Khalid Sheik Mohammed to Stand Civilian Trial in New York

The man who claimed to be the 11 Sep 01 strike "mastermind" will go to trial in New York, according to today's NYT. Steps toward keeping the promise to close Gitmo within a year appear to be continuing, despite delays caused by the uproar over what to do with detainees.




Associated Press

A photograph taken by the International Committee of the Red Cross of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed this year in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The detainee's family released the photo to a Web site, www.muslm.net.

The decision marks a milestone in the administration’s efforts to close the Guantánamo prison, something that President Obama announced shortly after taking office that he would do within a year, but that has proved difficult to achieve because of uncertainty about what to do with the detainees housed there.

Mr. Obama, asked about the decision in a news conference on his weeklong trip to Asia, declined to comment directly, but said that Mr. Mohammed would face justice.


“I’m absolutely convinced that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice,” Mr. Obama said. “The American people insist on it, and my administration insists on it.”

Other detainees will face military trials. This is a small step toward

bringing America back from the Bush League Nation status we held from 11 Sep 01 through 20 Jan 09, but it's a step, and worth noting therefore.

But the administration will prosecute another set of high-profile detainees now being held at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba — Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of planning the 2000 bombing of the Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen, and four other detainees — before a military commission.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said he would seek the death penalty against the five defendants if they are found guilty in federal court.

I for one applaud the efforts of AG Holder and President Obama to resolve these matters. I'm not at all sure that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has any peers in the United States, and I'm fairly certain impaneling an impartial jury in New York state, let alone NYC, to hear his trial is a Sisyphean task -- but then again, the people killed and maimed, and the survivors whose lives can never be the same, didn't have any sort of consideration or trial at Mohammed's behest before he unleashed the attacks that took out the Twin Towers, damaged the Pentagon and murdered hundreds of passengers in a Pennsylvania field.

The man is accused of a heinous crime. Let justice prevail.

New York City has been different. In March, for example, when the administration prepared to bring Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a suspect in the 1998 bombings of United States embassies in Africa that killed 224 people, to face trial there, Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said the city was well-accustomed to handling high-profile terror suspects.

“Bottom line is we have had terrorists housed in New York before,” Mr. Schumer said at a March news conference at the Capitol with other Democratic leaders. “They’ve been housed safely.”

Mr. Schumer at the time pointed to the “blind sheikh,” Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to blow up the United Nations building and other New York landmarks. “The main concern is bringing these terrorists to justice and making sure the public is safe,” Mr. Schumer said. “I have faith that the administration will do both.”

Still, Mr. Ghailani is not facing a potential death sentence, and is not nearly as high profile as Mr. Mohammed. A prosecution for the Sept. 11 attacks in New York City could test such attitudes.

There's more background in the Times story. It does look, though, as if the NYC bombings of the World Trade Center meant something particularly important to Mohammed's family:

Mr. Mohammed was captured on March 1, 2003, in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. For the next several years, he was held in secret prisons run by the C.I.A. In September 2006, Mr. Mohammed and 13 other “high value” Al Qaeda prisoners were transferred to the detention center in Guantánamo.

Aside from statements under interrogation, at a hearing held there released in March 2007, Mr. Mohammed took full credit for the 9/11 attacks and a number of other plots. (He also asserted that he had personally decapitated a kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter, Daniel Pearl, in Pakistan.) On Dec. 8, 2008, Mr. Mohammed, along with four co-defendants, sent a note to a military judge at Guantánamo asking to confess and to plead guilty.

Mr. Mohammed, an ethnic Baluchi, was born in Kuwait on April 24, 1965. He is the uncle of Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings. He studied mechanical engineering in the United States in the 1980s.

If, however, he is acquitted, then I submit he must also be subject to immediate and permanent deportation from the US. Unless, of course, he's found not guilty by reason of insanity -- if the trial jury should so find in his case, I'd recommend confinement in a mental hospital. If he should be found guilty, I'd recommend life without parole -- and I think it might be good if he had a 24/7/365 total isolation order, either way.

Cruel, you say?

Let him reflect on his achievements, say I, with no opportunity to brag.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

par4

Holder shouldn't be trying anyone until Bush/Cheney have been prosecuted. The amount of delay in that matter already makes Holder either compromised or complicit in torture.

par4

I'd rather put them all in the court system

Not such a bad outcome with this one case, but why the courts for this one, and military commissions for the others?

