USS Cole

New York Daily News: Keep 9/11 trial ‘the hell out’ of New York City (we say ‘not in America’)

The New York Daily News nearly matched their title ‘Keep the hell out: Obama must stop waffling and move 9/11 terror trial’ with the content of their editorial:

One of the most astonishing aspects of Obama’s struggle to find a location for perhaps the most important trial in American history is that the Justice Department got around to considering those “practical, logistical issues” only after Attorney General Eric Holder decided on New York.

Without consulting Mayor Bloomberg or Police Commissioner Ray Kelly in advance.

Without figuring the cost of security, estimated at $200 million a year, or making provision to pick up the city’s tab.

Without taking into account the extreme, long-term disruptions a trial would visit on downtown neighborhoods.

Without remembering the elemental truth that New Yorkers refuse to be played for chumps — a fact that puts Obama deep in the hole.

We’d be near full agreement with the Daily News had they not hedged by using ‘preferably’ in their closing line.

Since AG Eric Holder’s November 13, 2009 announcement, all major, national polls have shown a wide majority of Americans think that not only should the 9/11 trial not be conducted in New York City, foreign terrorists should not be afforded the Constitutional rights a federal court trial would provide them. Yes, some politicians would foolishly endanger the safety of their constituents and disrupt thousands of lives in their communities for years by inviting terror trials and detentions; they are the exception, not the rule.

Gitmo is no “black eye” on America; it is a uniquely suited, heavily defended, remote terrorist detention facility. Last year, during a meeting with 9/11 and U.S.S. Cole families, President Obama said Gitmo has been “confused with Abu Ghraib.” Our troops there are closely supervised by the DOJ and highly disciplined. The propaganda from the Left and al Qaeda would only move to the new locale if it is closed.

DOD sources have told us that had Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four fellow 9/11 conspirators been allowed to plead guilty and refused to appeal, the remaining prosecution costs for them would have been approximately $50,000. Had they not pled guilty and if they and all the other prosecutions were done by military commission at Gitmo, it would likely add tens of millions of additional dollars. Yet the total costs of prosecuting and detaining those now at Gitmo in the United States would run into the billions of dollars.

Detaining America’s enemies should never become a jobs program. Our valiant troops are already doing that tough and thankless duty for a hell of a lot less; it costs $100 million per year to operate the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Thomson Correctional Center alone will cost three times that much to purchase and twice as much to operate as a detention facility.

Last February, President Obama promised 9/11 and U.S.S. Cole families that “swift and certain justice” would be brought against those who had slaughtered our loved ones. Yet no one credible has disputed former U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White saying it will likely take three years just to prepare federal trials against the 9/11 conspirators. And last July, it was reported that military commissions for 66 detainees there were ready to proceed. Even with the revisions Congress made to military commissions, which the President signed into law this past October, they would surely get underway much sooner, at Gitmo, than by a federal trial.

We keep hearing that military commissions are untested. They’ve been around in some form since General George Washington used them during the Revolutionary War. Lincoln used them. Not including the Nurnberg trials, more than 1,100 were tried by military tribunal during and after WWII with an 89% conviction rate. The judges, lawyers on both sides, and legal assistants are well-experienced at conducting military trials.

What is really untested is successfully trying dozens of Gitmo’s terrorists in federal court, with trial and appeal judges accustomed to applying our Constitution. Why? Because there will be hundreds perhaps thousands of motions about delaying “their” speedy trial due to national security concerns, not reading them “their” rights, and not offering them “their” right to remain silent and the opportunity to speak with “their” attorneys before deciding if to speak at all. And here is news that perhaps you have read nowhere else: All those same Constitutional challenges would occur if military commissions are conducted on U.S. soil.

Non-New Yorkers are also not chumps.

With thanks for their editorial and due respect to the New York Daily News, the vast majority of those out here in fly-over country say no federal trial for those at Gitmo should ever happen inside the United States; all their trials should be by military commission, at Guantanamo Bay.

9/11 Families call Obama consultation on al Qaeda prosecutions and detention a ‘farce’

Elise Cooper of The New Majority wrote today of the June 16 and 17 meetings with Department of Justice officials of family members of the victims of terror (two groups of family members of about 45 people each met with the DOJ on those two days). The meetings were not pretty and Attorney General Eric Holder found somewhere more comfortable to be on the 17th. From what I heard, the families left the meetings fearing that President Barack Obama will bend over backwards to release as many from Gitmo as possible this year and attempt to prosecute those he can from among the rest in federal court, the consequences of both those actions be damned:

President Obama has spoken in the past about accountability and transparency; yet, those attending were not granted simple requests such as having the meeting recorded, receiving a list of those present, and being able to pass out a military commissions comparison chart. Bob Hemenway, who lost a son at the Pentagon, summarized the feelings of all interviewed by stating the meeting was “a set-up. It was a political ploy. We were pawns. What a waste. We were a show case. It was a farce.” The former Commander of the USS Cole, Kirk Lippold, pointed out that he requested a list of those who attended the two June meetings but has so far been refused.

The Attorney General, Eric Holder, attended only the June 16th meeting and stayed for only one out of four hours. Debra Burlingame, the sister of the pilot of American 77 that crashed into the Pentagon, explained that the families asked substantial questions which were either not answered or hardly answered. She stated that “Holder was sorry he walked into that room. For one hour they did not accept his platitudes. The questioning was aggressive, hard, and pointed. They got the message that these people were not going to be satisfied with the celebrity appearance and vague remarks. “

Family members were angered at being blind-sided, such as finding out after the fact that Jennifer Daskal was present at both meetings. Ms. Daskal is now a member of the DOJ detainee review task force. Previously she was the senior counter terrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch, where she wrote that the military commissions were “illegitimate, dysfunctional, and a kangaroo court.” [emphasis added mine] Alice Hoagland, whose son Mark Bingham died on Flight 93, remarked that she was appalled and that “Mr. Holder has a pre-disposition to listen and be swayed by the political opinions of these human rights groups. I felt violated and betrayed.” Debra Burlingame went further when she stated that “I would never have talked about the last moments of my brother’s life with a woman sitting there who has championed the rights of the people who killed him.”