'Dangerous and Irresponsible'

" Well they're coming here and let's just say Rudy -- happening. Everybody -- another summer like masterminded nine elevenths Khalid Sheikh bombings and four alleged co conspirators. Are being brought back to New York to stand trial of the -- Of what once was the World Trade Center attorney general Eric Holder defending that decision today saying and I quote. They should be tried where their crimes occurred. We're going to be getting reaction from a nine elevenths family member in a moment someone is not -- happy with justices but first to Rudy Giuliani himself. In this exclusive -- the former New York City mayor was among the first responders to those September 11 attacks. Things -- right now."

" Direction when it I think this is a very dangerous decision and any responsible one. And one that is actually -- necessary. Meaning if actually taken. Sheikh Mohammed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed couldn't be tried. Anywhere else but in new York and of course New York would handle it and do it. New York is already a target for terrorists we announced that every day talk about it every day to add something unnecessary. To that makes no sense -- the president has made me I believe irresponsible decision and finally this was an act of war. And one of the things I thought we learned from September -- Was that we were understated denial before September 11. We we went through this once before 1993 we had people terrorist attack the World Trade Center we did not recognize it as an act of war we tried them. In the -- the district of New York. It did no good. We were attacked in Africa we were attacked those embassies -- that we were tacked on the USS Cole and then we had the worst attack in our history. And I hope you praise from that day on it would be the last Islamic terrorist attack in our history and it was not the last because. We could go we had another Islamic terrorist attack on our soil. And why this administration has trouble figuring that out when the man yelled a -- bar. When he was murdering people as a former prosecutor. I find frighteningly. Incompetent."

" Obviously they must known in advance -- even doing this on our soil and in New York is it is going to be a provocative action. Sort of level alone. What -- because the they have they have elevated to a point of I believe irrationality. Process over safety. Mean there that this was a an act of war. By Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co conspirators they attacked us like Pearl Harbor. And this may be a different kind of enemy but it's just as dangerous just -- insidious. And you should be treated as an act of war. President Bush recognized that we went through. A decade or so of not treating Islamic terrorism acts -- war. Bin Laden declared war on us and we -- hear. -- state of denial before September 11 except at least before September 11. The administrations that existed then didn't have the experience of September 11. But I believe once September 11 happened Republican and Democrat would never go back to where we were before. In that foolish state of denial a nation that cannot face its enemies as -- nation that's in danger. So when Eric Holder says he would probably be pursuing the death penalty. Does little to what did -- I mean you're gonna have motions to dismiss the case you're gonna have motion for change of venue. I mean me you wanna think of a place where you -- better than New York we couldn't get a fair trial for the people who attacked the World Trade Center. -- it it was the biggest news story. Of the decade one of the biggest of the century. I had a case of much less publicity involving corruption. In New York City in 1986. But got so much publicity the venue had to be changed to Connecticut where I had to go try per per personal. That case got. 110 of the publicity that this case see it's very unlikely that New York would be able to be the -- anyway or criminal defense lawyers. Are going to have the obligation to try and get. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed acquitted. I don't think it could they also it is -- obligation can also throw this out on a -- our target but what are they doing as soon as they have they have. An obligation ethical obligation to -- every issue that requires United States government -- the case beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is if it's a 5050 case he's supposed to get acquitted if there are mistakes that have been made. In the processing of this case by the government it is conceivable that evidence will be suppressed. It's even I don't -- happened but it's not inconceivable the case gonna -- For predict what -- Friday what would throw it out I don't know I have no idea what they did. I have no idea how much."

" I mean this would then become a case not so much about -- would be. We'll talk about what he endured they get all right did that they don't -- around right."

" the activists are gonna use this week that the states government is gonna try to put. Khalid Sheikh -- on trial the defense lawyers are gonna try to put the United States government on -- but are they really going to be -- George Bush. -- He was the president of the United States. And I'll say this for President Bush he kept us safe from Islamic terrorist attack every day he was president. But only had -- down there it always it always happy about looking at -- maybe somebody procedures he use maybe somebody should note. But it only happened after he left office. On our soil. And that -- administration is still having difficult days later figuring out that this was an Islamic terrorist attack that. Bin Laden has instructed people to carry out -- attacks. Like this on carried out it is right in their game plan. The almost almost attack on on fort judge -- drawn. Was -- was -- was that was with such an attack not necessarily. Ordered but I've carried out in the name of the Jihad that's precisely what has funded it doesn't take a genius to figure that."

" So earliest when -- successor. -- Michael Bloomberg says I support the Obama administration's. Decision to prosecute -- Donovan terrorists here in New York. It's sitting at nine elevenths suspects face justice in of the World Trade Center site. Where so many New Yorkers were murdered. --"

" I disagree with it it is fitting. At the 9/11 murderers. Be treated as war criminals. Because with an act of war this was not just -- of the murder in the city of New York that year. This was an act of war and an act of terror -- be they should be prosecuted. They should be prosecuted in military tribunal. We would not have tried the people who attacked Pearl Harbor. -- name in a civilian court Hawaii. For what they did. And it's not just the danger that it brings to New York for unnecessary reasons again if if if that if this was the only option. And the mayor -- is right we should do to New York it is not the only option. There's a whole. Ideological political decision making behind why it's happening here. And believing in them but what that I mean is everybody's more concerned with -- what people can think of us what the rights of terror should be. And believe me in a criminal trial. The rights of terrorists. Are more important anything else I mean we we -- our criminal justice system is geared to lead guilty people go free. If there's any doubt. That's the way it is that -- better better to have nine guilty go free than -- innocent person. Convicted. Very different situation when your war so what when we see all of these procedural problems and -- going to be created. Over the months and users that this could take. With these terrorist sitting here. I think we're gonna realize that this was a terrible terrible mistake."

