9/11 accused don't want hearings during Ramadan

[Guest Peeves]

Now I'm usually a sensitive fellow. I tend to give reasonable requests consideration. However, I'm going to suggest that since so many followers of Islam, including Imams, Mullahs and Islamic associations,have repeatedly stated categorically that 'A Muslim would not do that thing" (I confess to taking a bit of license here), and, "These murderers are not Muslims, they're not following the Koran, they're just criminals...NOT MUSLIMS!"

Then whether it's an Islamic holy day should not be an issue....? Right???

So how in hell can a consideration " to Respect the Religious Observances of Enemy Prisoners under Common Article 3." be at issue?

I strongly suggest that no religious person would commit such an act. My opinion seems to be the opinion of practicing peaceful followers of Islam. So the issue of "RESPECT" is moot!

http://jewishworldreview.com/0712/postpone_hearings_ramadaan.php3

EXCERPT:

Lawyers for accused Sept. 11 attacks mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his four co-defendants are seeking to postpone their Aug. 8-12 hearing at Guantanamo, noting it falls toward the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

The trial judge, Army Col. James Pohl, set the date for the hearing in May and specifically ruled out an extension on grounds that it coincided with Islam's fasting month. He noted in his order then that no defense lawyer at that point had raised objection to a hearing that coincided with Ramadan.

But the attorneys do just that in a June 21 filing currently under seal on the Pentagon's war court website entitled "Joint Defense Motion for the Military Commission to Respect the Religious Observances of Enemy Prisoners under Common Article 3."

Edited July 11, 2012 by Peeves

[Michael Hardner]

We allow for religious freedom, and extremists do not. That's how you should think of this question.

[Guest Peeves]

We allow for religious freedom, and extremists do not. That's how you should think of this question.

Really? I think of the question as a Muslim might, insulted if they're accorded religious rights after acting as terrorists in the name of Mohammad.

Why would we insult Muslims by recognizing these criminals as followers of Islam.

Think about that.

[Guest American Woman]

Really? I think of the question as a Muslim might, insulted if they're accorded religious rights after acting as terrorists in the name of Mohammad.

Why would we insult Muslims by recognizing these criminals as followers of Islam.

Think about that.

That's a good thought, actually. Since it's been made clear by mainstream Muslims that the terrorists are not following Muslim law, respect for their religious beliefs should not be a requirement to Muslims.

[jacee]

Would a Christian have to attend court on a Christian holy day?

Nope ... Courts are closed.

[Guest American Woman]

Would a Christian have to attend court on a Christian holy day?

Nope ... Courts are closed.

You're missing the point.

[kraychik]

Really? I think of the question as a Muslim might, insulted if they're accorded religious rights after acting as terrorists in the name of Mohammad.

Why would we insult Muslims by recognizing these criminals as followers of Islam.

Think about that.

That's a really good point. We can build up on it and demonstrate the hypocrisy of certain Muslim groups as well, considering that on the one hand they will state that the terrorists are "unIslamic", while stopping short of excommunicating them (although there is no such thing in Islamic doctrine). Later, they are distressed when these terrorists are perceived to have had their freedom to religious expression curbed. The first example that comes to mind for me was the outrage we saw from certain Muslim groups over Osama Bin Laden's lack of access (for lack of a better word) to a proper Islamic burial. So they sort of imply that these Muslim terrorists aren't Muslims, and then freak out when these Muslim terrorists aren't accommodated in every dimension for their religious desires.

[kraychik]

Would a Christian have to attend court on a Christian holy day?

Nope ... Courts are closed.

Ramadan is an entire month, and I don't think there is a religious prohibition against having a hearing if one is accused during business hours. I could be wrong, but it looks like these Muslim terrorists are trying to exploit the value of "religious tolerance" and makes fools of us by leveraging the left to their advantage.

This reminds me of a deliciously ironic story I came across not long ago about a leftist-feminist journalist who was charged with a "hate crime" in the UK after assisting what appeared to be a religious Muslim woman dressed with a hijab unloading groceries onto the the checkout conveyor belt with the cashier. Apparently she was with her husband, who wasn't assisting her (lack of chivalry!). Well, this leftist-feminist journalist wasn't going to stand by and allow this chauvinist oppression to continue unabated, so she chastised the husband and invited herself to begin assisting the Muslim woman load her groceries for scanning. The Muslim woman and her husband protested, and began to accuse this benevolent leftist-feminist journalist of racism. Hilariously, the leftist-feminist journalist lady was charged with a "hate crime".

'I thought the innocent were protected ... it's been a hard lesson': Celebrity photographer kicked by Muslim woman she tried to help tells of pain at being charged as a racist.

[gunrutz]

Would a Christian have to attend court on a Christian holy day?

Nope ... Courts are closed.

