Civilian Trial, or Military Tribunal?
November 23rd, 2009 by MOTHAX
This combination of undated photos shows, from left: Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, Waleed bin Attash, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi and Ramzi Binalshibh. The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009.(AP Photos) Also, be sure to take the poll at The American Legion Big Q Website. This pronouncement should surprise no one:
The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday. Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but "would explain what happened and why they did it."It was virtually pre-ordained, following on the heels of news from earlier this month:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the biggest trial for the age of terrorism, the professed 9/11 mastermind and four alleged henchmen will be hauled before a civilian court on American soil, barely a thousand yards from the site of the World Trade Center's twin towers they are accused of destroying. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the decision Friday to bring Kalid Sheikh Mohammed and four others detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to trial at a lower Manhattan courthouse.The decision to bring the alleged perpetrators to justice in a civilian court, vice a military one seems to be one inciting strong reactions on both sides.
“I welcome anything that would bring these terrorists to trial,” said Sally Regenhard, whose son, Christian, was killed in the attack, his remains never recovered. “After eight long years there has been no justice on this on any level, and we want these people brought to justice.” The lingering wash of emotions of Sept. 11, however, runs strong, and they run differently. To many others, the prospect of the trial was both unfair and too repulsive to entertain. “It’s absolutely disgusting,” said Joan Molinaro, whose son, Carl, a firefighter, also died in the attack. She said of Mr. Mohammed, “He was willing to plead guilty in a military court. Now he comes to New York and gets all the rights of an American citizen, which he isn’t. He’s going to be, what, two blocks from ground zero, where he can see his handiwork and mock those he murdered.”The 9/11 Families for a Secure America Board Member Joan Molinaro asked rhetorically:
What are they thinking? Is this a good idea? No! It is a travesty of justice. It is a desecration of the 3000 people murdered on 9/11. This is a without a doubt a very dangerous thing to do. As a mother of one of the 343 firefighters murdered that day, I am appalled by this decision. You are giving this radical lunatic an open forum to spew his poison and laugh in the face of the victims' families.So, what do you think? Is civilian court an appropriate venue for this trial, or should it have transpired in a military tribunal?
Posted in Uncategorized, the burner | 11 comments