According to a just-released CNN poll, Americans are giving a big thumbs-down to the Obama administration’s decision to try the Sept. 11 terrorist mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian court. Sixty four percent of us want KSM tried in a military court; only 34 percent agree with President Obama that KSM should be tried in a civilian court in New York City. Read
Sixty percent of us believe KSM should be tried in the United States; 37 percent say the trial should be outside the U.S.
The CNN report reads in part: “The decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in front of a civilian court is universally unpopular – even a majority of Democrats and liberals say that he should be tried by military authorities,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Despite that, most Americans say that he will get a fair trial in the U.S.”
Almost eight in 10 Americans support the death penalty if KSM is found guilty, including a healthy percentage of those who don’t usually favor the death penalty.
laytonian
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 10:13 am:
Why are some people suddenly afraid of putting terrorists on trial on US soil in a civilian court, when it’s been the norm in the past?
It was OK when George Bush did it.
It’s not OK when the Obama administration wants to do it.
What’s the difference? Oh yeah, the right wing’s constant smearing of our President as an unpatriotic terroristic Muslim pretender (with a crazy pastor) who was born in Kenya and went to some sort of secular madrasa and palled around with terrorists (a guy he sat on a right-wing funded educational board with) and has a fake birth certificate (amazingly just like mine!).
If the left had carried out such a consistent smear campaign against George Bush, they’d be called unpatriotic. NOW, it seems to be the self-styled patriots who are free to act in unseemly ways against a duly-elected president.
There IS no thinking electorate anymore. People seldom look at both sides of an issue, and listen to whichever TV-radio shouter fills their pre-conceived opinions.
What do all of these terrorists have in common:
The conspirators of the first WTC bombing, including the blind cleric? The “19th hijacker” Moussaoui? The shoe bomber Richard Reed?
They were all tried in civilian courts, on US soil.
Doug, the CNN report also states “But six in 10 people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday say that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks should be tried in the United States, as the administration plans to do, rather than at a U.S. facility in another country.”
Don’t forget that a civilian court has more flexibility, with more likelihood of the death penalty.
Michael Trujillo
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 10:45 am:
This is one topic I’m not too passionate about. However, I’m still trying to wrap my brain around these polls. CNN “polled” 1,014 people. How can that small of a number equal a representative cross-section of America? I know flatlander tried to educate me about this, but I’m still not seeing it. 1,014 means 20.28 people were queried in each state. In less populated states, 20 people might be a good sampling. But, in more populated states, how does it work out?
Then, unemployment is (generally speaking) at 10%. Some were 101.4 of these respondents unemployed?
You see what I’m getting at. Where did CNN draw the names from? There are so many parameters unaddressed that I just don’t see how anyone can give this poll, (or the other CNN poll that says “Most Americans say Palan is unqualified to serve as President) or any poll of such miniscule proportions much credence.
I remain sceptical.
Wynona
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 10:55 am:
If you lived in NYC, you’d know why. This is going to be a circus that we citizens will have to pay for. Having a civil case and paying for security will be a major expense. This will be a prolonged case that will prolong the wounds of New Yorkers who had to live through 9/11 and its aftermath, just as time is enabling us to recover somewhat.
In addition, it will give Muslim terrorists and their supporters a venue for spilling venom about the US, US torture of captives, etc. This is clearly a military case of an individual who is not a US citizen and is not entitled to his “day in court.”
It is pretty outrageous that the government decided a priori with no consultation of the American people and New Yorkers. If our government is so keen on having a civil trial, how is it that they’re not having it in Washington, DC that also was hit in 9/11? Americans should be writing to their President and congressman to see if this decision can be changed
Mark Shenefelt
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 12:11 pm:
The right is frothing spittle that some of these guys will be tried in civilian courts. At least they’re being brought to trial somewhere. The previous administration sat on the killers for seven years, but that was regarded as, of course, patriotic, be-tough, defend America policy.
