The American Spectator : Know When to Hold Them

Text Size

Know When to Hold Them

By Ben Lerner on 12.17.09 @ 6:07AM

What happens if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed & Co. are set free?

So what happens if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other 9/11 masterminds, whose trials Attorney General Eric Holder has decided will take place in the criminal justice system in New York, get off on a technicality or are somehow O.J.-Simpsoned by a jury? Can we still hold them? If not, where do they go?

These questions have been on the minds of millions of Americans, including members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Committee recently convened an oversight hearing to examine Holder's decision to bring the perpetrators of the worst-ever terrorist attack on American soil to trial in civilian court, rather than before a military commission, where legal procedures more in line with the wartime circumstances of the enemy's capture would apply. Holder's responses to these questions before the committee, however, reveal a troubling lack of recognition that a lot can go wrong once you bring KSM and company into the Article III court system -- including having to contend with what the Supreme Court may have to say about what happens to these defendants if something indeed does go wrong at trial.

During the hearing, in response to a question from Senator Herb Kohl (D-Wisconsin) about Holder's game plan in the event of acquittal or mistrial, Holder stated he had instructed the prosecutors: "Failure is not an option." This response was met with audible laughter from 9/11 family members in attendance. The absurdity of the Attorney General's "trust me" approach was palpable.

But even Holder has conceded -- perhaps inadvertently, perhaps not -- that the fate of these uniquely situated defendants should his team fail to secure a conviction is really not up to him. Take his written response to Committee questions preceding his live testimony:

"Where we have legal detention authority, as the President has stated, we will not release anyone into the United States if doing so would endanger our national security or the American people."

Interesting choice of words.

The question of whether such legal authority exists, of course, will ultimately rest not with Holder, but with the judge presiding over the case. So while Holder and Obama cast themselves as tough guys who refuse to release a dangerous terrorist into the United States in the event of inadmissible evidence, mistrial, or acquittal, this posturing is effectively nothing more than, as Cully Stimson of the Heritage Foundation aptly describes it, punting to the judiciary.

This is all the more so in light of what the Supreme Court has said, and may possibly say in the near future, about the matter of indefinite administrative detention.

The Court weighed in on this issue in the 2001 case, Zadvydas v. Davis. Zadvydas, a resident alien born to Lithuanian parents, was convicted of a crime in the United States and, after serving his prison sentence, was further confined pending deportation. The statute that the Department of Justice was relying on for detention provided for 90 days to deport Zadvydas, and allowed for certain classes of aliens -- including aliens removed for national security reasons or judged by the Attorney General to be a risk to the community -- to be detained indefinitely beyond the 90-day removal period.

No country would take Zadvydas, and his detention went beyond the statutory 90-period. The Supreme Court weighed in, stating: "…once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent." The Court did allow for the possibility that a certain class of deportable aliens could be indefinitely detained -- those to whom a "special justification" applied, one that "outweighs the 'individual's constitutionally protected interest in avoiding physical restraint.'" The Court then went one step further and said that legislation authorizing indefinite detention might be narrowly applied "to a small segment of particularly dangerous individuals…say suspected terrorists." But Zadvydas did not fit that category, making his detention unconstitutional by virtue of his physical presence in the United States.

While defenders of Holder's decision to try 9/11 suspects in civilian court might be tempted to point to Zadvydas to show that these defendants fit into the Court's "special justification" group that could constitutionally be held indefinitely after a failed trial, it is cold comfort. Zadvydas after all still carved out a presumption against indefinite detention for deportable aliens. And in any event, this is the Court that since 9/11, in the midst of war, has steadily granted more rights to the terrorists we are fighting -- ruling in Hamdi that American citizens detained as unlawful combatants were entitled to challenge their detentions before a judge; ruling in Hamdan that military commissions had to comply with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the 1949 Geneva Conventions; and ruling in Boumediene that foreign enemy combatants were entitled to habeas review in federal court. All this of course was before the confirmation of liberal justice Sonya Sotomayor to the bench, who may be followed by additional left-leaning nominees in the not-too-distant future.

Then we have the remaining Uighur detainees at Gitmo. The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear their case, in which their attorneys will argue that they have a constitutional right to be released into the United States. Although these detainees are in fact trained jihadists captured in Afghanistan, our government previously (and erroneously) determined that they are not a threat to the United States because their primary grievance is with China, and are therefore cleared for release. However, because no other countries are willing to take these remaining apparently not-so-harmless Uighurs, they remain at Gitmo.

If the Court rules in their favor and orders their release into the United States, and KSM's case is somehow thrown out, his attorneys will surely argue that their client's situation is sufficiently similar to that of the Uighurs. They both will effectively have been "cleared", they will argue, and cannot constitutionally be held indefinitely simply because no other country will take them.

This may seem like a range of hypotheticals. Maybe Holder's team will actually get slam-dunk convictions in Article III courts. Maybe, in the event they do not convict, another country will take in KSM and his co-conspirators. Maybe the government will have legal grounds to detain KSM indefinitely inside the United States after all.