" Leaving aside just the trial if it happens here. You feared that this could also. Become a provocative event for those who was disheartened -- in other words if he -- Get sentence. And there might be some problems here and -- that you're on your target all over the way I would put it there are plenty of reasons why New York is a target over. It's just -- it and and and these things are are necessary and to some extent out of our control."

" Why take a risk with -- the one. If you don't have to and explain to me why you have to when he could be tried as a war criminal in Guantanamo. Now and and what happened well if you're shutting down Guantanamo. Well that -- your left -- you right you'd look but you -- other options out there and so now once that's a given but I know you don't agree. Then this becomes a given."

" Well maybe shows you -- was very big mistake and and what happens. If the defense decides to make a motion for change of venue. To another part of the country. A judge can deny that -- brand. A judge can deny it you can go to trial you can get a conviction and an appeals court to decide it was Aaron we're gonna go through -- whole thing all over again. A judge could decide that a lot of the evidence can't be used because it was obtained in a way that was. Shocking the conscience. A judge a judge could decide that the -- and what happens and out of them. That case and then listen all the evidence that are presented to -- who may look like somebody's innocent actually guilty but but is it such said it's such suited. We like guilty -- that that what -- that that and the guy gets off track. What I mean it it it has to be at least conceivable that there are quick otherwise you can have a trial so funny I mean there's no understood the little -- every if you -- acquitted. And he's looking around and pretzels in Manhattan I don't know what you do think it's equivalent in. Presumably then the government would say. OJ but actually he's a terrorist that we can hold anyway. And what let him out and try to send him to another company in this event data he's been exonerated -- whatever. Goofy whatever legal system so he that is then his civilian lawyers who probably gonna volunteered to do this. We -- all voluntary for these Guantanamo people anyway. They'll bring behaviors -- saying this government has no right to hold each and writ of habeas corpus no right to hold the body. There's no legal right to hold."

" You're saying what it. I don't think process. I know what you're saying the terrorists could use on planes against us and now they would not in -- federal --"

" Changes in general does this is cause we made the same mistake we made in 1993 we think they're criminals."

" He's our soldiers in a war against us. And the rules of war should apply so when -- bonus well -- you don't need to worry because that will be brought out. And it did that is the case did these guys well. Will do the time and if he has his leg."

" Get executed. Well. But the rules will apply to them of the rules that we apply the civilians who were alleged to commit crimes. We should be applying the rules that apply to soldiers. In a war against us. Who are alleged to have committed crimes are acts against us they are not entitled to the protections that civilians yet again this would be like. Trying. The people who attacked us in Pearl Harbor. You know in Hawaii court. As opposed to dealing with them as. War warriors who were who were who were soldiers who had to be tried and tried under those rules this is a very big mistake is unnecessary to do it. But it's part of a much bigger picture that goes back to the fact that we're not supposed to use the word war on terror."

" Who we think we're falling by that they'll war with us for."

" I mean so what do you think they're dying in and then these -- ready and they're looking analysts I think they're looking at it oh by having elevated political correctness. Having elevated what other people think of us."

" And having elevated concerns about offending. People in the Islamic community. I think we offend people in the Islamic -- about -- so condescending. As to think that decent. People of the Muslim religion can't distinguish between my saying that Islamic terrorism is evil. And of the Islamic religion is -- good religion. And anybody that's confused about that. Well that's a problem for them not for me."

" But you're saying in the end. Not a New -- of them already target. Yeah let's -- just improved its its target potential for a reason that is avoidable. I am more than willing to except I did when I was mayor I'll do it as a citizen in New York any of the reasons that are necessary. I refuse to accept when that's unnecessary. One that is a discretionary choice of political ideology. Which is -- buck has supposed to common sense. At a sensible application of the law."

" Do you think Eric Holder. Cares about anything's adjustment of three kids are nowhere. He's a good man I'm sure -- cares about all of this I think this is the application of a political ideology. Which is now overcoming what I regard as common sense and the -- and this is of prevailing wanted to do from the top guy down. Absolutely I think recover from the top actual. I mean. It began by telling us we can't describe this as the war a war on terror. -- the failure to use the word Islamic extremism. The failure immediately to point out. That -- attack. Was for the same reason. As the attack on September 11 as the attack in 1990s. As the attack on the Cole coming out of the same movement. Islamic terrorism. That should be distinguish at every point. From honest decent Muslims I was the first one. Long before Barack Obama was -- thinking about running for office when this city was attacked. In 1990s it in in 2001 I was the first one to go on television at night. And say I don't wanna see a reaction against decent Arabs and Muslims that they have no part in this. But I also wanna see a source close our eyes to the fact that this is Islamic terrorism that's what it is if we do it. If we are in denial we're gonna put ourselves in greater danger and we're gonna have more casualties. I thank you and thank you regionally on."