Is it weakness to try terrorists in civilian court?

Recall our reaction whenever US citizens are convicted without trial in other countries. Anyone who commits a terrorist act on our soil (whether Timothy McVeigh or the 9-11 planners) should be treated this way.

This is a huge risk for both Holder and Obama. When will this trial happen? What is it we expect to buy? Do we really think that a civil trial will buy better PR in the Muslim world than a military tribunal where he pleads guilty?

Defense lawyers must be warned: No circus, no OJ Simpson crap. this trial had best be exemplary. If not, America will once again show that it CAN'T do the adult thing. Clint Eastwood's comment about the encroaching juvenile approach to life of Americans will be proven correct.

While a military tribunal can be more tightly controlled we need to show that we believe in our own system. The setup of the special prison and other abnormal structures to deal with the 9/11 and other terrorists only illustrated to the world that we don't believe in our own system well enough to use it to try and punish these people. I don't agree with the setting of New York and the trial must not allow cameras inside, however, it is the only means that we must use to punish these people. If we can't use our own system to do this then what faith are we displaying to others that our system of government and justice is good for others (aka Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.). Without a display of that faith how can we sell these people that our system will work for them?

Whether we look "weak" is not the important question. Whether we are living up to our stated ideals and to our constitution is the important measure that the world has of us. Steadfastly adhering to our core beliefs, even when its tough, looks like strength to me.

The Judicial system and having KSM in a trial before his peers is one of the oldest values we uphold as a nation. THIS is what our soldiers are fighting for- true American values. He will not get off easy, the country will be safer, and his evil will be brought to justice and to the public eye. It has worked in the past! Look in the Neuremberg trials! This is the best option. We need to try him as a criminal for America!

execute these people if you have enough evidences simple as that
we are muslims are not terrorists but as each and every group of people you see good people and bad people .

Im saying, its more of where it happen than whos gona send them to jail

As Americans, who have been at war for over 7 years, we do bear the responsibility of acting responsibly on the worlds stage. This includes ensuring that we do treat those accused of war crimes and acts of terrorism in afair manner. We would demand the same treatment of our folks. We cannot set the tone while we continue to occupy other countries, that justice is a non issue.

A large number of terrorirsts have been convicted in the civilian courts including Moussawi and the first World Trade Center bombers. I am confused what all the hoopla is about. KSM will be convicted.

They committed the crime on American soil and should be tried there to. The Republicans are up to the normal let's do nothing game. Why didn't the last admin. do something with them.

The criticism against trying the terrorists in New York is all transparently political. If the administration had decided to try them in a military court, the Republicans would have said, "The administration doesn't trust the American system of justice."

We are a democracy built on a foundation of law and justice for all. Of course it's appropriate to try the terrorists in the city they tried to destroy. This is America and this is our strength.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed is no peer of mine, and if I were a member of that jury, I'd have a difficult time seeing him as innocent until proven guilty. And then what – life in prison, where my tax dollars pay for his Little Debbies snack cakes – or walking free, being sent home?

And thank goodness I'm not eligible to be on the jury because I can't imagine how long those people are going to be sequestered from their families and their lives – months, years?

I'm not delusional enough to think that the US legally system is free of corruption. Why are we pretending that making a show of a civilian trial is going to change the hearts and minds of our enemies? What, are they going to televise it? That is a terrifying prospect.

He isn't an American citizen. He isn't a peer. He deserves a military trial.

Trying these murdering war criminals in our criminal courts is the best thing Obama/Holder could possibly do. When one or more of these heinous butchers gets off on a technicality or there is a mistrial for one or more reasons it will signal the end of this miserable administration. It will be a day for celebration in the U.S. It seems that all Obama/Holder are worried about is making sure that these muslim scumbags have a way of spouting more of their hate speech and threats against freedom-loving people. May they all go to the swine pig Allah and their 72 virgins (who don't exist) asap!

If we start picking and choosing who is tried in civilian court, where do we draw the line? I think tring these terrorists in civilian court tells the world that everyone gets a fair trial. That fact alone, makes it harder for the world to dispute the courts decission.

Why report the news when you can create a controversy? The story is Khalid Sheik Mohammed is being tried in Manhattan by the very people that suffered the most from his actions. They, more than anyone else deserve to know everything and mete out the justice that he deserves.

To manufacture a story, CNN plays on the fears and political divisions in this country to create controversy and make money on the political divisions of this country.

"I'm just sayin'?" God people! Can you imagine a segment like this after the Kennedy Assassination?

No it is not weakness to try terrorists in a civilian court. What is weak is all the pub whining and terrophobia. Bush had 7 years to try the terrorists in a military tribunal and he failed. Saying we are afraid of bringing terrorists to new york shows that we a weak. New York City has 36,000 policemen and they can handle a few terrorists. The goal of terrorism is to create fear and intimidation and the pub whining is exactly what we should not be doing. We need to stop the whining, try the terrorists and rebuild the twin towers.

Are you kidding? These psycho extremists that people just want to kill, they are just people too. And though they aren't citizens we must accept they still have rights. Those rights give them an oppurtunity for a trial and New York's judicial system is hopefully able to handle that responsiblity. I think you need to start look at these "terrorists" and realize that is some mother's son, those are peoples homes on YouTube being demolished. Gimmee a break, let's opens our eyes for humanity's sake.

I am all for having the trial in New York. Military justice has been anything but justice for these men and their victums as well as a disgrace to America and lowered the world opinion of our form of justice. Le't show them American justice at it's best.

Carol good morning. this is the first time i'm commenting.Carol
here is what i want to say. what is wrong with the white men who help
run this country. Espically in the republican party they are the ones who have been making us look weak,cowardly,and untrust worthy
Now they want to spread fear about trying villans in this country The white men who have been running this country for the past eight years have put us in harms way in many ways and they would continue. Now that we have someone who just happens to be black to try and help us get moving again after these same old white men got us into this shape want to use the same tactics they have been usuing to keep americans off balance Keep moving president Obama those old
white men will soon be gone.Either thru atrishion or since they are so old thru the grim reaper there i finally said it have a good day

We've showed too much weakness since 9/11. Bin Laden's goal was to change America. There was a method to striking at our heart, hijacking civilian filled planes to be used as bombs and bombing them not into battle ship destroyers or military air fields but into two civilian towers where thousands of civilians worked. Yes, there was a method. When the Patriot Act was formed surely Bin Laden must have felt that his hijackers had not died in vain. The attack in which his terrorists pulled off was to change America, the home of the free, the home of the brave. What is free and what is brave about putting these five terrorists into a dark hole of military court? Are we a military run country? Is that what Bin Laden turned us into? As an American I plead hell no!
Give New York City and all Americans their day in court with those murderers. On 9/11 nineteen non-uniformed physcos turned four non-military jets into civilian hostage bombs that were smashed into a civilian farm in Pennsylvania, two civilian buildings in NYC, and though the Pentagon is military turf, the attack happened on our watch.
This is ot a time for more water boarding or cloak and noose courts in Cuba. The civilian court will not be a forum for Khalid Sheik Mohammed. It will be OUR show.
I am a deeply conservative American but I deeply support our president now.

