Scaredy Catservatives
We Americans, at least in the conventional wisdom zeitgeist, imagine ourselves and our nation to be tough, courageous, and superior to all others.
“America is #1” is the common refrain, even though that is hardly true in most statistics anymore.
Driving into work this morning, I was listening to 610 WIP. They were talking about the probable end of Brian Westbrook’s career, the Philadelphia Eagles running back who has now suffered two concussions in a month’s time. Keith Jones, as a former player for the Flyers who saw his career end prematurely due to injury, drew on his experience and said it can be tough for a thirty year old player to have his playing days end and then have to survive on a fixed income for the rest of his life, especially after the economic calamity that followed 9/11 and the most recent Great Recession. A very reasonable point, to me.
Well, about 15 minutes later a caller called in furious that Jones had even mentioned 9/11. “I am from New York! How dare you compare 9/11 to sports?!?”
Uh, he wasn’t. And his point is 9/11 produced one of the largest market sell offs in history…. until the 2008 collapse. His point was that many players invest their income in the stock market, and as a result of the two sell offs connected to … yes… the September 11, 2001 attacks and the recent economic depression, players have lost money. These are facts.
But they are also somehow insults to the brain dead American shouting “We’re #1!”
It occurred to me that, as I drove into Center City Philadelphia, that we cannot mention 9/11 now except in a positive light. We cannot even point out the economic consequences that resulted from the attack, as somehow that is either disrespecting the dead or New York or America.
As I continued driving, Angelo Cataldi repeated a wish that is common among almost all conservatives, but also among the left and middle.
“I hope they don’t try those terrorists in New York.”
Why?
Govenor Paterson seems to suggest in one of the links above that 9/11 was a painful event that New Yorkers are not over yet, and may never be over. That is understood. But all crimes are painful events to the victims and their families, yet we almost always hold the trials of the criminals committing the crimes in the jurisdiction where it happened, regardless of the victim’s pain. Indeed, the desire for vengence almost requires it, if not proper jurisprudence.
Indeed, it would seem that the same brain dead Americans shouting “We’re #1!” are the ones almost scared to death of trying or imprisoning terrorists on American soil. If America is so tough, superior and just, then we can handle putting terrorists on trial for their crimes against us. If America is so tough, superior and just, we can handle imprisoning them on American soil.
[S]ix in 10 people [i.e. 60%] questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday say that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks should be tried in the United States, as the administration plans to do, rather than at a U.S. facility in another country.
That CNN poll does not indicate how many people are opposed to holding the trial in New York. Indeed, that would be interesting to see the breakdown of how many people favor trying terrorists in the United States, but just not in New York. Because right now I think those crying “Not in New York” are the same as those crying “Not in America!” all the while screaming “America is #1!”
The same CNN poll does indicate that two-thirds (66%) of Americans want terrorists tried in a military court rather than a civilian court as the Obama Administration plans to do. I am undecided on that point, and I can see the positives and negatives of both. But that is a question as to process. So long as nearly the same amount of people want him tried here, I am comforted.
For I know that the chest pounding yet scared to death screaming scaredy catservatives are a vast minority in the country.
We cannot even point out the economic consequences that resulted from the attack
Unless, of course, you are a Republican trying to explain away the Bush deficit and dismal job creation record.
The nation is divided between those who would seek a soloution to the Gitmo Quagmire and those who seek to institutionalize that wretched place. Those who favor Waterboarding and those who find it an abomination. When the trial is over and we move on to others this whole idiotic event will go the way of the rest of the contrived Conservative “issues” that no one cares about.
9/11 is sacred unless… you need a backdrop for a GOP convention, or an example of how Obama’s crashing the economy, or you are a former NY mayor running for President, etc, etc, etc.
I keep hearing “common sense” over and over again …
Often from the conservative side.
What makes the most “common sense” to me, is to review issues carefully, and to face that we are in difficult times, and that difficult decisions will need to be made.
Plans … to create jobs, to overhaul education, to build partnerships with each other and other countries … will not be perfect. We will not return, by legislation or sheer dint of will, to the economic high times of the 50’s and 60’s. Unbridled consumerism, unbridled capitalism, unbridled corporate America – none of these are the answer to now.
In short, we as Americans need to directly confront NOW. A NOW that includes the first major terrorist attacks on this country,and the first trial of the terrorists that committed it. A NOW that includes kaleidoscopic changes in our economy, as well as global economies. A NOW that is teaching us, if we will listen, that we all share a common life and destiny. All of us.
It would perhaps be a most fitting and symbolic first step to try the 9/11 terrorist in New York City. It brings to mind Lincoln at Gettysburg: it is hallowed land, and addressing what happened there through a trial honors the memory of those who died there. And helps those of us who live on, to move ahead, honestly and in the truth of NOW.
