Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani speaking at the United Nations on September 24, 2009. On Sunday, Giuliani said President Obama is soft on terrorism.
(Patrick Andrade/Reuters/File)Photos (1 of 1)
Giuliani: New York trials show Obama is soft on terrorism
Rudy Giuliani said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed does not deserve the legal rights that a New York trial in a civilian court offers. Obama 'is getting away from the fact that we’re at war,' he said.
By Mark Sappenfield | Staff writer/ November 15, 2009 edition
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani took his tough-on-crime platform a step further Sunday, asserting that the Obama administration has become soft on terrorism.
On several Sunday talk shows, he said Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in a civilian court in New York was essentially a concession to a terrorist.
“In this particular case, we’re reaching out to give terrorists a benefit that’s unnecessary,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.” “In fact, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, when he was first arrested, asked to be brought to New York. I didn’t think we were in the business of granting the requests of terrorists.”
Attacking Democrats for not being hawkish enough on security matters has long been a chestnut of Republican campaign rhetoric. But President Obama’s painstaking approach to policy has opened him to criticism in recent weeks from people who want a harder line against terrorists from Afghanistan to New York to Cuba.
How several issues now before the Obama administration turn out during the next year will likely determine whether security is a soft spot that Republicans feel they can attack in 2010 elections.
Speaking broadly, Mr. Giuliani told “This Week”: “It seems to me that the Obama administration is getting away from the fact that we’re at war with these terrorists. They no longer use the term, ‘War on Terror.’”
More specifically, Giuliani laid out the key security issues currently facing Obama:
• The trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. To supporters of Mr. Holder’s decision, it marks America’s confidence in its legal system. To critics like Giuliani, it confers too many legal rights on the people perhaps least deserving of them – while also adding millions to New York’s security costs.
“This seems to be an overconcern with the rights of terrorists and a lack of concern for the rights of the public,” Giuliani said on “Fox News Sunday.” He suggests trying suspected terrorists in an military tribunal.
Others worry that a civilian trial could give terrorists a forum to preach their hateful doctrines against the US – a potential recruiting tool overseas.
“They are going to do everything they can to disrupt it and make it a circus and allow them to use it as a platform to push their ideology,” said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, (R) of Michigan on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
• Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and the Fort Hood shootings. Giuliani chided Obama for not deeming the Fort Hood shootings a terrorist act. Instead, Obama has tried to calm the nation and has implored Americans and Congress to wait until the conclusion of the investigation of the attack.
According to the FBI, the only suspect in the case, Hasan, corresponded more than 10 times during the past two years with a cleric in Yemen known for his anti-American rhetoric and his sympathy with Al Qaeda’s global goals. Mr. al-Awlaki was accused of being the “spiritual adviser” for two of the 9/11 hijackers while he lived near Washington in 2001. His website called Hasan a hero.
Giuliani said Sunday: The administration “has been very slow to react to the whole situation with Major Hasan, which was clearly a terrorist act in the name of Islamic terrorism.”
• The war in Afghanistan. Giuliani joined the chorus of critics saying that Mr. Obama has taken too long to decide whether to send more troops.
Politically speaking, what Obama’s review has done is to put him irrevocably on the hook for whatever happens there. If he is seen as going in any way against the advice of the commanders in the field – and if the situation deteriorates further – Republicans can portray him as solely responsible.
In other words, a Slate column commented: “Obama may have inherited this war, but it’s about to become his war and his alone.”
• Closing the Guantánamo Bay detention facility. Two key members of the Obama administration – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and senior presidential adviser David Axelrod – reiterated Sunday that Obama intends to close Guantánamo Bay.
Reports suggest that the administration is looking at the maximum-security Thomson Correctional Facility in Illinois as one place potentially to house suspected terrorists currently at Guantánamo Bay.
“There may be some local officials who are going to support it, but I expect it will be a huge issue up in Illinois, probably in the US Senate race up there next year,” Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell told “Fox News Sunday.
See also:
Who are Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other accused terrorists?
What did the Army know about Fort Hood’s Nidal Malik Hasan?
Afghanistan election over, will Obama make troop choice soon?
—–
Follow us on Twitter.
Comments
2. Pedro | 11.15.09
I disagree with Obama’s decision/recommendation to hold the trial of these terrorist in federal court in NY. Problems are (1) expense to the city (will be massive for security); (2) years it will take to complete the trial, whereas a military tribunal moves quickly; (3) creates a chosen forum for Islamic propaganda; (4) fair trial venue problem; (5) inadmissible evidence due to waterboarding/torture, putting Bush administration on trial; (6) grants evidentiary/procedural rights to avowed haters of our country. These are war criminals. Let our military tribunals handle this with dignity and without open press coverage. We don’t need to go through the trauma again. Do not understand why decision was made without firstly consulting Congress, - a poll.
3. RobW | 11.15.09
The Republicans are against trying these terrorists because within 16 months they will be found guilty and sentenced to death or life in prison–exactly at election time. The Republican goal of calling Democrats “soft on terrorism” will fail if at that point the terrorists are facing execution or life sentences.
As usual the Republicans have no interest in the country or the Constitution. All the Republicans want is power–at any cost, at any price they want to be in power. They could care less about America or her constitution.
4. Len Katzman | 11.15.09
Rudy Giuliani is making America less safe by falsely representing to the terrorists that America is a divided nation. Giuliani is doing this for his own personal political gain, and that makes him despicable in the eyes of many. Let’s all remember that Giuliani wanted Bernard Kerik, now a convicted felon, to be the man in charge of Homeland Security.
5. Annabel/NYC | 11.15.09
The 9/11 Commission, the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), and McKinsey & Co. reports all confirm that Guiliani had not properly prepared New York for the 9/11 terrorist attack:
1. He hadn’t updated the first responder communications system since 1993, causing a breakdown of communications between the police and fire departments. So 121 firefighters and hundreds of civilians in the north tower didn’t get out because they didn’t hear evacuation orders, and the fire chiefs had no idea that police helicopters had anticipated the partial collapse of both towers long before they fell.
2. Guiliani had collected $250 million in tax surcharges on phone use to improve the city’s 911 system, but diverted the funding for other uses. As a result, on 9/11 the 911 dispatchers were in disarray, telling victims to stay where they were in the towers long after the fire chiefs had ordered an evacuation. This unpreparedness caused the deaths of hundreds more civilians.
3. Against everyone’s advice, Guiliani had stupidly installed his $61 million emergency-command center in 7 WTC, so on 9/11 he had to mobilize the city’s response without having any operational base - a major contributor to the confusion and another reason for the considerable loss of life.
YET Guiliani is always the first to criticize anything and everything that Obama does. I say…shut up, Guiliani, you have no standing to criticize anyone.
6. dom youngross | 11.15.09
The Bush administration would have tried KSM as an asymmetrical-warfare combatant in a military tribunal at Gitmo.
The Obama administration wants to try KSM as a civilian in federal court in New York.
So what’s the common thread here? It is what’s going on in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan — the backdrop and context to the KSM trial.
It’s no hop-skip-jump to see that those who support Obama’s decision to try KSM as a civilian in federal court do so to seek even more balm to soothe the constantly-increasing dissonance they suffer from supporting President Obama’s more-Bush-than-Bush Afghanistan war of Candidate Obama’s and Hamid Karzai’s 2008 necessity — while our military involvement in Iraq still drags on, and new instability is caused in Pakistan.
If KSM is a civilian then ipso-facto, Obama isn’t the Bush that Obama supporters so despise.
During the day, Obama supporters are OD-ing on the pr X that Team Obama has been dishing out since January. And at night when they crash they are jones-ing for the dissonance balm. When push comes to shove though, and costs and consequences of Obama are real and highly-localized to them, Obama supporters take a break from both the X and balm to rejoin the majority, as was the NIMBY case with transferring and resettling Gitmo detainees to and in the US.
