November 13th, 2009
09:45 PM ET

Live Blog from the Anchor Desk 11/13/09

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/01/02/liveblogfinal.copy.jpg]

Is civilian court the right venue to try the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks and four other suspected terrorists? You might be surprised to learn who we found even suggested the civilian trials. We're Keeping the Honest. Plus, the raw politics of Sarah Palin's new book. Hear what Sen. John McCain thinks of his former running mate's possible plans for 2012.

Want to know what else we're covering? Read EVENING BUZZ

Scroll down to join the live chat during the program. It's your chance to share your thoughts on tonight's headlines. Keep in mind, you have a better chance of having your comment get past our moderators if you follow our rules.

Here are some of them:

1) Keep it short (we don't have time to read a "book")
2) Don't write in ALL CAPS (there's no need to yell)
3) Use your real name (first name only is fine)
4) No links
5) Watch your language (keep it G-rated; PG at worst - and that includes $#&*)

Filed under: Live Blog • T1
soundoff (242 Responses)
  1. Pati Mc Camp Hill, PA

    To Dan W.: Very well and eloquently said. I concur.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:19 pm |
  2. Lori

    I think that they should get the maximum penalties for their crimes regardless of cost. We need set a precedent with these individuals.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  3. Russell Erickson

    The war criminals we have been holding in the hotel type jail, should be tried only by the military court. America keeps showing its soft underside telling the world not to worry America is too soft to fight back

    November 13, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  4. Emily

    @ Megan,
    That is what I thought! ...however, I'm not in the Military and there has been years of debate about which way they should be tried!

    As long as they are tried & convicted!

    November 13, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
  5. sharon, sydney, ns

    I wouldn't want any of those men any where near New York if I lived there. Why invite trouble? I hate thinking it but lately the news has been filled with terrorists living all across the US, are they planning something for this? Pretty scarey thought.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  6. cpaige

    so now my question is: if these men on trial are found NOT guilty does that mean that NO justice is served & it's all considered a done deal? I guess i'm confused ... & maybe a bit naive...

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  7. Joyce, San Antonio

    I think it is a mistake to try them in Federal court. They are enemy combatants and should be tried by a military court. They will just try to take advantage of the court system to have their bully pulpit. Take them back to Guantanomo and try them there in a military court.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  8. Megan Dresslar - Shoreline, WA

    You are great job double duty! That was so awesome for you filling-in for Campbell Brown! Excellent job! 🙂

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  9. Ronney Lee

    The defendents are terrorist againest the United States and the American people. I feel that the American people deserve justice. Whether it is a federal or military trial is a matter of judgement call by the administration. Can these terrorist get a fair trial in federal court, yes.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  10. Brent

    If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is tried and sentenced to death, he will serve as a martyr and a rally cry for many young men around the world. While I believe in justice, I am concerned about the ability for anyone to be fair in this trial. Most importantly I am concerned about unintended consequences this trial and convicion may have.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  11. Carol

    As one who lost friends on 9/11 I am glad the trial will take place in the light of day. These men are murderers, not soilders. We New Yorkers know our city is a always a target. To move the trial off our soil for fear of retribution is cowardly.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  12. dave lake australia

    Surely the first thing the defence will say is their clients will find it totally impossible to have a fair trial in New York. What is wrong with Mr Holder. Does he not understand the words "common sense". I think the sheik is practising singing, ""Start spreading the news, I'm leaving today"

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  13. Tim

    The defense will ask for this case to be moved. The accused will not be able to receive a "fair" trial less than 1 mile from ground zero. I'm not sure what this administration is thinking? Should be held at Guantanamo for so many reasons. Safety & security are the first to come to mind.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  14. Tim Hillenbrand

    Why in the world are we WASTING tax payers good money on this circus? Keep the politics out of dealing with these terrorists! They should not be given the same rights as citizens have. Send them over to the Hague for trial. Let the whole world participate in their prosecution. Why should we pay for it?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  15. Dave In Alabama

    It does seem a little strange to use two different venues for trying the Guantanamo detainees, but it might be a way to get the whole mess over with a lot quicker.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  16. jane

    They are not American citizens and don't deserve the same rights.....they have admitted their quilt - let them have a military trial. They started this war and are war criminals.....they deserve a military trial. Keep them out of this country.....This is just Obama trying to push is will through.....not what is best for the country or what the people want.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  17. Jennifer - AZ

    Evening everyone. Happy Friday!

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  18. Delores White

    We make such a big deal about things. It is simple; these men admitted guilt, try them in the US where they committed their crimes, sentence them and be done with it. It has been drug out way too long. On Sara Palin, wow, she is not president material! If you want, read her book and lets leave it at that.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
  19. Mariann - Western NY

    Who would shoulder the cost of trial in NY.?..the military court?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  20. Ninad

    As someone who is not American but likes America and American people ( at least most that I meet) I would request Americans to be confident of their capability to handle matters that are painful in a fair manner. If not for anything else but to regain your stature in the world as a power that is not just economic but also a power that come from being a democracy full of low abiding, decent people that can lead the world to being a better place.

    This is an opportunity to show that you make the terrorist look small , acting maturely by treating them fairly.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  21. Jim

    The Military has had 8yrs to trial them, And why are the same people who say that these terrorist are part of a war are the same people that said they do not fall under the Geneva convention.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  22. Maurice Parr

    The crime occur on america land, clearly they should try on American soil, this may brought a closer to the 911 family.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:16 pm |
  23. Richard

    For all those who are against trying these terrorists in NY, I have one question for you. Why weren't they tried for the past six years? For six good years why didn't the Bush administration try these terrorists?
    Why are republicans making a big deal out of this?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  24. Sumesh

    Trial of 9/11 terrorists in the civilian court is the best option for US to get support from other countries.Face it ! we need international support..