Maybe. But if we are required now to look at what may appear to be outlandish scenarios, it is because the Attorney General has chosen to take a gamble on criminal trials, and force the rest of us to assume all the risks that go with them -- including the risk that we will be legally unable to hold the perpetrators of 9/11 now in custody and have to release them here.

topics:
Eric Holder, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad

About the Author

Ben Lerner is a Vice President at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (82) | Leave a comment

Ret. Marine| 12.17.09 @ 7:02AM

The terrorist, in this case, the Holy Land foundation, convicted last year for material and monetary support of a designated terrorist organization openly stated, and the evidence was admitted into trial, they would bring this country down by our own miserable hands, does any one now dispute these claims? It would seem the terrorist, with the help of the AG and pretender-n-theif, are smarter than the two would reconize. There is something terribly wrong with this decission to bring these mutts to a class 111 trial right here on the homefield. My guess is this is was in the decission process of the AG, or the pretender-n-theif. But now, they are going to have to reconize the threat to all citizens of this Country if these mutts are released, would this not be grounds for high crimes against the USA? Aiding and abeiting?

Deborah D| 12.17.09 @ 8:41AM

I'm with you Ret. Marine. The insanity of this decision belies any rational reason whatsoever. Those running this government don't give a rat's patootie for this country or (and especially) the American people. They want to bring it all down on our heads. This is just one more nail in our collective coffin. They want to "fundamentally change" the United States of America, and boy, have they done nothing but attempt that at every turn since (really before) January 20, 2009.

I think there are impeachable offenses going on in this administration, and there are illegalities going on in the administration (at all levels) and in Congress. The American people have to take the country back -- the sane must not allow insanity to destroy us.

Bruce| 12.17.09 @ 12:04PM

As long as the commies hold a Congressional majority you can forget about anyone filing Articles of Impeachment no matter how well deserved. Actually - if anyone had the guts to pursue the challenges to Zeros eligibility to serve as President, this would not be an issue for Congress to be involved in in the first instance!

Al Adab| 12.17.09 @ 1:46PM

Impeachable offenses? Undoubtedly you are right Deborah. Just think President Biden and ask how you would vote. Why was Clinton not removed? President Al Gore. Why did the hound Agnew from office before going after Nixon?

As desireable as the rule of law and our Constitution in fact is, are not such consequences worse? Puts us in a real dilemma doesn't it?

Deborah D| 12.17.09 @ 5:45PM

Al Adab -- I know...Biden? Pelosi? -- My God, the wackos are deep, aren't they? Impeachment might have to go many, many times (and, aren't they all the same? Haven't they all committed those offenses?)

First, we must take back Congress...then, who knows? These people will not stop...they have all the power and they are giddy with it. They think nothing of the American people. I pray for my country every day.

Karibou Kid| 12.17.09 @ 7:12AM

This is absolute, unadulterated madness. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that holder and obamao are the enmies within. They are stupid, too.

BREDNG10| 12.17.09 @ 7:44PM

Karibou Kid,Of course they are!Wasn't Holders group the attorneys for the Gitmo terrorists??Enemies within or conflict of interest or treason.Crimes and dismeanors anyone?

Melvin| 12.17.09 @ 7:56AM

There is something that we must address that is quietly and efficiently running in the background of this and the government in general.
I have been doing some amateur research into a woman called Sibel Edmonds.
"Sibel Edmonds' case is about the intersection of illegal arms trafficking, heroin trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activities and the corruption of many "highly-recognizable, highly-known names" in and around the US government, taken from Freedom Phoenix."
Some of you here may even be aware of her and her former employer the FBI. To put it bluntly this is one very, very smart cookie who uncovered some shady dealings that the FBI, Turkish government, and very high placed US government elected officials.
You can google her name and a plethora of information comes up that will surprise the dog squeeze out of you. This woman is no Alex Jones or Steve Quayle, she opened some doors that she shouldn't have.
Point is, foreign governments regardless of nationality have direct and effective access to those in the Senate and the House and other functionary drones.
"OK Melvin, so what else is new, we've known this for years now."
Yes this is true, but I had absolutely no idea to the extent of the foreign networks inside our
government.
So how does this scenario affect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other 9/11 masterminds? Money people, vast sums of money that we have no comprehension of how much will get this murdering bastard off.
Simply, a military tribunal on a restricted faraway island, cannot be bribed, but someone in the Department of Justice and a Democrat controlled House, Senate, and White House can.
Nothing like a well placed discreet campaign contribution to grease the skids of justice ehh?
Think seriously about this people, this isn't because of too much caffeine this morning, this is very bad juju.

Mattled| 12.17.09 @ 8:03AM

Somebody, somewhere in the RNC has to get a set a cajones and start putting out some effective ads.

Put a picture of Odoogie, Matthews, Olberman and KSM on a billboard together with BFF on it.

The MSM will scream like stuck pigs. Good.

Let's start getting the message out.

The MSM are no different than Al Qaeda.

