Terrorists Are Criminals and Should be Tried in Civilian Court

February 16, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (4)

Military commissions, on the other hand, despite recent improvements, remain a second-class system of justice that fails to meet both domestic and international legal standards. They have never been used for a murder trial, much less cases as complex as the pending terrorism prosecutions of the 9/11 suspects. The commissions have been mired in legal challenges and controversy, and, since 9/11, have delivered only three convictions, two resulting in sentences of less than a year (plus time at Guantánamo, in one case).

It is somewhat stunning that this controversy continues, considering the legacy of the previous administration. Throwing suspects into secret detention without due process and, in many instances, torturing and abusing them not only deeply hurt our international reputation; it also has failed to gather useful intelligence and has created a situation where some of the evidence that actually was collected is unreliable and now can't be used for prosecutions in any forum because it is tainted by torture.

Americans should resist fearmongering and refuse to let ideology dictate our national security policies. We should strive to both keep the country safe and uphold American values. If we abandon those values, we've really lost what it is we're fighting for.

Read why safety and national security mandate military trials for terror suspects, by Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas.

Tags:
ACLU

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

If they are not american citizens then they should not be allowed the right to be tried in a civilian court. The Military tribunal was created to try terrorists of the country and thats exactly what suspected terrorists are. Enemies of the state.

jesus crist. of WY 9:00AM May 12, 2010

Moslem terrorists are at war (Jihad) with us, and they are engaged in acts that would be considered war crimes (far from the usual for profit criminal acts).

I detect a lot of political correctness, which is never logically consistent. I hear few complaints from PC libs about the Nuremberg trials, which addressed "war crimes" in a military tribunal, introduced non-constitutional ex post facto "laws" like "crimes against peace," "war crimes,"and "crimes against humanity." The Germans had to defend themselves with one hand tied behind their backs because the Soviets were guilty of much the same "war crimes" as the Germans and couldn't be embarrassed for political reasons.

I think there is a place for show trials like Nuremberg and Saddam's trial where the guilt is far beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not there is a court finding of fact, and there is a lesson to be taught by making an example of defendants. Our government has pretty much stated that KSM isn't going to be going anywhere even if he is acquitted, so why pretend there are "constitutional rights" at stake.

Likewise there is a place for military tribunals where there is no doubt about the facts, that a terrorist fighting for Jihad committed or intended to commit war crimes. Do we really need a civilian court to determine the facts in the case of the crotch bomber? He was caught in the act before many witnesses and made admissions. Many terrorists openly admit their Jihadist motivations, with pride. We need enormously expensive and lengthy civilian trials and decades-long appeals for findings of fact where the facts are known?

Civilian trials should be reserved for cases that are in doubt and to prevent injustices.

I'm not unsympathetic to the Arab causes myself. Our nation should be on the side of justice, not one-sided intimidated by the Israel lobby. Bush invaded Iraq--a country that had no enmity toward us--pure aggression. Invading Afghanistan was semi-legitimate, though God only knows what could have been accomplished through diplomacy if Bush and the bullies weren't so eager to use the military of the "world's only superpower, but occupying the country long after al-Qaida flew the coop? Nevertheless, terrorists committing war crimes against us should be punished.

Luther of LA 11:01PM February 17, 2010

Yes, they can try terrorists in the civilian court as they have done so under the Clinton administration in the case involving those who blasted the basement of the World Trade Center. The terrorists, however, came back a few years later and destroyed both towers of the WTC. So, it was a successful civilian trial, but we lost 2,500 lives later. Good luck with another civilian trial.

Ike Hana of OR 5:40PM February 17, 2010

advertisement

Latest Videos

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Democrats Should Be Worried About Polls After Obama Scandals

Democrats should be more worried about President Obama's approval ratings.

Tea Party IRS Rally Should Wait Until After Moore Tornado Recovery

Tea party rallies against the IRS should wait until the tornado victims are taken care of.

God Bless America and the Boy Scouts

The Fund does the right thing by pushing the Boy Scouts to lift its ban on gay members.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Show the Failure of Obama's Big Government

Giving an inefficient organization like the IRS more responsibility makes it more likely to screw up, not better able to solve this nation’s problems.

advertisement