I think both individuals, The 911 mastermind and Hasan , Fort Hood,should be charged with espianage and sabatage. Then be put in front of a fireing squad
During WWII they would not have even got a trial

The annoucment of the 9/11 trials to take place in N.Y. is a smokesrceen to the ft.hood shootings, the shame and embarasment nobody in the goverment wants to take blame for.

Eric Holder is not really interested in whether terrorists get a fair trial under the USA justice system. Rather, he is interested in showing the world that there is now a new sheriff in town who wants to differentiate himself and the Obama administration from the Bush administration and its policies toward terrorists. He and Obama want to use this as yet another forum to demonstate to the world that under the Obama administration the US is a different and more compassionate country. Even for terrorist who plot to kill over 3000 Americans.
In my opinion, Holder is more committed to a liberal political agenda that to protecting the United States of America. There are no real legal reasons to bring KSM to New York for trial. Just a political stunt in another attempt to discredit the Bush administration. Its a sad day in America folks. Just Sayin'

. Why didnt the bush regime bring them to trial?

I feel that terrorism is a military provoked action. Therefore their crimes should be judged in military court.

We as Americans are proud of our government and system of justice and are not shy about telling opponents how much better our system is than theirs. It’s easy to talk about it, but now is the time to walk the talk.

With Eric Holder saying "failure is not an option" in the conviction of the terrorists and Obama stating that "those offended by" the terrorist civilian trial won't find it "offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him."(Associated Press)sets the stage for acquittal based on the lack of impartiality. According to Obama's statement, KSM is already convicted. KSM lawyers can argue for acquittal on lack of fair venue and preconceived condemnation. Sometimes, these people just need to keep their mouths shut!

Our Government needs to be very careful of what they do next, Are they not prisoners of War? Where is the Geneva Conventions Act? What would really be different if we Executed these people? How Pissed did the rest of the world get when Germany Executed THEIR Enemies during WWII? You all need to read your history and it`s mistakes first...Before you end up Repeating those Mistakes, I am in No way suggesting they NOT be Punished, But, Do it in a way that it does not Violate the standards of the Geneva Conventions Act.

What are these Republican demagogues thinking? We are a nation of laws. It really does not matter what Obama, Eric Holder or all the idiotic republicans think. The only thing that matters is what the 'NINE' think. I am quite sure that the 'nine' (the Supreme Court) would come down on full rights for all detainees, including the Miranda process, for all detainees. This would include Osama Bin Laden if we capture him. Think about it, the few rulings the courts have given so far on these detainees have flown in the face of republican nuttyness.

Of course he should be tried in a civilian court. What better way to respond to those who most need to see the best in the rule of secular law? What better way to showcase our justice system?

I would prefer to see the trial take place in a military tribunal because, afterall, he is a military prisoner.

What concerns me more than anything is that our "justice system" is NOT perfect. There is the possibility that a slick lawyer can get these scum off! Plus, even the President has stated we will find these people guilty & punish them. Again, some attorney could use this for a mistrial! We have a case here in my town where a local attorney went to trial for 30 counts. Today's headlines – He was aquited!! Prosecution messed up! Sorry folks, these "animals" do not deserve any rights or compassion, except for the bullets to put them down!

No, it's not a sign of weakness... but it may be a sign of STUPIDITY.

Dont try him at all. execute him then show his boddy to the world. then say this will happen to each and every terrorist caught

The only problem I see with the trials is the location. It will be a logistical nightmare from a security perspective and very expensive to secure the city during these trial. I find it funny that people talk about the dangers of these guys like they are superhuman. I am a retired vet and have delt with terrorist many time. The are mostly cowards and and only something to be feared if they have a bomb in their hands. I few NY criminals and gang bangers more than these guy. They are not braking out of jail or somehow breaking free to wrech havoc on America.

I think Khalid Mohammed should not be given any sort of human treatment out there. I'm surprised he's still alive, even after substantial evidence has been collected against him.
I understand that it's hard on the policy makers to make decisions like this because just like any big bureacracy, every move needs to me defined, systematic, and consistent.
But, we should understand that if Mohammed was tried in his country of origin, having him dead or cutting off his hands, would not even be a question. He would not have been given any sort of trial or rights.

Yes, it does make it appear that the US is a very weak country in trying this terrorist the US court system.

If we are a fair judicial country, then we should act like it. If a criminal was captured and held on war crimes, then the criminal should be in a military tribunal because the crime is of war crimes. If this person is a citizen than they should be tried in a jury trial, But seeings how this is of different nature, foreign enemy, then this should be held in a military tribunal. Personally though, I believe we should send him to a world court because this crime is between a nation and a part of a nation, not with in a nation itself.

Of course it's not weakness!! This is another attempt by "some" republicans to oppose the Obama Administration and terrorize the American people with misinformation and lies.

His fate should be put into the hands of the people whose lives he disrupted.

It is not weak. It shows the stength of our justice system. It is also not a weakness for Americans to express displeasure over the attorney general's decision. Isn't it wonderful that we live in a country where we all get to express our opinions. I much rather have it this way than any other alternative.

When KSM is acquitted of his crime I suspect he will vow to spend the rest of his life searching for the "real" mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

Don't tell me that the justice system in America is dependable.

It is not weakness to try that criminal in the jurisdiction where he committed the crime. Weakness is when you abandon the countries 200 year old tradition of actually trying people before the lynching because you are afraid.

It disgusts me to see how cowardly the Republican party has become. They no longer have any faith in the American system of justice and want to retreat to torture and political detentions instead of civilized criminal justice.

Hell no it's not weak to give them a fair trial. This is just more Republican whining and sniveling over "What If" scenarios. Everything this administration does is wrong to them. Quit giving them air time.

I completely agree with HOWARD.

I think civil court is the way to goo as a person is found either guilty or not guilty. In federal or common pleas court a guilty person can be found not guilty by reasonable doubt.

This is the only way that will show that justice is being served to try these terrorists in civilian court and present the facts and the decisions to the world. It is not as if this is the first time we have tried a terrorist in our courts and convicted them. Personally, I would rather see them convicted with a decision of Life in Prison, solitary confinement. To kill them will be the more of a incentive to their terroist organizations. The Military Courts have not been as quick and errorless as the Republican Party nay sayers and their supporters make it up to be. This is the archaic colonialism in the Republican party that always wants revenge by blood when in this case the opposite would be more painful to these terrorists and their followers.

It isn't a weakness to try him in civilian court,,,,,What is weak however, is Eric Holder's suggestion that the American people should take some comfort from the fact that if this guy walks, there are laws which prevent him from being "re-populated" in the US.
So, basically we will just transfer the problem to someone else, and he can just wage another attack on us from further away......

