November 24, 2009

John Loughlin on the Civil Trial of Terrorists

Monique Chartier

Candidate for the First Congressional District John Loughlin appeared Sunday on NBC 10's 10 News Conference with Jim Taricani and Bill Rappley. Below is the discussion between Loughlin and Taricani on the decision by the Obama Administration to try five terrorists in a United States federal court.

Illegal immigration was the topic of another interesting moment. Starting at minute 7:00, Bill Rappleye, as devils advocate, makes a case against e-verify by relaying assertions on the part of hospitality and tourist businesses in Newport that they would cease operation were they deprived of illegal (i.e., cheap) labor. Loughlin, a proponent of e-verify, cannot seem to muster any sympathy for business plans built upon "false economics" and the breaking of the law.

[Minute 15:15]

Taricani: There is a trial that is going to take place. The decision was made by the Obama administration, or the Justice Department, for the five terrorists, one who claims to be the mastermind for 911, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Do you think that trial should be held in New York?

Loughlin: Well, I think that that should be a military tribunal and for a variety of reasons. First of all, a lot of the evidence that will be exposed during the discovery process of this trial, which is constitutionally safe-guarded, is going to be made public and ...

Taricani: Don't you think that, regardless of how you feel about the Justice Department, they know all that? And you don't think that they've had a phone call or two with the CIA and the FBI about this?

Loughlin: But during the discovery process in an actual trial, that information ...

Taricani: Yes, but don't you think they've considered all this?

Loughlin: Well, apparently they haven't.

Taricani: Are you kidding me? You really think that they haven't considered this? The Attorney General of the United States of America ...

Loughlin: If they have considered it, they've come to the wrong conclusion. The correct way to try KSM, I think, is with a military tribunal.

Taricani: What about the statement that Senator Jack Reed from this state made? When he was interviewed about this, he said this sends a strong message to the rest of the world that this is America. When people are charged with a crime in America, they get a shot in a courtroom.

Loughlin: And it basically says, do you believe that an act of war committed against the United States America is a crime or is it an act of war? I think clearly in this case, it's an act of war. And if you look, the Obama Administration actually tried the folks involved in the bombing of the Cole in a military tribunal because they said it was a military target. Well, last time I checked, the Pentagon was a military target as well and I believe this belongs in a military tribunal.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Why hasn't John Loughlin been silent about this spat between the Bishop and Kennedy. You would think he either wasn't running, or had no opinion!

Posted by: Robespierre at November 24, 2009 10:52 PM

When someone is already twisting in the wind, it's hardly necessary to add to it. Kennedy's doing just fine self-destructing all by himself.

Posted by: Will at November 25, 2009 4:17 AM

Robespierre-if you watched the interview,loughlin stated he wasn't Catholic.I guess he thinks he ought to stay out of it.Good idea.
Monique-Apparently Holder didn't consider the consequences very closely-in a Senate hearing he admitted that he didn't know the ramificaations of allowing these defendants to enter the US under color of law for the trial in the event any of them were acquitted.He claimed he wasn't an immigration expert and didn't know what rights might attach.That is a specious claim as Holder was the Deputy Attorney General under Janet Reno,when the INS was part of the Justice Dept.And if he really did remain ignorant of immigration laws,he should have consulted with some legal experts,right?
Turns out Holder's former law firm represents 17 or 18 Gitmo detainees(not these particular ones)and did so while Holder was a partner there.Cuts it a little close on conflict of interest,no?
Not like Holder is a stranger to assisting terrorists-his work on behalf of the FALN in engineering their pardons while still Deputy AG and his work as an intermediary between United Fruit and FARC,the Colombian terrorist group attest to that.Actually,the latter activity was a violation of Federal law.
Holder is totally unfit for the job of AG.
Paying any attention to what Bill rapelye says is a waste of time.he makes some of the most stunningly ignorant remarks I've heard in local media since moving here in 1984.
Without Taricani,who is a very competent reporter,Rapelye could never sustain that show.
I thought John Loughlin was the most issue specific and prepared politician I've seen on 10 News Conference in a long time.Compare his appearance with Linc Chafee,the bumbling idiot.