Road Kill| 12.17.09 @ 8:42AM

This is a very slippery slope. "What was Holder and Obama thinking?" As it stands KSM and Co. have a heck of a case against the USA. For Holder to say that they must be convicted cheapens the American trial process. If they must be convicted why waste the time, effort, and money? It's obviously show time!! Melvin is correct in that the smell and gifts of money makes the District of Crimminals go insane. This alone can be the answer (but don't forget the socialist agenda) as to why our elected leaders, once ensconced in the big house, fail to govern in the best interests of the Republic. "But they are interested in what is best for this country," you say! Hardly, go past the evening news bites or what is published in the domestic liberal rags, filter out Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck. Instead read independent or European news sources, visit other web sites, observe our leader's actions, weigh their rulings and legislative decisions, and then give your findings consideration. Hard core terrorists on the streets of America is a real possibility.

sagman888| 12.17.09 @ 9:16AM

We have a costly, state-of-the-art, secure facility outside the country, and we're going to spend another fortune to upgrade a facility in the heartland to house these guys. Why? World opinion.

If I to choose one thing to prove the incompetence of this administration, Gitmo to Illinois would be it.

Appleby| 12.17.09 @ 9:44AM

Wait until the Poor Pitiful Terrorists find out that Illinois is not in the sunny Caribbean....

L. Ross| 12.17.09 @ 11:32AM

I think if we are going to open a facility on US soil, I think it should be in the Aleutian Island chain. Love to see them escape from there.

Franklin| 12.17.09 @ 12:17PM

I thought the same thing! The furtherst one out!

Al Adab| 12.17.09 @ 1:18PM

But gang, that location would provide jobs in the dnagerous Sarah Palin state. This administration would never do that as they are busy paying off their constituants, like Illinois. Notice where the stim money went?

Mattled| 12.17.09 @ 9:25AM

Holder reminds me of the character (i think it was a weasel?) in Lion King?

Madagascar?

The way his upper lip juts out and with the mustache making it even more pronounced.

Makes me giggle----kind of like OdumbOne does when he speaks.

Can't help it. He makes me laugh.

JP| 12.17.09 @ 9:50AM

There is something not quite right with an AG who wishes to force a very high level "show-trial". Holder and his ilk have fought and have gotten Habeous Corpus rights for the terrorists. Yet, when it comes down to actually instituting these rights through due process, the AG promises the people that the entire thing is for show. "Failure is not an option" may be a nice cliche, but as any trial lawyer will tell you, nothing is guarenteed. No one knows how a jury or judge may behave. Is the AG, our legal protector, advocating a show trial? Does he have other show trials up his sleeve?

Does Holder and his team of federal prosecutors realize what lengths a lawyer will go to in order to win the "Trial of the Century?" We live in a society obsessed with the Celebrity.Not even judges are also not immune (Remember Judge Ito?).

Obama and Holder have opened up a pandora's box. And in the process they are making a mockery of our sacred Due Process rights.

Doctor Right| 12.17.09 @ 11:26AM

"Obama and Holder have opened up a pandora's box. And in the process they are making a mockery of our sacred Due Process rights."

Which, of course, is their aim...As well as to cover for some of Obama's Muslim beloved brethren.

Tim| 12.17.09 @ 10:33AM

This was obviously Obama's insane decision, with Holder as front man and, if neceassary, fall guy. The heat should be focused on Obama not Holder.

c. j. acworth| 12.17.09 @ 4:55PM

Doesn't matter whose decision it was, Obama is the guy in the Oval Office, and as someone once said, "The buck stops here."

davelnaf| 12.17.09 @ 11:07AM

In Liberal World every human being is entitled to the same rights enjoyed by every American and it doesn’t matter if these non-Americans are demonstratively evil nor does it matter if they were caught bearing arms against American soldiers. This kind of thinking also makes generous room for the notion that when an individual so chooses he or she can option their ‘right’ to enter the US illegally and instantly become a defacto American. Likewise, the assumption of innocence of a blood-stained terrorist until he is proven guilty is all about helping a liberal feel even warmer inside. Whatever other distortions of commonsense were in play in the Obamanoids’ decision to bring KSM and gang to NY their ongoing ‘get back at evil Bush’ tantrum probably played its part in coloring their ‘judgment .’

Doctor Right| 12.17.09 @ 11:24AM

I hope these murdering scum are released.

It will be the end of Obama's Presidency...Hell, it may end THAT day...And the end of the Democrat Party.

Then we can track these clowns down and introduce them to Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson...Up close and personal.

Franklin| 12.17.09 @ 12:21PM

It's a scary thought, but you could be right. The military could give us a hand at catching them. They can also arrest Obama et al and put them all in the same cage.

VinnieCCT| 12.17.09 @ 8:43PM

I agree. Their release will be the nail in the progressive coffin. Besides, where in the U.S. could these people possibly live? Most likely, they will flee the country and then the "company" will "take care" of them.

Bram| 12.17.09 @ 11:26AM

Hard to believe Obama is reckless enough to gamble his presidency on an unprecedented court case. The day KSM is released on a technicality, the Obama presidency is effectively over.

JP| 12.17.09 @ 2:02PM

Yeah, but just think of the book deal KSM will get! Meanwhile the President will go into hiding in Indonesia! Picture KSM doing the talk show/book circuit while The Anointed One is hiding in some isloated Mosque!

c. j. acworth| 12.17.09 @ 4:59PM

Not really, Bram. He'll just blame Bush, and the same deluded crowed who voted for him in the first place will go along.

molonlabe28| 12.17.09 @ 11:38AM

I think that, at a minimum, there will be a hung jury at KSM's trial.