Of course its appropriate to try the terrorist in a civil court and most importantly a civil court in New York. Poetic Justice. This is America. This is what we do. We are a democracy. That democracy is built on law and justice for all. Look at the message this will be sending to the rest of the world. Looks like strength to me. And any way, it's not like they are going to be found Not Guilty. And if they are found Not Guilty (stretch), what are they going to do, let him loose in New York City. He wouldn't last 10 mins. Calm down folks. This fear thing is getting out of hand.

Stop the madness! It's the all fretting that makes us look weak.

Majority of Americans do not have any idea how military courts work. They are not in a position of knowing which system would be best for these war criminals. So far I have not heard any factual reasons for not using the court system. Everything seems to based on emotion only. This is just another issue for the Republicans to whine and have tanturms about.

Get real there is know war on terror , this is as stupid as the police action in vietnam. it wasn"t a military target like the cole. So all you cry babies don't think we can do this you might as well look for a new system of government.

The tone of your story was compltely biased. You really didn't give much time to Holder or those that support the triles. You should be ashamed of your self for such shoddy reporting.

You never mentioned the sucsess rate NY Federal court has or the 1993 convictions of the Shake.

The judicial system is broken, city, county, state, federal. It doesn't matter what you do with terrorists, rape, murderers or anything else. No one is taking care of business by letting the tax payer keep these people alive. Just wasteful. America is the weakest country on the planet. None of this is news. No one ever receives the ultimate penalty. Put them in prison and give them food, shelter, religion, dental, medical recreation, library, exercise, education, vocation. They live better on the tax mans dollar than they ever had it before. Disgraceful.
Jonathan Parker

It is a sign of weakness not to bring the terrorists to justice in civil court. Unlike the Ft Hood massacre, the victims in New York were all civilian, i.e. fire fighters, business men and women. It is only right that they be tried in civilian court. Justice will be served. Kudos to you Mr. Holder and President Obama. Under the former administration, eight years and no one has paid for their wrongdoings yet? Americans had better be glad that this administration has the backbone, concern, and audacity to see justice being served.

Our justice system isn’t weakened. Transparency strengthens justice in the long term. We see how weak the Islamic courts are when they seal off transparency. Everybody knows that Islamic law, which prides itself in its secrecy and its unabashed supremacist foundations, is grounded in injustice, particularly against women.

It’s interesting that those who are against our civilian justice system are the same voices who seek a more theocratic (‘Christian’ ) justice system and governance over America. They are no different than the Islamic extremists. In fact, here are their marching orders, which say it all:

“Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost. As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors - in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.”

- Dr. D. James Kennedy, Pastor of Coral Ridge Ministries, ‘Reclaiming America for Christ’ conference, February, 2005

We don’t need American justice to mirror Islam.

I am tired of this the right continues to use fear to get their agenda across. I am proud that our government is giving us, the civilian population, the opportunity to deal with this war criminal instead of a war trial were he would have a completely closed trial and be put straight to death. This is true democracy, letting the people decide his fate and I'd want it no other way.

Any decision made by the Obama Aministration will be opposed by the Republican Party. The rats have come out of their holes. Where were they during the Bush "error"? Only they can change the Rule of Law; for example–Enron.

This is a no brainer. This guy has admitted his guilt so why are we fearing putting him on trial. I do believe that his trial should be held in NYC. I also believe that the media should be allowed in so that the American viewers can see the person to admitted to this heinous crime. Also, if it is closed to the media then you get all kinds of misinformation. Let America and the world judge the trial for themselves. This tragedy happened to not just us in America but people all over the world. It is my belief that if we start to look and act like cowards then we will be treated as such. Maybe this is the opportunity to stop fearing these people and get a good luck at why they feel the need to bomb and kill another individual. I respect Holder and the governments decision. We are putting hatred on trial not KSM. Just sayin, how hard is it to find him guilty? Let him talk so that we can make sense of this madness.

I don't think it's a sign of weakness. I certainly don't think that our allies will see it as so; but rather a sign of strength and fairness. However, I think that this man has committed war crimes and should be tried in a war crimes tribunal. And that may mean a military court. I do not feel it's appropriate to try him in a civilian court. I do think that executing him would be a huge mistake. I think to do so would make him a martyr in other terrorists' eyes. And I think he'd prefer to be executed than to spend his life in an American prison. I'd prefer for him to suffer more!

Almost 9 years after the attack, you are still saying that SMK :ALLEGEDLY" was involved in acts of terrorism. Only 3 people have actually been tried. We could leave them in a military prison until they die of old age or try them and fry them.

I feel it is essential that Khalid Sheik Mohammed be tried in civilian court. While I certainly understand that many view him to be a war criminal, I also feel it is imperative to recall his actions targeted American civilians, not military personnel on a battlefield. Justice is certainly owed to the United States, but he should be held accountable to the citizenry he targeted so mercilessly. This man did not merely attempt to destroy our buildings, but aimed to raze our security, our freedom, our commitment to justice. This commitment is a sacred trust, one we cannot afford to forsake.

No it is not a sign of weakness to try the terrorist in Federal Court. Folks are just whining because it is the Obama administration that has the courage to make this decision. Former President Bush would much rather hold someone forever with no hope of a trial. If Bush had said try them in Federal court the Rep. would jumping for joy and agreeing like there is no tommrow, but since it is the Obama administraion doing this everybody wants to complain. Grow up people.

The American people, especially those who lost loved ones in the 9/11 attack, deserve answers in order to know that justice has been served. This would not be possible if this terrorist were to be tried by the Military, as it is their policy to seal records from American civilians.

Illinois, USA

No, I don't think it is a weakness to try the terrorist in civil court, those that are worried, doubt our great nation and give more credit to the terrorist than they deserve.
We really have a created a complex situation by declaring war on the act, terrorism. For after all it is just a ACT!

I don't see a problem with a civilian trial. Didn't England try terrorist in their courts? How about Germany, France, Spain, etc.? Is their justice more efficient than ours? Besides 190+ convictions vs 3 (ie., civilian vs military). I want a conviction that the world can see that the U.S.'s justice system is an example for the rest of the World.

This is the issue:

Trying "terrorists" in anything other than a civilian court sets a dangerous precedent that could be abused and used against our own citizens in the future.

("Terrorist" or even "Domestic Terrorist" as legal terms are thrown around more loosely as time goes on.)

Also – this debate undermines the legitimacy and honor of our civil judicial system.

These are individuals which killed American citizens, and trying them in our justice system shows that we are not blindly accusing individuals as Stalin or current Iranian government would. Instead, we are confirming and strenthening our own justice process by presenting evidence of the accused deeds and sentencing according to that evidence. It is not the world we are attempting to appease, but our own principals we are attempting to uphold against the threat of terrorism. The republicans and those who question our ability to try these accused terrorists in our civil justice system are allowing an increased security induced by terrorism to threaten the liberty provided to us by our democracy and democracies around the world. This is clearly fear mongering, after 8 years of conservative fear mongering encroaching on our civil liberties, we are tired of it. Allow Holder to do his jobb. Stop focusing on your next election and pass some legislation to reduce healthcare costs via increased efficency and increased prevention measures.