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Its all about the show

You can continue your ways if you make a big show out one instance. Its a case of the exception proving the rule. People buy into it all the time. I'd say this gives them several more months of keeping Gitmo open.

Positive? Sure. But I've seen enough Village games to know how they operate. The right will claim this is anti-American. Democrats/progressives will claim its a huge step forward. Both sides will use this to raise money. A year from now, Gitmo will still be open (or relocated to another venue) and the same thing will be happening. Political classes will make money, fans on both sides will claim victory but not much will change.

Wake me up when this is actually the rule rather than the exception. (The "wake me up" comment is a figure of speech, btw. Its occasionally necessary to make that explicit lest charges of being a whiny do-nothing person get thrown about. Sad, that.)

If I was gonna guess, lambert, I'd say it was something

to do with Charlie Schumer's willingness to have it happen on his turf.

The GOP have been beating the idea of closing Gitmo down with the NIMBY contingent.

Yeah, actually.

Some NIMBYs would rather see a Supermax-type facility shut down with the accompanying loss of 200-plus jobs than accept Gitmo detainees there.


We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

1 John 4:18

what would you have done with the prisoners, instead,

gqmartinez?

Let 'em rot indefinitely in Gitmo?

That's so far from justice I don't even want to peripherally imply, let alone suggest, such a procedure is anything but a bad idea. Habeas corpus, remember?

Turn 'em loose?

Send 'em all to trial somewhere?

Well, actually, sending 'em all to trial somewhere is what's going on. IIRC the ones involved with the Cole bombing are facing military proceedings (which IMNVHO is justified, as there were few/no civilian casualties aboard the Cole and the Navy can handle, shall we say, above-street-grade tough guys without lethal force, demonstrably?) and the guys bragging about their hand in 11Sep01 will face justice as it can be arranged. I don't know if any of the identified personnel other than KSM were/are charged re: the Pentagon attack or the plane that went down in PA, but if that arises, I would look for efforts to try those individuals in those jurisdictions (possibly, in the case of the "Let's Roll" aircraft, in some jurisdiction where the actual hijacking is believed to have occurred, if PA's solons / population go all NIMBY).


We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

1 John 4:18

What if

A couple of problems with this move:
1. How exactly do you find people in New York for the jury who will not be biased?
2. Hypothetically, what happens if there is a hung jury or an acquittal? Does the government release KSM? And if not, what do you do with him then?

This seems like a show trial more than anything else.

Points 1 and 2 ...

... go for any trial, including this one.

msExpat, below, gives the reasoning behind "show trial."

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Another big problem:

Well, two, actually:

1.We waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammad 183 times before he confessed.

Speaking as a legal resident of New York City, who theoretically could serve on his jury, that fact alone would give me pause before voting "yes" on a conviction, and especially before signing off on a death sentence. (It looks as if Khalid will plead guilty anyway. He wants to be a martyr. He wants a death sentence. Which for me, casts yet another reasonable doubt on his guilt.)

2. As Glenn Greenwald points out, Obama's Justice Department is cherrypicking. We're sending Khalid to a civilian court, because the government thinks it has an ironclad case. But we're sending other Guantanamo detainees to military tribunals, and leaving still others to languish in "preventive detention." Unless you have one standard of justice for all, Khalid's can't be anything but a show trial.

What part of "military jurisdiction" re: the Cole bombers

didn't get through to y'all?


We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

1 John 4:18

As A Former Member Of The Military

I don't see the jurisdiction.

It didn't happen on a military facility and the suspects aren't members of the military.

Civilians who damage military facilities in the US are tried in Federal Court, not Courts Martial. The US military courts have jurisdiction over US military personnel. You can't give a civilian an Article 15.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice is for the military.

Federal court, POW status, war crimes tribunal - those are the valid and legal choices.

He's been waterboarded 183 times, has he not?

Going to be hard to suggest that, after all that torture -- the 183 times we know about, and who knows what else -- he is competent to stand trial.

Reporter to Mahatma Gandhi: What do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi to reporter: I think it would be a good idea.

I agree...

and I'm a New Yorker.

Sadly, given our illegal detention and torture of the prisoners at Gitmo, I doubt the federal government has any untainted evidence against any of them. Sure, they confessed to terrorism. I would have too.

ERA Now!