[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 7202-7203]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          TIMES SQUARE BOMBER

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, all Americans are relieved that Federal 
and local law enforcement officials were able to track down and 
apprehend Faisal Shahzad, the man they believe to have been behind the 
attempted Times Square bombing. We were especially relieved the bomb 
never went off. Those who worked around the clock to find and capture 
Shahzad and extract a confession from him deserve our respect and our 
gratitude.
  Senate Republicans are waiting to hear from the administration to 
what extent Shahzad had ties to terrorist groups in Pakistan, whether 
his efforts were part of a wider plot to strike the homeland, whether 
or not he was on the no-fly list, why he was permitted to board an 
international flight, and whether intelligence community interrogators 
have had access to Shahzad.
  It has been my consistent view that when a terrorist is captured, 
members of our intelligence community must be able to interrogate the 
prisoner in order to extract intelligence. This is true whether the 
suspect is an American citizen, like Shahzad, or not an American, like 
the Christmas Day bomber. In this case, it is my hope the 
administration did all it could to gather all the relevant information 
it could.


                           NYC Terror Trials

  Attorney General Holder indicated yesterday that the attempted Times 
Square bombing does not change the administration's thinking on the 
trial of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and that the 
administration is still considering New York City as a venue for a 
civilian trial of KSM. The administration only shows that on this issue 
it does not get it.
  That much was clear to anyone who watched yesterday's press 
conference. Here was the New York Police Commissioner reminding 
reporters that no fewer than 11 terrorist plots have been directed at 
New York City since 9/11 and that, as he put it, nothing has changed 
with respect to terrorists coming to New York to hurt and kill 
Americans.
  To me, it was jarring, in the face of that kind of cold reality and 
the repeated pleas of elected officials in New York from both parties, 
to see the Attorney General still stuck--still stuck--on the notion 
that holding these trials in downtown Manhattan is anything but a bad 
idea. Trying KSM in New York City was a bad idea last year. It is a bad 
idea today. The only thing that has changed is that the American people 
have just been reminded of how determined terrorists are to carry out 
their deadly plans.
  As I have said repeatedly, Guantanamo is the right place to detain, 
interrogate, and try terrorists such as KSM. Guantanamo is a safe and 
secure, state-of-the-art facility where we can detain enemy combatants 
far from our communities and without fear of onsite retaliation. Some 
we hold indefinitely. Others we hold until we deem them safe for 
transfer to another country. Still others we can hold until we try them 
in military commissions, and we can do that right there at Guantanamo.
  Guantanamo was a wise investment. It was built for good reason. Let's 
use it for the purpose for which it was built, rather than further 
endangering communities such as New York or burdening them with the 
disorder and the

[[Page 7203]]

massive expense that would accompany a terror trial.
  It is precisely because of potential dangers and difficulties such as 
these that we established military commissions in the first place. If 
we cannot expect the very people who masterminded the 9/11 attacks to 
fall within the jurisdiction of these military commissions, then who 
can we?
  Americans do not want Guantanamo terrorists brought to the United 
States, and they do not want the men who planned the 9/11 attacks on 
America to be tried in civilian courts--risking national security and 
civic disruption in the process.
  (The remarks of Mr. McConnell pertaining to the introduction of S.J. 
Res. 29 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

                          ____________________