A civilian jury trial for these terrorists is an incredible waste of human and material resources just to provide necessary security. It undermines my faith in the judgment and common sense of the Obama administration. It will do nothing to improve America's reputation with the rest of the world, friend or foe. It's not too late for the Attorney General or the President to reverse this silly decision and admit it wasn't such a good plan after all.

We clearly have the right to bring these terrorist to justice in either military courts or in Federal courts. The choice to do it by the administration in the Federal system is clearly an act of Political pandering by the current administration to the far left. I am not sure the public display arguments by KSM are significantly different in either system....but after watching our more liberal court system acting in an over-deferential maner for the acused rights one does wonder if the outcome is as assured as Holder suggests. And it does put a greater burdon and risk on NYC....they have been through an ordeal already....why choose to put them through another when it there is another option........the answer....Politics...not the opportunity for Justice.

First, it's my understanding that Khalid Shaikh Mohammad (KSM) was waterboarded. Was all the incriminating evidence obtained from him prior to waterboarding? If not, it wouldn't be acceptable in a civilian court, would it? I don't think waterboarding should have been used in the first place, but now that the deed is done, we can't unring the bell. Second, given all the television publicity nationwide, publicity directed specifically to him, how can you find an acceptable jury pool? Aren't these basic structural problems when trying high level terrorists? These guys were processed based on the assumption that they'd be tried in military tribunals. Regardless of what we think about that, we're stuck with it. It's not black and white, either shoot them w/o a trial or give the same criminal law considerations we'd give an American citizen.

I am a New Yorker and I agree with Atty General Holders decision to try the 9/11 masterminds and murderers in NYC. Those terrorist are not soldiers nor are they fighting under any flag or for any country, why give them that status. We will show the world -that our justice system is the best. KSM will be tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison. IMO giving him the Death penalty would be the easy way out, let him rot in solitary confinement for the rest of his miserable life.

Times like this distinguish those who genuinely believe in American ideals from those who only pretend to. Everyone deserves their day in court and those who cower at each shadow do a great disservice to our country.

He is not an American and does not deserve a civil tiral. He should be tried by the military and promptly executed. I'm tired of our goverment wasting hard earned dollars on BS.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed is a terrorist, coward, and criminal and should be tried in a civilian court. He is not a soldier or "Prisoner of War" and should not be honored by treating him as one. Treat him like any murderer, robber, or drug dealer and incarcerate him with the general population.

Has New York been declared a "war zone"? We have no business conducting a military tribunal in this instance if the crime was not officially a war crime. This is a criminal crime against the U.S. and should be conducted IN THE U.S. where hopefully the full extent of OUR LAWS will be expended.

Good Morning, AM Friends.

Would just like to say that all of this "hoopla" over the #1 Terrorist presenting a threat to NY or USA. seems quite un-necessary.
HOW is this threatening??
The man will be locked up with Bracelets and cuffs, I would presume.
What he says cannot hurt NY, other than bring back memories, in my opinion.
He's done the damage, and I feel that the people who are still suffering would do well to realize this. He cannot do it again.

This is causing so much unnecessary fear among USA citizens, that it's doing more harm than any words from this Terrorist's mouth.

How do we look to the Terrorists looking on?
He's already a hero to them. What we say or do isn't going to give them any ideas that they don't already have. We are being mighty presumptuous, if we honestly believe this. Terrorists have their own ways, plans and thoughts. They are probably laughing at our Juvenile arguments.
Perhaps, at my ripe old age of 64, I seem idealistic; or my thoughts perhaps sound Elementary.
But, people like Rudy G.; Lindsay Graham, and Jeff Sessions and the INFAMOUS know all WAR THINGS, John Mc Cain are biased Republicans, I do believe.

No matter WHAT Eric Holder or the Administration does, is never suitable to them.
It is quite obvious to me, that these LEADERS(?) of the Republican Party, are just plain making FOOLS of themselves.
Showing the WORLD that they are childish, and do not intend to make the World more peaceful, if things cannot go their way. What kind of leaders are they?

Heads of THE PARTY OF "NO"! And very silly in my eyes. Seems they and many others of their kind, could do well with a Session in Anger Management!
Thanks so much for listening.
Sincerely,
Laura.

Its not cowardly to try terroist in civilian court, but it is unproductive, it only helps them with thier message without encouraging ours.

Re: RufusVonDufus comment.. that's right – root for our country's failure for partisan gain. Way to go!

When did the American people become such cowards? Not solely in the face of the trials of the 9-11 perpetrators. Everything that comes up in our news or life in this country, whether it is a true reason for concern or is made up by those who want to use whatever issue for their own ends, has people running in terror. Usually with the Republicans running behind them whipping up their cowardice for their own purposes. There are also enough Democratic cowards doing the same thing.

I want justice for those killed in the twin towers and for their families and friends. Don't you think to all those who have suffered through the years since their lives were assaulted by these ignorant terrorists are strong enough to stand up to them? After what they have been through I believe they are strong enough to heroically stand in the face of these terrorists on their own land in dignity and deliver the justice the terrorists deserve.

The Democratic Party has become an Anti-American political party. It is lead by and full of left wing crazies and welfare recipients. I am ashamed to admit that I was once a Democrat. Liberals, Progressives, or whatever they want to spin themselves as only disgust me. I can't wait for 2010 & 2012. No wonder every other party is unity against them.

This IS not a matter of weakness- it's a matter of ignoring what holds these men together in the first place-Allah, being radical muslim, adhereing to radical Islam.. We in the U.S. might stand on our heads to "separate" "church" and state, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world does. Or have we already forgotten what one lone man in our military uniform did to his fellow soldiers- in the name of Allah..I'm for military trials-these men are NOT citizens and might their "peers" be bound by a religion more than justice? Come on , don't we have a saying "blood is thicker than water"??

What is wrong with America the Home Of The Brave and the Land of the Free we criticize ourselves at every turn, this guy master minds the most devastating terrorist act the world has seen. 3000 innocent people die and finally he is caught, he sits at an American naval base in Cuba for years, Our Congress criticizes the former President and wonders why isn't the guy brought to trail. The current President has the nerve and courage to do something and what do some Americans do?, what does some in government do? Criticize! Come on now do we really think that there is one person in New York City who could be on that jury who would think the "death penalty" is not appropriate. Why hasn't anyone considered that the worst thing that could happen is a "request for change" to move the trail elsewhere, because this terrorist cannot get a "fair trail" in New York! and after all our Justice system is rooted in fairness. Stop "whining America" There was no hesitation to try the Oklahoma City Bomber and he got the " Death Penalty" and he killed less than a tenth of those killed in New York, and don't forget the Pentagon, and the flight that went down in Pennsylvania . America please stand tall and be united on this issue.

"We hold these truths to be self evident"

It is not how we treat the best, but how we treat the worst that shows our strength or weakness. We should always hold to our principles. Conducting a fair and open trial shows the rest of the world that the US System is strong and it works.

Fearing that we will not get a conviction in this case shows either that one does not really believe in our system or that one just wants to score political points on an emotional level. Our system also defends their right to say that.

