Speaking of principles, how could anyone be opposed to a trial for Khalid Sheikh Muhammed or any other terrorist? Does Boehner truly believe that a jury will find Muhammed not guilty?
We have a court system firmly planted in the bedrock of our government. Its purpose is to ensure that everyone has a chance for justice (in theory, at least!). An open and transparent democracy needs courts and public participation if there is any hope for a truly progressive democracy where we are all free.
I hesitate to include Nidal Hasan in the same category as Khalid Sheikh Muhammed. In the rush to explain Hasan, people have begun to label him as a terrorist, yet I wonder what Senator Lieberman and Fox News would say call Hasan if he wasn't a Muslim.
"Terrorism" isn't an all-encompassing menace like "Communism" or "Facism". However, all are effective concepts used to justify suppression and fear, along with abuses in power that any democracy should resist.
Some members of our government and media make no distinction between jihadists, eco-protesters or anti-government forces. If we label everything as "Terrorism" and have a universal band-aid approach we ignore the actual reason why a particular group is motivated to violent protest. The most effective way to fight any crime is to understand why it happened. Only then can you solve the problem.
And I imagine that John Boehner, Bill Kristol and Joe Lieberman would be the first to scream for their rights if some foreign government locked them away without trial.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment