On November 13, 2009, the U.S. Justice Department announced that it will be transferring five of the Guantanamo Bay detainees to New York to face trial for their involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks involving the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Despite a public outcry against this strategy, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi are to be tried in Federal Court literally blocks from the scarred hole in the ground where the Twin Towers once stood. Recent polls show that Americans oppose trying terror suspects in the Federal court system by a margin of two to one but that has not deterred Obama administration Attorney General, Eric Holder, who claims that the day has finally arrived for these men to face justice.
After a brief statement, Eric Holder faced harsh questioning in the Senate yesterday and was visibly unprepared for the direction the questioning had taken. Senator Lindsay Graham asked Holder “Can you give me a case in United States history when an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?” As Mr. Holder struggled to find an appropriate answer he finally uttered that he would have to research the issue at which time, Senator Graham interrupted and answered the question for him. “The answer is never” Graham said, adding “We are making bad history”’.
Senator Graham was not being deliberately argumentative; he was stating a point of law that could spell doom for the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four coconspirators. If you try these individuals in Federal Court you must bestow the full protection of the American legal system on the defendants; protections that would thwart the ability of the United States to gather intelligence from captured terrorists crucial to the efforts of this nation protect itself against future attacks. Mr. Holder could not answer the question of whether or not these defendants were advised of their Miranda rights or if they had ever been offered legal council, both of which are fundamental to any civil prosecution.
If Mohammed had not been advised of his rights or given the opportunity to seek counsel, the statements he made regarding his involvement in the attacks would be inadmissible in civilian court. The detainees were captured by the military in a foreign country during the prosecution of a war so reasonably, they had not been “Mirandized” when taken into custody nor had they been offered an attorney prior to questioning, both of which are required by our system of justice. We already know that the CIA engaged in water-boarding the detainees to obtain additional intelligence and whether you agree with that practice or not, the information it yielded has kept us from feeling the sting of additional civilian attacks on American soil since 9/11. As beneficial as that information was, the methods simply will not fly in a civilian court.
The primary question that any first year law student would present in the defense of these individuals would revolve around the Constitutional protections against torture, self incrimination, the right to legal counsel and since he was captured in 2003, the right to a speedy trial. They would not be wrong, that is how our system of justice protects American’s from potential abuses of the authorities. Unfortunately, we do not have a separate set of rules for the prosecution of foreign combatants or extremist terrorists. If we intend to prosecute them in the United States criminal justice system then those same protections would have to be afforded to the terrorists. There are already recorded statutory cases where the Supreme Court have overturned convictions and freed known criminals because their civil rights had been violated. The Supreme Court did not free these individuals because the violation of their rights brought the evidence against them into question, they were guilty men freed in essence, only because their constitutional rights had been violated.
Knowing what we know, can anyone argue that even if the courts were to ignore these facts and allow the trial to proceed at all, that the Supreme Court would have to review the conviction on appeal and would most likely free these men because their civil rights had been violated during their apprehension and incarceration? That is the law and that is why we do not try these cases in civil court. These are foreign combatants that launched an attack against the United States in effect, declaring war on America. Their trial is a military matter and does not belong in the civilian courts nor do they deserve to be afforded the same constitutional rights guaranteed by an America they are pledged to destroy.
One of the most disturbing things about this is the number of stories I have seen coming from the press calling the transfer of these prisoners to New York “foolish” or indicative of the administration’s inexperience. As usual, I have a very different take on this. Eric Holder is an exceptionally bright individual. He had begun working for the Justice Department upon completion of law school before serving as a judge for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In 1993, Holder was appointed to the post of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and eventually became the Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton. This man knows the law and I am sure he knows the precedents of Supreme Court decisions regarding prisoners whose civil rights had been violated. If he doesn’t, you can be certain his staff does. In light of his experience and knowledge of the law, why would Eric Holder attempt to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian courts if he knows that a conviction cannot stand a Supreme Court challenge?
This administration has been locked in battle to advance their radical agenda ever since Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. They had counted on the complacency if the American people but the recession had turned the spotlight on and the people have been waiting for some sign from this President that he is going to take meaningful steps to restore the vitality of the economy. The President pressed for immediate passage of a $787 billion dollar stimulus bill claiming that passage of this bill would stem the recession and reduce unemployment. We watched as the administration spoke glowingly of how well the stimulus plan was working while each month an additional 200,000 plus people lost their jobs.
Instead of focusing on the economy, we watched the administration campaign for an energy bill (cap and trade) that promises to further cripple business in this country and to hobble the economy. After Cap and Trade was passed through the House of Representatives, Healthcare reform became the priority for Obama and we watched the House churn out a massive one-thousand page bill and press for a vote before the members of Congress had even had an opportunity to read it. As the details of healthcare bill were revealed, people took to the streets and attended town hall meetings to protest against this crazy jumble of taxes and mandates in an attempt to bring attention to what American’s really want…jobs and a stable economy. People recognize that America can not survive if we continue the growth of the Federal Debt but the government keeps writing massive spending bills.
