.gif)
From Human Events:
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Military Trial: Sanity Trumps Eric Holder
by Human Events
04/09/2011
[The following article will be printed in the April 11th issue of HUMAN EVENTS newspaper.]
After a year of heated arguments and abuse heaped on those who disagreed with its position, the Obama administration finally reversed itself April 4 and decided to prosecute 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators before a military commission, instead of in a civilian trial in New York City. We hate to say we told you so, but we did. Human Events led the charge against the foolish idea of civilian trials with a petition drive. The petition eventually garnered more than 130,000 signatures, including those of luminaries such as Mark Levin, Peter King, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and George Allen.
The first point of our petition declared that trying those who make war against America in civilian courts would set a disastrous precedent. Mohammed was but one officer in a vast shadow army. Would we propose to drag them all across the oceans to American cities for dangerous and expensive trials? Why did it take a year for the administration to grasp this simple, common-sense point?
We concluded the petition with a message from David Beamer, father of United 93 hero Todd Beamer: “Our enemies must be thrilled. We are willingly handing them an opportunity to inflict economic harm on New York City, keep their cause in the headlines, gather new intelligence, create new terror strategies, stimulate recruiting, celebrate newfound rights, and foist a fresh round of pain and suffering upon their victims.”
Not everyone in the administration came around to our way of thinking. A notable exception was super-liberal Attorney General Eric Holder, who was visibly unhappy with the task of announcing a decision he disagreed with. Holder’s press conference was a remarkable display of truculent arrogance. In what is certain to become one of his most infamous sound bites, Holder asked himself whether he “knows better” than his critics and answered with a firm “yes.” Even in defeat, he maintained that all the objections to his plans for a civilian trial were “needless controversy.”
Holder claimed that his case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was a thing of glittering procedural beauty, a prosecutorial snowflake made of diamonds, “one of the most well-researched and documented cases” he had ever seen in his “decades of experience as a prosecutor.” No doubt it took a huge amount of time and money to forge this legal Excalibur. Holder was ready to spend more than $400 million for his chance to bring his peerless case against a man who had already confessed to the crime, and asked to be executed. In the process, Holder would have put countless civilian lives at risk and given terrorists a global platform from which to deliver propaganda against the United States.
Trying Mohammed and his cronies in a military court does not remove them from our legal system. It is a legal judgment against them, declaring they are not mere criminals, but unlawful alien combatants who deserve none of the luxurious protections afforded to American citizens, or, for that matter, to lawful combatants. Those who were murdered on 9/11 were not only the victims of a crime, but also the targets of a military attack from a declared enemy at war with the United States. Todd Beamer and the other heroes of United 93 were not only citizens standing up to a crime in progress. They were also soldiers pressed unexpectedly into service, who handed the enemy its first great defeat in a war that has spread to every corner of the globe.
The misguided Obama-Holder attempt to drag this case into a civilian court was not a minor error in judgment, rectified with no harm done. It sent a message of uncertainty and hesitation to our terrorist enemies. We must be prepared to mount a ferocious defense against foreign enemies who murder our citizens in heinous acts of war. Justice is what comes after a war is over. The administration started talking about civilian “justice” long before we could claim anything resembling a victory.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Military Trial: Sanity Trumps Eric Holder
by Human Events
04/09/2011
[The following article will be printed in the April 11th issue of HUMAN EVENTS newspaper.]
After a year of heated arguments and abuse heaped on those who disagreed with its position, the Obama administration finally reversed itself April 4 and decided to prosecute 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators before a military commission, instead of in a civilian trial in New York City. We hate to say we told you so, but we did. Human Events led the charge against the foolish idea of civilian trials with a petition drive. The petition eventually garnered more than 130,000 signatures, including those of luminaries such as Mark Levin, Peter King, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and George Allen.
The first point of our petition declared that trying those who make war against America in civilian courts would set a disastrous precedent. Mohammed was but one officer in a vast shadow army. Would we propose to drag them all across the oceans to American cities for dangerous and expensive trials? Why did it take a year for the administration to grasp this simple, common-sense point?
We concluded the petition with a message from David Beamer, father of United 93 hero Todd Beamer: “Our enemies must be thrilled. We are willingly handing them an opportunity to inflict economic harm on New York City, keep their cause in the headlines, gather new intelligence, create new terror strategies, stimulate recruiting, celebrate newfound rights, and foist a fresh round of pain and suffering upon their victims.”
Not everyone in the administration came around to our way of thinking. A notable exception was super-liberal Attorney General Eric Holder, who was visibly unhappy with the task of announcing a decision he disagreed with. Holder’s press conference was a remarkable display of truculent arrogance. In what is certain to become one of his most infamous sound bites, Holder asked himself whether he “knows better” than his critics and answered with a firm “yes.” Even in defeat, he maintained that all the objections to his plans for a civilian trial were “needless controversy.”
Holder claimed that his case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was a thing of glittering procedural beauty, a prosecutorial snowflake made of diamonds, “one of the most well-researched and documented cases” he had ever seen in his “decades of experience as a prosecutor.” No doubt it took a huge amount of time and money to forge this legal Excalibur. Holder was ready to spend more than $400 million for his chance to bring his peerless case against a man who had already confessed to the crime, and asked to be executed. In the process, Holder would have put countless civilian lives at risk and given terrorists a global platform from which to deliver propaganda against the United States.
Trying Mohammed and his cronies in a military court does not remove them from our legal system. It is a legal judgment against them, declaring they are not mere criminals, but unlawful alien combatants who deserve none of the luxurious protections afforded to American citizens, or, for that matter, to lawful combatants. Those who were murdered on 9/11 were not only the victims of a crime, but also the targets of a military attack from a declared enemy at war with the United States. Todd Beamer and the other heroes of United 93 were not only citizens standing up to a crime in progress. They were also soldiers pressed unexpectedly into service, who handed the enemy its first great defeat in a war that has spread to every corner of the globe.
The misguided Obama-Holder attempt to drag this case into a civilian court was not a minor error in judgment, rectified with no harm done. It sent a message of uncertainty and hesitation to our terrorist enemies. We must be prepared to mount a ferocious defense against foreign enemies who murder our citizens in heinous acts of war. Justice is what comes after a war is over. The administration started talking about civilian “justice” long before we could claim anything resembling a victory.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment