9/11 Terrorist Defense Attorney: "I'm Proud and Honored" to Defend Them
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 at 12:33AM Scott Fenstermaker, defense attorney for the four 9/11 architects to be tried in New York City, said yesterday that his clients would give “their assessment of American foreign policy” on the witness stand during their civil trial and that “their assessment is negative.”
Tonight on Fox News’ O’Reilly Factor, Scott Fenstermaker went further, asserting that it wouldn’t be al-Qaeda propaganda spewed in the courtroom, but rather “U.S. government propaganda”.
Fenstermaker went on to reiterate that it wasn’t 3,000 people who were killed on 9/11… it was “less than that”, and wouldn’t concede that those “less than” 3,000 Americans were murdered; that would be the jury’s job. He concluded by saying he is honored that people upset by the defense of these terrorists hate him because, he believes, that means they hate the rule of law.
O’REILLY: In the courtroom, we are going to hear al-Qaeda propaganda, correct?
FERNSTERMAKER: I wouldn’t say that’s the case. I would say you’re going to hear a lot of propaganda, but I wouldn’t necessarily say you’re going to hear…
O’REILLY: Well if they’re al-Qaeda, what kind of propaganda… are we going to hear Roman Catholic propaganda?
FERNSTERMAKER: You’re going to hear a lot of United States government propaganda.
The way these men have been treated is contrary to the values of the United States and I’m hear to protect the protections that they have.
Take away the visual and Fernstermaker could be any number of Obama associations; Jeremiah Wright, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Bill Ayers, or any number of his Marxist czar and cabinet appointments.
PREVIOUSLY:
Obama Admin Gives 9/11 Terrorists Constitutional Rights in NYC Civilian Trials
Graham to Holder: ‘If We Capture bin Laden, Do We Read Him His Rights and Give Him a Lawyer?’
9/11, Fox News, VIDEO, White House 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (21)
I actually saw that last night and I don't really care for O'Reilly. That was the most amazingly stupid interview I have ever seen.
I cannot understand why he even agreed to an interview if he was averse to answer direct questions. All he managed to do was a poor attempt at dehumanizing those who lost people on 9/11 by quibbling over the 3 people short of 3000 victims.
4 people short of 3000. I made a typo with the number. The total was 2996 victims.
Steph, that was just NYC. Others were killed on Fight 93 and at the Pentagon.
"2,976 victims and the 19 hijackers died in the attacks" says Wikipedia.
"There were a total of 2,995 deaths, including the 19 hijackers and 2,976 victims. The victims were distributed as follows: 246 on the four planes (from which there were no survivors), 2,605 in New York City in the towers and on the ground, and 125 at the Pentagon.[38][39] All the deaths in the attacks were civilians except for 55 military personnel killed at the Pentagon."
I'm sure Fernstermaker includes those 19 hijackers since he's so sympathetic to their plight.
Ya gotta wonder how many people are crippled, blind, maimed, burned, and permantently psychologically traumatized besides the 3k.
This show trial in NYC will be the reopening of all their/our wounds and a spitting in the face of our veterans and their families.
I read a figure that said 6,000 injured. I'm not sure if that includes all those suffering long term lung problems in NYC from inhaling ground up building particles, but that brings the total to just about 9,000.
Not to mention all the workers at the site whom have breathing problems from the rescue efforts. Some people are just scum.
I agree with O'Reilly... he's a weasel.
2996.
That interview was pathetic. Anything for a buck I guess.
Just in: Barack Obama's home Teleprompter fails During Family Dinner last night
I understand people being angry with the concept of defending mass murderers. However, once an attorney takes a case he/she is ethically bound to represent their client and defend them to the fullest extent within the rules. This attorney didn't say he wanted them to get off, only that he wanted them to get a fair trial. Once the decision was made to try these murderers in this venue they are entitled to representation. He's doing his job, as distasteful as that may appear.
Right, timo. It seems right-wingers just hate justice when it applies to other people.
Timo, I agree with you. We know that these sorts of people take these types of cases to build their image. Of course if your going to set him free, I ask that you make certain to do it in New York, or anywhere in the US for that matter.
justice is not always swift, or without controversy...but there are those on the right that want to simply put a bullet in the head of every suspected terrorist, that is not justice or following the rule of law that distinguishes this great country of ours.
I understand why Mohammad Al Chuque continues to defend his comrades in arms; what is so puzzling however, is why he cannot see the difference between those who wish to live under our constitution, and those who wish to destroy it. Perhaps, it is a debilitating mold growing in the dark corners of his mother's basement where he has private time with his Internet.
Timo says "This attorney didn't say he wanted them to get off, only that he wanted them to get a fair trial". It seems to me that if we are looking to a fair trial, having an attorney assigned to help provide the defense who goes on the top rated cable program on the top rated network and makes this statement is grounds for a new trial if convicted. He should have said damn straight I am going to do everything possible to get them acquited and set free as that is my job. It is also interesting to see how Obama saying they will be found guilty in this format is a bit of a problem. Where can you get a change of venue to get a fair trial when the president says you are guilty. This is being handled about as poor as you can imagine by a hopeless president. Little did we know when he ran talking about hope that the hope he was talking about was the hope his presidency is limited to a single term.
I see no way this trial takes place in NYC unless the terrorist force their attorneys not to seek a change in venue. What a joke the democratic leadership has proven to be and would anyone have predicted that it will soon have the country remembering fondly the days of W. Bush.
As to following the law, I think FDR had it right in how he tried the Nazi spies who came on shore in our country. Military tribunal followed by execution. They had no rights under the constitution or convention for anything else. When you fight a war outside the boundaries, not under any flag, and out of uniform, you have no rights.
timo, I can accept that he wants them to get a "fair trial." My beef is why did he consent to do an interview if he was going to act like a schlub?
Steph C: I see your point, but O'Reilly is an idiot if he thinks this guy was gonna answer half of these questions, his obligation is to his client not Bill or Fox. It was a pointless interview.
Greta: I know plenty of defense attorneys. There is a difference between wanting your client to get a fair trial and wanting them to get off. You should be able to see the difference.
And I personally believe that with many of the detainees they should face justice in military tribunals, just for the record.
The Constitution does not exist only for those who defend it, it exists to guide our government and our system of law for those who approve and those who disapprove equally. That you should have learned in 9th grade civics.
The sad thing here is that the Obama Administration would never have agreed to this trial if they hadn't closed off any possibility of a not-guilty verdict and made sure that no information about the mistreatment of these prisoners would see the light of day. The prisoners for whom they have doubts aren't getting trials, they're getting kangaroo military tribunals or in some cases, no attempt at justice whatsoever.
People who believe in the greatness of America and the brilliance of our Constitution and our system of law should be clamoring for the speedy trials of all the prisoners currently held in Guantanamo, Bagram, and all our other many military-run prisons as a demonstration to the world of the superiority of America and its justice system. But instead, as usual, the right-wing hypocrites are showing their true colors.
Timo, if I were on trial and my defense attorney said on a national cable program he wanted me to get a fair trial, but did not want to see me free, I would fire him. You say there is a difference between wanting your client to get a fair trial and wanting them to get off. That is hard to understand. If after a trial you could prove your attorney did not want to see you free or did not believe you should be free, I would bet you would get a new trial on appeal. I realize you are a liberal so you may never quite understand things like legal concepts and be tied to empathy for the criminal terrorist rather than the victim. Imagine the left cry if it came out the defense team did not want the terrorist free.