Discovery will, as intended by the Obama administration, reveal and compromise our military and intelligence efforts in the fight against radical Islam.

I am not, however, worried about the consequences of the release of dangerous terrorists, whose visages have become widely known as a result of a well-publicized tiral, into our heartland, because I trust our populace to deal with them more effectively than our government.

Dixie Pixie| 12.17.09 @ 12:08PM

Gentlemen I disagree.

This is Justice sacrificed on the High Altar of Legalism.
Obama and his ilk have created a religion of the worship of Legal Procedures.
All must bow to the Great God Judicatory and the Legalism Rites of Procedures.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.17.09 @ 12:24PM

Folks,
As you all know, I try very hard to peer into the future...and peer into motivations.

C'mon, people!
These people don't take wild risks, without a reason.....or reasons. It is certainly not "insanity" from their point of view. It is not a simple "oopsie we overlooked X or Y or Z"
As the author once said, "There is a method to their madness."
Well,
I think we all know...(heh, most of us), what their overall intent is....their goal if you will.

Everything else...EVERYTHING ELSE...is simply a means to that end. Just fill in the blanks in terms of the various "means". Just for instance:
1. A distraction...any distraction
2. Dispiriting us
3. Frightening us
4. Splitting us up fighting each other ie: third party
fantasy-land bull corn.
5. Baring our throats to terrorism...martial law?
6. Hoping one of us goes nuts and starts shooting...
martial law? deferring elections?
7. Getting some of their own...acting as if they are
us...to start shooting...martial law...deferred
elections?
Add your own thoughts...but keep in mind that we must not forget ...their end intent....
UNFETTERED POWER! (get over it.)

Tony in Central PA| 12.17.09 @ 12:46PM

I watched some of Holder's testimony before the committee. He seemed confused and caught off guard by several of the most basic questions. It was painful to watch somebody so entrusted with our safety display such apparent incompetence.

I'll bet anything KSM and his codefendants are going to be well - represented. Their attorneys are going to ask a lot of questions that Eric Holder probably didn't consider, such as, " Why weren't the defendants advised of their Miranda rights at the time of capture ? " and " How can these defendants receive a fair trial when the President and the AG have already publicly stated there is no chance they could be freed and that ' failure is not an option' ?". There are many other questions that would undermine our system's guarantee of a fair trial instead of the apparent " show trial " this Administration desires.

There's a good reason we haven't tried enemy combatants in civilian courts before and we're going to be getting a national history lesson in why we haven't thanks to our historically ignorant Administration.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.17.09 @ 1:06PM

Hi Tony
The key phrase in your comment was: "apparent incompetence".

"Dumb like a fox" is the phrase you are looking for.
See my comment above.

Tony in Central PA| 12.17.09 @ 2:03PM

I have to disagree here, Ken. I think Holder is a political appointee who got where he is mainly by championing the liberal orthodoxy. He's part of a large group that has abandoned things like reason and common sense. He's probably not had to do much thinking in his work because his ideology did the thinking for him. The bad news for us is that these people went from their Fantasy Islands in academia and the judicial world to running our country. We lose.

Al Adab| 12.17.09 @ 1:23PM

This entire dag and pony show is simply another example of the Administration pandering to both the Left and the "international community". They believe, as a matter of Faith, that the safety and sovereignty of the United States is secondary to "proper" international views.

Witness bowing, personal letters now to N. Korea leader, the dictator of the day tour, Honduras wrong knee jerk positioning and the list goes on. We are in the hands of internationalists; not those who adhere to our Constuitution.

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 5:45PM

Al Adab --

You should read a biography of Jefferson. He was an "internationalist" in many respects.

But seriously: this administration is not "pandering" to the left. Obama has tripled our commitment to Afghanistan; he's bombing parts of Pakistan. His letter to N Korea simply restated the Bush position: that N Korea should return to the 6 party talks.

Bush held hands with the Prince of Araby. Obama made a curt bow to a king. Big deal.

Al Adab, my friend, this country is in serious trouble. Wringing hands over symbolic gestures and the hysterical nonsense Beck frets over on television is not the way to make this country stronger.

What is?

Elvis your television. Insist on massive increases in spending on education and infrastructure. Create market incentives for innovative research and design. Abandon "international" adventurism. By the end of next year, we will have spent TWO TRILLION dollars on Iraq. What's it gotten us? Are we safe now? Give me a break! Everytime a terrorist cell or plot is uncovered and thwarted, the reason is that law enforcement agencies here and abroad worked well together. Fighting terrorism, in the end, isn't the show 24, and it isn't bombs and tanks and airplanes. It's just detective work. I know that's not as entertaining, and I know that doesn't feel like the vengeance we so crave with such blood thirst. But it is the truth.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.17.09 @ 2:22PM

Well Folks,
As far as I am concerned...THIS IS "The twilight's last gleaming". ...when so proudly we hailed.

...are we up to it?

Must our country be "re-born" in blood?

