The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“TRIALS OF DETAINEES” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the Senate section on pages S552-S553 on Feb. 11, 2010.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
TRIALS OF DETAINEES
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, it is so interesting to notice the change of approach. When President Bush was in office and we were fighting terrorism, Democrats would come to the floor and question interrogation and prosecution and be reminded over and over again by the Republican side of the aisle that we were literally interfering with national security and the authority of the Commander in Chief. I took those criticisms lightly because we do have a responsibility in Congress to speak out as a separate branch of government if we disagree with the Executive. Now to hear the other side, they have completely switched their position. Now they believe it is fair game to question the decisions that are being made on a daily basis by this President of the United States relative to our national security.
What my friend from Missouri, who has every right to come to the floor and speak his mind representing his State, has failed to mention is one basic fact: Since 9/11, 195 terrorists have been convicted in article III courts in the United States of America. Decisions were made by Republican President George W. Bush to prosecute suspected terrorists in article III courts, and, yes, that would involve Miranda warnings because they believed that was the most effective place to try them.
There was an alternative, so-called law-of-war approach, to use military commissions. How many of these suspected terrorists were actually tried before military commissions since 9/11? Three. Madam President, 3 have been convicted before military commissions, 195 in the courts of our land.
Now come the Republicans to say: We want to stop any conviction in any criminal court in America. We believe the people should only be convicted by military commission.
I take a different view. I believe this President, this Attorney General, and all of the people involved in national security should have the options before them: Use the best forum available to bring out the facts and to result in a conviction.
Do I fear our court system will be used by these alleged terrorists? They may try. They have not had much luck. When Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 19th 9/11 terrorist, was tried in Virginia, I don't think it changed America one bit. I don't think it changed the way we live and the security we have. Incidentally, he was convicted and is serving a life sentence in a supermax prison, one of our Federal penitentiaries.
Those who argue that we should never consider it ignore the obvious. Look at the list of terrorists convicted in Federal courts aside from Zacarias Moussaoui: Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Omar Abdel Rahman, the so-called Blind Sheik; the al-Qaida sleeper agent Ali Al-Marri from my State of Illinois, where he was arrested; Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber; and Terry Nichols, the Oklahoma City coconspirator. Our courts work. Why would we choose to tie the hands of this administration to choose the most effective place to try a terrorist?
This notion, too, about keeping Guantanamo open, that it was just President Obama's idea, no, it happened to be Senator McCain's idea as well, his opponent in the Presidential election. He called for the closing of Guantanamo, as well as GEN Colin Powell, who was head of not only our State Department but head of national security under former Presidents. It is an indication to me that this, on a bipartisan basis, is something that should be done and done in a careful way. I would agree with that. But let's be honest. There has been a bipartisan consensus that this is a good thing to do to make America safe.
The last point I would like to make on this issue is that we have a responsibility to tell the world that those who are accused of terrorism will be tried in our courts or before our military commissions in a way that respects due process so that at the end of the day, we do not have an outcome where people question whether we applied the principles and values to these trials as we apply them to other trials involving Americans.
For those who argue they should be given the back of the hand, ignored, no warnings, no due process, at the end of the day we will not be stronger if we follow that counsel and that advice regardless of the outcome and afraid America's intentions will be questioned. I want us to be strong in this world, not fearful and shuddering and quivering before these alleged terrorists. We need to stand up strong, be safe as a nation, gather the information.
This so-called Christmas Day bomber who was found on this plane, whether he should have been Mirandized or not, the fact is, after a short period of time his family was brought to where he is being held in a Federal penitentiary--I might add, in Michigan--and after meeting with them, he gave even more information. To argue that he has not been helpful and not forthcoming I think states something the record does not reflect.
____________________
