Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
New York says no to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed 9/11 terrorist trial
Share:
by Rory Cripps | January 31, 2010 at 10:12 am
734 views | 45 Recommendations | 18 comments
Videos
The Obama Administration planned to move Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four other accomplices accused of plotting the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. from their prison cells in Guantanamo to New York City for a federal criminal trial. But mounting opposition from New York politicians along with six U.S. senators may force the administration to put the plan on hold.
The New York Times reported on Wednesday that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said about the trial, “It’s going to cost an awful lot of money and disturb an awful lot of people . . . . “My hope is that the attorney general and the president decide to change their mind.“
Initially, Bloomberg was supportive of holding the trial in New York, however strong opposition from the New York business community and community organizations, has caused him to withdraw his support.
Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) along with five other U.S. Senators sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday, which read in part:
"We and many others have already expressed serious concerns about whether a trial in civilian court might compromise classified evidence, including revealing sources and methods used by our intelligence community. We are also very concerned that, by bringing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other terrorists responsible for 9/11 to the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan, only blocks away from where the Twin Towers once stood, you will be providing them one of the most visible platforms in the world to exalt their past acts and to rally others in support of further terrorism. Such a trial would almost certainly become a recruitment and radicalization tool for those who wish us harm."
For some who have always advocated military commissions for the 9/11 plotters, the demise of the Manhattan plan simply proved their point. “It just shows what a dumb idea it was in the first place,” said Senator Lindsey Graham Republican of South Carolina, in an interview Thursday.
Mr. Graham plans to reintroduce legislation in a few days to block criminal trials for the 9/11 suspects altogether. A similar bill is already pending in the House. Two Democratic senators, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Jim Webb of Virginia, joined several Republican colleagues last week in coming out against criminal trials for the Qaeda plotters, raising opponents’ hopes that Congress could make the hunt for a new 9/11 courthouse moot.
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
Rory Cripps
New Port Richey, Florida, United States
Recommendations (45)
158
St. Louis, Missouri, United States
Susan Marie Kovalinsky
Ledgewood, New Jersey, United States
Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke
Redwater, Alberta, Canada
Hugh Askew
Omaha, Nebraska, United Statesnanute
New York, United States
Barbara McPherson
Nanaimo, Canadamarianmo
Mission, Canada
Rhonda J Mangus
North Tonawanda, New York, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (18)
at 10:43 on January 31st, 2010
There was a story on twitter that the Administration was offering 200 million to cities for security for these trials.
The justification for conducting civilian trials for KSM and four others are flawed.
Why do we leave justice in the hands of the military when it comes to infractions by our soldiers in Afghanistan.
One of our Captains (Semrau) is presently being tried for murder by Court Martial.
My other question is, when u move terrorists from GITMO to Illinois how is that going to make Al Quaeda and the Taliban feel better?
at 11:44 on January 31st, 2010
ACP:
My other question is, when u move terrorists from GITMO to Illinois how is that going to make Al Quaeda and the Taliban feel better?
Interesting question . . .
at 11:16 on January 31st, 2010
Publicity for 911 ! Who has not heard of 911 ? I thought people getting tried for a crime was supposed to be a deterrent not a recruitment aid ! If somebody is guilty you charge them in a court of law, according to international law, not American vigilante law. What has America got to hide, is Michael Moore correct, was the whole thing faked ?
at 12:14 on January 31st, 2010
Sputnic: The controversy here is that the 9/11 attacks were essentially an act of war. And many feel, as do I, that enemy combatants should be tried in military courts instead of civilian courts. On a personal note, I spent 40 years in NYC. To hold the 9/11 trials at the Federal Courthouse in lower Manhattan will pose major problems for the city, its residents, and those that work in the area.
at 12:30 on January 31st, 2010
If holding the trial in NYC would cause logistical problems, and perhaps the people do not want the trial held there, particularly relatives of the twin tower murders, then fair enough. That is not a reason to not have a fair trial, a trial that should have happened years ago. America is a pretty big country !
at 12:59 on January 31st, 2010
The only 1 in the universe that has the right to torture is God, in hell. "evidence" obtained in this way is an insult to the free world, and, I believe, an insult to God. A trial will reveal if these confessions were obtained under torture or not. The trial must go ahead.
at 13:25 on January 31st, 2010
I said it was wrong Roy ! Thought a lot of people got off on technicalitys in America. Torture is not permissible in Sharia (not Shia, although they use a lot of it too) law. Many countrys do not obey their own laws, as the USA itself has sadly demonstrated to the world, the UK too with "extraordinary rendition".
at 13:29 on January 31st, 2010
Good discussion here. To clarify the difference between a miltary tribunal and a civilian court just let me say that there is a jury of military officers. The judge as in a civilian trial clarifies issues of law. The accused is given a defence lawyer. The biggest difference are the rules of evidence.
To suggest that a civilian trial is fair, especially in this case is not looking at the obvious. Both President Obama and the Attorney General have already pronounced these terrorists guilty. How do they know that, if this is to be a fair trial?
at 13:38 on January 31st, 2010
Always thought the land of the free believed in innocent untill proven guilty too Karl !
at 13:55 on January 31st, 2010
Be patient ! No correction needed. You can get Youtube videos about almost anything (including real Muslim women and how they feel about their Hijab) featuring driving Muslim women. I tried to make that sound exciting, something I helped research ages ago, for another story.
at 14:06 on January 31st, 2010
You are technically correct, the illegality of women driving in Saudi arabia has not yet been repealed. Just to show you how old that law is, women are allowed to fly planes in Saudi Arabia
at 16:25 on January 31st, 2010
Where does not matter. The main thing is to try him and execute him.
at 16:40 on January 31st, 2010
Thanks for the comment 158! Much appreciated!
at 03:37 on February 1st, 2010
Where does not matter. Just try him and execute him. If you've already determined his guilt, why bother with a show trial, civilian or military? There has been talk that the City of Newburgh would like to have the trial in their community. They could use the money.
at 15:57 on February 1st, 2010
nanute: Yeah! I hear the mayor of Newburgh would welcome the trial because he needs the money. Newburgh . . .they even have a prison up there close by. Unless the town changed, it's a dump but it is a tad bit closer to Islamabad.
at 16:06 on February 1st, 2010
nanute: When are you going to post your picture? I think you're cute and I would love to look at it every time I respond to one of your comments.
at 09:36 on February 1st, 2010
During the Inquisition many people confessed to despicable crimes that they didn't do. Really, if someone tortured me, I'd deny everything for about three minutes. Confessions obtained under torture are about as valid as those 'confessions' by the US downed flyers captured by the VietCong.
at 16:02 on February 1st, 2010
Barbara: Point well taken! It is remarkable that we've come to the point nowadays of distrusting the U.S. government to such an extent that we question whether or not so called "terrorists" are in fact "terrorists and guilty of the crimes they're charged with . . . .