A just trial for a terrorist (Update)
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed
It is clear to me that those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks are sick and twisted individuals. Somehow, conservatives have decided that putting terrorists on trial is too something — too risky, too easy and too open to the public. So we need to do more. We need military tribunals. For some conservatives, that doesn’t sit right either. Some have argued that these terrorists do not deserve the same rights that we enjoy. They should not have a trial. They are guilty and that’s that.
I beg to differ. We have evolved a legal system over more than 250 years. Our system balances the rights of the accused versus the rights of the victim. Trials are as much about evidence as they are about process. We’ve been told by our politicians that we are a good and just people. If that is true then we should be able to have a trial in which US citizens sit on a jury, weigh the evidence and make a fair decision. In my opinion, these trials are as much about placing the guilty behind bars as they are about showing the world that eight years after the terrorist attacks we can conduct a fair and just process; not only in the eyes of the American people, but also in the eyes of the world.
Finally, on a personal note, I do not want revenge. There is nothing that a trial will do to erase the memory of that awful day. I personally do not want the death penalty for these terrorists. I would like for these guys to sit in jail and rot for decades. I would like for them to have long lives. I would like for them to be able to live long enough to understand that God is not about killing people. It doesn’t matter if it is the God of the Jews or of the Christians or of the Muslims. God is about love. God is about tolerance. God is about loving thy neighbor as thyself.
Glenn Greenwald has some additional comments about the amazing amount of cowardice that the conservatives are showing:
Understanding and Combatting Terrorism, USMC Major S.M. Grass, 1989:
Terrorism is a psychological weapon and is directed to create a general climate of fear. As one definition cogently notes, “terror is a natural phenomenon, terrorism is the conscious exploitation of it.” Terrorism utilizes violence to coerce governments and their peopleby inducing fear.
William Josiger, Fear Factor: The Impact of Terrorism on Public Opinion in the United States and Great Britain, 2006:
At its heart terrorism is about fear. While terrorist attacks destroy, maim and kill, the intended audience for these attacks is almost always the whole body politic and the terrorist’s goal is to strike fear into their hearts.
The Obama Administration’s irresponsible decision to prosecute the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks in New York City puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people.
This is literally true: the Right’s reaction to yesterday’s announcement –we’re too afraid to allow trials and due process in our country — is the textbook definition of “surrendering to terrorists.” It’s the same fear they’ve been spewing for years. As always, the Right’s tough-guy leaders wallow in a combination of pitiful fear and cynical manipulation of the fear of their followers. Indeed, it’s hard to find any group of people on the globe who exude this sort of weakness and fear more than the American Right.
The Attorney General Eric Holder was on Capital Hill yesterday talking about his decision to try KSM in NYC. Rachel Maddow discusses this with Steve Simon.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
These individuals need to be put on trial. It has taken far too long to get to this proper point. I would not, however, want them put to death. That would give them martyr status among some groups. I would prefer that they have long lives imprisoned by the terror of their acts.
I agree 100%.
Thanks of your comments.
Erri, this is your biggest mistake I’ve seen; these guys are not going to sit in jail and rot and repent at the same time. They are not citizens, so they do not have the rights of citizens. There is no Constitutional right afforded these nuts. Why do you insist on giving them rights to which they are not entitled? I want them executed, and as fast as possible. We don’t owe the world an obligation to treat them fairly. And it’s not about revenge, either — it’s simply about killing them and killing them for good! No one needs these people for any reason whatsoever. And why put a target on NYC’s back again?
Bud – I’ll tell you why? Because we are better than they are. We have laws. We don’t simply excute people. That’s not the home of the free. If killing isn’t about revenge then why? When will conservatives admit that it is all about revenge.
If want to tell me that they aren’t citizens then I will agree they aren’t. I would point out that we have international treaty obligations that we have agreed to. If after a trial and these guys are found guilty and under our current treaties and laws you want your revenge, then a judge and jury should approve the death penalty.I don’t like the death penalty but I would agree that laws allow that and I would agree with that decision.
BTW, if an economic refugee (illegal alien) kills an American during a robbery what does the law say that we do with that individual?
Finally, I really don’t care if these guys sit in jail and repent or not. We can’t change the rules just because we don’t like them. These are the rules that we’ve lived by for years. They’re called laws. We assigned the Geneva Convention which covers terrorists, enemy combatants or whatever you want to call them. To sit down and take your time and read it. It’s in there.
But, one of the reasons I feel so strongly about this has to do with our own history.
The law is the law. We’ve signed the Geneva conventions. The international criminal Tribunal has ruled that quote every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth. There is no intermediate status.
BTW, I don’t mind being wrong. I have been wrong before and I will be again. Please show me in the Geneva Convention where we can do whatever we like with the prisoner and I’ll be happy to agree with you.
Oh, about NYC. So, do you think that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups are going to target NY more that they already have? Do you think that we are too weak as a people to try these killers? I would say that we should move the trial to Kansas City or Minneapolis but what is the point? What city has the most experience with counterterrorism — New York City. What city tried and convicted more terrorists — New York City. I’m thinking if the blind sheik is still in jail in spite of the rantings of Osama bin Laden, we can try and convict and sentence Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
Thanks again for your comments.
[...] make logical decisions at the ballot box. Palin’s response to Eric Holder’s decision to try KSM in civilian court in NYC was an excellent example of her appeal to raw emotion. There was no [...]