Al Adab| 12.17.09 @ 2:35PM

Agreed. I personally enjoy the 4th verse:
"Oh, thus be it ever when free men shall stand
Between their loved homes and the wars desolation
Blessed with victory and peace, may this heaven rescued land
Praise the power that hath made and preserved it a nation.
Then conquer we musr, when our cause it is just
And this be our motto, in God is our trusr
And the star spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave."

With you Old Tex, I hope we are brave enough.

Ret. Marine| 12.18.09 @ 4:58AM

Why yes it should Ken....besides what an excuss to off all the libtards all in one big fight to their deaths. Sounds good to me. I might even think the good lord is giving us clues as to why this must be done now, or forver we will have to live our peace into despotism.

ACynic| 12.17.09 @ 3:21PM

Frankly, it's hard to see how the Arab pig terrorist KSM can be convicted.
Already, Barack Hussien Bin Obama and many in the US Congress have stated that this Arab pig terrorist was tortured.
Well, that is all you need to have all his "confessions" tossed out.
Further, when captured, he was never informed of his Miranda "rights."
Well, in any court in the USA that alone will set you free.
Lastly, his lawyers will demand - and legally so - to see, literally, the evidence against him. Of course, much of this is top secret. If the US refuses to turn over this evidence, then what?

Get ready for the pig arab mass murderer to walk.

Just goes to show when you elect a dedicated Marxist Leninist communist-fascist as president, you have a threat to the USA that is far far greater than that posed by Al Qaeda and Obama's good pal Osama Bin Laden.

Al Adab| 12.17.09 @ 3:37PM

Cynic,
Both you and Anthony below are right on. No defense team worth their salt- and KSM will have the very best (at our expense)- will let pass the prejudicial comments from the Pres. and his AG. That alone is enough to contaminate any potential jury. Can you imagine finding anyone in NY who never heard about 9-11? This entire administration does their thinking from ideology and campaign speeches not from law and reality. Should have been a military tribunal and hanging years ago.

Anthony| 12.17.09 @ 3:31PM

Both Obama and Holder are poor excuses for lawyers. Their collective knowledge of the Federal Rules of Evidence and Criminal Procedure is breathtakingly ignorant. But they must be forgiven; they were too busy taking gender rights courses and law and ecology, instead of basic litigation training.
Besides, we have nothing to fear, both Obama & Holder have pronounced these men guilty and have already imposed the death penalty. It's a done deal, folks. Don't you believe our fearless leader?

canuckistani| 12.17.09 @ 4:17PM

What you all afraid of? Bush blew it with the decision to bring these tools over to gitmo in the first place. If they are set free, hand them over to the Afghan government for a trial over there. You want to see score-settling? And these are scores way beyond our simple comprehension. They're all dead men no matter what happens. If we try them here, we can reclaim some of our bullshit moral superiority and sleep better knowing we have the flag to wrap ourselves in. Be wary, the US is being shut out of oil leases in Iraq as we speak. What was the point again? Oh yeah, protecting the phantom state of Israel and their undying quest for condos on a rock pile. Seem worth all of the fuss to you?
Enough Marines have died protecting Israel over the years, and the last 7 included. Perhaps we should tell our "friends" to make a deal and stop asking us for unqualified support. I've always believed we should have time-shares at resorts in Haifa and Telaviv that we've subsidized for over 60 years. Nice beaches, pretty women and decent food. At least shoreleave for our fighting men?

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 5:36PM

What happens when KSM is set free? This question is on the minds of "millions of Americans" because they pay attention to silly media outlets that entertain foolish questions.

What happens if KSM is set free? Well, let me ask you a question, Mr. Lerner.

What happens when the Atlantic Ocean turns to yogurt, as is foretold in the twenty fourth book of Revelation?

What happens when the Cow jumps over the Moon?

Why don't you get serious, for a change?

This country has serious problems; the causes of most of these problems are enormously complicated and generally not attributable to one political philosophy or another. The notion that pure "conservatism" or pure "liberalism" has answers to the threat of terrorism or the likelihood of a decade of double digit unemployment is just childish. I'm sick to death of adults who do their best to think and act like children. Brazen ignorance in the mode of Beck, Palin, and W will not save you, and absurd fear-mongering about terrorists just makes everything worse. Grow, the hell, up. Do you honestly believe for one moment that if KSM is acquitted of the charges he's to be tried for the government will simply let him walk?

There are plenty of good arguments against trying KSM in New York. There are thoughtful people -- some conservatives, some liberals -- making those arguments. But it takes work. You actually have to think about what you are writing. You don't just shovel any bullshit that comes into your head at your reader and count on them being know-nothing tea-baggers who don't give a damn about reason or facts. Jesus, Christ. The mediocrity of "conservative" discourse is shameful.

Margie| 12.17.09 @ 7:02PM

Come on, LibRead,
Stop using the Lord's name in vain. You're a Christian, right?

Paul McGrath| 12.17.09 @ 5:45PM

What I find amusing is that the Obama administration has apparently decided to sidestep the whole messy problem of taking prisoners by instead blasting our enemies--and anyone who happens to be near them--to smithereens with unmanned drone missiles. They've already used these attacks more often than were used during the entire Bush administration.

