By GottaLaff
I'm not sure how many ways this can be said, but until a few irrationally fearful political game-players come to their senses, I'll post about this topic every which way I can.
Via Tim Rutten of the L.A. Times:
If the president, who campaigned on a promise to restore the rule of law in the treatment of the jihadis, reverses course, it will be not only a lamentable triumph of politics over principle but an affront to common sense and some of our most valuable historical precedents. [...]Other Al Qaeda-linked terrorists who have passed through the normal criminal justice process [...] were tried and convicted, and all are serving life sentences in federal prison [...]
The notion that Mohammed, his alleged accomplices and the other 35 Guantanamo detainees the administration says it wants to bring to trial pose some particular challenge or threat that these other defendants didn't is simply absurd. The only real difficulties posed by these new cases are the ones created by the extra-legal, extra-judicial handling of their situations up to now, mainly the use of torture to obtain confessions and other evidence. Those problems -- products of the previous administration's panicked overreaching -- are going to be there no matter how or where these trials are conducted. [...]
This is an instance in which the Obama administration must choose between principle and political expediency.
I just gave you the generalities, Rutten gives you the details here. And he does it well. Suffice it to say I strongly agree with him, and am sick and tired of the fear tactics used for no other reason than political gain.
Our legal/security systems are just fine. Better than fine. Too bad they're being exploited. In fact, it's shameful.
All my previous posts, about this, rants and otherwise, can be found here.
The post No reason for Obama to backtrack on 9/11 trials appeared first on The Political Carnival.