Now we are faced with the sad fact that the Government has absolutely no idea where hundreds of billions in stimulus money has been spent. The eighteen-million dollar website dedicated to tracking the stimulus money and the jobs it has created has been an unqualified disaster. The site shows jobs created through millions spent in Congressional districts that do not exist. The media’s examination of the figures shows not just a trend, but a systematic exaggeration of the jobs that have been attributed to stimulus money. Despite this expose’, the administration is still applauding the success of the stimulus bill even as unemployment topped 10.2%.
The President is also struggling with an image he has created of an inexperienced Commander in Chief that is unable to take decisive action even when his hand-picked theater commander in Afghanistan tells him he needs to reinforce the troop levels in the Afghan war or face the failure of the mission. The request made by General McChrystal in mid-September is still under consideration and that does not bode well with the people that heard Candidate Obama say that he would heed the advice of his generals and give them the materials and support they need to succeed in their mission.
Anyone that has ever been on stage know that spotlights can get awfully hot; heat this President didn’t expect. When faced with the possible loss of both healthcare and cap and trade they had only one course left….blame Bush. The public trials of Mohammed and his friends are meant to shift the spotlight from this administration and on to the so-called “atrocities” committed against the people detained in Guantanamo Bay. After all, what would bring Bush’s name back into focus better than months of testimony about the poor treatment these people received at the hands of the Army and the CIA? Well, that was another miscalculation on the part of Obama and his crew.
Americans have not forgotten the burning buildings or the innocent Americans leaping to their deaths to escape the flames. They have not forgotten that the “accused” was not only responsible for the 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon but also the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the attempted airliner “shoe bombing” by Richard Reid, the bombing of nightclubs in Bali where Americans frequently relaxed and Mohammed has even admitted that he was in fact, the individual that beheaded American Journalist, Daniel Pearl.
We are a compassionate nation but we have no stomach for barbarians that practice the slaughter of innocent people. This is not an enemy that is really seeking retribution for perceived ills. This is an enemy that hates us for who we are. His actions are not meant to convert people to his religion but rather to eliminate them entirely. Even the Spanish Inquisition’s ultimate goal was to secure the salvation of man and to spread the word of God, not to indiscriminately kill anyone that did not already possess a bible.
If the Justice Department insists that these men are tried in civilian courts and they are freed on a technicality, the spirits of the people murdered by this fanatic will scream aloud and their voices will be heard every remaining day of Obama’s single and inglorious term as President.
Paul
Despite a public outcry against this strategy, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi are to be tried in Federal Court literally blocks from the scarred hole in the ground where the Twin Towers once stood. Recent polls show that Americans oppose trying terror suspects in the Federal court system by a margin of two to one but that has not deterred Obama administration Attorney General, Eric Holder, who claims that the day has finally arrived for these men to face justice.
After a brief statement, Eric Holder faced harsh questioning in the Senate yesterday and was visibly unprepared for the direction the questioning had taken. Senator Lindsay Graham asked Holder “Can you give me a case in United States history when an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?” As Mr. Holder struggled to find an appropriate answer he finally uttered that he would have to research the issue at which time, Senator Graham interrupted and answered the question for him. “The answer is never” Graham said, adding “We are making bad history”’.
Senator Graham was not being deliberately argumentative; he was stating a point of law that could spell doom for the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four coconspirators. If you try these individuals in Federal Court you must bestow the full protection of the American legal system on the defendants; protections that would thwart the ability of the United States to gather intelligence from captured terrorists crucial to the efforts of this nation protect itself against future attacks. Mr. Holder could not answer the question of whether or not these defendants were advised of their Miranda rights or if they had ever been offered legal council, both of which are fundamental to any civil prosecution.
If Mohammed had not been advised of his rights or given the opportunity to seek counsel, the statements he made regarding his involvement in the attacks would be inadmissible in civilian court. The detainees were captured by the military in a foreign country during the prosecution of a war so reasonably, they had not been “Mirandized” when taken into custody nor had they been offered an attorney prior to questioning, both of which are required by our system of justice. We already know that the CIA engaged in water-boarding the detainees to obtain additional intelligence and whether you agree with that practice or not, the information it yielded has kept us from feeling the sting of additional civilian attacks on American soil since 9/11. As beneficial as that information was, the methods simply will not fly in a civilian court.
The primary question that any first year law student would present in the defense of these individuals would revolve around the Constitutional protections against torture, self incrimination, the right to legal counsel and since he was captured in 2003, the right to a speedy trial. They would not be wrong, that is how our system of justice protects American’s from potential abuses of the authorities. Unfortunately, we do not have a separate set of rules for the prosecution of foreign combatants or extremist terrorists. If we intend to prosecute them in the United States criminal justice system then those same protections would have to be afforded to the terrorists. There are already recorded statutory cases where the Supreme Court have overturned convictions and freed known criminals because their civil rights had been violated. The Supreme Court did not free these individuals because the violation of their rights brought the evidence against them into question, they were guilty men freed in essence, only because their constitutional rights had been violated.