7. Beth in Georgia | 11.15.09
These are stupid arguments, and Giuliani is not a stupid man, so I can only surmise that he is politicizing a non-issue and bleating wingnut code words and phrases to advance himself within the Republican party. Would he rather this be a military trial, rather than civilian, with limited press access? I’m very glad it’s going to be an open trial, because an open trial will showcase the best of our American justice system, which is, after all, what the “terrorists” hate.
8. GAB | 11.16.09
Giuliani is the joke. Why didnt the Republican party take steps to charge the terrorists under military law? Why didn’t they take care of Aphganistan when they were in the Witehouse? No, they left the mess for the Democrats to cleanup. including wrecking the economy to the worst state in 30 years.
Maybe the Dem’s should push back
9. Pete74cny | 11.16.09
Looks like Mayor Giuliani and other Republicans believe the terrorists are prisoners of war now. Quite a reversal. I guess the Geneva Convention should kick in, right Republicans.
10. Kuyashi | 11.16.09
Guiliani is soft in the head. He, like so many other right-wing talking heads, will say anything to gain media attention. It is shameful to tear down the President during wartime. Shameful. No one elected him to dispense this blather. He is filled with his own self-importance. He has no foreign policy experience, no military experience, and couldn’t even mount a successful presidential bid.
Why does anybody care what he thinks?
11. MikeU. | 11.16.09
Sarah disses the Party for $1.25 million and Rudy shows foot in mouth disease again: he must know his snide comments about Obama’s work as a “community organizer” brought out Democrats in droves for Obama but he just can’t stop from shooting himself in the foot again. This latest sarcasm will have the same effect when the trial is over and Obama is running for re-election. Thanks Rudy and Sarah for a great 30 second commercial showing how out of touch Republicans are.
12. WILLIAM J CLEMONS | 11.16.09
Why so much credence to the “sayings of Giuliani” like he is a “fairy of delight to believed beyond his nose” –it seems if Giuliani speaks, the media creaks. He who has not faith in our American Judicial System should be croked with absolute rhetoric that will stop his nonsensical laboring of all he can deposit on the barnyard floor. Why doesn’t someone in the media get something resembling guts to stave off this on again off again sprial of unwholeseom resembalance of “there goes he once more”.
The same Giuliani that some years ago supported the Judicial system to handle almost all types and severities of cases —now AND ONLY BECAUSE OBAMA IS IN THE FRAY ——–he simply refuses to remember. This should stand as an example of what to come if THE MISGUIDED ONE RUNS FOR GOVENOR.
13. Larry Linn | 11.16.09
If Rudy was still a prosecutor, he would be begging to have the trial in NY>
14. Anthony Donovan | 11.17.09
Very wrong Mr. Guiliani. It is these right wing demogogues that have been soft on terror. Bluff, fluff. It is they that have given terrorists more than they ever dreamed of. It is they that brought back the moral and ethical bankruptcy of torture, of illegal prisons around the world, of breaking international laws on preemptive war, and created war which we know was based on lies, and nothing to do with Al Queda, nothing!! They act like a lynch mob here, presuming guilt before a court of law. Where have we gone?! Why does the press allow such voice without a truth meter running?
We need to return to law. We need to hold these people accountable, whomever was responsible for 9/11 and the lies afterward. The puny tiny band of terrorists who brought about 9/11, mainly from Saudia Arabia, could have been rounded up and evicerated very quickly without standing armies setting up large bases in the Muslim world. They almost were but we pulled back the special forces.
The Right calls for small government and are responsible for it’s exponential growth in military industries and privatizing armies. There are people here in the US that need prosecution. Those who’ve wasted many more innocent lives, and plundered our wealth.
I served all through the night at Ground Zero. I’ve friends who’ve lost relatives in the towers. Vengeance is the lowest response we could have mustered. The feeling I felt that night was deep deep compassion and tremendous love from around the world. Great wise leaders from around the world and people in the know about real terrorism were on the line immediatly to offer support and help. They were ignored. Another agenda was in play. We know this now. We had a great opportunity to bring the world together. We didn’t take it.