Thats a good point, sort of. But as someone who is technically a christian, i don't care if christian terrorists are executed on easter. The fact that our holidays and our work week is set in part due to christian values isn't really the point since most people no longer view Sunday as the lords day.

[guyser]

Cool story bro !

This reminds me of a deliciously ironic story I came across yada yada yada...protested, and began to accuse this benevolent leftist-feminist journalist of racism. Hilariously, the leftist-feminist journalist lady was charged with a "hate crime".

'I thought the innocent were protected ... it's been a hard lesson': Celebrity photographer kicked by Muslim woman she tried to help tells of pain at being charged as a racist.

Whats the link for? Your read on the story might as well be about the cost of eggs considering you either 1) didnt read your own link or 2) you just like making things up.

Lets go with #2 shall we? There is enough proof since you've arrived.

Edited July 11, 2012 by guyser

[cybercoma]

We allow for religious freedom, and extremists do not. That's how you should think of this question.

That and we also allow due process, and extremists do not. Therefore, these murderers are not actually murderers until they've had their trial, made their cases, and it's proven they were responsible before a court of law. In other words, denying an innocent person (innocent until proven guilty) their right to religious observance is unconstitutional. Even if they were convicted, they would be allowed to observe these things in prison.

[kraychik]

That and we also allow due process, and extremists do not. Therefore, these murderers are not actually murderers until they've had their trial, made their cases, and it's proven they were responsible before a court of law. In other words, denying an innocent person (innocent until proven guilty) their right to religious observance is unconstitutional. Even if they were convicted, they would be allowed to observe these things in prison.

Actually, whether or not they are murderers isn't contingent on them having a trial, or what a jury or judge determines to be their guilt or lack of guilt after a trial. A trial will determine whether they are convicted of murder or not, but it cannot change what they've done (or didn't do, if you think they're not guilty). Being a murderer isn't always the same thing as being a convicted murderer. Conversely, some convicted murderers are not murderers, having been falsely convicted.

[jacee]

Ramadan is an entire month, and I don't think there is a religious prohibition against having a hearing if one is accused during business hours. I could be wrong, but it looks like these Muslim terrorists are trying to exploit the value of "religious tolerance" and makes fools of us by leveraging the left to their advantage.

This reminds me of a deliciously ironic story I came across not long ago about a leftist-feminist journalist who was charged with a "hate crime" in the UK after assisting what appeared to be a religious Muslim woman dressed with a hijab unloading groceries onto the the checkout conveyor belt with the cashier. Apparently she was with her husband, who wasn't assisting her (lack of chivalry!). Well, this leftist-feminist journalist wasn't going to stand by and allow this chauvinist oppression to continue unabated, so she chastised the husband and invited herself to begin assisting the Muslim woman load her groceries for scanning. The Muslim woman and her husband protested, and began to accuse this benevolent leftist-feminist journalist of racism. Hilariously, the leftist-feminist journalist lady was charged with a "hate crime".

'I thought the innocent were protected ... it's been a hard lesson': Celebrity photographer kicked by Muslim woman she tried to help tells of pain at being charged as a racist.

Supercilious biatch got what she deserved.

She could have helped (or not) without the judgemental and condescending comments. None of her damned business how couples choose to split their domestic duties ... and I'll bet she wouldn't have even noticed if not for the hijab, so it was racially motivated.

She's not a "benevolent" feminist but an aggressive and intolerant one.

True feminism is about a woman's right to CHOOSE how to live her own life, NOT how to toe the 'feminist' line.

Obviously this is just another of mapleleafweb's virulently anti-Muslim threads.

[jacee]

Thats a good point, sort of. But as someone who is technically a christian, i don't care if christian terrorists are executed on easter. The fact that our holidays and our work week is set in part due to christian values isn't really the point since most people no longer view Sunday as the lords day.

Irrelevant.

Point is the Muslims in question are being criticized by the OP and other posters in this thread for requesting a religious consideration that is already afforded to Christians.

It's just another racist thread.

[DogOnPorch]

Irrelevant.

Point is the Muslims in question are being criticized by the OP and other posters in this thread for requesting a religious consideration that is already afforded to Christians.

It's just another racist thread.

Islam is a religion and a political ideology...not a race. Should Islam be protected from all forms of criticism?

Edited July 11, 2012 by DogOnPorch

[Shady]

Irrelevant.

Point is the Muslims in question are being criticized by the OP and other posters in this thread for requesting a religious consideration that is already afforded to Christians.

It's just another racist thread.

It's not racist at all. That's just your usual fallback position.

Anyways, I don't think anyone would have a problem allowing for a day or two. But to realistically think that a whole month be allowed is completely ridiculous.

[DogOnPorch]

It's not racist at all. That's just your usual fallback position.

Anyways, I don't think anyone would have a problem allowing for a day or two. But to realistically think that a whole month be allowed is completely ridiculous.