Knowing what we know, can anyone argue that even if the courts were to ignore these facts and allow the trial to proceed at all, that the Supreme Court would have to review the conviction on appeal and would most likely free these men because their civil rights had been violated during their apprehension and incarceration? That is the law and that is why we do not try these cases in civil court. These are foreign combatants that launched an attack against the United States in effect, declaring war on America. Their trial is a military matter and does not belong in the civilian courts nor do they deserve to be afforded the same constitutional rights guaranteed by an America they are pledged to destroy.
One of the most disturbing things about this is the number of stories I have seen coming from the press calling the transfer of these prisoners to New York “foolish” or indicative of the administration’s inexperience. As usual, I have a very different take on this. Eric Holder is an exceptionally bright individual. He had begun working for the Justice Department upon completion of law school before serving as a judge for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In 1993, Holder was appointed to the post of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and eventually became the Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton. This man knows the law and I am sure he knows the precedents of Supreme Court decisions regarding prisoners whose civil rights had been violated. If he doesn’t, you can be certain his staff does. In light of his experience and knowledge of the law, why would Eric Holder attempt to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian courts if he knows that a conviction cannot stand a Supreme Court challenge?
This administration has been locked in battle to advance their radical agenda ever since Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. They had counted on the complacency if the American people but the recession had turned the spotlight on and the people have been waiting for some sign from this President that he is going to take meaningful steps to restore the vitality of the economy. The President pressed for immediate passage of a $787 billion dollar stimulus bill claiming that passage of this bill would stem the recession and reduce unemployment. We watched as the administration spoke glowingly of how well the stimulus plan was working while each month an additional 200,000 plus people lost their jobs.
Instead of focusing on the economy, we watched the administration campaign for an energy bill (cap and trade) that promises to further cripple business in this country and to hobble the economy. After Cap and Trade was passed through the House of Representatives, Healthcare reform became the priority for Obama and we watched the House churn out a massive one-thousand page bill and press for a vote before the members of Congress had even had an opportunity to read it. As the details of healthcare bill were revealed, people took to the streets and attended town hall meetings to protest against this crazy jumble of taxes and mandates in an attempt to bring attention to what American’s really want…jobs and a stable economy. People recognize that America can not survive if we continue the growth of the Federal Debt but the government keeps writing massive spending bills.
Now we are faced with the sad fact that the Government has absolutely no idea where hundreds of billions in stimulus money has been spent. The eighteen-million dollar website dedicated to tracking the stimulus money and the jobs it has created has been an unqualified disaster. The site shows jobs created through millions spent in Congressional districts that do not exist. The media’s examination of the figures shows not just a trend, but a systematic exaggeration of the jobs that have been attributed to stimulus money. Despite this expose’, the administration is still applauding the success of the stimulus bill even as unemployment topped 10.2%.
The President is also struggling with an image he has created of an inexperienced Commander in Chief that is unable to take decisive action even when his hand-picked theater commander in Afghanistan tells him he needs to reinforce the troop levels in the Afghan war or face the failure of the mission. The request made by General McChrystal in mid-September is still under consideration and that does not bode well with the people that heard Candidate Obama say that he would heed the advice of his generals and give them the materials and support they need to succeed in their mission.
Anyone that has ever been on stage know that spotlights can get awfully hot; heat this President didn’t expect. When faced with the possible loss of both healthcare and cap and trade they had only one course left….blame Bush. The public trials of Mohammed and his friends are meant to shift the spotlight from this administration and on to the so-called “atrocities” committed against the people detained in Guantanamo Bay. After all, what would bring Bush’s name back into focus better than months of testimony about the poor treatment these people received at the hands of the Army and the CIA? Well, that was another miscalculation on the part of Obama and his crew.
Americans have not forgotten the burning buildings or the innocent Americans leaping to their deaths to escape the flames. They have not forgotten that the “accused” was not only responsible for the 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon but also the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the attempted airliner “shoe bombing” by Richard Reid, the bombing of nightclubs in Bali where Americans frequently relaxed and Mohammed has even admitted that he was in fact, the individual that beheaded American Journalist, Daniel Pearl.
We are a compassionate nation but we have no stomach for barbarians that practice the slaughter of innocent people. This is not an enemy that is really seeking retribution for perceived ills. This is an enemy that hates us for who we are. His actions are not meant to convert people to his religion but rather to eliminate them entirely. Even the Spanish Inquisition’s ultimate goal was to secure the salvation of man and to spread the word of God, not to indiscriminately kill anyone that did not already possess a bible.
If the Justice Department insists that these men are tried in civilian courts and they are freed on a technicality, the spirits of the people murdered by this fanatic will scream aloud and their voices will be heard every remaining day of Obama’s single and inglorious term as President.
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment