It is a time honoured convention to retrace one's steps to the scene of the crime, to go back to where it all began. Giving justice to the civilian criminals of 9/11 in the city is appropriate in terms of retribution. They need to know how the city they damaged would reciprocate/'treat them'.

New York felt the blow of the history changing event that defines the Y-generation( Gen-X was defined by the falling of the Berlin Wall) most tremendously. New York needs closure and justice.

The trial should not be held anywhere else, since the effects of these war crimes were personal to N.Y.C

Obama has marched forward, finally putting an end to a tragedy dragged on for about a decade. Criminals must be tried in the face of American justice transparently, humanly and fairly, lest we stoop to their level and barbarically treat them like animals.

The trial in NYC is unjust, the families of the victims of 9/11 , see the attack on their kin as A War Crime. and feel that the deliverers of justice should treat 9/11 criminals as war criminals.

To them it is clear that the attack on the W.T.C was an act of War for Muslim fundamentalists agaimst america/American freedom/liberty/justice.

More than N.Y.C the victims' families felt the blow the hardest. It is more important for them to have closure and make peace with the event. If they are not given justice/satiated/appeased/acquiesced then what is the point of the trial? We learn a lesson from Nuremberg where the Nazis were tried, that a military proceeding can be fair ,transparent,open to the media and humane. But these men must be treated as what they are : War criminals not civilians as Obama claims.^[1]

1. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/opinion/24iht-edgerson.html?_r=1

This man is guilty without doubt , to claim that he may be innocent is absurd. The trial is not about whether he did anything wrong: Of course he did.

The results of this trial revolve around how he and his fellows/comrades should be punished.

Why have a trial, if his guilt is unquestionable?

The central issue of this trial is not whether or not 9/11 occurred, but whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was responsible for the attack. The severity of the attack. and the experience of the New Yorkers, does not have bearing on that issue. Indeed, the experience of the New Yorkers might lead them to assume guilt without accessing the merits of the prosecutions case.

It is of the utmost importance that Sheikh Mohammed be given a fair trial. To do so emphasizes that the Western world's commitment to democracy and human rights has not been shaken by terrorism. This also forestalls any claims that Sheikh Mohammed has been persecuted because of his religion.

Ultimately, if the prosecution has evidence of Sheikh Mohammed's guilt, he will be convicted no matter where he is tried. It is important that we do not allow our commitment to procedural democracy be undermined by terrorism.

For Adolf Eichmann's part in the Final Solution, during which he travelled to visit the Palestinian site where the British had mandated Israel to be in 1937 , Eichmann was tried for his crimes in Israel. His crimes were in many places around Europe, but it was symbollically correct for Eichmann to stand trial in the Jewish homeland.

New Yorkers, on this occasion have a homeland; New York. Thus, it makes sense to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed there, where it is charged with symbolism, and historically consistent.

People working in the WTC who died on or as a result of sept 11, 2001 were not necessarily `New Yorkers`so to speak. What is a new yorker? 60% of residents in N.Y.C are from outside the U.S, even Americans working on wall street or in this instance the world trade center were not generally New Yorkers(maybe new New Yorkers, but not people who could/would define or describe their homeland/hometown as The City.

The jury members will be gleaned through a voir dire examination to make sure that they will not be prejudiced or partial.

Despite Mohammed's demands to defend himself, he will be appointed a Yank attorney who will have to defend his actions in light of the torture he has faced and perhaps the insanity that is culturally/socially/historically/religiously embedded in his mind.

Let's face the facts. N.Y.C is more prejudiced against these alleged criminals than any other place in the world. Precisely because NYC felt the immediate adverse effects of this event the hardest. NY will have no mercy.

Waterboarding; an illegal method of torture was used illegally by Americans in extraterritorial prisons on terror-suspects. Including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed(An Arab terrorist caught by Pakistani authorities and sold to the U.S) 183 times in 2003.

Taking this into account a forced confession or botched evidence is not an/a easily/callously dismissible notion.

NY will not give these men humanitarian justice: It's too wounded and hungry for revenge.

This is not a 'conventional' trial.

Intelligence agencies do not present covert evidence from classified files in conventional trials.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Pre-judging the results of the trial as: 'This man is guilty without doubt' qualifies as prejudice.

When celebrity criminals are tried, jurors are conventionally requested not to watch/read the news to keep themselves impartial/objective/rational/'taking into account only the facts of the case and NO external influences'.

Clearly this becomes extemely difficult in the case of the 9/11 trials, verging on close to impossible if they take place in New York.

Too many New Yorkers are angry and still feeling the effects of fresh psychological/physical wounds, both direct (lung diseases from the collapse of the twin towers) and indirect (suicides,murders and other chaotic panic because of 9/11). Deaths and diseases in the family and an ubiquitous and paranoid fear of the middle-eastern 'other' could prevent the jurors from remaining impartial.

Many people are opposed to Obama for a string of other reasons, namely:

Stalling decision-making(e,g: health-care-bill, environment) for fear of a filibuster from the senate.

Troops in Afghanistan & Iraq

No gay-marriages yet.

The majority-rule does not apply in determining what is right.

mainly on this point: That man should not be tried in New York.

The move by Obama is considered to be soft on terror.

people don`t want it in New York generally.

It does in a democracy