How clever.

jarjar| 12.17.09 @ 6:59PM

This is yet another reason why you don't torture.

Margie| 12.17.09 @ 7:00PM

Where's J. Edgar Hoover when you need him?
(sigh)

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 9:08PM

He's dead. But check out your most flamboyant local gay bar and you'll find a lot of men just like him.

Margie| 12.17.09 @ 9:27PM

Party pooper! I bet you've never wanted to conjure someone up before.
And as far as I know, the man wasn't what you say. That was a Left Wing Extremist rumor.

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 10:12PM

Margie,

I hate to break it to you. J Edgar Hoover was as gay as a three dollar bill. It's historical fact. Read any biography of him.

Hoover had a long time "life companion" with whom he lived until he died. As if they were married. It's true.

If I could conjure anyone, it would be RFK. It's a nice thought.

brown| 3.4.10 @ 4:06AM

Based on all sources and based on all of the recommendations of the world and the great work and the research that has been done, I am quite confident that the outcomes in these cases will be successful and he will be subject to the most exacting demands of just. The American people insist on the sentencing of shake. But his confession could be called into question during trial.Masters Tickets

Odysseus| 12.17.09 @ 7:06PM

To answer the question "what happens if KSM goes free:" The answer is that the Democratic party is done for. They have let the kooky wing of their party take over and it is going to cost them dearly.

CountryJo| 12.17.09 @ 7:22PM

I am beginning to think they want to see him acquitted.

When the President of the country is on the record as saying he is confident of a conviction, where is the presumption of innocence, which KSM is entitled to, since they have given him the gift a regular trial?

Holder is all but telling people to convict him.

If a “regular” criminal were on trial, I think both these things would be cause for a mistrial.

And if I were on the jury, I would take both those things into consideration, and I say that having lost a co-worker on Flight 11.

They are either naïve to the point of insanity, stupid beyond belief, or are intentionally looking to get him set free.

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 9:10PM

They WANT him acquitted?

How do you people end up being capable of convincing yourself of such nonsense.

For the love of God: TURN OFF right wing radio. Read a good NEWSPAPER. Stop marginalizing yourselves in these foolish, demented backwaters. You sound stark, raving mad, for crying out loud.

JP| 12.17.09 @ 10:36PM

LR,
Do you think KSM deserves to be acquitted? Is he innocent until proven guilty? What should the evidence be? Should the jury listen to evidence obtained during the Bush42 years? After all, that evidence was most probably obtained via illegal means (torture, illegal wiretaps, via criminals no better than KSM himself? Should that evidence be thrown out unless a "reliable witness" can be deposed? Is KSM entitled to the same standards of evidence that a simple thief or mugger is entitled to? Unless the prosecution is able to provide evidence that can show the entire chain of evidence, should all that evidence be thrown out?

If you answer "NO" to any of these questions, are you for throwing the case out, and releasing said "criminals" back to US streets?

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 11:45PM

1. I'm opposed to trying KSM in civilian court.

2. However, I don't think a good case is being made against the trial.

3. There is no way in hell KSM would be released for any reason. If he is acquitted, he can and would be detained as an enemy combatant anyway -- indefinitely.

The problem with this thread and article is that it offers the most hysterical, extreme, and really zany interpretation of Obama's motives possible.

These arguments don't say ANYTHING about Obama. They just make the people that make them sound foolish.

But that's not all. As I've argued many times here, the Glenn Beckification of the right is harming the body politic because it's draining the very act of dissent of credibility.

The state and the corporation would like nothing more than for dissent to be carried out by rodeo clowns.

brown| 3.4.10 @ 4:09AM

I have the solution. Perhaps Bruce Ratner is willing to donate a portion of his real estate empire to house Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his buddies in New York. Maybe he could come up with another eminent domain-stimulus scheme where he doesn't even have to pay as much for it or where he could even turn a profit? Now that's a win-win but will definitely get him his Masters Badges

misterbee| 12.17.09 @ 7:57PM

"The day KSM is released on a technicality, the Obama presidency is effectively over."

Respectfully disagree, Bram. Please don't think that Oba-mao will just quietly leave town. He would declare marshall law and seek to have the military take over the country. NEVER underestimate the depths of evil to which these people will sink. They have devoted their lives to the overthrow of our constitutional republic and they have never been closer to their goal. Don't expect them to slack up now.

VinnieCCT| 12.17.09 @ 8:53PM

Couple of problems with your theory...

1. To declare martial law, the people would have to be disarmed.
2. The military would have to be loyal to him.
3. Thank God (and our founding fathers) for the second amendment.

Paul| 12.17.09 @ 7:58PM

If KSM follows his lawyers' advice and pleads not guilty, the government will not be able to convict him in a civilian court.

KSM wasn't Mirandized, all of his previous statements will be inadmissible as the result of torture, chain of custody regarding any physical evidence was not maintained. Basically, they have no admissible evidence that he did anything wrong at all.

The only chance the gov't has of convicting him is if he decides to cooperate by maintaining his desire to be a "martyr" to the cause, reaffirms his guilt, and asks for the death penalty.

We'll see. It's really all up to him.

