Holder: Don't fear trial of 'coward' 9/11 plotter

[jefferson_dem]

Holder: Don't fear trial of 'coward' 9/11 plotter

WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Eric Holder is defending his decision to put the professed Sept. 11 mastermind on trial in New York — and urging critics of the plan not to cower in the face of terrorists.

Holder is set to testify Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where lawmakers are likely to spar over the attorney general's decision last week to send Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four alleged henchmen from a detention center at Guantanamo Bay to New York to face a civilian federal trial.

Critics of Holder's decision — mostly Republicans — have argued the trial will give Mohammed a world stage to spout hateful rhetoric.

In remarks prepared before Wednesday's hearing, Holder says such concerns are misplaced, because judges can control unruly defendants and any pronouncements by Mohammed would only make him look worse.

"I have every confidence the nation and the world will see him for the coward he is," Holder says in written testimony obtained by The Associated Press. "I'm not scared of what (Mohammed) will have to say at trial — and no one else needs to be either."

Addressing other concerns about the case, the attorney general says the public and the nation's intelligence secrets can be protected during a public trial in civilian court.

"We need not cower in the face of this enemy," Holder says. "Our institutions are strong, our infrastructure is sturdy, our resolve is firm, and our people are ready."

<SNIP>

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-18-holder-wednesday_N.htm?csp=34

[WinkyDink]

1. The accused is still innocent, right? I mean, not having had a trial and all?

Just checking our "values".

[ShortnFiery]

2. I'm OK with the trial of KSM being placed in NYC. However, Holder should not FEAR

between escalating the number of troops in Afghanistan as well as NOT shutting down GITMO, that President Obama will be a ONE TERM PRESIDENT - ergo Holder will be out of a job at the end of 2012. :thumbsdown:

[jefferson_dem]

3. The exception proves the rule, huh?

That you spin this story as a hit on the administration shows how bitter you really are.

What the fuck does Holder have to do with Afghanistan policy anyway? :crazy:

[vaberella]

9. They're deranged. I was wondering the same thing.

Loony tunes is all I got out of it.

[vaberella]

8. What the hell does the your post have to do wih the OP?! n/t

[Thrill]

10. Why not be OK with it? This isn't 24. He isn't going to beat the shit out the guards

and then proceed to blow up shit in NY

[Bullet1987]

4. This is going to be a show trial...but what does the Obama Administration

hope to gain from it? Is this a move to appease the critics who attack what seems to be Obama's waning support for escalating the war in Afghanistan? Is this an attempt to bring closure and end all of this terrormongering (would also tie in with Obama possibly wanting to take his time with Afghanistan which can be seen as slowing down the war itself). I'm trying to understand the administrations angle in this. We all know the guy is guilty, but of what? Will sensitive information be withheld from the public? Or will it be an open trial?

I'm not getting my hopes up about some bombshell secret being revealed though. If the lawyers from DOJ don't hide information, the MSM will (if it's too explosive).

[Clio the Leo]

5. They're attempting to satisfy the Constitution.....

... not push an angle.

When Timothy McVeigh was tried and convicted, the (then) President was not doing it for political reasons. When a local court tries Joe Nobody for the muder of Jane Doe, it's not being done for political reasons.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. ~ The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

[jefferson_dem]

7. No offense, but you sound like some of the rw mob members on this issue.

"We all know the guy is guilty..."

Really? So no need to apply due process and justice in order order to assess guilt or innocence in a court of law, huh? Ok then.

[Hepburn]

6. I was just listening to this from Holder....

...and IMO, he did a great job on his introductory statement.