I don’t see how keeping terrorist suspects with no charges and no trials in Cuba is justice. A trial would be cathartic, I think. I would certainly be happy to know the planners of 9/11 are in prison awaiting execution.
Actually … I should qualify my statement, with apologies on the Oklahoma City bombing. I meant to say, the first major international terrorist attacks. I do believe that OKC is another harbinger of now, though. Another sign, another message we need to be listening to, tragically much in the same vein as 9/11.
The people who oppose bringing them here are the real problem for this country. They are citizens who have no faith in our police forces, homeland security, or criminal justice system. Most likely conservunists who as a knee jerk reaction oppose everything the president stands for. These jackasses (im talking about the soon to be found guilty and executed terrorists) are not super villains. The idea of 9/11 wasn’t even that inventive. When ya get right down to it, these guys are no more thugish than head of the Aryan Nation, or The KKK, or the Tea Party movement. Stop being so afraid of them…. John Stewart made a good point last night in making fun of the blond hooker on Fox and friends “What if they ARE released… onto the streets of NY…”
OKC was an attack by the right wing of this country at a time when Right Wing Intolerance Party operatives were on the air waves calling for an end to an oppressive Democratic presidency….. another one they lost and couldn’t deal with it, so they caused americans to die…. real patriotic conservatives.
Well, of COURSE I’m worried that the people who caused the 9/11 attacks won’t be convicted. I think it’s obvious that, at the very least, the ones who are still running free abroad won’t be, any time, soon. And that’s a sad and scary thing for me.
But, when I was much younger, paying my bills was so sad and scary that I’d put them in a drawer. That wasn’t a win solution to the problem, as you may imagine, and I was fortunate to have friends to hold my hand and get me through my fears on it.
We’ll do some hand holding, and we’ll confront our fears, and we’ll get through it. Because we’re not really “a divided country.” We’re America.
(And #1 in my heart, anyway. 😉 )
yes we are. the sad truth is, there are 2 Americas. There is the majority who brought a new administration with progressive ideas, and the Faux News Republic of Wingnuts. They truly believe that bringing the terrorists back to NY will cause another 9/11. interesting because when we ARENT talking about 9/11 these pigs dont consider NY part of “they real america” They are all disgusting nationalist pigs. I cant wait to see what they do when all of these guys are convicted and executed. “in OBAMA’S America, we dont throw our values out the window ’cause the scary guy with the beard slipped one by W”
even the soldiers of the boston massacre got a fair trial
Rasmussen – America OPPOSES Khalid Shaikh Mohammed Trial Move From Gitmo to NYC
Rasmussen/ The Lid ^ | 11/17/09 | The Lid
A Military Tribunal in Cuba. That is what Barack Obama called for in 2006 while he was in the Senate (see video above) and that is what voters said to Rasmussen in the latest poll released today. Only 29% of American voters support President Obama’s decision to transfer Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSL) and his band of thieves to NY for a civilian trial. 51% prefer that KSL remain in Gitmo to be tried in a military (19% had no opinion). Putting aside location for a moment, only 30% of Americans said suspected terrorists should have access to U.S. courts, while…
I’m no wingnut, far from it, but I have a big problem with a civil trial for KSM et al, let alone holding it in NYC, for reasons already stated above, such as: possible acquittal due to technicalities (use of torture); turning NYC into a jihad target; the cost of providing security.
9/11 was an act of war, therefore KSM does not deserve a civil trial, instead he deserves a military tribunal.
Why stress NYC citizens to the threat of a terrorist attack? This is not a question of how tough we are, how well prepared we might be, rather, it is a question of the negative impact of this event on NYC citizens. Haven’t they been traumatized enough?
I am also against execution of those found guilty. We should do what they did to us? No, wrong, morally wrong! Moreover, execution would be too good for KSM. For both reasons, life in solitary confinement would be the worst punishment possible, morally justified, and well deserved!
you think new yorkers at THAT weak?.. i mean theri baseball teams, yes. but the average new yorker is a tough MFer. you have THAT little confidence in out criminal justice system? Perry, you may not think you are a wing nut, but you sure did drink their “Americans are weak” kool aid.
I say put these guys in gen pop somewhere in the midwest and let 1-8 deal with them.
So little nerd Michael Bloomberg is more of a man than “lizard.”
lizard is a wingnut. there are no “men” in the wingnut party. just hairier pigs.
Perry,
Read this. KSM will not get acquitted. It ain’t gonna happen. They wouldn’t be trying him if they didn’t think they’d get a conviction. In fact, KSM will probably admit to being a member of al Qaeda in the trial. It’s highly likely that KSM will get the death penalty.
Didn’t he already plead guilty? Why even have a trial?
