Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And hello again from Fox News in Washington.
The decision by attorney general holder on Friday to try Khalid Sheikh Mohamed.
And four of his alleged 9/11 conspirators and a New York city's civilian court.
Triggered fierce criticism and strong Friday's.
We're going to hear both sides of the argument today starting with former mayor Rudy Giuliani.
And mayor welcome back to FOX News Sunday.
Nice to be -- -- I want to start with comments that attorney general holder made on Friday when he announced his decision.
-- -- -- After eight years of delay those allegedly responsible for the attacks of September the eleventh will finally face justice.
He will be brought -- New York.
To New York to answer for their alleged crimes in -- courthouse just blocks away where the Twin Towers once stood.
Mayor is a matter of simple justice is their right to bring.
These men back to the scene of the crime.
Why would we generally don't do that we -- we generally don't bring people back to the scene of the crime for justice the reality we didn't do that in -- -- the wars.
It would seem to be what the Obama administration is telling us loud and clear is.
That both in substance and reality the war on terror from their point of view is over we're no longer treat these people.
As if this was an act of war we're gonna go back to the pre 9/11 approach that we had in 1993.
Trying it as a civilian.
Which -- turned out to be a terrible mistake they are repeating the mistake of history.
But your successor Mayor Bloomberg disagrees with -- on almost every point he says it is quote -- it.
To try these men in downtown New York City he says that -- -- city.
Has handled his big terror trials before Andy says the new York city police department can handles the security issues is Mayor Bloomberg wrong.
I don't agree with I mean the reality is accurate within a new York city police department can handle other security no question about it and of course if the case had to be in New York.
I was should handle it doesn't have to be.
There are going to be military tribunals for other terrorists.
Why would you have military tribunals for this terrorist.
And of course it's going to create more secure security concerns just wait and see how much money New York City spends on this in order to protect him.
And finally what kind of granting his wish his wish was to be brought to New York.
It really makes no sense to me.
To be granting him his wish he should be tried in a military.
He is a war criminal this was an act of war we made this mistake once before.
We didn't read the intentions correctly and then we ended up with three more attacks on American soldiers and the attack of September 11.
It would seem to me that the Obama administration would read that history.
And not make this mistake because this is the administration that told us that there was no war on terror the only problem is the terrorists seem to believe there is a war on us.
-- that mayor I wanna pick up on this argument that that it's a mistake could free terrorists is common criminals.
In a civilian court I want to take you back to do what she is sad.
After the prosecution of the 1993.
World Trade Center.
Bomber as you said this I think it shows.
You put terrorism on one side you put our legal system on the other and our legal system comes out I had an after the 2006 trial of the so called.
Twentieth hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui -- sad.
It shows that we can give people a fair trial that we are exactly what we say we are we are a nation of war.
Respectfully may -- you supported civilian trials for terrorists that.
And if there's no other alternative I support civilian trials for terrorists the reality is there is another alternative here and this administration has created.
At least five possibly more terrorists are going to be tried in those tribunals.
If there was no other choice again Chris.
I support this if there was no other choice and they had to be tried and they are of course they should be tried -- New York.
But the reality is there is another choice it is a better choice for the government.
This choice of New York is a better choice for the terrorists.
Why would you seek to give that terrorism better choice than you're giving the Arab.
They've been giving the public but but apparently -- -- starts -- 98 but with regard to 1993.
It turns out we were wrong in 1993.
That was a mistake most experts have come to that conclusion well what about -- most sex with -- parents and a solid.
I would have preferred to see him tried in a -- -- a military court that a civilian court -- it's going to be a civilian court.
Well then let's let's convict him let's do it as well as we can't but the reality is this this gives all the benefits to the terrorists and much less benefits.
To the public and finally we thought we are doing what he wants us to do -- mayor is asking is asking for a trial in New York.
And we're giving it to him since when -- we in the business of granting the -- and that of which of the terrorists.
Mayor some of these detainees have been -- right here is KSM.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has been held for six and a half -- what about the argument.
That the Bush Administration have these guys for all these years couldn't set up.
Military commission is that that passed -- constitutional Muster.
And at least this president is ending the delay in bringing them to justice.
She -- and the delay bringing the -- bringing to justice in a military court we spent six or seven years developing a constitutionally permissible military tribunal.
He's satisfied with that he's gonna use it what the -- you bring -- got a New York for when he doesn't have to other than to give this guy more benefits.
Then that he's entitled to.
This seems to be an over concerned with the rights of terrorists and a lack of concern for the right to the public.
Mayor you know you keep asking and it's -- certainly legitimate question why is the president doing this I'm gonna throw it back at you you talked earlier I think on Friday.
About that this is a choice a process.
Why do you think President Obama and attorney general holder have made this decision.
Well I think they think that somehow this is going to increase our reputation overseas.
I think it's part of a whole whole package.
Of the president not seeing the war on terror after all he tells us that we can't usually -- description war on terror.
Problem is the terrorists not listening to -- they're continuing to make war on us he is delayed inordinately and making this decision about the war strategy in Afghanistan.
When in fact he criticized President Bush for not paying enough attention to Afghanistan to delay there Chris is political strategy not not war strategy.
And finally this whole thing what -- of this time is another indication he did he doesn't get it.
He doesn't get the fact that there is an Islamic war against this major this -- made it easy he yelled out when he was doing the shooting I'll -- bar and now it turns out.
