Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in NYC: 5 Challenges

(Nov. 16) -- Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to move five accused 9/11 terrorists, including confessed mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, from Guantanamo Bay to New York City for trial has ignited a complex debate. Here's a breakdown of the main points of contention.

1. Crime or Act of War?

Those who oppose moving the case to civilian court argue that it sends the wrong message about the fight against terrorism. Sept. 11 was an act of war, they say, so Mohammad (KSM) and the others should be tried by a military tribunal at Guantanamo.

"He is a war criminal," Rudy Giuliani, who was mayor of New York on 9/11, declared on "Fox News Sunday." He said that for the Obama administration to treat this like a common criminal case indicates "the war on terror, from their point of view, is over."

Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia sided with Republican Giuliani, saying war criminals "do not belong in our courts."

Another Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, said a military trial is exactly what KSM wants because it would give him the appearance of a "holy warrior."

"That image of a soldier will be portrayed by the Islamic community. That's not the image we want," Reed said on Fox.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy contends that a conviction in federal court will demonstrate the power of the American justice system.

"We're not afraid of these people. We're ready to stand up to them," the Vermont Democrat said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "Let's use our system. Let's convict them."

2. Exposure and Evidence

"Trying KSM in civilian court will be an intelligence bonanza for al-Qaida," warned John Yoo, a Bush Justice Department official, in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday.

The defendant will have the right to demand that the government reveal in open court how it obtained all of its evidence, which will expose U.S. intelligence methods and sources, according to Yoo. That will help terrorists discover weaknesses in their organizations and adjust plans accordingly, he said.

University of Wisconsin law professor Frank Tuerkheimer downplayed the risk of exposing intelligence secrets in this case. It's been so long since KSM was caught in 2003 that any information that comes out during the trial would be of little value to terrorists now, the former federal prosecutor told USA Today.

It's not clear exactly what evidence will be admissible in a civilian trial because some of it was obtained through harsh interrogation. The CIA waterboarded KSM 183 times, according to government documents.

Leahy expressed confidence the government can get a conviction even without that evidence.

"They indicted him long before this waterboarding," Leahy said on CBS. "They had evidence enough to bring indictments against him long before that."

3. Publicity and Propaganda

A public trial in civilian court could give the defendants a platform to spout anti-American rhetoric, critics fear.

"They wanted center stage, and they're going to want to keep it for as long as they can. They will bring every motion forward that they can that will drag this trial out," Michigan's Pete Hoekstra, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, predicted on CBS.

He and others in the GOP have warned that in a civilian court, lawyers for the accused terrorists could try to turn the tables and put the Bush administration on trial.

Leahy said he's confident federal judges will be able to maintain order in court. And if KSM wants to get up and brag about 9/11, Leahy said on CBS, "I would just sit there and let that jury hear it, because he's going to be convicted."

4. Security

Holding such a high-profile trial in the heart of New York poses an "unnecessary risk" for the city that's been hit by terrorists twice since 1993, Giuliani warned. He also noted the added cost of providing security and the inconvenience citizens will face.

"Just wait and see how much New York City spends on this in order to protect [KSM]," the ex-mayor said on Fox. "This gives all the benefits to the terrorists and much less benefits to the public."

But the city already has been the scene of other big terrorism trials. New York's current mayor, Michael Bloomberg, said he has "great confidence" that police and federal authorities can handle security for the trial. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly promised his department will meet any security challenge.

5. The Emotion Factor

The thought of KSM and his cohorts being brought to a courthouse just blocks from where the twin towers once stood is already stirring strong emotions. Legal analysts are sure the defense will ask for a change of venue, arguing that there's no way the suspects can get a fair trial in New York.

There's concern that people who were traumatized by the terrorist attack will suffer all over again if the trial goes ahead in lower Manhattan.

"Ripping that scab open will create a tremendous hardship," Lee Ielpi, whose firefighter son died in the south tower, told The Associated Press. "It's like throwing it in our face again," his wife, Anne, added. "We can't get away from 9/11, we can't."

But others who lost loved ones argued it's appropriate that the men charged with killing thousands should be tried where the atrocity occurred -- and the mayor agreed.

"It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered," Bloomberg said.