Civilian 9/11 Trial May Be Military Commission Instead

Eric Holder

DEVLIN BARRETT and BEN FELLER   02/12/10 11:02 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, after weeks of controversy over its proposal to hold a civilian terror trial in New York, gave ground Friday and revived the possibility of using a military tribunal to try professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Both Attorney General Eric Holder and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs did not rule out a military trial when asked about the Obama administration's options.

Trying Mohammed in military court would mark a further political retreat from Holder's announcement last year that the five Sept. 11 suspects now held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, would be tried in federal court in New York.

The Obama administration is trying to head off a possible vote in the Senate that could stop any terror suspects currently held at Guantanamo from being brought to the United States to face a civilian trial. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is offering such legislation, after losing a vote last year on the issue.

At stake is the public's perception of the administration's handling of national security, already shaken last year by strong congressional opposition to transferring any Guantanamo detainees to American soil. A Hill defeat over the trial issue could embolden the GOP minority to raise national security concerns in the midterm elections later this year.

The prospect of such a vote could test of how many moderate Democrats have abandoned Obama on the issue.

White House officials said Friday that Obama and his top advisers will play a direct role in ultimately deciding how to prosecute Mohammed. The administration initially decided to try the five terror defendants in New York but have since appeared to backtrack.

As a result of Holder's decision to seek a civilian prosecution, Bush-era military charges that had been pending against the five suspects were dismissed last month. Those military charges could now be revived.

The administration is reconsidering Holder's plan to put the five men on trial in a federal court in Manhattan, after local officials there balked at security and logistics complications.

"Obviously there are efforts on Capitol Hill through legislation to restrict either the type of or the venue of a trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his coconspirators. That, by definition, involves the White House and ultimately the president," Gibbs said.

"So since this effort has moved from strictly a Justice Department decision to something that's in the legislative arena, the White House – and by definition the president – are involved."

Gibbs also suggested critics' opposition is disingenuous.

"Some of the people that you hear now that are opposed to the trial in New York were in November supportive of the trial," Gibbs said.

The White House insisted it is sensitive to their concerns.

"We're going to take into account security and logistical concerns that those individuals now have," Gibbs said. "The cost of the trial, obviously, is one thing."

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who has repeatedly criticized Holder's decision to try Mohammed in New York, said the White House has bungled the issue from the start.

"What it shows is there was no preparation, no advance work done by the administration. It's one of the most irresponsible decisions anyone has ever made," said King.

For his part, Holder said he still expects Mohammed to be tried in a federal civilian court, but conceded it's possible that won't happen.

"At the end of the day, wherever this case is tried, in whatever forum, what we have to ensure is that it's done as transparently as possible and with adherence to all the rules," Holder told The Washington Post in an interview published in Friday's editions. "If we do that, I'm not sure the location or even the forum is as important as what the world sees in that proceeding."

The administration has been on the defensive about its record on terrorism since a Nigerian man allegedly tried to blow up an airliner landing in Detroit on Christmas. The suspect faces charges in federal court, but Republicans say the Democratic administration should treat such suspects not as criminals but war criminals.

Administration officials counter that the Christmas case was handled no differently than the Bush administration had handled similar earlier cases, and say Republicans are simply looking to rack up political points.

Some of the recent resistance to the administration, though, came from local officials in New York, both Democrat and Republican, who argued that putting Mohammed on trial there would put New Yorkers at risk of further attacks. They also worried aloud about the cost to taxpayers of hundreds of millions of dollars in security expenses and about the staggering toll on nearby businesses.

Holder still maintains that a civilian trial would be the best option for the case and "best for our overall fight against al-Qaida."

