.jpg)
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (center) and four other terrorists will be tried in New York City. AP Photo
Welcome to my new series titled "A Witty reply." In these articles I will attempt to respond to some of the consistent criticisms of my readers to my articles. These criticisms can all be read in the comments sections of the articles I reference. For a while now I have tried to respond in the comments sections and have found that I occasionally spend more time writing comments than articles. With this series I hope to kill two birds with one stone as the saying goes. Today's reply will focus on the decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other terrorists in New York City.
Please allow me to provide a few disclaimers. First I respect the opinions of my critics and will try to reflect their argument so these replies are in no way meant to insult or demean them. In fact these articles should be seen as a compliment in that they address a persistent argument which I view reasonable. Secondly please know that I can not possibly respond to all comments so please do not be offended if I do not address your particular criticism or argument. Finally know that the articles are opinion and not an attempt to report the news. I believe these opinions are based in fact more than that of my opponents but that is of course open to debate. I invite all readers to provide their own rebuttal below provided these comments are civil in nature and on topic. With no further delay let us begin.
This Witty reply is in response to comments on the articles titled "Debate emerges over decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York City", "Jon Stewart takes on conservative fears over Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial", and "Jon Stewart criticizes conservative hysteria over Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial. The critics claims that the decision to try KSM (khalid Sheikh Mohammed) in America will only endager Americans and give the terrorist a platform to spread their propaganda. Furthermore it is argued the terrorists may be able to recruit followers while in prison, communicate with other terrorists, or even be set free because of a legal technicality.
My Reply:
(1) As to the men possibly going free Geraldo Rivera best addressed this argument in the video clip linked here. Legal scholars believe that the case against these men is as close to a slam dunk as possible. In fact the men have reportedly confessed to the crimes in correspondence they attempted to send while in being detained. Some say evidence will be excluded under what is commonly referred to as the poisonous tree doctrine but there are a number of exceptions to that doctrine. For instance the government can still use evidence if it can prove that it inevitably would have found the evidence otherwise.
(2) If we try these men and convict them they can be given the harshest penalty under the law which is the death penalty. There was absolutely no discussion of executing the men held at Guantanamo Bay. The world community was already upset that the men were being detained with no rights at Guantanamo. The prospect of the men being put to death without a fair trial would have literally pushed the rest of the world over the edge.
(3) World opinion matters and the trial of these men will positively effect this world opinion. The negative world opinion attributed to the Bush administration greatly inhibited our ability to get allies to commit more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and to join in sanctions against Iran and North Korea among other things. Has the world community embraced us now with open arms? Absolutely not but the building of "soft power" as it is called takes time and the benefits will be seen if we continue to not "got it alone" as we did in the Bush years.
(4) If we abandon the ideals which separate us from the terrorists then that is what will be the first real victory for them. The 9/11 attacks were an attack on our ideals as much as it was on our land and people. If we say that we no longer respect the right of all humans to have a fair trial then ultimately what separates us from the terrorists themselves. The terrorists killed because they felt they were right and justified in their cause. They gave their victims no trial and no chance to respond. If we execute men or detain them forever without due process how is our method any different than their brutal methods? We ultimately prove ourselves more "right" by living up to our ideals even for the those even when dealing with those we despise.
(5) Those who believe that these terrorists will be able to spread propaganda in the trial must have never attended a criminal trial. Defendants are not allowed to simply give a political speech any time they like. In reality trials are very structured and defendants who try to deviate from courtroom procedure generally find themselves escorted out very quickly. If the Nazi's were not able to successfully spread propaganda through the Nuremberg trials I do not believe that the terrorists will somehow do a better job in New York City.
(6) In order to believe the terrorists will be able effectively spread propaganda you ultimately must believe they have a good argument. I personally believe that the more the terrorist argument is exposed the more it benefits us. The truth is ultimately on our side. We should therefore not be afraid of the terrorist argument. Instead we should bring it out into the light and expose it for the evil it is.
(7) Should these men be found guilty there would be a sentencing hearing following the verdict. There the families of the victims could presumably confront the terrorists in person if they wish. Some victims have no such desire but for some it is a cherished experience to face the people responsible for their suffering and say whatever they wish.
(8) Terrorists have been tried in America before without any of the fears of conservatives being realized. Specifically the men who tried to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993 were convicted and sentenced to life in prison. They did try to spread their ideology in the sentencing phase of the trial but no great propaganda victory was won. They were not able to convert the prisoners around them to radical Islam. They were not able to get off on a legal technicality. They were tried in a court of law for the world to see and their actions were condemned in a public trial. Richard Reid the infamous "shoe bomber" was also tried and sentenced to three life sentences for his attempted terrorist attack. Once again no major propaganda victory, no legal loopholes exposed, no terrorist attack was made on the family of the judge or bailiffs as conservatives have warned about with KSM. The federal judge who tried terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui (also found guilty and sentenced to life) concluded plainly that "the system does work" when putting terrorists on trial.