Everyone was with us to prosecute those involved. Surrounded in Tora Bora, we let them go, and we let the Tailiban mixed with Al Queda corned in the north go into Pakistan. Who gave those orders? It was they who were soft on terror.
It was they who ignored the signals and calls from the Middle East and experts here at home before 9/11 who needed some explaining. None forthcoming. Wrap yourselves in a flag and call in the army.
Having a fair trial based on the facts in a court of law is the right thing to do and it is several years overdue. Torture is not a way we get to the truth.
There are many ways to be tough on terror, one is to be on the side of justice and what is right in the world. Another is to be able to admit our mistakes and apologize, and make right. Another is to honor those innocent lives lost, now numbering in the hundreds of thousands, by building a world that practices the preach of inclusion. Diversity was always our strength, and it was a long hard fight to get that wisdom. It still is. Bigotry and prejudice and greed and corruption and lies we have had to fight every step of the way. We still do. Stop with the externals of patriotism and do what is right for the heart of our country.
I wish the press would get it straight… there never should have been a “War” on terror. There should have and must still be, great inteligence gathering, which can only happen with deep trust with allies, tough prosecution, and covert action…. it was a huge criminal act…. not a war. We got taken by our own, and the press all carried the banner.
Rudy is off base and this is all lowly political tactics, and they should be called out on it. They’ve never allowed a decent investigation of 9/11, and perhaps we’ll get to some of it…
15. Katharina Sri (former: Noor Aza Othman) Germany | 11.17.09
Obama sounds like having a hidden agenda - I’m really getting suspicious! Hillary should have won instead! I never thought I would agree with the Republican Party after all. As Barnabas Fund brilliantly observes at - http://www.barnabasfund.org/News/archives/text.php?ID_news_items=468:
…..Arab liberals have criticised President Obama`s tendency to endorse conservative and radical forms of Islam while ignoring liberal Muslim trends. A Yemeni liberal journalist accused Obama of appointing Muslim advisors who do not represent the diversity of Muslim opinion and who want to implement oppressive shari‘a rules.[23] Others have criticised Obama`s overtures to the Taliban and Iran as strengthening the radicals and weakening the reformists and liberals.[24]
A similar trend is visible in liberal and mainline Christian denominations whose leaders prefer to deal with Islamic traditionalists and hardliners in interfaith dialogue while ignoring the liberal reformist voices emerging within Islam.
It is time Western governments and Christian Churches implemented a policy of rejecting traditional Muslim and Islamist demands and that they shifted to a position of active support for the new voices of reason and moderation within Islam.
Barnabas Fund applauds these encouraging moves and the courageous Muslims advocating them.
16. Muhammad NaIya | 11.17.09
It is suprising all this noise about president Obama on allowing the suspects of 9/11 to be tried in a civil US court. An offence has been commissioned and the best system to adjudicate and pass sentence is the courts.
Let us not forget that the suspects are SUSPECTS! no matter hoe henious the crime. By allowing a civil court to try them, Obama has actually given the US Legal System a chance to redeem the image of the US. Afterall, would you rather the evidence procured after “water boarding” KSM over a hundred times is admitted as evidence? NO, the military and para military systems have caused enough bad name for the US. A conviction by a civil court will prove to many thaat the US is serious about respect and dignity for the human kind.
17. Barbara | 11.17.09
Giuliani is only speaking the truth. Terrorist in NYC will destroy the country but I guess I’m not surprised. Our African commander is trying to destroy the country. I’m just sitting back and enjoying the ride down the hole.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. fuhgeddabowdit | 11.15.09
As an American, I am saddened by Mr. Hoekstra’s lack of confidence in our nation’s system of justice. As a New Yorker, I am maddened by Mr Giuliani’s lack of confidence in my city’s courage.