The fearmongering over terror trial gets worse
Last week, three well-known conservatives, including Georgia’s Bob Barr, released a letter urging politicians to stop “fearmongering” over the issue of bringing terror suspects to the continental United States and trying them in federal courts. Alas, they were ignored. The fearmongering continues.
Actually, it has gotten much worse, reaching new heights (or nadirs) of faux hysteria as Republicans repeatedly outbid each other in claims of imminent Armageddon if Khalid Sheik Mohammed is tried in New York. Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) has already had to apologize for a tasteless harangue on the floor of the House in which he suggested that Mayor Bloomberg’s daughter might be kidnapped if the trial is held in NYC.
Yesterday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) went on Fox News to hype his proposed legislation to prevent KSM from being tried in New York City.
Gohmert first claimed that “millions of New Yorkers who will be put at risk” by such a trial, where “you’ve got weak links all along the way. From the jailers, the bailiffs, the clerks, the jurors, the judge, everybody in the courtroom, their families. You’ve got subways, tunnels, bridges, all subject to terrorism.”
Gohmert continued: “Unless they’re trying to create a new jobs bill by allowing terrorism back in New York, then this is insane.” He added, “and even that would be insane.”
I’m confused. Republicans are supposed to be the party of tough guys. To use language popular among their talking heads, they sound like a bunch of namby-pamby bedwetters. Are they that scared of Khalid Sheik Mohammed?
Zacarias Moussaoui, who was implicated in the 9/11 atrocities, was tried in a federal court in Virginia and is serving a life sentence in a supermax prison in Colorado. The sky did not fall.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
47 comments Add your comment
fred dre
November 18th, 2009
7:43 am
it’s just a backhanded slap at obama. i guess they haven’t noticed the tea party terrorist.and we all know what these warped minded nuts are about.
SouthernGal
November 18th, 2009
8:03 am
Since he will be tried in a civilian court…he is guaranteed all the rights of an American Citizen…and should be tried by a jury of HIS PEERS…just who are his peers? It is not Americans.
bob
November 18th, 2009
8:06 am
Does it bother anyone that these guys will now get the same rights as an American. Why did Obama reward terrorist behavior ?
Turd Ferguson
November 18th, 2009
8:17 am
Rather a little concerned “fearmongering” than being a “peacemonger”.
Robin Hood
November 18th, 2009
8:29 am
Just an FYI, Moussaoui was arrested in the United States and read his miranda rights. KSM was arrested in Pakistan, no miranda rights, and was waterboarded. They are not the same situation. There are definitly lawyers and judges out there that would dimiss this case based on these two things. What will you do then, Hmmmmm?
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
8:33 am
They should be tried in NY. They are not war criminals. When they hit the towers we were not at war with anyone or country at that time. That is why they should not be tried in a military court.
Things were not done right by the previous administration because Bush was too chicken sh** to do the right thing. Yes this decision by Eric Holder has many people so pissed off right now. Guess what? Doing the right thing is almost always the hardest thing to do.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
8:36 am
You tell em Turd. Who wants to live in peace when our US soliders are being killed everyday? Who wants to live in peace when war can bankrupt our childrens future faster than any Healthcare proposal out there.
Yes please give me an extra side of fear with the two wars on our plate!
Joey
November 18th, 2009
8:37 am
I have no fear of these NY Trials.
They will be helpful to the US over the long hall.
One more poor decision by the Obama Administration.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
8:46 am
Hey Joey,
Im confused. The trial will be helpful to US but this was a poor decision. Please expand on our comment. That doesnt make sense.
Joey
November 18th, 2009
8:49 am
“We were not at war with anyone or country at that time.”
I can agree that the US had not declared war on any country or anyone.
Question:
In your opinion had anyone or has anyone declared war on the US?
Joey
November 18th, 2009
8:54 am
Explaination:
“One more poor decision by the Obama Administration.”