Liberal Reader| 12.17.09 @ 9:18PM

Paul --

You're getting dangerously close to making sensible, sane points in your post. Think carefully if you want to go any further in this way: you'll be a lonely man around here.

The REAL problem with trying KSM in a civilian court is this:

While the government can skirt the issue of Miranda, and some of the other concerns you raise, it sets an awful precedent.

If the government can water board KSM almost 200 times and then STILL claim to be giving him a fair trial, it's not too long before the government may look at other menaces and wonder why people can't be water boarded to thwart them.

In the end, there are greater security threats to Americans than Al Quaeda. 9.11. was an awful act of mass murder and terrorism. No question. But violent drug gangs pose a continuing threat to our citizens that is probably greater than the threat posed by Al Quaeda.

Why shouldn't the government then capture and torture gang members?

Why shouldn't the government torture ANY individual involved in a criminal conspiracy?

In the end, this is not really a Constitutional issue. It's not clear to me that the Constitution precludes torture.

But our tradition, since Washington, is to hold torture in the deepest contempt. We know it is practiced by the weak, by the illegitimate, and by the tyrannical. We know torturers are eventually exposed and reviled. We know that the world has silent scorn for the torturer, since he shows his profound weakness in torturing. So we don't torture, and the government should never be able to say it can set aside torture and offer a fair trial.

Margie| 12.17.09 @ 9:54PM

In the spirit of Bill Clinton- It all depends on your definition of torture."
Come on LibRead. You know full well the terrorist is an enemy combatant and ought to be executed.
Good evening.

JoshInHB| 12.17.09 @ 10:33PM

Liberal Reader-"If the government can water board KSM almost 200 times and then STILL claim to be giving him a fair trial, it's not too long before the government may look at other menaces and wonder why people can't be water boarded to thwart them"

I Think this may be the real game that Holder and O are playing. And there's no doubt the posters on this board will applaud that decision.

Then shortly thereafter, O will say its time to fight the "new terrorist threat", namely American right wingers (patriots). The precedents will have been set. We will slide to tyranny.

DaveS| 12.17.09 @ 8:13PM

KSM was about to plead guilty in late-2008, take the death penalty, and go to his eternal reward. If a civilian court does the same thing, what's the difference? I'll tell you: ex post facto Bush assasination. And what if Khalid benefits from a hung jury? To borrow a phrase: ending Obama as we know it by stupidity assassination, and ending American standing in the world. Either way, a President is assassinated and the Colosseum crowd is entertained. It is time to revoke the accreditation of the law school from which Holder emerged. These clowns are the worst.

Gloria Steinberg| 12.17.09 @ 8:34PM

If these guys are freed on a technicality, or for any reason, Eric Holder should be arrested immediately and tried for treason. And on November 8th, 2012, when he is defeated, Barack Obama should be arrested and tried also, along with Rahm Emanuel and the rest of Obama's socialist cronies.

haydn| 12.17.09 @ 8:53PM

america will be on trial, not ksm. release ksm in new york would be at his own peril. imagine an angry new york lesbian and ksm going toe to toe. ksm wouldn't stand a chance.

JP| 12.17.09 @ 10:44PM

"In the end, there are greater security threats to Americans than Al Quaeda. 9.11. was an awful act of mass murder and terrorism. No question. But violent drug gangs pose a continuing threat to our citizens that is probably greater than the threat posed by Al Quaeda"

Violent drug gangs didn't hicjack 3 airlines and fly them into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Voilent drug gangs didn't sink the USS Cole; violent drug gangs didn't blow up 2 embassies in East Africa, or supply weapons to Somali militias in 1993.

BTW, should KSM's lawyers demand a trial outside of Manhatten? Should all evidence gathered against KMS by our intelligence operatives and foreign operatives be deemed illegal? Should KSM only be tried by evidence gleamed by "normal" law enforecements? Should the trial judge throw out all evidence obtained by either the FBI, CIA, or foreign operators unless said agencies can make these agents available for cross examination? Finally, should KSM be released if a jury cannot find him guilty in a court of law?

Huntingmoose| 12.17.09 @ 11:29PM

*******************************************
IT IS BARNEY FRANK ALL OVER AGAIN

"JUST ROLL THE DICE"

AND THIS TIME NOT WITH MONEY BUT WITH LIVES AT STAKE....

******************************************

Andrew B| 12.18.09 @ 4:55AM

AG Holder and President Obama have accomplished something truly remarkable: They have created a scenario where every possible outcome is a travesty.

If KSM is convicted in civilian court, it will only be because that court was willing to throw out every possible legal protection and precedent. He cannot possibly be found guilty under current law, as his rights were completely ignored on the battlefield (as they should have been) and in subsequent detention as an enemy combatant. Therefore, he can only be convicted if the Holder, Obama and their team is willing to "shred the Constitution", as the Right has been accused of doing for years.

If KSM is found not guilty (hung jury, etc.), it will be a gross miscarriage of justice, and will further undermine the American People's faith in the wisdom and power of government.

Either result, or any variation of the above, is a bad one.

KSM should have been interrogated and then executed. He even agreed with that sentiment, until he was given the chance for a big, showy turn upon the world stage.