Posted by: joe bernstein at November 25, 2009 6:34 AM

Whenever I hear the argument that companies would fail were it not for cheap, illegal, labor, I am somewhat non-plussed. I think it is a continuation of the fraud we are perpetuating on ourselves. We can no longer afford to buy American products, so we "outsource" them. We can no longer afford American labor, so we "outsource" it. What happens when those workers find a "path to citizenship" and become expensive. Do we simply "outsource" more illegals?

"United Fruit and FARC", this is quite murky. We have to accept Latin America for what it is. Many years ago my father was under contract to United Fruit. While in Anafagasta (I think) he was arrested for no reason other than that he worked for United Fruit. It was understood by the civil authorities that United Fruit would "bail him out" for a couple of hundred dollars. United Fruit was practically a government in the way that the East India Company ruled India for a century or so. Don't misunderstand me, it was probably a bettter government than the locals could supply.

Posted by: Warrington Faust at November 25, 2009 8:25 AM

Warrington-my father in law was able to come to the US because he was a wiper in the engine room on one of their ships.Where he lived in Honduras,United fruit ran things-just a simple fact of life.My father in law was able,through hard work and long service to become a Second Engineer,which is a position that usually is filled by graduates of the Merchant Marine Academy,or an equivalent state institution.In his day "up through the ranks"was still a possibility.He was sunk by a U Boat on the Murmansk run,and later served at the invasion of Normandy and the Antwerp campaign.All this before he was a citizen.
So I have no hard feelings toward the United Fruit Company.My anger is directed at Eric Holder and at EVERY Senator who voted to confirm this traitorous scumbag.He wasn't content to just enable terrorists-he also arranged the pardon of Marc Rich-an evil international merchant of death-a modern Basil Zaharoff.
Holder didn't HAVE to do the things he did-he did them because he WANTED to.
Jack reed's opinion on anything is worth garbage to me.He has been bought and paid for by the banking industry,and it's like being a little bit pregnant-once you become a whore,you stay one.
Sheldon Whitehouse in all likeliehood hasn't been bought-he is just that much of a posturing effete fool that he appears to be.
This administration sucks,period.

Posted by: joe bernstein at November 25, 2009 9:24 AM

Will's right - Democratic success was built upon knowing when to shut their mouths when Republicans self-destructed.
I'm no Patrick fan, and I'd seriously consider voting for Loughlin. I just wonder, though, if he'll have to deal with the whole RINO name-calling - that's probably Patrick's most likely route to victory at this point.

Posted by: rhody at November 25, 2009 9:44 AM


ALL WASHINGTON HAS TO DO IS ADD AMENDMENTS TO THE 1986 IMMIGRATION CONTROL & REFORM ACT? THE SIMPSON/ MAZZOLI BILL QUALIFIED IN THE EYES OF SEN TED KENNEDY (RIP). WHO ALSO SWORE THERE WOULD--NEVER BE ANOTHER AMNESTY. Having another path to citizenship indicates to me, that there is some underhand discussions going on behind the back of taxpaying Americans. That Sen.Harry Reid (D-NV) Speaker N. Pelosi (D-CA), Sen. John McCain R-AZ will be involved with pushing through this next AMNESTY and--THE PEOPLE--will be last to know? How many more billions is it going to cost in raised taxes to legitimize 20 to 30 million foreign nationals? Currently we have two wars on the agenda, a health care package with loopholes for illegal immigrants, Cap & trade and global warming? Not forgetting that Obama promised fair free trade agreements and a bunch of other planned money spending free-for--all's?

As I stated, their is no need to spend millions of dollars the country doesn't have--but prints it anyway and then tries to pass another Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill. These jokers in Washington can save taxpayers millions instead of discussing a whole new bill, just by amending parts of the 1986 law? Including in this amendment process, would be up-front information for the public to decide on? Those politicians who have been poisoned monetary by heavyweight business lobbyists and the hundreds of anti-American, open border extremists. As with Sen.Gutierrez D-IL who should not be present, as he reneged on his oath of allegiance to the United States. E-Verify should be a mandatory law, for not just new employees but for everybody who draws a payroll check. The police engagement 287 (g) law should also be fully funded by the feds and not just half measures, so that many counties can refuse to execute the illegal immigrant arrest law.