Let the trial begin.

Here I go again. Yes, the crime was committed on American soil. So we want the "revenge value" of trying the criminals ourselves. But if the use of torture and the high level of publicity surrounding the accused might make that problematic, why wouldn't we want KSM tried for crimes against humanity.? I don't believe that any Muslim would automatically give him a pass. Even the leader of Hamas condemned the attack on the World Trade Center (per Robin Wright). In fact, if there are Muslim representatives on the World Court, it would have been an excellent chance for them to weigh in for mainstream Muslim values, which could do something to counter the tendency to label most Muslims not personally known to us as jihadi sympathizers or likely to become jihadi sympathizers.

Right now it is the media who is giving the terrorist the attention he craves. If you guys would stop making such a big deal out of this and stop constantly broadcasting the Republicans who are opposed to this for obvious political reasonsthen they could try, convict and execute this guy like it should have been done years ago. If the last administration only convicted three people using tribunals, then that is a terrible track record. You are again adding fuel to the fire of this whole issue and will inflame the nut jobs again just like in the summer with the town halls. Sometimes I wonder if the Republicans are protesting so much because they are afraid that some things will come out to incriminate them. Don't forget Sadam Husain was probably tried and executed so quickly so that a lot of former ties with the US could not be made public. Let the judicial system do its job and move on. Have some confidence in your judicial and law enforcement systems. The term terrorist means that they try to instill fear in everyone and make our everyday lives less productive. You are allowing the terrorists to get their way by helping to spread this fear.

"Is it weakness to try terrorists in civilian court?"....No, not a sign of weakness, but it IS a sign of ignorance and idiocy on the part of those making this decision.

Trying a foreign combatant in a civil trial is an extraordinary waist of time and money and a subversion of the legal system. Only a strong prosperous country could afford such a luxury. Prior to 911, the United States government pursued justice for the attacks on U.S. warships, embassy and people based on the criminal justice system. The attack on 911 proved the failure of that criminal justice approach and President Bush declared war on terrorist. Our soldiers should not be restricted by the criminal justice system when they are on a foreign battlefield. Our criminal justice system, intended to protect the innocent until proven guilty should not be subverted by a foreign terrorist or combatant trial.
Our government should unite on a policy to fight this new kind of war, one that is not based on a recognized state from defined boundaries, but is a coordinated aggression from multiple and moving locations harbored by unfriendly states or states that are not willing to root out the terrorists.
A terrorist that belongs to an organization like Al-Qaida that threatens and acts to attack U.S. citizens and property should be killed and if captured should be retained until the end of the war and assurance that the protagonist organization is eliminated. Yes, that would mean that terrorists captured on the foreign battlefield would remain in detention without trial, but there would be resolution of their status when and if their organization and they would cease their aggression.

No way! This is the most stupid idea in the history of our country. What a waste of time and money...any just watch, he'll be acquitted just like OJ on some technicality

Try all terrorist suspects in the US court system. It shows the world we have faith in our constitution, in our court system and, ultimately, in our citizens who must sit on the juries. We are Americans: we do not fear our American justice system.

BroDave
Albany, GA

Duuuhhh......the Bush admistration convicted about 3 terrorists in the war curts during the same time that 194 were convicted in the civil courts. Just because this administration has some grapefruits, and the GOP idiots do not know how to accomplish the task....only makes the GOP look weak, not this decision.

Trying these criminals in New York's criminal court is the most appropriate course of action. Trying these cases in a military tribunal provides them with "soldier" and "hero" status to young Muslims who may want to emulate them. There is no war between the US and the Muslim world and we should be emphasizing that fact. Treat these men for what they are – common thugs and mass murderers in the court where others of their ilk are tried.

The jury selection is going to be a nightmare- how are you going to find 12 new yorkers in manhattan who weren't there on 9/11 and don't suffer from asthma and other ailments from the collapsing towers.

I'm a US Citizen/Latin American-who has lived in many countries- Get out of your "Leave it to Beaver" comfort/safe/free speech/choice lives, cozy couch and go live in a few countries, go Travel-experience the real world where Human Rights/Civil Rights are not part of their vocabulary. These nations love who ever fabricated this political gimmick that our world reputation is being tarnished by Gitmo and our interrogation methods and closing Gitmo will restore our moral position in the world, taking advise from these nations about moral position is like taking advise from a druggy that it is not right to open a rehab center to help local druggies fight their addiction. What a joke that the US is being reprimanded by nations whose believe of Human Rights/Civil Rights are at the bottom of their list or not on the list at all. Of course they don't like Gitmo/interrogation methods, they don't like Human Rights/Civil Rights either. I am very proud of our country, our US military and their work in protecting & defending those that cannot help themselves and doing all they can to insure the safety of all of us as well as others. GO TRAVEL and experience it for yourselves.

To have the terroist trial in the U.S. court system is a testament to
our resolve. Why would the republican all of a sudden turn coat and
run yelling fire as cowards to. Before they were the vista of being
strong on security and country first.We now see that they are really
sheeted cowards, spreading deceptive,fraudulent misinformation
to their cultist followers. They fell so for from grace with their lies and
fear mongering during the entire time George Bush served as the selected
president of these United States. Mr.Bush showed his inapt ability to serve
as president. Now tyhat we have someone with all of the qualities to be president, smart, handsome,and charming.You on the right can't
take it you can't hold your anger. A BLACK MAN GOVERING the mighty
Anglo-Saxon. You christain right flag waveing patorits be careful of
what you ask for you might just get it. God is in charge, and with Him(God)
for you He is more than the whole world aganist you.rightist give up the hate fall in line lest move the country foward.

Not only is this a huge safety concern for my fellow Americans in New York , its also a economic concern. Unless I missed something, New York is just as broke as the rest of the country. Now we're giving these terrorists the same rights as Americans, using American tax dollars to pay for their defense and throw in $75 milllion for security. What a shame!

The debate is purely political. Of course he should be tried in a civilian court he's a civilian. He does not belong to an army of a sovergn natioin. We prosecuted the terrrorist that tried to blow up the world trade center in 1993 in a civilian court in NY. We prosecuted Zarrchouri frogive the mispelling in 1996. What is to be gained by using a military tribunal? Secrecy? Purhapes the GOP would be happy with a Iranian trial that lasts a half day. I myself consider the US far superior in respectinig the rights of the citizens of NY. The citizens of NY deserve to see these terrrorist brought to justice. I think most people see this as a political ploy. Rudy Gullianni is currently preying for another terrorists attack and I think that is sick.

i doesn't matter where they are tried. it only matters that they are found guilty and are punished appropriately. maybe the courts can tie them up in a building that we are going to demolish. let them see what it feels like to have a building fall in on them. an eye for an eye.

