New York City terror trials the right thing to do

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and at least four of his al-Qaida confederates will finally face justice in an American courtroom.

KSM, as he is called, is the confessed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and a committed adherent to the perverse apocalyptic martyrdom cult preached by his al-Qaida masters.

By his own admission, he hopes to die for what he has done.

To some, the decision of President Barack Obama’s administration to try these terrorists in New York City is not pursuit of justice for criminal murderers but an open invitation for terror attacks on our soil.

What a terrifying world we inhabit, if the merchants of fear are to be believed.

They say we elected Adolf Hitler president.

Now, all-powerful terrorist supermen are being brought right into the heart of the very city they sought to destroy.

Because these men will be tried in the American criminal justice system, there is a chance they could be acquitted.

KSM, last seen looking slightly less disheveled than Nick Nolte, might soon be loosed upon New York City to mastermind the kidnapping of Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s daughters (warning courtesy of Arizona Republican Rep. John Shadegg).

Meanwhile, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham continues his quixotic quest to earn a Supreme Court nomination from President Sarah Palin.

Graham, official drama queen of the United States Senate, demanded to know if Attorney General Eric Holder believes Osama bin Laden should be read his Miranda Rights.

Sen. Jon Kyl, another Arizona Republican, wondered aloud if the administration’s motivation for holding these trials in New York might be that Holder’s liberal lefty lawyers want to see the terrorists go free.

Holder responded with laughter.

Now I must ask: What are these people so damn afraid of?

So what if the terrorists are acquitted?

That risk is the price we pay for the administration of justice, and we must have justice.

We cannot keep people locked away in perpetuity on a naval base because we’re afraid of them.

We have an obligation to avoid the path of least resistance and do the thing we know to be right, however frightening.

In any case, fear mongering is the very thing we must not do.

We were warned for so long that if we betray the things we do and the way we do them – like, say, buying lots of gasoline – then we have let the terrorists win.

Besides, Muhammed is no superman.

He’s a logistics specialist. Do you know people who work as logistics specialists? I do.

They do not frighten me. For a moment, I wonder why I’m bothering.

These criticisms are hollow anyway.

An element of the disloyal opposition has decided the way it will proceed is to attack every single thing the administration does, says, implies, suggests or considers – no matter what it may be.

To hell with questions of right, wrong, logic, reason and efficacy.

Aren’t conservatives supposed to be the law and order people – the firm believers in rule by law rather than rule by mob? Permanent offshore lockup for people we’re afraid of is no sort of law and order.

It is hypocritical and evil.

Again, we have the "partisanization" of an issue that should not be a political question.

We can have legitimate, informed debates about charges, rules of evidence, precedent and the rest. But not about the need to try these people.

I don’t mean to suggest we owe KSM and his cohorts something. Our obligation is not to them. It is to us. We owe this to ourselves.

We must demonstrate to the world that we are still right and still good, that we believe in rights and fairness and that we act on those beliefs.

We must demonstrate our commitment to law, order and justice to the world, and reaffirm that commitment for ourselves.

We must do these things not because they are easy but because they are hard.

Nothing could be more American than giving KSM his day in court.

Nothing could demonstrate that he and his allies have not beaten us and that they have no hope of doing so because we are strong, and we are right.

There can be no greater demonstration of strength and right than KSM in an American courtroom, lawyer by his side, answering for his crimes before a judge and jury.
 

• Facebook Comments
• Site Comments

9 comments

Nick

Thu Nov 26 2009 03:06

Personally, I am a little torn on this one. One the one hand, I don't think KSM deserves a trial in our court system at taxpayer expense since he is not a citizen. On the other hand, even though he is not a citizen of this country, we could still give him his day in court that he is not entitled to because, come on, he's not going to get off anyway.

