This morning Rasmussen reported that the majority of Americans think that terrorists should be tried by military tribunal and not outside of Guantanamo Bay. Presumably, their reasoning follows along the lines that terrorists should not be granted the same rights and protections granted to U.S. citizens facing criminal prosecution, and a general “not in my backyard” sentiment when it comes to choosing a location for the trials. Both of these arguments against Federal trials in civilian populated areas seem quite fair on their face. However, that doesn’t necessarily make them right.
It is possible to create a much longer list on this issue, but here are the top five reasons why terrorists should not be tried by Military Tribunals.
5. We don’t need to give terrorists more recruitment material. From mistreatment in prisons, to Guantanamo Bay itself, we’ve been fueling the fires of resentment against us, and handing recruitment material to terrorists on a silver platter. Bluntly, we’re better than that.
4. The “rights” we would be giving them aren’t real. Be honest. We’ve seen plenty of trials involving heinous crimes in this nation, and we’ve all known very well that when the accused were actually guilty, the trials were often just shows. Does anyone seriously think that any amount of work done by a defense attorney on behalf of the terrorists would cause them to be found “not guilty”?
3. Anything but a public trial would be ineffective in the end. Military Tribunals would be carried out behind closed doors, and only the results would be known to the public. That would do a great disservice to our country. The world needs to see the inner-workings of these proceedings, period. If it is not known, we add to reason five here, and additionally create an environment of distrust worldwide. We’re the freedom nation. Why do we need to hide?
2. Logistics is not an excuse in the age of technology. Security rightfully should be of the highest concern. But why are we even considering this as we would any other sort of trial in the past? We’ve never been in this position before, so we have the opportunity to bend the rules a little. It isn’t even a matter of bending the rules – defendants have attended trials in the past via closed circuit television due to security concerns. Leave the defendants behind bars, and let them view the proceedings via television. It’s not like there isn’t a gaggle of teleconferencing firms out there that have the technology to manage this.
1. Terrorists are not entitled to trials by Military Tribunals. By trying terrorists in Military Tribunals as opposed to civilian courts, we would be validating their cause as a legitimate military action, and would grant them the status of military combatants on a field of battle. The cause of any terrorist organization is not worthy of such status. If that were the case, then we probably should have tried Timothy McVeigh in a Military Tribunal, simply because he felt that he should declare war on the U.S. Terrorists are not military combatants – they are common criminals. They do not wage war on a field of battle – they attack civilians. They are mass murderers, pure and simple. Treating them as anything else would be granting them some level of honor. It’s sad to think that so many Americans want to do just that.
Tags: Rasmussen, Terror Trials, Terrorists
Secured by