Hey Shelby,
I didn't know Handsome and Charming were qualifications for a president as you invoke, but yah, that would make sense why so many un-informed and intellectually lacking sheep voted for a inexperienced and unknown leader. At least he looks good when the country falls apart inside out from socialist plans and bad ideas forced unto a dead economy. You got some hate in there yourself.
But trying terrorists in NY is like giving any terrorist cell still sleeping in USA the golden opportunity for a nice piece of radical terrorism that'll make headlines for centuries. "Brilliant " move. I mean that with sarcasm, in case you miss it. Advice, Give it to Chicago, be more interest than the Olympics, and Jarret and Daly can rent their houses out for the media.

This trial is going to cost us, the taxpayers,a whole lot of money. I for one, do not want my tax dollars spent on offering our justice system to a known terrorist. He is not a US citizen. He is a terrorist and should be treated as a terrorist. A rope is far less expensive than a trial would be and I bet it would not be hard to find a volunteer to tie the knot. Send him down here to Florida. We have plenty of rope.

Is everyone kidding? Do you people think that an irrational terrorist will respect the US and stop what they are doing because we are trying them in civilian courts? I see the terrorist saying, "ohhh, now that the US is trying people in civilian courts, lets stop the bombings"

Steve, are you a retard? a terrorist is an organization usually sponsored by other countries, therefore military trial is the way to go.

John Adams said his finest act was defending the British Soldiers arrested following the so-called Boston Massacre. He cited it as an example of the kind of nation we were creating, where the rule of law govens.

Where does the Republic Party get off suggesting John Adams was unpatriotic?

This whole "enemy combatant" status raises criminals and thugs to a level of respectability they clearly do NOT deserve. It also somehow gives the same status to a chauffeur, several students, and any number of farmers who never picked up a weapon in anger, but were turned in for a variety of reasons connected with the rewards being offered.

These people committed a crime on American Soil. Not an act of war, for they represented no nation, wore no uniform. A CRIME. The appropriate response is, and always was, to give them the identification they deserve: criminals. Try them as criminals.

Do you all remember because I remember on 2-26-1993 North Tower of the World Trade Center bombed-attacked under the Presidency of Bill Clinton, 6 dead, 1000 injured. We gave them civilian trials and it made no difference to them, what we got was a 2nd attack to our country. I read Ramzi Yousef’s admitted the 1993 attack was an act of terrorism. I read His uncle, Shaikh Mohammed Ali Fadden, was involved in the 911 attack as well as 1993 attack. I read Nosair was convicted of guns in Federal Court but acquitted of murder in Criminal Court. The 911 terrorists should be tried in Military Court, they attacked our country, NY is our country. Lets stop this political gimmick that the US needs to restore its reputation with the world because it has been tarnished by Gitmo, interrogation methods, war in Iraq, Afghanistan when these nations have Human Rights/Civil Rights at the bottom of their list or not on the list at all. Of course they don’t like Gitmo, interrogation methods, war anymore than they like Human Rights/Civil Rights, that would be like a druggy getting happy that a local rehab center has opened to help druggies fight their addiction. I am very proud of our US military, their work in protecting & defending those that cannot help themselves and doing all they can to insure the safety of all of us as well as others.

136 Terrorists were tried in civilian courts under George W. Bush. And, only now, is this a sign of weakness. Once again, the procrastinating hand of GOP discontent is sweeping our nation. Where were the outcries 4 years ago?

The outcries were only beginning 4 years ago. By the time the majority cared it was too late because now the media is successfully misdirecting innocent peoples rightful frustrations.

International treaties (the Geneva Conventions to be specific) do not require nor do they support civilian trials for war criminals. The problem is that people are considering the 9/11 attacks as crimes. There were fewer people killed at Pearl Harbor than were killed on 9/11. Does anyone truly believe that Pearl Harbor wasn't an act of war? Of course not. Why? Because the Japanese presented us with a piece of paper informing us that they had declared war. Now the fact that they had already bombed Pearl Harbor before the official proclamation was presented, didn't make it any less an act of war. Exactly why does anyone believe we have over 100,000 troops in Iraq and over 50,000 troops in Afghanistan? Does anyone really believe that ANY law enforcement organization is suitable for this task? It is a WAR folks, wake up. The 9/11 commission report said that the Islamofascist terrorists had declared war on US but we had failed to take them seriously. Whether Congress declares it as a war or not, it is a war. Why sugar coat the truth? The enemy know it's a war. Our soldiers fighting it know it's a war. The family members who have to bury their loved ones know it's a war. About the only people who don't know it's a WAR are the AG, the President and their drooling supporters. The Geneva Conventions have a designation for combatants who are not uniformed, carry no identification, attack civilian targets with no military value, and hide their weapons when attacking. The designation is "Unlawful Enemy Combatant". As an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant", following a MILITARY TRIBUNAL to determine their status, "Unlawful Enemy Combatants" are subject to detention without further trial until the end of hostilities OR executed at the discretion of the theater commander. Should they be allowed to remain alive, following the end of hostilities, they may be tried as war criminals and then punished accordingly. That's what international law allows for. There is no time on a battlefield to for the niceties of a criminal investigation to obtain evidence to hold a civilian trial. If they're on a battlefield without a uniform and are shooting at you, they're guilty of being an unlawful enemy combatant. Those bullets whizzing past your head is evidence enough.

No I do not think it's weakness as long as the law is carried out right and handed out very heavy on that person. Gitmo really should stay open. I Think Obama should not close the Gitmo Base just to please the american people. It's WAR Time the american people have to understand this.

I am a retired Police Officer and after many tears of dealing in the civilian criminal court i have found that what you receive her is the illusion of truth and the facade of justice.
The judge is present to expedite the cases and clear his calender. The attorneys are there to win by whatever means necessary.
A defense attorney will tell you he will not prove you innocent only not guilty and there is a difference.
Therefor, these people should be tried in a military court where the facts for both sides are presented.Theories and theatrics are not present only the facts of the case are present.

Yes in fact this country has become weak..People its not just the republicans,its the Dems to,they are the majority in the house the senate and the whitehouse.Inflations going up,jobs are going away and they are still letting thousands of people into the country daily and we cant afoord it any longer.Ever herd of Distractions of the truth.
This is just whats happening all over america,
We are a divided country and why its on a down hill path fast. Are ya ready to be hungry,very hugry when theres no food to eat because we no longer grow half the food in this country we should be,Imagine our Gov paying farmers not to grow food to eat but for some kind fuel for a motorized car or truck..PLEASE!
Screw the terrorist its just a distraction like most all TV,kill em and get it over with and lets REUNITE the people of this country and FIX it ourselves because the people we're over paying to run it arent gonna do it.They are to cumfortable in their cushly offices and retirement they have and we dont.
We've been had people its time to wake up before the sleep in our eyes permanently glues them shut
.Oh ,dont forget how the amercian dollar is on the decline in value thanks to Bush and Obama and ALL those in office.They are spending money in Washinton that doesnt even exsist and we, our kids and grand kids and maybe greatgrand kids are gonna have to pay back and didnt even spend a penny of it,much less see any of it.
So what about the terrorist now,just a small drop in the bucket in my opinion.

The military tried the Nazis and it worked fine. Bush is always wrong per the Democrats so the military trials had to be a failure.

I don't think it is a sign of weakness. I do think, however, they ought to be tried in a military court if we are to believe Obama's speech regarding being at war with Al Kaeda. It's the new day type of war, a war beyond the nation state. No more marching armies. Just organized people with murderous intent, in cicvilian clothing, blowing up buildings and airplanes.

These suspects are not "combatants" in the sense of what the military calls a combatant. Nor are they POW's. Their tactics violate both the LOAC and ROE. Their victims are American citizens not the soldiers so they should be tried in civilian court. You do have trust in the criminal justice system do you?

We've already tried several terrorist in civilian court, including Arab terrorist.

Don't let politics over ride common sense or let partisan spin dictate our laws.

There is a good chance any terrorist initially held as a military prisoner then tried with the rights afforded by US Criminal Court will walk. Military prisoners are not read Miranda rights, are not presumed innocent, and are not given prescribed access to legal counsel. How can these inconsistencies possibly survive a trial, and if so, survive an appeal.

The two justice systems cannot be mixed because they are intended for two completely different purposes and are intentionally incompatible.

This is a major blunder. If meddling politics now gets in the way, and the perp is found guilty, even on appeal, it will go to the Supreme Court and has to be overturned. This will hand the terrorists yet another major victory in their war against us and embolden them even more.

We are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Come on guys...this is war...we didn't start it...it was brought to us. These people are prisoners of war. Simple as that. This war isn't over until the enemy agrees to formal conditions of surrender. Enemy combatants are the responsibility of our armed forces to imprison. They should be treated humanely but imprisoned none the less. If their actions deem a trail appropriate then a military tribunal is more than adequate. This entire episode is just another example of "change" for no reason other than political reasons. Don't we have more pressing business to attend to? And don’t even give the cr&p that we need the jobs this will create…there are more than enough domestic criminals that could fill that prison three times over.

I am sick of hearing about the constitutional rights of terrorists. They are not US citizens and therefore have no constitutional rights. Yet the media and left wing lunatics love to talk about how we are violating their rights. If they had a clue, they would just shut up. If they love the terrorists so much, why don't they invite them into their own house?

If they are captured by military then it should be a military tribunal. They were captured in a war zone. The call it a war. Simple as that.

The terrorists committed WAR against the USA. They should be tried in a military court and if found guilty executed by a firing squad.

OBUMa just wants to endanger NYC again because he is a hater of america and wants to destroy this great land. He should be impeached.

War act == military tribunal.

This is a stupid debate. The masterminds and participants in
the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 were tried in civilian
court and I believe that was during the Bush adminstration. Nobody
said anything about that then. Also to try these mugs in a military
court is just what they want. They just want attention. These are
cheap criminals and should be tried as such!

the lawyers that have just about ruined our country are at it again. they are the one's screaming for trials to take place in the u.s. because it is a gold mine for them. the government must pay some scummy lawyer $150 an hour and this can run into millions of dollars counting all the appeals for just one terrorist esp if he gets the death penalty. all terrorists in guantanamo or captured overseas should never be brought to the u.s. for trial. the should recieve a military tribunal. if the crime happens here inside the u.s., then we have no choice.

No terrorist who committed the act outside the United States should be tried here. And those who commit crimes here in the name of jihad, and are identified as committing terrorist acts should be tried by military tribunal. We are in a Global War on Terror, and in times of war, these types of crimes are war crimes, just like German sabateurs during World War II. These Germans were captured and then President F.D.R. asked the Supreme Court what to do; were the Germans entitled to habeas corpus? The Supreme Court said "no," because they were members of a country at war with the U.S., were not U.S. citizens, and because the Army had an established method of trying war criminals. Kahlid Sheik Mohammad is not a U.S. citizen, is a member of a group who have sworn to the destruction of the U.S., have admittedly committed acts of terror against us, and since we are in a Global War on Terror is not entitled to the protections of habeas corpus. He nor any of the other war criminals being held in Gitmo deserve to set foot on U.S. soil. They have fulfilled no responsibilities, either as citizens of the U.S. or of the world, that might entitle them to any rights whatsoever other than those which compel us to treat them with dignity and respect as detainees under our control. They deserve obscurity and a military trial only. Nothing more, nothing less.

Any non-US citizen who commits an act of terrorism within the boundaries of the US should be tried in an International Court within the confines of the US. As MJ Granger mentions above US citizens abroad whom are caught of commiting an illegal act are not treated by the laws of that country.
We should be concerned about treating the terroristic criminal with basic humanitarian needs and fairness, nothing more. To avoid extraneous cost, 5 to 8 hours is enough time close the case; hence capital punishment to follow. We should not be so concerned about 21st century political correctness. We have competent executives, judges, and agencies. Let them handle it without interference of the media and the masses.

I always believed we should hold criminal trials in these cases. I have no problem trusting our system to deal with these criminals. Also, I think treating them differently telegraphs to the rest of the world that the American Justice System is simply not effective. Additionally, approaching this problem from a criminal aspect enables us to legitimately use profiling (which DHS refuses to do). These people are criminals, not prisoners of war.

Since McVeigh and the 'shoe bomber' have been convicted in our Federal courts (McVeigh-dead/death penalty) and the 'shoe bomber' still imprisoned after his conviction, I am confident that a jury in New York will be ojective, and faithful in their duty as jurors.

Recent history teaches me, that this is not a mistake!

They tried to hurt us, so we need to judge them and send them to dead

If we claim to cherish human rights and the principle that all men are created equal, then we MUST enforce that belief by applying justice equally across all suspects.

Anything less is a violation of our heritage, our lineage, and the Constitution we claim to hold so dear.

Cherishing human rights and believing in the Constitution doesn't mean there can be no fitting punishment to crimes and violent acts. Applying justice equally is not as important as applying justice fairly and according to one's actions. Context matters. In war time those who commit illegal acts of war should be tried in war tribunals. In peace time those who commit illegal acts should be tried in civilian courts. Non-U.S. citizens have not earned the right to habeas corpus, especially if they commit acts of violence in the name of war/jihad, and especially if these acts are carried out on foreign soil. Different crimes in different circumstances deserve different considerations. These criminals deserve obscurity, not the full rights and priviledges of the common peaceful citizen.

It is weakness to fear trying terrorists in civilian courts.

The most obvious example is Timothy McVeigh. He was prosecuted in civilian court, and, far from advancing his agenda, exposing it in court greatly weakened it.

Why try them if they're caught in the act trying to detonate a bomb ? Take them somewhere safe away from innocent people and let them detonate themselves. If they want to kill themselves , let them . It'll save us the trouble .