HOWEVER, in this particular case the decision is much much easier than everyone is making it out to be. You have all been missing the point. Do a little research. KSM has already pled guilty. Seriously. Look it up. He as already admitted what he did and what he is responsible for, and to top it off, he has already REQUESTED the death penalty. So, this debate is over before it started. Giving this guy a trial in new york is nothing more than a political act. Of course Obama is sure that he will be found guilty no matter what. If need be, I am quite confident that the prosecution will bring as evidence KSM's admission and request for the death penalty, just to be safe. For goodness sakes, even giving this guy a military tribunal is a political act. Both are unnecessary. All he needs is a sentencing hearing. Yet here we are debating where a guy who has already pled guilty and requested the death penalty should be tried. Only in America.

Dave

Sat Nov 21 2009 12:48

Here's the thing, and this is true in many liberal vs. conservative sides of the issue. The "liberal" side often "feels good" and sounds best in theory (universal health care- yeah, sounds great! until you see the practical issues that arise when you try to implement it. same for social security, welfare, unemployment, cash for clunkers, etc...). So, in this case, yeah, on the surface, in theory, NY terror trials sound great- bringing them to justice in the city they tried to destroy. But then you get to the conservative side of the argument. The conservative side doesn't often "feel" as good or make you all warm and fuzzy inside, but in practice, it usually works best (letting people help themselves vs. letting the government help them and them becoming dependent, trying to make deals with the USSR vs. standing up to them, etc). While I agree, it would be a bit of poetic justice if we could try terrorists in NYC, it just is not practical. The best thing for this country is to try them in a military court; the decision to try them in NYC is a purely political one done without deference to common sense and national security.

TNMountaineer

Sat Nov 21 2009 10:31

Apparently WVU Mom has forgotten the terrorist's are entitled to a vigorous defense by "liberal lawyers." What about Miranda, pre-trial publicity; poisoned jury pool; rules of evidence; etc? However, it has turned into political theater and payoffs by the USAG who is going to wind up allowing the American taxpayer to pay his liberal colleagues tens of millions of dollars they would otherwise not get in a military tribunal. If this proceeds, as it seems it will, the terrorists are going to make a mockery of our judicial system (what goes on in the courtroom will be public even if no cameras are allowed), and the appeals will drag on for years if not decades. So much for a "speedy trial."

She is right; this is about bringing them to justice. Our judicial system is made up of two components; civil and military. The terrorists admit they are at "war" with us. Why extend them citizen rights in civil courts for military acts? This is a "military/religious war" being fought by people who are outside of any recognized government entity who have to innovate to find "weapons" to use (airplanes) or count on our other enemies to arm them to attack our homeland and troops. Just because they are not a part of any formal government military doesn't automatically make these terrorist acts "criminal." Also, they do not discriminate between our military and general public--we are all the evil Satan.

Dave

Sat Nov 21 2009 10:30

WVU Mom, if terrorists are to be tried in a civilian court, law dictates that they are entitled to trial by an impartial jury. Please, explain to me, where exactly shall the courts find 12 impartial people to serve on a jury?

Also, WVU mom, I just noticed this comment...
"The conservatives cannot and will not stop their war against Pres. Obama. Until they do, we will never be united and they will continue to tear us all apart. "

President Obama hasn't stopped his war against conservatives! Dismissing the tea party protests, boycotting Fox news, basically an all out attack on Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh! This is from the guy that said he wasn't going to be "politics as usual" and he would work with everyone! Do not blame the state of this country on conservatives. There has not been a true conservative in the White House since Reagan, and many conservatives have been warning that our government's policies were destructive and would weaken our country. As for the "tearing apart of this country", you need to look no further than BOTH political parties (republicans aren't really conservative anymore, they're some form of 'progressive lite' now) and the current administration to see who's at fault.

