Problem 1. Some of the judges in the American civilian court system were placed there for political reasons because they would produce rulings that would be acceptable for lefties, or tow the liberal line. There is a chance that the judge for this trial will be one of those judges with an axe to grind and who will let this guy off the hook. Then he can begin to plot the next 9/11 type of attack.

Problem 2. The judge and or jury may feel intimidated by the prospect of condemning an important al qaeda terrorist. They'll know that they may have to fear for their lives, for the rest of their lives, and so they may feel pressured to let the guy off the hook. No such problem...

Problem 1. Some of the judges in the American civilian court system were placed there for political reasons because they would produce rulings that would be acceptable for lefties, or tow the liberal line. There is a chance that the judge for this trial will be one of those judges with an axe to grind and who will let this guy off the hook. Then he can begin to plot the next 9/11 type of attack.

Problem 2. The judge and or jury may feel intimidated by the prospect of condemning an important al qaeda terrorist. They'll know that they may have to fear for their lives, for the rest of their lives, and so they may feel pressured to let the guy off the hook. No such problem exists in the military court system.

Problem 3. There's something called "discovery" in the case which requires that the lawyer of the defendent have access to the same data the prosecution has which means the defense will know the secret methods the US used to obtain the evidence against the terrorist. Once that is out in the open, those methods may no longer be viable in the future. Without those tactics available, the citizens of the US are more vulnerable to the next attack by al qaeda.