Only with employers that have been instrumental in operating E-Verify should be allowed to display the E-Verify notice. Any person who illegally displays the placard, should be heavily fined if they violate this federal law. Senior Citizens could be hired by the feds nationwide, to inspect 1-9's at businesses and audit documents in each region of the country. None of this will be any good if --AMNESTY--is passed as millions more illegal immigrants will be scaling the fences, or under the pretext of being a tourist gain entry to America? The last AMNESTY turned into a joke against the American taxpayer. CORPORATE WELFARE or ENTITLEMENTS are the best way to explain this, because of the illegal cheap labor market thats poured through gaping laws in enforcement. Everybody has their price including the politicians who have been cheating the American people for years, by drafting undisclosed legislation rewarding illegal immigrants with health care and education. The illegal immigration occupancy of our country, has corporate, agriculture and open border lobbyists pouring millions of dollars into forcing another facade of Amnesty through the politicians bank accounts. Money in the way of foundation grants, George Soros are funneled into the Southern Poverty league, ACLU and other commodities of the Liberal-Socialist-Marxist groups, who have an ominous agenda of wide-open immigration--legal and illegal-- to satisfy their masters.

IF millions of us sit on our hands this time and stay silent, the House-Senate will push through another AMNESTY package and the biggest losers will be all of us. All those working illegally in America will do a disappearing act from agriculture and other industries, and once legal can steal every conceivable job that benefits low skilled American workers. The majority will still be paid under the table, and the same act will repeat itself as directly shown after the 1986 Amnesty. If you think the border fence is sturdy enough for those waiting to hear the Amnesty call, we really need some sense knocked in to us. TIME TO MAKE YOURSELF KNOWN TO THE LAWMAKERS WE VOTED FOR AT 202-224-3121, or go their in person. GOOGLE--these websites---NUMBERSUSA will show you the costs and enforcement gradings of those in Washington. JUDICIAL WATCH will uncover for you the rampant corruption money game. CAPSWEB will explain irreversible population growth in California and nationwide. Other sites of interest on Immigration enforcement is ALIPAC and AMERICAN PATROL and THE DARK SIDE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws. READ THE FACTS, NOT PROPAGANDA FROM THE LIBERAL NATIONAL PRESS. READ THE REAL POLLS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AT:

Posted by: Brittancus at November 25, 2009 2:14 PM

"path to citizenship"

Brittancus, you raise another hugely disingenuous phrase used by advocates of illegal immigration to disguise their true goal.

The United States has a path to citizenship. When someone says, "We have to create a path to citizenship", what they really mean is, "We have to allow people to cut in line and disregard our laws." They are also saying, prima facie, that they do not respect the millions of the immigrants who came here legally, in conformance with our procedures, ON OUR EXISTING PATH TO CITIZENSHIP.

Last but not least, when a politician talks about creating a path to citizenship, in addition to the above, he is also saying, "The sovereignty of my country and the Constitution that I swore to uphold are completely secondary. Let's get my future constituents in here so they can start voting for me."

Posted by: Monique at November 25, 2009 7:59 PM

The phrase "path to citizenship"is another example of ignorant(or in some cases,deliberate)misuse of a term by leftists.To be a citizen,first you have to be a lawfully admitted permanent resident(immigrant)and then there are waiting periods of various durations based on your individual circumstances.
Like the term "comprehensive immigration reform"means in leftist-speak:AMNESTY!!And no increased enforcement measures.
It's so transparent when David Cicilline lisps in his rapid fire speaking style the magic words"comprehensive immigration reform"and the other lemmings like Rev.Anderson,et al parrot the same unmitigated crap.

Posted by: joe bernstein at November 25, 2009 8:34 PM

The decision to bring five 911 co conspirators to a New York court to face a civil trial is correct for many reasons. First those that planned and carried out attacks against civilians are criminals. It only serves their propaganda purposes to be given higher stature as enemies of the U.S. instead of criminals. Second Obama has promised to close the infamous Quantanamo prison and these cases need to be adjudicated first. Third the whole Bush administration premiss that 911 was not a criminal case that required a police action to hunt down the perpertrators and either kill them or capture them so that would be made to answer for their crimes gave liscense use unconstitutional methods such as wiretapping and torture to fight an unconventional war. Trying these men in civil court would help reverse the Bush error.
In the last century the U.S. and some European states experienced a similiar international terrorist group with the Anarchists. The U.S. went nuts by passing draconian anti sedition laws (if you remember after 911 the governors staff actually tried to bring back some of these long discredited laws ), arrested the writers of pamphlets and rabble rousing speech givers, tried and hung some of them. Europe suffered the worst of the bomb throwers with the attempt of the Anarchists to assassinate all the crowned heads in Europe. The anarchists caused much fear among the wealthy and the middle classes and strengthened the hands of the authoritarians. Calmer heads though prevailed especially in France where only those who had acted by throwing their bombs into crowded resturants were tried in court. The pamphlet writers and speakers urging anarchy were not arrested or tried. If any are interested in the early 1900s and the political and social landscape of that time you may wish to read The Proud Tower by Barbara Tuchman.

