9/11 Mastermind to Face Public Trial
On Friday, November 13, 2009, United States Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that the government would prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed architect of the 9/11 World Trade Center terrorist attack, and four others in a civilian courthouse just blocks away from the scene of their alleged crimes. In a statement, Holder said that Americans—especially the victims and family members of those who died in the suicide hijackings—“deserve the opportunity to see the alleged plotters of those attacks held accountable in court.” Holder further stated that, after eight years of delay, those who were allegedly responsible for the terrorist nightmare will finally face justice. He added that he expects that prosecutors will seek the death penalty for Mohammed.
Some people are opposed to the public trial of Mohammed and his henchmen in a public court of law on the basis it will give Mohammed a soap box upon which to spew his hateful rhetoric against the United States and promote his belief in “jihad,” or holy war. But that argument is similar to those made during the Nuremberg trials of Nazi officials following World War II for their roles in the Jewish Holocaust. Rules of trial procedure prohibit Mohammed and his colleagues from using the trial as a public forum in which to air their hatred and extremist views. And if he wishes to voice his extremist and hateful speech against the United States, let him—the jury will know what to make of his extremist views and how to deal with him.
9/11 was the worst tragedy ever committed by terrorists against the United States. Thousands of people lost their lives on 9/11, including the hundreds of brave firemen bearing “FDNY” equipment who went into the buildings to save lives, only to lose their own when the buildings collapsed.
Instead of trying the case in a public trial in a civilian court open for all to see, including the survivors and the press, authorities had the option of trying the terrorists in front of a military tribunal. Some people argue that we should not give Mohammed and his gang the kind of rights we apply to American citizens when they are charged with a crime. The answer is that the United States is a civilized country, and giving Mohammed et al. the same rights we give any criminal shows that the United States respects the rule of law. And trying the terrorists in a open civilian court will expose Mohammed and his followers for the extremists and cowards they really are.
Questions will be raised as to the admissibility of some evidence. The CIA has admitted to having used some brutal interrogation methods, including “waterboarding”—a technique that simulates drowning—to get information out of the suspected terrorists. Whether any evidence that was obtained improperly is admissible in court will be an issue for the judge to decide.
We should provide Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and his fellow henchmen with a fair trial according to established United States court procedures. They are the terrorists, not the United States. We must rise above the guttural hatred we all feel toward the terrorists and give them a fair trial and opportunity to present their defense, if they have any justification for what they did. There is no doubt in my mind that a fair and impartial jury will come to one conclusion: that Mohammed and his colleagues are guilty of masterminding and implementing one of the worst terrorist atrocities in recent history.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.