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  25. Dave

    This decision to put them in civilian court is nuts. Is it worth the risk of these enemies of America walking? Is it worth putting the 9/11 families through this? Is it a good idea to give these killers a podium to spew their hatred and to recruit new followers of their radical religious and militant beliefs?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  26. Jeff Olson

    The judicial branch has an opportunity to show that it will uphold the tradition of Law in the United States. It is the appropriate venue and jurisdiction. The military courts are just as capable but they had their change to prosecute a speedy trial.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  27. Alex

    Mossaoui's trial lasted 4 years even though he confessed. Is that considered a success of the federal court system with all the mockery he subjected the system to? Are these trials going to last for years too? And at what point would Administration have to acknowledge it a failure? Or are we going to hear all kinds of spin as to how good these trials are?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  28. camille melkonian

    It shows we are way above other countries, we are giving them due process. This is honorable on our behalf. This a very fair way to try them.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  29. Lori

    Can they be tried in both federal and military courts? It seems that there are crimes against both.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  30. M Wheelon

    At last I have my country back with law and order. By his action, Holder has religated these defendants to their real status of accused murderers, and they shall be tried as such. A circus? No – a government using the law to hold people accountable for their actions.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  31. Kent Wall

    The trials in New York should result in not only the just punishment of terrorist but, if possible, a time for healing in America. The nature of Al-Qaida as an Islamic cult of murderers must be shown to the world.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  32. Anthonia-Bay Area!

    Hmm, maybe the trial should be taken place in New York...simply because 9/11 happened in New York, and in that case the trial will be fair for the suspects..

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  33. joe saldana

    military courts for all of these jackels.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
  34. George Walsh

    IMO Federal Court is the absoulutely wrong venue. They should be charged with war crimes and a military tribunal held much in the manner as was held in Irag to convict Saddam Hussein. This is a big, big mistake. Obama and Holder are mistaken to think this a proper venue. The trial should NOT take place in NY. I hope it takes 100 years to work out the details nd start the trial. They should rot in Guantamo!

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  35. carla

    we were not at war on 9/11/2001

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  36. norm

    I believe it would be an absolutely awful mistake to bring these people to trial here! We would instantly become like the bull'seye on a dartboard-i.e. a perfect target! I am not saying the NYPD couldn't handle the local security needs, but we should 100% be prepared to be bombed, or some similar horrific act, if these individuals step foot on our soil, and the attacks, incidentally, could be from 2 sides-radical muslims, and our own ultra-conservative right-wing militias, who, as we know from reports by the southern poverty law center, have been much more active again lately. do we really want to risk this?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  37. Wayne

    Wouldn't it be better to consider these terrorists as common criminals, and not consider them soldiers or warriors?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  38. Megan Dresslar - Shoreline, WA

    Hello Randi!!!
    Nice see you tonight, You are blogging with us tonight! 😀

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  39. Janice Waite

    I agree with the Obama Administration that these terrorists should be brought to justice and why not in a U.S. court since the crime took place in the U.S. I do not believe it is best to keep them held in a detention center forever. They should be tried and put to death.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  40. steven

    These are war criminals and should be tried in a military court. If tried in the civilian court they will get life without parole and the american taxpayer will pay $80,000 a year for their time. This is clearly an infringement on the constitution of this country.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  41. Carlos Galvis

    By making enemy combatants, their prestige was raised [[ prisonesr of war in their self-proiclaimed war. Treatinmg them like common crimminals makes them the likes of thiefs and burglars. They are crimminals. Niot combatants. anembarrassments to the muslim world

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  42. Glen

    We've held scores of terror trials in US Federal Courts before, gotten convictions, and the convicted are currently serving in US Supermax prisons. Why is the KSM case different? Is the Right just trying to politicize this whole thing? If torture is part of the reason they may be acquitted, blame the Bush administration.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  43. Emily

    @ Randi Kaye,
    Glad to see you here!
    What about the Security to the City of NY? Any concerns about another attack?
    Will the media be involved?

    What (approx.) will this cost NY? (Security, etc.)

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  44. Sheldon

    Anderson I think what most of the opponents of these trials are missing is if we try them in military courts were saying they are soldiers. This would entitle them to Geneva Conventions rights and other soldier of war rights that we have violated.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  45. Kyler

    A fair way???????
    How naive do you nuts think the public is?
    As if he would not be guilty?
    His guilt is a already a given!!!
    stop the circus!

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  46. "starr, formerly known as vincent

    One question about a trial...how much would it cost? Considering all of the necessary security, etc. That could be a factor.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  47. Deryck

    If these criminals confessed to the crimes by whatever means, Why go through the actions of putting them on trial if they are going to be executed anyway? Don't in America when someone pleads guilty, they go straight to sentencing?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
  48. Jo Ann, North Royalton, Ohio

    All I can say is that as much as I love NYC, I will be glad I am not living there during this circus.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:13 pm |
  49. John

    We had somewhere around 3 to 5 years to try them by military tribunal. There were serious problems with getting it done. At least one military prosecutor quit. If it had been feasible, the Bush administration would have done it.

    We should proceed with the civilian trial in New York.

    November 13, 2009 at 10:13 pm |
  50. andrea

    don't other countries try terrorists in their regular court system already?? spain, for example?

    November 13, 2009 at 10:13 pm |
1 2 3 4 5