Obama said in a CBS interview that he hasn't ruled out holding the trial in New York federal court but was taking into account the objections of Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the city's police.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST NEW YORK

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, after weeks of controversy over its proposal to hold a civilian terror trial in New York, gave ground Friday and revived the possibility of using a militar...
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, after weeks of controversy over its proposal to hold a civilian terror trial in New York, gave ground Friday and revived the possibility of using a militar...
Filed by David Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 48
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:14 PM on 02/14/2010
It amazes me of the schizoprenic terrorist trial hypocrisy with american courts dealing with the apparent enemy combatants in local city. Is this how terrified americans really are or is it staging. Makes no sense. England, Canada, Spain and many more allied countries all tried their terrorists in local jurisdiction courts.. One of these  in Canada with the 18 caught terrorists was 20 minuts from my house, many went to school with my kids. I am not worried. Why is America the BBBBBBBBBBBBBig Cheeeeeeeeeeeeese of the World so terrified. It is nonsen se and stûpididy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:04 PM on 02/14/2010
It is a cover up, and the propaganda is thick and heavy to slip KSM into Dick Cheney's cover up 'military' system (Christmas T3rror Event, CIA saying a new a-t-t-a-c-k could happen within 6 months, Obama picking NYC instead of simply doing it before the Supreme Court, etc.)

US involvement in 9-1-1 is an open secret. There are plenty of sources that focus on an individual facet of 9-1-1. The three WTC buildings' collapse is a small piece, even irrelevant to KSM.

The ONLY forum where all of the currently disparate pieces can be put together and shown as "PROOF" is in KSM's civilian court (i.e. before the Supreme Court).

That is why this corrupt government will NEVER allow a civilian trial to occur. Thus, providing them plausible deniability indefinitely. Corrupt governments never allow real court cases to proceed that would fundamentally discredit themselves.

You have to be open to the possibility that elements within the US power structure are corrupt, if not, then you are like a good g-3-r-m-a-n from the thirties.
09:39 AM on 02/14/2010
Dear Mr. Holder-
Next time you do something this important, will you at least talk to the President first?
Its incredible to me that you would decide the location of the KLM trial without informing either the President or NYC officials.

Obama needs his people to me smart. He has enough problems with the ultra liberal wing of the party and the hypocritical-obstructionists Republicans to have you gum up the works too by giving them talking points.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Balzac
01:44 AM on 02/14/2010
All I can say is that if the case has been compromised badly enough, there's a chance of a mistrial or acquittal, I'd want the military trial.

If the prosecution thinks the case is a lock, let's have the civilian trial so the defense can dig up all the skeletons on Cheney's torture policy before we give Khalid Sheik Mohammed the death penalty.

I don't want Cheney getting off the hook on torture, but I don't want President Obama derailed by a trial which turns into a big can of worms.

It's a tough situation and the decision needs to be based on some well-considered scenarios which include all the possible routes to failure which could hobble President Obama's executive power and national security. Dick Cheney is praying for this to be some kind of disaster and his people are all waiting to sabotage it if they can.

The Supreme Court would love to get a piece of this. They want to make this trial into a farce, an albatross to hang around President Obama's neck so he gets discredited on national security and Cheney gets off the hook so he can run the anti-government without sweating his own culpability.

Dick Cheney wants the suspense to be over. He doesn't get to choose the time and the place, and the battleground when America judges him. The business of running the country comes before relieving Dick Cheney of the weight on his chest.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:14 PM on 02/13/2010
do it in the Supreme Court
06:55 PM on 02/13/2010
Just one more example of sniveling cowardice of the Obama Administration. How to lose you base and respect.
05:57 PM on 02/14/2010
It's Peter King (R), McCain (R), Bloomberg (R) (who was good with it until all the other Repugnants started wetting their pants about it) and (R) and (R) and (R).... snivel whine it's not safe it's too expensive be afraid............... so as much as I want them to say "Get over it, he needs to be tried", they do have to take a look. GET A GRIP AMERICANS - WHY DO YOU LET THE R'S SCARE YOU ABOUT THIS!??!?! I'm a New Yorker, I'm a block from the Trade Center hole - WE WANT THEM BROUGHT HERE AND TRIED! You can stay away from NY and change your Depends. Let us have justice!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Balzac
05:08 PM on 02/13/2010
It appears there are two possible legal entities which can be assigned to Khalid Sheik Mohammed for the purpose of legally processing him. He can be tried in the manner American citizens are tried, or he can be tried in the manner of a captured enemy in a military tribunal.

To me, it seems somewhat contrived after all this terrorist has been put through, and all this time he's been in American custody, to use the expedient battle-field justice system. It's not as if they're in some isolated outpost in which justice needs to be expedited quickly and efficiently.