That he has business cards with son of all of printed on the business -- Not so hard to figure out that this was yet another Islamic terrorist attack on American soil now the second one that we've -- In the in in in this decade and we had won -- 1993.
Mayor Giuliani wanna thank you thanks so much for coming in today it's always good thank you -- -- how much profit -- always a pleasure to have future.
Now for the other side of the argument we're joined by democratic senator Jack -- a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a former army ranger and senator welcome back -- I wanna start where we ended with mayor Giuliani -- military commissions have -- reform by congress attorney general holder announced Friday he is going to use them.
As a legitimate.
Legal forum to try five of the other Guantanamo detainees.
Why not use them for the alleged.
9/11 conspirators well first of all these violent -- for -- thinking it's criminals terrorists.
-- stayed on to New York in the nation are significant.
And they -- have to be treated I think fairly -- with all.
Due process but with great I think sensitivity to the crimes -- committed against America.
They attorney general pointed out very clearly that they're so practiced the location of the -- Those type of victim.
The investigative services they're engaged in this process.
And that led him to conclude that the best form and also I think as the prosecute the best form to guarantee the success of prosecution.
With the federal court and in this case in your city.
Let me ask you about -- a point that that mayor Giuliani made that the Obama administration.
These his allegation is holding these trials in new York and civilian court to make a political statement this president is different.
Than the last president and to say to the world.
Well as you pointed out that in 2006 with -- the twentieth hijacker.
Under the Bush Administration with pride in a federal court and Alexander Virginia.
Mayor Giuliani was one of the test testified in the penalty phase and he as you indicated claim this was a symbol of American justice and -- and 1993 but this was not -- thank goodness this is 2006.
The alternatives fit for military tribunal then the Bush Administration decided.
To make any of the case in federal court they succeeded a 190.
Or so terrorists and convicted in federal -- only a handful less than ten in tribunal.
There -- 200.
Individual serving time in federal facilities now for their terrorist crimes so.
What was what was -- statesman like decision -- the Bush Administration can't be a political decision by dissident.
Before we get into some of the specific risks let me ask you more fundamental question a lot of people are asking why did these men allegedly enemy combatants who have declared war on the US.
Why did they is deserve the same constitutional protections.
As an American service.
While the court has determined that they deserve some constitutional protections that was the whole issue of the -- -- case another case that they could have put fewer constitutional protections -- a military commission they could have if they were tried under military -- -- little provisions we've set up but they're also credible and I think.
This debate about how we playing into the hands of terrorists.
And all of these particularly.
The -- Mohamed wants to be considered a holy warrior a jihadist.
And if we tried before military offices that image of a soldier.
Will be portrayed by the Islamic community.
That's something you want the police are looking elsewhere and I -- mayor Giuliani said he's quite right when it went in march of 2003.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was picked up.
His first two things he's had a wanna I -- lawyer and two I want to be taken to New York are two big more granting him his wish by trying him in New York no I don't think so because I think the attack here on September 11 was designed -- to kill innocent Americans.
It was to break our spirit it was to render our system of government.
Fragile and and broken.
When the Foreman of that jury stands up and delivered the verdict not empowered by religious fanaticism by but at the constitution.
He won't know he's war.
And I can't think of a better group of people to judge the guilt or innocence and the punishment for these divisions and people New York for the -- to all but here I think -- the question there.
Are some obvious downsides to having this trial in a civilian court in New York City there's the risk.
That intelligence information will come out there's less protection of that in fact in the 1995.
Prosecution of the so called blind Sheikh.
Apparently information came out that Osama bin Laden was -- a co conspirator and he then left Sudan for Afghanistan there's obviously the danger of a terrorist attack it's going to make.
-- New York City once again ground zero for al-Qaeda.
-- that the danger of a more of a political circus that they're gonna use this as a platform if there were obvious downside.
What's the upside.
The F that I think is you are indicating.
This country's basic values.
And it's not to condone terrorism but is to stand as a symbol in the world.
Of something different what the terrorists represents.
The -- violence directed at those they dislike this is an opportunity to show that we're better than that.
We're much better and that's up so it's it's basically a political decision -- -- mean political in the sense of partisan.
But it's more of a political statement by this country than it is a matter of justice or security or safety for the all those factors have been considered and in fact in the -- case which took place about two or three miles from here in Alexandria.
Present at the same now the problem classified information security.
We were able -- I think new York and often the case referred to in the -- about the blind Sheikh.
Those individuals involved did not seek protective orders or use the system a class issue properly that's been established.
Where we're going to be very conscious on -- attorney general not protect this information.
So both -- -- things that are I don't think the president would help -- the occasional major decision.
Which would release classified information -- in danger -- necessarily the public we've.
Again those effects pretty clear we've done this before we've done has -- we got about thirty seconds left what if one of these guys gets off.
Well if that's highly -- evidence that there are no guarantees -- -- from there are no guarantees but under.
Basic principles and national war as long as these individuals pose a threat they can be detained and then while.
But and very briefly is someone isn't quite it and then he's picked up again well I got that that that -- under the rest of -- do not believe they will be released because.
Under the principle of preventive detention.
Which is recognized during hostilities.
And I know what I'm saying is if he's acquitted and then picked up again and held blood but let's remember that if you presume that will be acquitted released I don't raise them if -- -- Senator -- thank you thank you always a pleasure thanks for coming.
Filter by section