The poor decisions are growing and may soon mark the end of Democrat control of Congress. Likely followed by President Obama having opposition for the Democrat nomination and not being relected.
Tall
November 18th, 2009
9:01 am
This shouldn’t be happening at all. They are not citizens of any country – they are terrorists. These are enemy combatants who have renounced their sovereign citizenship. Geneva Convention statutes do not apply to them. Therefore, they should have received a briefing and an opportunity to volunteer information. After that, execution. End of story.
If you haven’t noticed, New York Governor David Paterson is very unhappy that this is going on in New York.
Joey
November 18th, 2009
9:16 am
Paterson is just another fearmonger. We know that all Democrats support the NY Trials. Otherwise Cynthia would have identified some of them as fearmongers.
I under stand that Reid and Pelosi got into an argument about this. Both wanted the trials to occur in their respective home cities.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
9:20 am
Thanks Joey,
I appreciate you comment without going negative. My brian is like a sponge. I love to learn and read about new things.
In my opinion no country has declared war on the US since WWII. Of course there will be elements within a country or countries that would love to do harm to us. Think about it. We have housed hundreds of suspects in Gitmo. Several of whom were released by the Bush admin with no trial. They were just dropped back into the country they were found. The others that are there and have been there for years with trial are the brothers/family of some of the elements in other countries. Gitmo is a breading ground for other countries to recruit people into harming us.
Dont get me wrong. I can not say with a straight face the Prez Obama has been just perfect since he has been in office. But I can say with a straight face he needs the support of all US citizens right now. Just like we gave Bush after 9/11.
Joey
November 18th, 2009
9:36 am
Georgia Peach:
Bush initially got a lot of support, but not full support. There was plenty of debate and disagreement. Also plenty of critics. The My Pet Goat (cowardness) crowd. The conspiracy (Truthers) crowd. And the Our Dumbest President crowd.
President Obama does not need us to come together to support his desire to have Civilian Trials in NYC.
Call it like it is.
November 18th, 2009
9:39 am
Fearmongering or common sence? First and foremost don’t even play Cindy, if the rolls were reversed and it was the Right bringing in these guys, you would be screming from the mountain top. There are way too many open issues with bringing this guy in here. Why tempt fate at all on this? I mean how many of us would truly believe that these guys could have brought down the towers, but they did! Yet you think we are cowards because we fill they might try to attack NY again over this trial. Who among us has their head in a hole now?
I will admit mistakes were made. First and foremost it should have never gotten this far. This piece of trash should have been shot in the gut and left out in the desert to rot or at the very least let the families of 9/11 have him.
If not that, let these guys rot in a concrete box in Gitmo. All we are doing is giving him a platform to preach. Fixing a problem thats not broken.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
9:42 am
NO NO NO! Im talking about supporting him as a whole, as our President. All those groups you named did not start within the first year of Bush’s presidency. Bush didnt get this type of blow back at the level we’re seeing for our new president. It dishardening because when Bush was pres anyone that had anything negative to say about him was Unamerican but now those same folks are saying the most vile things about Obama but they are the true patriots. Somehow I serioiusly doubt that. (Sorry got off subject)
Vinny
November 18th, 2009
9:52 am
Georgia P -
Once Obama starts making decisions and acting in the best interest of U.S. citizens, we will start supporting him.
This action is not in the best interest to the U.S. If KSM decides to represent himself, then he will have full access to classified documents. I guess Obumbles didn’t think about that one.
Joey
November 18th, 2009
9:53 am
Georgia Peach:
You do not recall the period after the 2000 election and up to 9-11-01 the same as I recall it. There was zero support of Bush by Progressives or Democrats.
Any day you could read about the election being stolen from Gore. Any day you could read about the Supreme Court “mis-ruling” about the election. Cynthia and Jay and every one in the Left Wing of our News Media were in full attack mode. It was constant.
Jimmy62
November 18th, 2009
9:53 am
What could go wrong with bringing a mass murdering terrorist into the country to become a martyr to an international mass murdering religious cult?