Good going, Mr. Holder.

Washingtonista| 12.18.09 @ 10:02AM

Just where, Mr. Lerner, did you get your evidence that the Uyghurs in Guantanamo are "jihadists"? There simply IS no evidence to support this.

IL Patriot| 12.18.09 @ 10:35AM

When KSM et al are released into New York City, they will take their vouchers for "reparations" (courtesy of the U.S. Taxpayer) and walk straight to lower Manhatten. They will then laugh out loud and spit into the giant hole in the ground where the World Trade Centers once proudly stood. Then they will go into the new massive mosque which will be constructed next to the giant hole in the ground where prayers to thank Allah will be plentiful. The American people won't be surprised but the MSM will be. We're through the looking glass people......

Gerald Stephens| 12.18.09 @ 10:35AM

TO KEN (OLD TEXAN)…

and others of like mind. Edwin Vieira, Ph.D., J.D. (both from Harvard if it makes a difference to you) provides a fascinating historical review and analysis for DYI.

The title you will enjoy reading is: Constitutional “Homeland Security” Volume 1: The Nation in Arms.

It is available from the Committees of Safety.org

Should it be required, I will see you all at the bulwarks.

Gerald Stephens
Hartford, CT

P.S. Ken, seeing you in print again assured me they have not mucked with you to date.

dasboot| 12.18.09 @ 3:32PM

Once again, Holder hates America. This was clear to me from way before he became AG. I think alot of it has to do with his own self loathing; what with having to hide his homosexuality from everyone. Just look at his Freddie Mercury mustache. Just be yourself Eric. Thanks American voters for putting these communist nitwits into power. More advice for Holder: since you hate America so much, just leave. You are a multi-millionaire. Do us all a favor and move to France or Saudi Arabia.

Blacque Jacques Shellacque| 12.18.09 @ 10:09PM

I'll settle for an angry mob of New Yorkers descending on DC, dragging Holder out of his office, then administering the justice of their choosing...

Richard Baker| 12.19.09 @ 10:30AM

Doctor Right:
How about Mr. Weatherby or Mr. Barrett? I'm with you.

Redball6| 12.20.09 @ 1:26AM

So aah how many months or years before you folks see "US" in the street Armed and shooting! I think were in single digits! but of course I would think that being from Arizona, we kill snakes here

Rodger Smith| 12.21.09 @ 9:46PM

What happens if they are set free? Uh, gee, I thought that was OboHolder's plan to begin with. Obama is more dangerous than Adolf Hitler, as too many will soon find out...

allan guida| 2.5.10 @ 3:23PM

I have been thinking about KSM and 83 waterboardings (WB). If 10 WB's didn't work, why would 73 more do any good? Maybe the 84th would do it? I doubt it. KSM gave us no useful information.

asdfasd| 2.25.10 @ 3:27AM

When we need to convert AVCHD video on mac to other common and wanted video or audio formats, AVCHD Video Converter for Mac is always the first one that occures in our mind. What characteristics does this magic AVCHD Video Converter Mac have?
AVCHD Video Converter for Mac,AVCHD Converter for Mac

karen| 4.2.10 @ 4:45AM

For men always fit the occasion if there is any doubt about what a man should wear. Sometimes an invitation is not very specific about the www.herveleger-outlet.com
; or it’s a place you are not familiar with so you don’t know what the dress code for the venue is likely to be. www.us-chaneloutlet.comIt’s very embarrassing to be asked to put on something more suitable or to ‘up’ one’s dress standards before being allowed to enter a restaurant or nightclub.

zxcvzxcv| 4.7.10 @ 5:49AM

iTunes Converter is a professional and multifunctional software which can convert iTunes support formats, such as MP3, AIFF, WAV, MPEG-4, AAC, Apple Lossless, etc. to any other format and vice versa.
AVI to MP4 Converter is a professional and multifunctional software which can not only convert AVI to MP4, but also support converting between all other video formats, HD video formats included. In addition, AVI to MP4 Converter also functions as excellent AVI codec, audio converter, audio/picture extractor and video editor.

tyiue| 4.22.10 @ 2:33AM

ArenaBetting.com dukung fair play FIFA world cup AFSEL 2010Winning is without value if victory has been achieved ArenaBetting.com dukung fair play FIFA world cup AFSEL 2010 or dishonestly. Cheating is easy, but brings no pleasure. Playing ArenaBetting.com dukung fair play FIFA world cup AFSEL 2010 requires courage and character. It is also more satisfying. ArenaBetting.com dukung fair play FIFA world cup AFSEL 2010
always has its reward, even when the game is lost. Playing fair earns you respect, while cheats are detested. Remember: It's only a game. And games are pointless unless played ArenaBetting.com dukung fair play FIFA world cup AFSEL 2010

I’ll have a Poptropica full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You

Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale

You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need to jump up when the Hydra is about to strike. He will rear one of his heads back to attack and his eyes will bulge out. When this happens, jump up in the air and then try to land on top of his head. That head will get knocked out. When all five heads get knocked out, the Hydra will be asleep and you can click on him to get one of the scales. Poptropica I’ll have a full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. PoptropicaHaving trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You Poptropica