It's a logical game for any criminal to play.

[Guest American Woman]

...I don't think anyone would have a problem allowing for a day or two. But to realistically think that a whole month be allowed is completely ridiculous.

As I understand it, the concern is that the hearings fall within the last ten days, which are the holiest of Ramadan. The hearing dates were set in May, however, with no objections at the time. However, whether or not people would have a problem with it misses the point of the opening post.

At any rate, there are other religions besides Christianity and Islam, and I'm sure the courts operate on some of their special religious holidays. The courts are closed on Good Friday and Christmas because this is a Christian nation and most people observe said holidays. I don't know if anyone is given a pass for days the courts are normally open, but when setting hearing dates, if objections are made for legitimate reasons, I would wager the objections are given due consideration if possible. However, I doubt if such dates are worked around a person's personal lives - sometimes it's a matter of "when in Rome, do what the Romans do." If I were arrested in England, for example, I would expect their courts to work around their time table and holidays - not mine. (Though I'm sure they'd respect my not wanting to have a hearing on the Fourth of July. )

[cybercoma]

It's pretty simple. Christian holy days are respected by default. The least they can do is respect others' religions and holy days. You know, treat everyone equally. Unless your idea of equality is that everyone is equally allowed to be Christian.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's pretty simple. Christian holy days are respected by default. The least they can do is respect others' religions and holy days. You know, treat everyone equally. Unless your idea of equality is that everyone is equally allowed to be Christian.

Yea...just like Canada's Constitution Act...equality for all religions....NOT !!

[kraychik]

Yea...just like Canada's Constitution Act...equality for all religions....NOT !!

As you can see, the misplaced condescension of the Canadian left is on full display when it engages in this anti-Americanism masquerading as moral posturing. It's hilarious, and it's one of those things I never get tired of, like burgers and pizza.

[kraychik]

It's pretty simple. Christian holy days are respected by default. The least they can do is respect others' religions and holy days. You know, treat everyone equally. Unless your idea of equality is that everyone is equally allowed to be Christian.

Sort of like how these folks respected America on 9/11, right?

[Canuckistani]

Sort of like how these folks respected America on 9/11, right?

So you're not better than them?

[Guest Peeves]

Irrelevant.

Point is the Muslims in question are being criticized by the OP and other posters in this thread for requesting a religious consideration that is already afforded to Christians.

It's just another racist thread.

"Just another racist thread."

OK I missed that.

I was just considering the feelings of others that claim this type of behavior is not Islamic.

Sorry.

To clarify. IF guilty as charged then they are not really real Muslims according to many in the Islamic community, Imams, Mullahs, agencies and associations, because real Muslims wouldn't ever do such a terrorist thing.

Assuming they are then innocent we would though be calling him and his cohorts liars, since they seem to be bragging about the terrorism..9/11 and more.

Key 9/11 suspect 'admits guilt'

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

Mohammed said he planned the 9/11 attacks, the transcript said.

The alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks has admitted his role in them, and 30 other plots in a hearing at Guantanamo Bay, the Pentagon says.

"I was responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z," said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a partial transcript from a closed-door hearing.

He also said he had planned attacks on Big Ben and Heathrow airport in London.

Again, elsewhere.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed brags...According to US transcript

"I was the operational director for Sheikh Osama Bin Laden for the organising, planning, follow-up and execution of the 9/11 operation," Mr Mohammed told the hearing, in a statement read by a representative.

According to the partial transcripts, he also admitted responsibility for a series of attacks, including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York, the bombing of nightclubs in Bali in 2002 and a Kenyan hotel in the same year.

He claimed responsibility for the failed attempt by the so-called shoe bomber, Richard Reid, to bring down an American plane.

So it's a racist thread. I apologise to my Muslim friends for the granting to these murderous confessed terrorist killers, their right to inclusion as followers of peaceful Islam by such as jacee.

Obviously then they should rather be tried by some Islamic court, since jacee deems them to be followers of Islamic custom.

So jacee, I'm confused. Should I accept that he IS indeed a follower of Islam dedicated to terrorist acts as a Muslim and offend those claiming he isn't REAL Muslim, or offend him by calling him a liar and bragging about things he really didn't do, or, Act as a Christian and discontinue any hearings/trial or justice so long as it's falling on any Islamic (or Christian) occasion.

Next month's would not be the first Ramadan war court appearance by Mohammed and the four men accused of orchestrating, funding and training the 19 terrorists who hijacked the four aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001, killingly nearly 3,000 people in New York, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field.

I sure don't want the facts clouded up with mean discriminatory racist denial of their rights as. uh... ....accused admitted possibly Islamist terrorists.

Edited July 12, 2012 by Peeves

[cybercoma]

Sort of like how these folks respected America on 9/11, right?

I guess you want to be just like your enemies then. Good for you. I have higher expectations for our society.