What could go wrong with rewarded mass murdering foreigners with the same rights that we give to our own citizens?
If something does go wrong, are Obama and Cynthia going to take responsibility for it, or are they going to shift the blame to Bush or to right-wing boogeymen, who despite beging out of power somehow are to blame for everything that ever goes wrong.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
10:08 am
Vinny: In your opinion (President Obama is his name) has done zero at this point in his presidency to better the USA? If this is true he should have continued all the things that worked so well for Bush the last 4 years I guess. And please we are adults here. The name calling only dilutes the debate and makes you appear amateurish at best.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
10:13 am
Joey: I have to disagree. The opinion polls at that time for Bush was in the 70’s and 80’s or better after the attack. We as a country wanted him to succcess because nothing had happened on our soil like that before.
I consider myself a progressive. I too wholeheartly supported Bush right after 9/11. We as a nation were in shock and full of fear. Now its eight years later and the Supreme USA should put these people on trial. Vigalanty justice will only bread more terriorists. If we do what they do how are we better? We’re not. We would be just like them. Does that bothter you at all?
RAMBLE ON!!!
November 18th, 2009
10:14 am
Just another OJ…when the verdict comes in not guilty will Cindy and the rest of you moonbats be jumping up and down celebrating?
Is the Governor of NY a Republican?
Jack
November 18th, 2009
10:28 am
Normal people have a normal fear of abnormal killers. If those misfits are brought to New York, they should be hung in a public square: that would give the plotters of the next 9/ll something to think about.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
10:29 am
RAMBEL ON!!!: U made it. Cool. Now you can join Joey and Vinny and it will be 3 against 1. Im ready! Whatcha got today. And again if I say something that is correct please let me know just like I did for you yesterday. Fair is fair in a good debate.
Chris Broe
November 18th, 2009
10:30 am
Sarah Palin should be included in Khalid Sheik Mohammed’s firing squad, (after a fair trial, of course).
Where was Saddam Hussein’s trial held? That went pretty well, even though Baghdad Bob had argued that Iraqi president Jalal Talabani was dithering when he changed the venue from the Kurdish-held Mosque in Heebeejihad to the Temple at FoolJa.
Saddam was found guilty of meeting and conspiring with Osama Bin Laden at Rick’s Cafe in Casablanca, (cheney waterboarded this info from a Gitmo detainee/snitch), and then hanged in Iraq.
Lets change the venue to Iraq, (the country responsible for 911). Think of the poetic justice!!
Funny how easily distracted from the balloon-boy story we are with this circus about venue-wandering.
Is the boxed-set of Judge Wapner’s “Hussein Trial Reenactment” series available yet?
Jimmy62
November 18th, 2009
10:36 am
Obama is already interfering with the legal process, saying that KSM would be “convicted.” How can he know that? Is it rigged? It’s one thing for a random citizen to say it, but another for the guy who is in charge of the system. And don’t think the defense won’t bring that quote up and say that KSM is being prejudged and the whole process is tainted.
So what happens if we are forced to let him off on a technicality, like for instance, Obama tainting the process by telling the jury pool that the man “will be convicted?” Are we going to let KSM walk free through the streets of NY? Probably not, so why bother with a trial in the first place? He should be tried before a military tribunal, like war criminals are supposed to, not treated with the rights inherent to a citizen of the United States.
Again, will Obama take responsibility if something goes wrong? If he’s found innocent, if there’s a mistrial, if other terrorists use this as an excuse to attack New York in some way, will Obama say, “THis is my fault, I really screwed up and, in my hubris and personal opinion that I know everything and am always right, ignored all the obvious things that could go wrong and all the warnings, and now a lot of people are dead because of me?”
