How do Terrorists Think?

I left my psychological manual on the terrorist mind at-home so you people will have to remind me the correct response to this:

For more than a decade, questions have lingered about the possible role of the Saudi government in the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, even as the royal kingdom has made itself a crucial counterterrorism partner in the eyes of American diplomats.

Now, in sworn statements that seem likely to reignite the debate, two former senators who were privy to top secret information on the Saudis’ activities say they believe that the Saudi government might have played a direct role in the terrorist attacks.

“I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia,” former Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida, said in an affidavit filed as part of a lawsuit brought against the Saudi government and dozens of institutions in the country by families of Sept. 11 victims and others. Mr. Graham led a joint 2002 Congressional inquiry into the attacks.

His former Senate colleague, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, a Democrat who served on the separate 9/11 Commission, said in a sworn affidavit of his own in the case that “significant questions remain unanswered” about the role of Saudi institutions. “Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued,” Mr. Kerrey said.

Their affidavits, which were filed on Friday and have not previously been disclosed, are part of a multibillion-dollar lawsuit that has wound its way through federal courts since 2002. An appellate court, reversing an earlier decision, said in November that foreign nations were not immune to lawsuits under certain terrorism claims, clearing the way for parts of the Saudi case to be reheard in United States District Court in Manhattan.

Okay, so as I understand it, this civil trial will be held ON American soil! In Manhattan! Are they nuts? Did they not learn their lesson when they tried to prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed? I mean, prosecuting the global war on terror domestically is invitation for more terrorist attacks at-home right? Or does that only apply to criminal, not civil cases? To individual, not state-based prosecutions? I'm confused. How come terrorists don't want to attack civil prosecutions?

I mean, it's simply not possible that the opponents of prosecuting Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in New York City were just a bunch of fear-mongering jingoists right???