Eric Holder casts doubt on 9/11 trials: Attorney General 'not sure' if holding trials in NYC is important.

From Raw Story - Published: Friday February 12, 2010

US Attorney General Eric Holder appeared in an interview published Friday to leave open the option of abandoning a civilian trial for accused September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Holder's interview with the Washington Post came amid a backlash at the Obama administration's attempt to bring some terror suspects to justice through civil rather than military courts and to try Sheikh Mohammed in New York.

"At the end of the day, wherever this case is tried, in whatever forum, what we have to ensure is that it's done as transparently as possible and with adherence to all the rules," Holder told the Post.

"If we do that, I'm not sure the location or even the forum is as important as what the world sees in that proceeding."

Holder made clear to the Post, however, that a military trial of Mohammed, who is currently in the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay, was neither his personal nor legal preference.

The Post also cited three Obama administration officials as saying the president will take a much more proactive role in deciding a venue for the Sheikh Mohammed trial, after initially deferring to his Justice Department.

White House officials declined to confirm the report. But in recent days, Obama has clearly become more publicly active on the issue, as a political row over his plan to bring terror suspects to trial runs out of control.

On Sunday, during a CBS interview, Obama noticeably appeared to take ownership of the issue, as he noted rising opposition in New York to holding a trial close to the site of the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.

"I have not ruled it out, but I think it is important for us to take into account the practical logistical issues involved," Obama said.

"If you have got a city that is saying no, and a police department that is saying no, and a mayor that is saying no, that makes it difficult," Obama said.

But he added: "We have not ruled out anything -- we will make a definitive judgement based on consultations with all the relevant authorities."

Story linked from here.

*If anyone thinks its worth it or has the time.. you can contact A.G. Holder's Office here:

Civilial or Military courts

Does it really matter? It seems to me that if they were so certain of his guilt and role in 9/11 why haven't they tried him already? Its been suggested the trial itself would take years? Really? The OJ trial had a "mountain of evidence" to go over and it completed in months. If they had the evidence, he would have been convicted some time ago. I think the evidence is sitting right next to the white paper that Colin Powell promised.

peace all
"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear."
-- Douglas MacArthur

I think the real reason for

I think the real reason for the PTB not wanting a NYC trial is because hundreds if not thousands of activists will show up and protest, holding large ae911truth banners behind the corporate news anchors, etc. Too much truth will seep out, much like it did at the DNC and RNC in 2008.

Quite simply, the baddies don't want millions of people watching the news and seeing things like this outside the courtroom:

Then of course, there is also the issue that a true legit civilian trial might find KSM not guilty, and of course, as we all know, the PTB want a guilty verdict from the outset.

Everything going to script

Everything going to script then.
Pretend you have overwhelming evidence to convict KSM in a civilian trial.
Have your President reaffirm the 'News' & tell everyone "we have overwhelming evidence to execute him".
Then everyone backtrack and use public protection from 'terrorists' along with concerned complaints by major players to move the trial to a kangaroo court & swift execution behind closed doors after all.

Why not have a civil trial anywhere else in the country?
No , we think its best and safest to have a military trial but it will be fair. Sure!