Disorder in the Court
Kohlmann, shooting down frequent interruptions by defense lawyers, then proceeded with a set of questions to make sure Mohammed understood the consequences of his choice. Attempting to dissuade the defendant, he emphasized that if he is found guilty, the military commission "could ultimately sentence you to death."
Mohammed made it clear he understood all too well. "Yes, this is what I wish: to be a martyr for a long time."
"So you could be sentenced to death?" Kohlmann repeated.
"Maybe you didn't understand what I said," Mohammed shot back. "Military forces are still in Iran and Afghanistan. They are still in our holy land. I am not talking about your American Constitution … your evil law. I am talking about God's law."
The hearing took further bizarre turns throughout this morning. Another of the defendants, Walid Bin Attash, an alleged 9/11 supporting player and also a key figure in the October 2002 bombing of the USS Cole, also rejected his court-appointed lawyers and declared his intention to represent himself. "I am a Muslim and I believe in God, and I reject this session," he said. Another court-appointed lawyer, Thomas Durkin, a notable criminal defense lawyer out of Chicago, ignored repeated admonitions by Kohlmann to "sit down" and stop talking. He told the judge that his client, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, was on "medication" and incapable of making a decision at the moment about how he will be represented. (Bin al-Shibh, a former roommate of lead hijacker Mohammed Atta who is accused of playing a key role in plotting the attacks, was also the only defendant whose legs were shackled in the courtroom.)
After his initial declaration—and twice invoking President Bush by name for invading Iraq and Afghanistan—Mohammed later said he would be willing to allow his appointed defense lawyers to stay on the case as his advisers and that he even might later "change his mind" about representing himself. But his apparent intention to attempt to dominate the proceedings was quickly underscored during a lunchtime recess when, after intensely studying an authorized artist's sketch of himself about to be released to the news media, he rejected it as inadequate. He told court personnel that he wanted the nose in the sketch to look more like the one in an FBI photo of himself, according to a Pentagon spokesman who witnessed the exchange. Mohammed was apparently given veto power over the sketch, and it was not released.
Update: The afternoon session proved every bit as tumultuous. Bin al-Shibh confessed his chagrin that he never got to become a 9/11 "martyr" and there was further squabbling between lawyers and the judge—much of it blotted out from the news media—about the circumstances surrounding the forced "psychotropic" medication being given to the defendant (apparently to keep him sedated). Meanwhile, another defendant, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali—accused of being a key financier for the attacks—seemed to mock the court, proclaiming that he too had been tortured "free of charge" for years and declaring the entire proceedings unjust and "political."
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: DXLVI @ 08/06/2008 1:48:40 AM
Comment: The defendants are nothing more than a bunch of crybabies (Allah would be proud). When I think of what they did to the inocent people at the WTC... I hope like hell they were tortured. I doubt it, but I can hope. If I give it any further thought tonight, their suffering would give me comfort. They hate us. Not because we're bad people, but because they are bad people. How many of you rasist have killed anybody because of the color of their skin? How many of you sexist have murdered somebody because their anatomy is different than yours? How many of you religious folk have killed someone from another church? These guys don't just hate diferent people they kill people because they think diferently than them. They don't just want you to be like them, they want you to be like them because they told you so. Do we as Americans (regardless of you politcal party) really need to use these jerks to be intraspective about us? Does anybody here choose these defendants as your, or better yet, your children's role models? These are all better questions than Olderwiser's questions. Sad dictator regime? You must be talking about the Bush administration. Please, consider this. They want to kill or convert as many Americans as they can. They want you to worship Allah just like they do. This will involve you learning to speak Aribic. They want to set-up an islamic dictorship to make sure you worship Allah just like they do. They hate President Bush and you hate President Bush (hack dictator is a pretty nasty thing to call our President). I hope you are as unhappy as you sound. Because you seem to have no problem at all with what the defendants did. Yet, you inpuned the reporters, the military and our President because of a question you think isn't answered in the story. I think they will get a fair trial. Will it be a perfect trial? I bet that's never happened for anybody. Was it an act of war or just a crime. Did they do it to make a buck? Was it vandalism? Or did they murder over 3000 people to achieve a geopolitiacal, ethnic, and religious goal? Sounds a lot like war to me. Either way, we aren't on trial, our country didn't deserve this and if they are guilty then I say execute them, cremate them, and dump their ashes down a toilette.
Posted By: weneed2openris @ 07/25/2008 7:32:10 AM
Comment: I wish that we would stop using the words radical and extremist. The quran is very clear on what muslims should do, they dont have to be radical or extremist...to follow the quran exactly means they must fight in the name of allah. That is not to say that all muslims are bad in anyway, most muslims do not follow the quran word for word, but their holy quran states, if they are called to fight, and dont, they are as bad as the infidels (unbelievers). So media, please stop using those words, extremist or radical, islam is NOT a religion of peace but of violence and the quran is saturated with instructions to kill all unbelievers. We better open our eyes before we are under sharia law.
Posted By: simplesimon33 @ 06/18/2008 11:54:29 PM
Comment: Martyrs in the making at Guantanamo by Timothy Rutten LA Times (on 6/8/08)
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed may have been called to answer about 9/11 attacks but real questions will never be asked at these mock trials like:
1. What was the connection between Pakistani ISI and Al Qaeda?
2. Who in Pakistani government was KSM in contact with?
3. Pakistani ISI director General Mahmoud Ahmed had instructed Omar Sheikh (kidnapper of Daniel Pearl) to wire $100,000 dollars to lead hijacker Mohammed Atta in his Florida bank account. Mohammed Atta used that money for flight training, living expenses and purchase of tickets on the day of the attacks. How many meetings did KSM had with General Mahmoud Ahmed before 9/11 attacks to finalize that arrangement?
4. General Mahmoud Ahmed as ISI Director only reported to Army Chief General Musharraf. Did KSM also met General Musharraf to finalize the day of 9/11 attacks and financing of the attacks? How did two Generals as Pakistani government leaders helped in executing 9/11 attacks?
5. How did Omar Sheikh who was released by India in 1998 hijacking of an Indian airliner to Taliban, wound up with KSM?
6. Why did kidnappers of Daniel Pearl demand the delivery of F-16 jet fighters by US to Pakistani government as a condition for release of Daniel Pearl? What connection did kidnappers of Daniel Pearl have with Pakistani government?
simple simon