The Trial of the Century: Will it be televised? Would it matter?

The following are excerpts from a Washington Post story, with my observations in bold.  Enjoy. 

Accused 9/11 defendants to be tried in N.Y. court
By Peter Finn, Carrie Johnson and Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 13, 2009
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/13/AR2009111300740.html

"Khalid Sheik Mohammed -- the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- and four co-defendants will be tried in federal court in New York instead of a military commission, with prosecutors likely to seek the death penalty, U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced Friday."

The writer's lede is carefully crafted not to use the standard "alleged" or"accused" language typical for normal defendants.  Instead, "self-proclaimed mastermind" is just snarky enough to convey guilt by admission while still remaining factually correct.  A lede tailored to fit the prevailing belief that KSM had anything to do with 9/11.    

"I am absolutely convinced that Khalid Sheik Mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice," Obama said. "The American people insist on it, and my administration will insist on it."

Just like it insisted on a public option, or better yet its insistence on transparency in the bailouts of the financial and auto industry, or the stimulus dollars?   Admit it, you caved to pressure from the left to wind down Gitmo and now figure a dog and pony show in Lower Manhattan will cause everyone to unite in vigilante justice and be distracted from their daily domestic woes.  

"While in CIA custody, Mohammed was subjected to a series of coercive interrogation techniques, culminating in waterboarding. Asked about the prospect that defense attorneys could use the acknowledged waterboarding to derail the case, Holder said he would not have authorized the prosecutions if he were not convinced the outcome would be successful."

That's Eric holder putting his job on the line.  What a gamble-- it's like wondering if an Israeli court would have found Hitler guilty and executed him.  I wonder what will happen?  Just don't forget, if this was any one of the tens of thousands of other capital case defendants tried in a domestic court, the acknowledged torture of a defendant would sink any chance for prosecution.  How about false imprisonment-- will the defense lawyers challenge the Bush policy of indefinite detention at Gitmo for the last eight years?  Because KSM was held there effectively uncharged for so long, can any statements he made at that time be considered coerced, or at least made under duress?  Unless the government has evidence of KSM planning the attacks, and is willing to reveal how it obtained that evidence (which it won't-- claiming state secrets), then any conviction based on statements made by KSM at Gitmo will be illegitimate.

"Our nation has had no higher priority than bringing those who planned and carried out the attack to justice,' Holder said."

Then call in Bush, Cheney, Pataki, Guiliani, Bernie Kerik, Larry Silverstein, George Tenet, Norman Mineta and the myriad other vermin who have profited from the attacks and ensuing wars while escaping any accountability for their failures that day.  Cui bono? is the first question to ask in any crime-- and it's clear to me that neither KSM nor the shady al-Quaeda gained anything from those attacks.

"We applaud the administration's recognition that both the law of war and domestic criminal law are appropriate tools" against al-Qaeda, said Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies. "It makes sense that those who killed civilians in New York face justice in federal court there. And using military tribunals to try those who attack military objectives overseas as part of a self-declared war on the United States is consistent with the law of war so long as those trials are in fact fair."

That's Juror # 1-- bitch already has him convicted before the trial starts.

Mohammed and his co-defendants have said at Guantanamo Bay they want to be executed so to achieve martyrdom.

So just let them do it--  it'll save us all time and money.  Otherwise, just for fun, let them see if they can pull off a similar attack.  If ten thousand unlikely, simultaneous civilian and military failures happen again and, defying all laws of physics, it's a successful attack, then we'll know we have the right guys.  As an added upside, and with the proper stories planted in the proper places (is Maureen Dowd still around?  Nic Kristof?), the American people could easily be led to believe that the terrorists were supported by the governments of Iran and Venezuela.  Nothing better than another war to rev up the economy and cut those jobless numbers...