Last year, President Barack Obama decided to bring terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of Sept. 11, to Manhattan and try him, and four others, in federal court. This was an illogical and insensitive extension of not human rights, but constitutional rights, to enemy combatants. The plan was a slap to the face of not only those who lost loved ones in the bombing, but to all Americans who are entitled to the rights and privileges afforded by our Constitution.In the face of growing opposition, Obama is considering changing the venue. Further, a bipartisan group of senators sent a clear message of discontent to Obama by drawing up legislation that, if actually passed, would prevent him from allowing the trial anywhere in the U.S. court system. Included in this group is Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., who is particularly concerned because northern Virginia might be an alternative location for the trials. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., says that the trials have the "potential to compromise classified intelligence and put our national security at great risk, not to mention the American people at greater risk."President Obama is OK with allowing the terrorist Mohammed and his cohorts to return to the site of the most horrific terrorist attack in U.S. history.It is acceptable to Obama to extend constitutional rights to America's enemies and provide them their day in court - a court that lies in the shadow of ground zero. This is not acceptable to Americans who understand that we are at war with an enemy that does not follow any rules of combat, does not fall under the provisions of the Geneva Convention and certainly does not belong in our civilian courts.Some say that trying the terrorists in civilian court shows that the U.S. justice system can prevail over terrorist threats.Why take the risk when we now have in place a reformed military commission system that is fully equipped to prosecute terrorists, securely and with a minimal cost to the taxpayers?While the American justice system is the best in the world, there is no need to prove it to al-Qaida. In fact, the trial of Ramzi Yousef, one of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers certainly did not convince his uncle, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, not to attack America on 9/11.Further, in a bizarre related trial, a state appeals court ruled in 2008 that the Port Authority was liable for damages caused by the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and that the terrorists were only 32 percent responsible for the attack while the Port Authority, which did not prevent the attack, held 68 percent of the responsibility.Since Obama already stated last November that Mohammed would be found guilty and put to death, why the mockery of a court proceeding at all? Just recently, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, "Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is going to meet justice and he's going to meet his maker." Apparently, Obama and Gibbs consider themselves judge and jury.Obama's failure to define war crimes as separate from the crimes of common criminals is epic in its scope of arrogance fueled by a leftist legal agenda. Obama's thinking on this issue is fundamentally flawed and his actions, once again, have caused many people to question his motives and vision for America.The estimated security costs, per year, of holding the trials in Manhattan surpass $200 million and even if the trials move to another U.S city, the costs will far exceed those of a military court. It is impossible to measure the emotional costs although clearly they will be substantial.The obvious question is: When did the "rights" of terrorists supersede public safety and economic common sense?Holding the trials in civilian court provides a platform upon which terrorist organizations can rally their cause and raises the possibility of another terrorist attack on the judge, jury and citizens near the court. This alone should make Obama's plans unthinkable.As Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., said, "In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them." Given the financial, emotional and security risks involved, how is it even possible that President Obama is still considering trying any terrorists on U.S soil?

Contact Record Searchlight contributing columnist Alana Marie Burke at alana@alanaburke.com, at www.alanaburke.com or tune in to The Alana Burke Show on KCNR 1460 AM.