What is a terrorist? Is it different than being an illegal combatant? Timothy McVeigh was a U.S. citizen, and therefore entitled to all the rights and privileges of a citizen, including the right to a fair trial in a civilian court of law. Foriegn terrorists are not entitled to any rights and privileges, including hbeas corpus; they get what we give them, which, to date, has been the spirit of the Geneva Conventions for fair treatment with dignity and respect. Even the Taliban are entitled to more protection because they are a psuedo-recognized force. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization whose members are also illegal combatants in the Global War on Terror. The "war" part means the military take care of the legal aspects of a person's detention. We set up tribunals to determine the battle field status of a detainee, and then determine the disposition based on the findings of that initial "trial." The basis for the decision on status is the same as that for our Grand Juries, which use the 51% rule: if the evidence shows that it is more likely than not that the detainees status is this or that, then that is what the status will be. It's really that simple. From there, a magistrate (U.S. military JAG) reviews the case and makes a recommendation for disposition. Depending on the approving authority, the detainee may be released or tried for his alleged crimes. It's all in the manuals, regulations, and Law of War. Nobody need go re-inventing the wheel here. The terrorist/illegal combatants who are to be tried in new York deserve neither to feel the soil of freedom and liberty under their feet, nor enjoy the publicity and notariety that will surely come with their presence in the greatest city in the world. They do not deserve, nor should they have the world stage for one second more. They deserve the obscurity and lonliness of an isolated prison, say, somewhere in the Caribbean with maybe a sea view.

It's only OK if Republicans do it. If Democrats do it then it's weak.

The Bush administration even tried the 20th hijacker in Federal Courts. Seems like nobody got all bunched up over that. It's the same old rabble cranked up about the same old stuff. They're too ignorant of actual law (you don't have to be a citizen, fools - the Constitution states that trials, the right to confront accusers, and all other rights are granted to ANYONE on trial in the US).

The protections are there too keep the mob, which has been well-represented in this thread, from taking matters into their own hands.

Why fear what this idiot has to say in open court? People watch way too much Law and Order. If you want to try people in secret and punish them in obscurity, maybe you can set your personal "wayback machine" to 1950's Stalinist USSR.

Of course, never let the facts get in the way of Conservative Red Meat Talking Points. Beating the "other side" is more important than patriotism.

to JW in VW and everyone else. We are a country ruled by laws. Not by individuals or even groups.The first question is jurisdiction. Then be it military or civil, the accused is to get a fair trial. Period. Personally it is obvious that the civil court is far more efficient. AND would be the way that anyone could get the "fair" trial part. I consider Al Qaida to be a government/country that has declared war on the US. How did we treat the solders who targeted civilians in other wars? We know about Neuenberg and (small scale) or Lt Calley in Vietnam. I haven't yet read the Geneva Convention, but I believe its the starting point.
It also addresses another point: As much as we all cry vengeance, we (USA) still don't follow the civilized world when it comes to capital punishment. We should be ashamed to see who are the other countries who've not signed up.
GS (in Switzerland)

The best you guys can do is get Elliot Spitzer. Who cares what elliot Spitzer thinks. I have to say it was a little funny watching him sit across from Kiran with her skirt facing him. How much is CNN paying him for his opinon that no-one cares to hear?

First off these terrorists are not American and do not have the rights of an American. These guys are sworn enemies of the American way and do not deserve the rights of Americans! They also are enemy combatants and should be tried as such in a military trial that military officers are the ones to decide whether guilty or innocent and hand out the punishment of death. Then we will slow the recruitment of these terrorist and they would have their so called martyrdom, which actually is giving their lives to save someone and not kill anyone! When their children grow up they will learn that this will be the outcome if they want to fight the western world but we should reassure the Muslim world that martyrdom does not come by killing people but saving people who's life is in danger and it is the terrorists who puts peoples life in danger! The passengers of the flight that nosed dived in Pennsylvania on 9/11 are martyrs.That's a fact Jack.

Anyone who thinks that Bin Laden hasn't been winning this "war" from the beginning and is still winning it now isn't paying attention. Convulsed with fear, we have torn up huge parts of our own Constitution, thereby demonstrating that it contains mostly hollow words, not closely held and jealously guarded beliefs. We are bankrupting ourselves in two ill-conceived foreign wars, with a military budget we can't possibly sustain while watching our infrastructure crumble, our schools fail and our social safety net decay. Our political system and social fabric are fraying to the point where a new civil war is not inconceivable. So, tell me again, are the policies of the Bush years and the continuation of too many of them by Obama working? Really?

Last time I checked, Americans weren't being blown up randomly in public, nor do we have a foreign country providing us with security. And as for Bin Laden, If you consider hiding in a cave for 9 1/2 years, having most of your firends and colleagues killed or jailed, and wondering if that buzizng sound overhead means a missle with your name on it, 'winning" then you are derranged, sir (ausman98). And we're not in "two wars," we are in a Global War on Terror (GWOT), with forces in over 72 countries world wide. The GWOT actually started in November of 1979 when Marine CPL Stephen Crowley was murdered by male Mulim extremist "students" who were allowed to storm the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, on rumors that the U.S. had siezed control of Mecca in Sauidi Arabia. The news was spread of the siege, unsubstantiated of course, by a liberal media quick to pounce on anything anti-American. Stephen Crowley was the first casualty in the GWOT, and it took us until 9/11/01 to wake up and smell death in the air. When I returned from Iraq in November of 2005 I noticed everyone going about their daily business as if there was no war. At first I was incensed, but then realized that that was what I was fighting for – people being able to go about their daily business. Some people call that freedom and liberty, and the persuit of happiness. Sound familiar? There is a price to pay for all of that, and currently, in this country (USA) we have an all volunteer military doing quite a good job of it. Any questions?

MJ Granger, with respect, your first sentence makes my point. Americans are not being blown up randomly in public. And if we hadn't had a fabulously inattentive and dismissive attitude toward security (despite more than adequate warnings) in 2001, it wouldn't have happened then either. Just because it did happen doesn't justify the gross overreaction in terms of restriction of civil liberties, violation of Constitutional principles, international treaties, and almost drunken expenditure of financial and human resources. Other nations around the world have experienced acts of terror without such a spasm of unfocused and improperly focused activity. The reaction to terror is not to bankrupt oneself and repeatedly inflict injury on oneself. The intent of terror is to get the target to react in just the very way we have. Despite your own very noble intentions and efforts, we are clearly less than what we were–both in our own eyes and in that of the rest of the world. It is in that very real sense that Bin Laden is winning. It is a war of ideas, sir; and as such will not and cannot be won with bullets and bombs. Bin Laden has no army. We're shooting at shadows and ghosts and building a huge reservoir of frustration and fatigue in the process–and not just in this country. The mere fact that there hasn't been a successful attack here since 9/11 is wonderful; but it is not an indicator of success in an overall sense.

Rather than reassuring, I find it perverse that if we are truly at war justly that only a small subset of the population– volunteer or not– is asked to be aware of it and shoulder even a tiny share of its burdens. I suspect that more hasn't been asked of the rest of us because the bedrock bankruptcy of the policy prosecuted may become apparent enough to force a re-evaluation that some do not wish us to make.

As for blaming (at least in part) "liberal media" for what you say was the seminal event in this "war", I think you've played your hand poorly on that one, my friend, and laid bare a bias unsupported by fact. I've learned not to try and argue a point where bias has overcome the speaker's ability to reason.