No. He’ll just find a way to blame it on Bush. And Cynthia and the rest of the media will help him cover, since they are just as at fault, and just as unlikely to ever take responsibility for anything.
dave
November 18th, 2009
10:41 am
This is a bad decision. It is difficult to understand the motivations behind the decision, but it is not difficult to understand that there is very little upside from this decision. Inflammatory rhetoric about fear-mongering completely sidesteps the basic issue – this is a bad decision.
not a CT fan
November 18th, 2009
10:41 am
Here she goes againl CT the left wing nut caring more about terrorists than innocent US citizens. But I’m not surprised. It’s true to her character. Time will tell whether birnging these terrorists to NY for trial was right or wrong, but if it turns out to be wrong, I’m sure CT won’t say a word. Obama, on the other hand will have his handy-dandy teleprompter handy.
ctucker
November 18th, 2009
11:15 am
Gentle Readers,
I repeat: Zacarias Moussaoui, who was implicated in the 9/11 atrocities, was tried in a federal court in Virginia and is serving a life sentence in a supermax prison in Colorado. The sky did not fall.
David Granger
November 18th, 2009
11:15 am
Cynthia, my biggest complaint about granting these terrorists the same rights and protections that US citizens are entitle to is that I honestly believe there will be one or two jurors who will be so vehemently liberal that they will refuse to vote for any conviction just as a slap at George Bush. I hope I’m wrong.
Joey
November 18th, 2009
11:18 am
Palin Phobia Syndrome in a discussion of Terrorist Trials.
Got to smile at that.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
11:27 am
David: Stop the what if’s. If you are a true patriot of this great nation then you know we have the BEST justice system in the world. What would be the other option? They are not war criminals. We were not at war when they hit the towers. Bush didnt do anything the whole 5 years he had KSM at Gitmo. Now Pres Obama is trying to fix this mess and all you can say is “a liberal will refuse to vote for conviction.” I do believe when 9/11 happened conservates werent the only ones killed or had a loved one that was killed. This tragic day hurt us as a nation. Forget the bullsh** about liberals and conservates.
ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, WITH LIBERTY AND J-U-S-T-I-C-E FOR ALL!
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
11:30 am
DAVE: What about this decision was bad? Please give more details other than this is a bad decision. If you have a valid point I will be happy to agree. I do not agree with you now. What would be the other legal option? Do nothing like Bush/Cheney? Yeah, that will teach those mean terriorists.
GAPeach1
November 18th, 2009
11:51 am
Simply put: They are terrorists! They should not be treated the same as alleged criminals in this country.
RAMBLE ON!!!
November 18th, 2009
12:12 pm
OMG!!!
did you just say “we have the BEST justice system in the world.”
BHAWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
you “deal in facts”, please provide these.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
12:20 pm
GAPeach1: What should we do with them? How should they be treated? If it were an American citizen in another country should they country just kill them or should they have a trial to get their day in court?
I know the hijackers are guilty. They will see justice.
EVIL REPUBLICANS TIME IS UP
November 18th, 2009
12:20 pm
THE ARAB IS GETTING BOMB BECAUSE OF HIS EVIL DEEDS THAT ARE BEING DONE NOW AND IN THE PAST,THE ARAB STILL HAS SLAVES AND STONES HIS WOMEN,TRY THEM AND SEND THEM 2 AMERICAN LOCAL PRISONS!
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
12:23 pm
OMG! Indeed. So Ramble On we do not have the best justice system in the world? I thought America was the best at everything. Best healthcare system, best military, best education, best transit. You are sounding very un-American saying those things. Or at least liberals did when they said those things when Bush was in office. Man thats funny how that works.
RAMBLE ON!!!
November 18th, 2009
12:42 pm
What’s really funny is GEORGIA PEACH can’t make a post without saying Bush. News Flash, he hasn’t been President for 10 months now.
Nice spin…now I’m un-American. Could you please explain some of these facts you exclusively deal in.
What is the % of blacks in prison? (Is this the Justice system YOU and Cindy speak of)?
Ron and Nicole?
Robert Blake?
Marlon Brando’s kid getting away with murder.
Oh wait, we did send Paris Hilton to jail.