WVU Mom

Sat Nov 21 2009 09:07

Guys, I understand what you're saying and I would agree with you in another case. HOWEVER, the attack on NYC by these terrorists was UNPRECEDENTED. Do you think people FORGOT what happened on Sept. 11, 2001? Do you think any judge or jury is any less passionate about bringing those attackers to justice today as they were on that day? There are no people MORE deeply or profoundly hurt or changed than the people of New York City, or the people at the Pentagon, or in Pennsylvania. What could send a more powerful message than putting a terrorist on trial in the very place in front of the very people they attacked. It's not about allowing a terrorist access to our justice system. It's about bringing that terrorist to justice. Do you really believe there is a judge or jury in NYC that will let this guy off easy? With regard to making him a martyr, wouldn't the result be the same at a military trial? The Sept. 11 attacks were not a "military" act. It was not carried out by another country's army against our army. It was carried out against innocent civilians. By putting this terrorist on trial in a US court can only reinforce that the justice system we have fought, lived and died for is what we believe in the most henious attack on US soil. We're not a bunch of backward, prehistoric chooches that live out in the desert overseen by warlords. For Gods sake, we're citizens of the United States of America.

Dave

Fri Nov 20 2009 14:59

"Aren’t conservatives supposed to be the law and order people – the firm believers in rule by law rather than rule by mob? Permanent offshore lockup for people we’re afraid of is no sort of law and order."

They are not US citizens, they have no Constitutional right to a trial in a civilian court. Try them in a military court and get it all over with. This is going to end up being a trial of the Bush administration and the CIA, and its going to be incredibly destructive for our already weakened country. I hope with all hope that I am wrong, but based on the track record of this administration, I can come to no other conclusion.

BSME Alumni

Fri Nov 20 2009 13:45

IF these terrorists were US Citizens, I would actually agree with you. However, they are not. As US citizens we are privileged to be protected by the Constitution and applicable US law – no matter how heinous the crime. It is not appropriate to extend these rights and privileges to everyone through out the world, especially when the crime is an act of war against our nation and way of life. This war is perceived by the terrorists as a holy war, that in their minds has been going on since the crusades. This is not about politics or any administration; it is about the value of your citizenship and the privileges, protections and responsibilities that implies. We should not allow this enemy, these terrorists, the opportunity to become martyrs and recruit for their cause through our free press on the world stage. Of special interest to you Mr. Shields, is that in the world view of these terrorists, they want to spread Sharia Law throughout the world. Under this religious law homosexuals are beaten and or killed for their “crime”, without a trial. These men must be stopped and perhaps more importantly, not be given a platform to preach their poison.

HenryL

Fri Nov 20 2009 11:14

This administration seems to have forgotton that we are at war and the "trial" is for a declared enemy of the US way of life. He doesn't deserve a civilian trial, he doesn't deserve to be alive right now. Holding the trial in what would have been the shadow of the WTC is simply political theater conducted by the most inept administration to lead this country in its history. We will not be impressing anyone with this trial and will likely incur further attacks on our soil or abroad. The distinction here is this was not a crime, it was an attack. An act of war. Granted we are not at war with another country but we are at war nevertheless. We can chose not to believe it but that denial will not stop the extremists from killing us whenever and where ever they get the chance.

Hold a trial, I don't think so. Hold one in New York, simply stupid. But that is the standard of the Obama administration, stupidity.

WVU Mom

Fri Nov 20 2009 09:44

C.G., you are right on target. I couldn't agree more. Besides, this guy is not going to be let free by our justice system. The people who are suggesting that are admitting there is something tainted about the justice system they work for and support. Calling out "liberal lawyers" is just an opportunity for deeper public polarization. Where else but NYC will this terrorist be brought to more profound justice? I'm disgusted that even Rudy Giuliani of all people is against the idea that justice be brought in the city that was attacked when he was the mayor. If you had asked him on that day - Sept. 11, 2001, where those responsible should be brought to trial, you cannot tell me he wouldn't have wanted it in NYC in front of a judge and jury from same. The conservatives cannot and will not stop their war against Pres. Obama. Until they do, we will never be united and they will continue to tear us all apart.

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out