved to the e-voting putsch. Expect a lot of trouble--and baffling results--in New York in the future. All the other states had succumbed to the fast-tracking of these extremely riggable electronic systems by 2004, and, overall, the vote counting system in the U.S. has now been rendered completely 100% riggable. The system is in fact worse now than it was in 2004, with ES&S's recent buyout of Diebold, giving ES&S--which has even worse far rightwing connections than Diebold--an 85% monopoly of U.S. voting systems. Half the states still have no audit/recount controls whatsoever, as a check on machine fraud; and the other half do only a miserably inadequate 1% audit (99% of the actual votes are never counted against the machine totals). We can expect more trouble--really big trouble--everywhere in 2010, 2012 and beyond. And this could be part of what is wrong with the Obama administration. If they don't talk with their dicks, and continue larding the war profiteers with trillions more of our non-existent tax dollars, they're out.)

[gratuitous]

16. Yeah, who needs due process anyway?

Just outdated language from a quaint old document. And I've lived so long, I remember a time when the Attorney General of the United States stood for the rule of law.

[bemildred]

17. This is disgraceful, that's the "reality" here. nt

[backtomn]

18. Isn't that nice !!!

So......we can't capture and interrogate him, we don't want the Pakistani's or Afghani's to have him, we have to give him a lawyer and try him in New York.....so to avoid all that, we will just kill him (even if he surrenders). What has happened to the Obama we elected?? Another example of Obama "playing" for votes?? Could be.

[nyc 4 Biden]

19. Ok Holder, you're a real tough guy.

Nice to have our top prosecutor handing out death sentences.

[Stuckinthebush]

20. Personally I'd like to see him in a courtroom

That's what we do, right? Even Tim McVeigh had his day in court.

I'd love to hear what binny has to say.

[LiberalFighter]

28. Especially if Bush and Cheney can be convicted of treason or otherwise with bin Laden's testimony.

[Stuckinthebush]

51. Bingo!

That's exactly right.

[Ignis]

53. ...Which is precisely why he'll never live to testify.

Can't have those unpleasant truths in the court records, y'know!

[izzybeans]

21. Wouldn't that be a war crime?

[closeupready]

22. He's dead.

So this makes sense.

[OregonBlue]

23. Even if bin Lades is alive I am sure he would fight to the death rather than be captured. I don't

think this statement is out of line. I'm sure it's the truth.

[Yupster]

48. I could see circumstances under which he'd be captured alive

One way would be if he was smoked out and tried to slip out of Pakistan in disguise by airplane. I could see marshalls getting on the plane and arresting him.

Another way would be if his murder were botched and he was captured seriously wounded.

[DavidDvorkin]

24. No need for a trial

The Bush people assured us of his guilt.

[devilgrrl]

25. That's if Osama Bin Laden existed in the first place.

[Doctor_J]

26. I wish the admin would start groveling for our votes instead of the Limbeciles

this kind of stuff is so tiresome.

[Mz Pip]

27. Fine.

works for me.

[sabra]

30. Would U.S. forces kill or capture bin Laden?

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - Would U.S. forces kill or capture al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, if they ever found him? The goal is to capture him, the Pentagon insists, but the leading U.S. law enforcement official says that's not likely.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who Republicans accuse of giving too many legal rights to terrorism suspects, told a House panel this week that bin Laden "will never appear in an American courtroom."

Holder indicated the Saudi-born leader of the group that mounted the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks would almost certainly be killed by U.S. forces or his own people, since bin Laden has indicated he would rather die fighting.

But the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan assured on Wednesday the objective was still to find bin Laden and bring him to justice. Not kill him.

"We certainly would go after trying to capture him alive and bring him to justice. I think that is something that is understood by everyone," General Stanley McChrystal said, briefing reporters in a teleconference. It was unclear if he was aware of Holder's comments.

Read more: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N17118571.htm

[kenny blankenship]

31. If they don't have a case against OBL they're confident will win in court, then all that torture

was for what? Fun?

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. I don't know - I regularly flip back and forth between "they'll kill him"

and "he's already dead".

[rcrush]

33. Really? Still pretending like they are trying to capture him?

Like he hasnt been a dead CIA asset for years now?

[cloudbase]

38. It depends on

the situation existing when they find him, and that decision might just rest with a twenty year old with a rifle. They'll take him alive if they can, dead if they must.

Edit: posted in the wrong place-meant as a reply to the OP.

[Kalun D]

34. Define

""bring him to justice. Not kill him.""

define "bring him to justice" normally in a democratic society that means a court of law, has been since the country was founded.

he's already been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion and they don't have any evidence against him as witnessed by his FBI most wanted page which has no mention of 911.

Besides this is all totally irrelevant, he's been dead since 2002. They are just keeping him "alive" to keep the fear level of the American sheeple high enough to support the continuing oil wars. After all your chances of getting killed by a terrorist are about 100 times as rare as getting hit by lighting.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

35. Dead men tell no tales....

as we have seen.

[Kalun D]

36. Exactly Why

Exactly why they are not going to try any of the Gitmo prisoners in NYC. They don't have a case against any of them, and their fraudulent "war on terror" (war for oil) would be exposed for the total sham that it really is.

[theoldman]

37. Most men in the military would love to capture Bin Laden.

A live trophy beats a dead one any day of the week.

[KansDem]

39. Considering he's not even on the FBI's "10 Most Wanted" list for the 9/11 attacks...

USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

...I doubt he'll ever be brought to justice and stand trial for them.

[Mari333]

40. hahahahaha hilarious propaganda piece.

[4lbs]

41. They had the opportunity 8 years ago, in the mountains of Tora Bora.

He was injured, and US supported forces had him pinned down.

They awaited the green light from the top brass back in the US for the go ahead to 'take him out'.

For more than two hours they waited.

While they waited, he was able to slip away.

If he was killed/captured back then, Bush/Cheney's support for going into Iraq would have been dissipated. So, it appears to me they let him live, to be the boogeyman that they partly used to justify them going into Iraq.

[JBoy]

42. That's the kind of language that gives tea baggers a boner.

[wildbilln864]

43. UBL is long dead!

No way a six foot six man with a dialysis machine trailing behind him has remained at large for this long with no leads. He died in Dec of '01.

[timtom]

46. I find this vastly amusing and, at the same time, disconcerting

that such a fairy tale should be perpetuated this late into the game. And it seems as though many here still treat it as a likelihood that OBL is still alive.

Or, that he had anything to do with 9/11.

[WinkyDink]

49. Dead men tell no tales.

[classysassy]

52. Justice

denied for Bin Laden,but we demand justice for our evil doers.