How many millions did we spend to try Brian Nichols after his killing rampage?
The US has the best Justice System in the world…if you’re the criminal on trail with a fat wallet.
I look forward to your opinion…I mean facts.
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
1:22 pm
Awesome post Ramble. I could have done without the sarcasim but here goes.
You are 100% correct that I have mentioned Bush on several, not all, of my posts today. What I was trying to do was make a point. I will continue to use Bush’s name anytime I want, remember that.
Based on your comments you gave a few examples of the system that does not work right. Guess what? I agree. There will always be exceptions to the rule.
But can you agree with me on the fact that some of the things being said about this new president, had those same things been said about Bush that person(s) would be called unAmerican by you and others? Can you at least agree with me on that?
GEORGIA PEACH
November 18th, 2009
1:25 pm
Brown v. Board Education
Roe v. Wade
Plessey v. Ferguson
The convictions of Tim McVeigh and the olympics bomber guy.
Jimmy62
November 18th, 2009
1:52 pm
Moussaoui is a really great example there, Cynthia. The district judge in that case nearly dismissed the indictment, and no one was sure how things were going to turn out till Moussaoui surprised everyone by pleading guilty. If not for his cooperation, he might very well be a free man.
Can you count on the same thing with KSM, a man who knows how to manipulate you already? And yes, KSM is manipulating you and the US media and Obama. Suckers.
RAMBLE ON!!!
November 18th, 2009
1:57 pm
You site examples of US citizen trials.
Bush vs Obama…No, with all due respect.
The liberal vitriol and hate about Bush, then and now, pale in comparison. MSNBC is 100% completely dedicated to it with the exception of Morning Joe.
The AP has dedicated 11 reporters to fact check S. Palins book. Compared to Obamas…zero. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
…Getting off the topic, and I got to go.
bromack
November 18th, 2009
2:19 pm
Didn’t Eric Holder’s former law firm do pro bono work for some Gitmo detainees… I bet they smell a really huge payday coming if they can represent the Gitmo 5.
Frankly, wouldn’t it be cheaper on us all if they just continued the tribunal proceedings at Gitmo….These guys already bragged that they did it…
But… Obama and Holder were law school students… not economics majors….
JCHoulihan
November 21st, 2009
10:47 pm
Fearmongering? This lifelong Democrat, a survivor of 9/11, doesn’t need Republians to tell me to be afraid. How dare you. I lost friends, neighbors, my office. I pulled charred bits of paper and human beings from my fireescape. We are woman and children, elderly and infirm. Those of us who survived that day dodged a bullet. How dare you demand based on ideology that we put our lives and well being on the line again. SCREW YOU. All it takes is a dirty bomb in a suitcase? Why not send the terrorists an engraved invitation. SCREW YOU. Who are you to pronounce on the bravery required of survivors to get up every day and just function. SCREW YOU
Jack
November 24th, 2009
9:26 pm
I don’t understand why everyone is so outraged over the 9/11 terrorists being tried in civilian Federal Court. From what I’ve seen, the Federal Courts are where most all foreign terrorists have been tried for years now. Zacarias Moussaouri, one of the 9/11 conspirators, was convicted not to long ago and I don’t recall any outrage – especially like this. In fact, under both the Clinton and the Bush administrations, over 200 foreign terrorists have been successfully convicted in Federal Courts. Also, after doing a little bit of reseach, I’ve read that the detainees at Guantanamo Bay were all classified as “enemy combatants”. Under this classification, they cannot be tried by a military tribunal because they are protected under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. If they were classified as “unlawful enemy combatants”, they could be tried by the military – but, unfortunately, they are not. So as I see it, the Civilian Federal Court is the only way to convict them (and hopefully get the death penalty). If by some chance they are found “not guilty” or the case is thrown out due to some technicality, I think they still can be held indefinitely by the military as “enemy combatants”. The military has already tried a few detainees but not to the success as they hoped.