I really wish the public dialogue on this issue were more in depth. The reporting on this seems to be just informing us in the manner of a sports reporter, telling us this or that team scored a point. Let's discuss the rights of foreign nationals in the United States, extradition treaties and the legal theory behind them, how treaties with foreign countries are made reference to in general within the constitution, the natural rights of individual people regardless of circumstances, the binding of a particular kind of legal process to a particular courthouse, etc. I'd really like to dig into this issue, and all the details of the case which are publicly available. I guess most reporters and news sources don't have the stomach for this kind of boring legal business.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Balzac
04:59 PM on 02/13/2010
People keep referring to courts as if the location of the court defines and limits the kinds of legal activities which can take place within.

People's apprehensions about the Khalid Sheik Mohammed trial are revolving around the issue of extensive torture and how that might impact the work of the prosecution.

The worst case scenario would be a trial which spiralled out of control with a supreme court intervention, a mistrial, an acquital, or a big freak out about the culpability of the last administration's policy of torture.

This is a big can of worms and it should not be allowed to derail President Obama's important and historical work. There are many more cases of torture which are available for which to set the precedents against torture and from which to put the last administration's policies in perspective.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
diamonds61
03:03 PM on 02/13/2010
Please move the trials to a more obscure location; we do not need another 9/11. Please reconsider ASAP to avoid placing America at risk. According to military intelligence, the terrorist already are here in our country and ready to strike. We, as Americans, need to become more vigilant and interested in our suroundings and neighbors. We cannot leave the safety and welfare of our country to any official anti-terroist agency or program; we need to notify the proper authorities of any unsual activities that we may witness. There are plenty of hot-line numbers to call; get involved and help protect our country.
10:43 AM on 02/13/2010
I'm an Obama guy but he's starting to worry me

The Republicans say no Public Option.....he takes Public Option off table
The Republicans say attacks on banks on wrong.....now CEO salaries are justified
The Republicans say no trial in NYC.....now military tribunals are being considered

Will he make a stand on anything?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:30 PM on 02/13/2010
He's an uncle tom for elite investors and the CEO class that talks a big game
09:30 AM on 02/13/2010
Eric is like pissed cause his law firm represents KSM....and they'd make a whole lot more money if it was in NYC...oh so sad Eric...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
boner
11:00 PM on 02/12/2010
American justice, especially for a trial of this magnitude isn't something to hide away in some corner of a military base. A military trial isn't for big shots like KSM, it's for the low level, no name pawns. The case caption will read, "The People of the United States of America vs. Khalid Sheik Mohammed". As one of the "people" I don't want my right to see that justice is served taken away from me, especially where their is no precedence to do so. Regarding the venue, as a New Yorker that lives with the daily threat of a terror attack, a trial wouldn't add even an ounce more threat. If I had my way, KSM would be tried in Macy's window!! Let's show off American justice for the world to see.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:41 PM on 02/12/2010
KSM knows too much.

KSM was a political trophy in the War on Terror

Cheney's tribunal system always had KSM in mind, the disposal

KSM is in the center of the Nine Eleven plot and circumstances

KSM and those circumstances MUST NEVER be revealed to the little people

Obama's job is to get KSM into Dick's cover-up system

There was never another option

You are seeing propaganda and history play out before your eyes Joe/Jane America
09:16 PM on 02/12/2010
I'm a New Yorker. New York will always be a target whether you have the trial here or not. Have the trial here. We are strong. Let's show the world our values and our system of justice. There is a better chance of KSM being convicted in a civilian court. Do some research. Tell me which terrorist has been convicted in a military tribunal. And if they have, how much time did they serve and where, and once released what country were they deported to. The terrorists that have been tried in a civilian court have ALL been convicted and are serving life sentences in AMERICA as I type this post. We need to think and not be emotional. We are being suckered by Al Qeada. This is want they want. They want us to be scared. They want us to give up our values. We are better than them.
03:35 PM on 02/12/2010
Looks to me like Holder want's to keep his current job.

If he sticks to KSM for NYC he then remains an albatross around Obama's neck.

If he backs off that decision, he removes Obama's albatross and also remains as AG.