Posted by: Phil at November 26, 2009 10:58 AM

Phil-you are just wrong.I don't care to try and change your mind,because I see that there is unwavering support for this from Obama supporters.It's almost like a group thought.I'd prefer if we went by precedent as in the case of the German saboteurs landed by submarine,and tried before a military tribunal and executed.
You,Phil and the rest of the people who agree with you,just choose to ignore the inconsistency of procedure between the USS Cole attackers and this situation-military target?What is the Pentagon?Don't bother answering,because you can't.Nor can you explain how it is that Holder admits before a Senate committee that he doesn't know the consequences of an acquittal after these people are brought into this country under color of law to stand trial.
I don't see a problem with Gitmo.It's one of the things Bush actually did right.
We currently have Cuban boatlift people in detention at St.Elizabeth's Hospital,a secure facility in Washington,DC.They've been held since 1980 and are never getting out.Why?Because they are considered too dangerous-these are the intractable violent mentally ill that Castro,hero of the left sent us.The Federal courts had no problem with this procedure.
Before you assign reading(I read Tuchman's bookmany years ago)try a little research on your own.
I see these people as enemy warriors and not as criminals-warriors who committed war crimes by targeting civilians and even military targets while we were not engaged in active conflict with them.
Your way of thinking and mine are irremediable.

Posted by: joe bernstein at November 26, 2009 7:16 PM

AR Readers

Since joebernstein has asked me not to respond directly to him, not to engage him in thoughtful discussion about important matters about which we apparently disagree he has left me with almost no other alternative but to invent a conversation based on his comments. It is as follows:

Phil-you are just wrong.I don't care to try and change your mind,because I see that there is unwavering support for this from Obama supporters.It's almost
like a group thought.
-joe bernstein

I don't belong to any groups except the Rhode Island Shellfisherman's Association.

You,Phil and the rest of the people who agree with you

Wait a second and let me...

Don't bother answering,because you can't.

Do you mean we cannot disagree about important matters that affect all of us
- Phil

Your way of thinking and mine are irremediable.

Well I suppose I should be thankful for that.

Posted by: Phil at November 27, 2009 8:19 AM

I'll just throw this out here and whoever doesn't like it can just ignore it or whatever.
The rationalizing that goes on by the Obamabots concerning this KSM trial is beyond anything I've seen from them previously.
They do realize that Obama and Holder have two motives here,right?
The impending show trial is designed to,in the short term,embarrass the Bush administration and hold them up for public condemnation.
The darker,more evil motive is to do the same to our country in the eyes of the world.
Obama has made a point of sitting through being berated by third world piece of crap tyrants like Ortega and Chavez about how bad our country has been.and he stammers excuses that he wasn't to blame.He bows like an obedient subject to scum like the Saudi princes and makes a fool of himself with the Japanese Emperor,who isn't scum,but he's also no one to bow to.
the Obamabots are not all necessarily on the same page about this-that the US needed a comeuppance,but there are enough of them out there like Ward Churchill,who believe their own country somehow deserved being attacked.They are right there on RIF and the Daily Kos.The others are deluded fools.
Here we have a President whose spiritual mentor for 20 years said the same thing;whose wife was "never proud of this country";whose mentor gave the racist Louis Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award;while he sat there like the RCA Victor dog listening to his master's voice.He finally made a show of dumping Wrght,but to believe that he wasn't lying when he denied hearing Wright's poison for 20 years,one must conclude Obama is just that stupid.I don't think think he is stupid.I think he shares Wright's opinion of America.
I think we will pay a heavy price for the coming circus.

Posted by: joe bernstein at November 27, 2009 12:43 PM