9/11, Eric Holder, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

‘Eric Holder’s Horrible Hearing’ by Mary Katharine Ham

by  • 

The Weekly Standard’s Mary Katharine Ham writes of the “mixed” reaction by 9/11 family members who attended Wednesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing wherein AG Eric Holder testified about the decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed et al in federal court:

Jon Kyl, the Arizona Republican, raised cheers from the gallery with his sharp questioning of Holder, who contended that his decision to bring 9/11 terrorists to civilian courts was based, not on politics, but on where he’d have the best shot at conviction.

“How could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has already asked to plead guilty to a military commission and be executed,” he asked. “How can you be more likely to get a conviction in a [civilian] court than that?”

Peter Regan — who lost his dad, a New York firefighter, on 9/11 — is disturbed by the plan on several fronts. After 9/11, the then 20-year-old joined the Marines, serving two tours in Iraq before coming back home to follow in his father’s footsteps in the fire department. The possibility that they may face trial in civilian courts means suspected terrorists captured on the battlefield may have to be informed of their right to counsel and to remain silent.

“I just couldn’t imagine,” Regan says. “We’re soldiers and Marines and sailors. It’s not our job. We’re not cops. We learn Miranda rights once we come back if we want to pursue that career.”

Holder could not answer when asked by Lindsey Graham if combatants apprehended on the battlefield had ever in U.S. history been prosecuted in federal courts.

“I’ll answer it for you, and the answer is no,” the South Carolina Republican said. “We’re makin’ history. And, we’re makin’ bad history.”

MKH has the take from others who attended and keen observations about the level of agreement with Holder’s decision.

——

Note: 120,000 people have co-signed our letter to President Obama. (You can still add your name.) 911FamiliesForAmerica.org is partners with theBravest.com and KeepAmericaSafe.com in this effort.

9/11, David Beamer, Eric Holder, war crimes

‘Eric Holder’s Baffling KSM Decision’ by David Beamer

by  • 

I attended the hearing this past Wednesday. My reaction is in today’s Wall Street Journal; Attorney General Holder’s Senate testimony this week did nothing to reassure the families of 9/11’s victims. Here is an excerpt and the link:

How can we be assured that these enemies will be found guilty? Given that criminal courts are now the presumed venue for those captured on the battlefield, will soldiers need to read them their rights at the time of capture? Since you wish to make exceptions on a case-by-case basis to the presumed civil venue, don’t all those captured need to be read their rights and have the opportunity to remain silent? Won’t this venue expose intelligence to our enemies? Can our classified information really be secured? Can we in fact predict how the judge will rule? If these people are brought into the country will they get additional rights under immigration law? What if they claim asylum?

The attorney general seemed bewildered in the face of these inquiries. Recurring themes in his responses included “I think,” and “I can’t imagine,” and “I am not an expert in immigration.”

Has our attorney general not considered these issues, or imagined the possible unintended consequences that will arise from his historic decision? It certainly seemed that way. If he had, he would have had better answers.

PLEASE READ THE REST

——

Note: 120,000 people have co-signed our letter to President Obama. (You can still add your name.) 911FamiliesForAmerica.org is partners with theBravest.com and KeepAmericaSafe.com in this effort.