Now the killers will be run through an American justice system, and Obama is getting trashed for it.
It’s sadly predictable, beyond hypocritical and also very hysterical.
.
Al
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 6:27 pm:
Clearly we make targets of ourselves when we conduct trials according to the rule of law and established precedent. Meanwhile, holding prisoners in secret facilities, where we extract evidence under torture, isn’t provocative at all.
Right?
I mean, if we don’t abandon our judicial system, then the terrorists have won!
laytonian
on Nov 17th, 2009
@ 9:01 pm:
Wynona says ” This is clearly a military case of an individual who is not a US citizen and is not entitled to his “day in court.”
So, Wynona. Did you protest and complain about the other terror trials conducted under other administrations? Why not?
flatlander100
on Nov 18th, 2009
@ 12:32 am:
Wynona wrote:
“It is pretty outrageous that the government decided a priori with no consultation of the American people and New Yorkers.”
Is it? I don’t think so. The Justice Department does not “consult the American people” on which court it will bring cases in when it has a choice to make. It never has. Nor should it. No matter how many polls get taken, the selection of a venue for a trial — for any trial — should not be decided by poll or referendum. As for the cost: well, the cost of trying those accused of serious crimes is part of the cost of living in a free country rather than in a dictatorship where trials are superfluous, and an unchallengeable order by the dictator for a quick kill without trail or opportunity for defense takes their place. I like our way better.
However annoying some may find it, putting the accused on trial, and according him the protections of American law all defendants are entitled to, is one of the things that make us better — or used to — than the countries from which the terrorists come. We are not like them — or so we like to think — and our habit of putting even terrorists on trial is one of the things that makes that so. Not only was the Bush administration’s preference for incarceration for many years without trial of any kind a betrayal of a fundamental American value, it did not strengthen the United States. It did the reverse.
I’d also note that the Justice Department has a good record of winning convictions in terrorist cases. It tried the first bombers of the World Trade Center under, I think, Clinton. And convicted them. Timothy McVey was tried successfully as well, convicted and executed.
flatlander100
on Nov 18th, 2009
@ 9:56 am:
Bob Wadman has an excellent op-ed piece on this topic in Wednesday’s SE. Link below. It really is first rate. Headline is “We need a little backbone on the home front.”
http://www.standard.net/topics/opinion/2009/11/17/we-need-little-backbone-home-front
Midwinter
on Nov 18th, 2009
@ 1:49 pm:
Since when does the public get to say where trials are held? I’m pretty sure all of this is covered in the country’s owner’s manual.
» Don’t Worry, It’s Only $400-600 Million to Try Terrorists in NYC - Big Government
on Jan 8th, 2010
@ 4:30 pm:
[...] Money isn’t the main reason trying these terrorists in civilian courts is a bad idea. It’s not even in the top five. But it is one MORE reason the decision by President Obama and AG Eric Holder should be reversed. Most Americans want them tried in military courts. [...]
IFC News Don’t Worry, It’s Only $400-600 Million to Try Terrorists in NYC
on Jan 8th, 2010
@ 5:27 pm:
[...] Money isn’t the main reason trying these terrorists in civilian courts is a bad idea. It’s not even in the top five. But it is one MORE reason the decision by President Obama and AG Eric Holder should be reversed. Most Americans want them tried in military courts. [...]
» What Was Missing from the SOTU Address - Big Government
on Jan 28th, 2010
@ 3:04 pm:
[...] month ago an attempt to blow up an airliner full of passengers over Detroit was narrowly averted; a strong majority of Americans don’t want KSM and his cohorts to be tried in New York; and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan [...]
IFC News What Was Missing from the SOTU Address
on Jan 28th, 2010
@ 5:47 pm:
[...] month ago an attempt to blow up an airliner full of passengers over Detroit was narrowly averted; a strong majority of Americans don’t want KSM and his cohorts to be tried in New York; and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan [...]