Comments
Mr Witt,
1) If those of us who believe that propaganda will be spread in criminal trial, must have never attended a criminal trial, why then do you admit that the terrorist tried in court for the 1993 bombings did try to spread their ideology in the sentencing phase of the trial?
2) If no great propaganda victory was won during that trial, why were the World Trade Centers attacked again 8 years later?
3) If we believe the terrorists will be effective at spreading propaganda, we ultimately must believe they have a good argument? Are you serious? It's obvious that they are successful at spreading their propoganda! Look at the spread of terrorism! That does not mean we believe they have a good argument!
4) The families of the 9/11 attacks overwhelmingly are opposed to these trials/so don't pretend it's to benefit them be facing them in court.
5) Do you think we are fooling the world by having a trial, when we are saying it's a slam dunk for the death penalty?
Gigi: So you are saying the 1993 terrorists were successful in spreading propaganda? Can you find any press accounts which show how they effectively spread their ideology through trial? And are you seriously contending that the 9/11 attacks were caused by the trials of the 1993 terrorists? Seriously....it was not radical Islam or U.S. foreign policy toward Israel or our troops in Saudia Arabia. Your position is that the 9/11 terrorists (in their hole in Afghanistan at the time) were reading press accounts from the New York Times of the 1993 terrorists trials and were so inspired by their propaganda that it inspired them to attack us on 9/11. Give me a break. If we would have kept the 1993 terrorists at Guantanamo and tortured them 24/7 until they died the 9/11 terrorists still would have attacked us. Only they may have been able to recruit more people to attack with more planes.
Ryan,
Four out of five points...that's pretty good.
The fact is, the 1993 bombing trials did not do anything to stop the 9/11 bombings!
Gigi:
You are right, the 1993 Trials did not stop the WTC bombings on 9/11. That is simple logic: al Qaeda has several terrorists and can recruit them easily in different countries. Just because we put a few on trial does not mean that al Qaeda will disappear.
2)As for terrorist propaganda, there is no propaganda except for what the United States creates itself through its geopolitical assault on the Middle East. If we want to take away their propaganda, then we should change our policy. Most Muslims in the world who want to fight us are doing so right now in Afghanistan and Iraq.
3) The families: What the families want is not the issue, it is the trial of these individuals. Also, I don't know where you received your information. In articles I've read, family members were interested in being able to attend these trials.
David:
You make my point better than I could.
The fact that you hold America responsible for the actions of the terrorists is exactly the political mentality that most Americans suspect is behind the desire to parade these villians on national television!
Firefighter, Tim Brown has collected over 100,000 signatures from 9/11 families and supporters that object to the civil trials and led a protest against them.
Mayor Giuliani, who has been a tireless advocate for the victims and their families said that the trials pose an unnecessary security risk to the city and an unncecessary advantage to the accused. He should know!
While it's true that the victims wishes should not be the deciding factor, neither should the anti-American political mentality of Eric Holder and this Administration!
The fact that most victims and families do not want these trials, speaks to the issue RYAN WITT raised to support these trials as a way for the families to confront the accused.
Good Points-BUT the problem with the polictical crowd is that their always trying to appease the crowds and camreas, instead of doing the right thing.
Personally qa 145gr JHP in these terrorist braincase would be the justice that they get from me personally. Either that, or chain them to a volkwagon, and drop the volkwago into the ocean from 30,000 feet.
Consider IRAn and how THEY treat their criminals---Presto magjic-their gone!
In the[url=http://louboutindiscounting.com/ ]christian louboutin[/url] , christian[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/]louboutin shoes[/url] , louboutin shoes ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com]christian louboutin sale[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com]christian louboutins[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/black-christian-louboutin-c-75.html]... christian louboutin[/url] a lot of people were reluctant to shop online. Many were worried about the[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-pumps-c-66.html ]christian louboutin pumps[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-boots-c-65.html ]christian louboutin boots[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com]discount christian louboutin[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com]cl shoes[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/Cheap_Christain_louboutin.html]cheap christian louboutin[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/faq.html]christian louboutin online[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/]buy christian louboutin[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-sandals-c-67.html ]christian louboutin sandals[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-flats-c-81.html]... louboutin flats[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-heels-c-82.html]... louboutin heels[/url] ofentering their card detailson the internet and thereliabilityof the internet but as[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-wedding-c-84.htm... louboutin wedding[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/Christain_louboutin_women.html]chris... louboutin women[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/about_us.html]christian louboutin us[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/about_us.html]christian louboutin wholesale[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-very-brode-suede... very brode[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-nprivepatent-lea... louboutin sandals black[/url] ,[url=http://www.louboutindiscounting.com/christian-louboutin-new-c-73.html]ch... louboutin new[/url] ,[url=]louboutin sandals sale[/url] ,[url=]christian louboutin pump sale[/url] ,[url=]christian louboutin sandals sale[/url] has become morewidespread.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!