I hear you, UI, but don’t have the confidence in Holder that you have.
Were I a NYer, and I used to be one, I would oppose the trial in NYC, for reasons given.
I don’t see any positives with the idea. Why do it?
Besides, what is the downside of having a military tribunal, the proper venue for a war crime by a non-citizen. Were KSM a citizen, that would completely change the arguments.
The other possibility would be the International Court, a Nuremberg-like trial. But we don’t recognize the IC, thanks to Clinton and Bush-43.
That brings us back to the military tribunal. Why do you oppose it?
Woe be it that I’m aligned with the wingnuts on this one, though it has absolutely nothing to do with them. Just my opinion!
Interesting on the death penalty …
These guys are not afraid to die.
It is their stock-in-trade.
If we kill him, he will likely become a martyr, breathing life into terrorist causes everywhere.
Food for thought.
Good point!
Perry,
Bush wasn’t proposing military tribunals, he was trying to put together something completely else. He was trying to invent a whole new way. KSM’s crime was actually against mainly civilians and DoD employees, so I think it’s appropriate that he’s tried federally. He won’t ever be free because of AUMF and the Patriot Act:
OK UI, I get the point that even if acquitted, claimed to be a slam dunk, we have the Patriot Act to prevent KSM from being released anyway. This then exposes us to an additional question about what it means to be acquitted. This is really weak. This is one more negative; I still see no positives about a civilian trial in NYC, none!
Moreover, you have not answered my other questions in 1:11 above.
And, what about jury selection? There’s a big challenge in itself.
I’m open to being convinced otherwise, but have not seen a persuasive case made yet, by Holder or anyone else.
All Holder is saying is that under careful consideration here is the plan of action. No, these other issues have to be addressed and explained in public.
Which question? Did you read the WaPo link? All your questions are answered there.
I don’t think it’s weak to have faith in the judgment of Obama – he’s a Constitutional scholar and he has appointed smart people. He’s also a politician. He knows it would be a disaster to have an acquittal of KSM. That’s why I feel completely confident that a cautious politician like Obama knows what he is doing in this regard.
I think it’s only people who don’t have faith in our Constitution that want to invent a new way to try terrorism suspects. Especially considering that we’ve tried terrorism suspects before successfully. Conservative opposition is all about scoring points and not about actual issues. Just look at former federal prosecutor Rudy 911iuliani fear-mongering if you don’t believe me. Republicans would have me believe that either KSM and other terrorism suspects are supervillians or that our courts, law enforcement and jail personnel are incompetent.
I missed seeing your WaPo link, UI.
It does answer most of my questions, however, I have a problem with the comment about military tribunals, that Bush & Co. were not able to configure them such that they would be consistent with Constitutional requirements. Since Holder/Obama sent some of the detainees for trial by military tribunal, that argument makes no sense.
I don’t know author Andrew Cohen, except that he is identified as CBS Chief Legal Analyst. Wiki has nothing on him, only on some spiritual leader with the same name. The reason I mention this is that some of Cohen’s ‘facts’ are speculations based mainly on the earlier NYC terrorists’ trial. That was over ten years ago, times have changed, so I hope it is still a reasonable foundation.
I realize that the Repubs are fear-mongering this issue, making it tempting to support Holder/Obama on this, knowing the low quality of Repub objections to everything.
For me it is not a question of incompetence, rather a question of unintended consequences in which case the authorities are overwhelmed, as in 9/11 itself.
It would be helpful if Holder and/or Obama pushed back at the Repubs, as this would help to further clarify the foundations for their decision on this case, and on the other cases headed for a military tribunal. I remain concerned about this, as well as about the impact of the trial on NYC. I will stay tuned.
Breaking: Terror-abetting attorney ordered to prison immediately Hot Air ^ | 2:05 pm on November 17, 2009 | Ed Morrissey
Perhaps Lynne Stewart should have quit while she was behind. Convicted of abetting terror while acting as an attorney for the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, Stewart had remained free on bail while appealing her conviction. Today, the federal appeals court not only upheld her conviction and revoked her bail, but they also sent the case back to the district court for reconsideration of the shockingly light 28-month sentence Stewart initially received
Disbarred radical lawyer Lynne Stewart is going to jail – maybe for a lot longer than she thought.
A federal appeals court Tuesday upheld her conviction for smuggling messages to her jailed terrorist client, and said she deserves more than the 28 months she got because she may have lied at her trial.
Stewart, 70, is to surrender to U.S. Marshals immediately. The Brooklyn resident has been free on bail since 2006.
Oh God!!! Don’t try her on American soil!!!
In many ways Cohen’s article is a speculation on why the DOJ thought they could make the KSM trial work.
It is something of a shame, isn’t it, that AG Holder has to push back on repubs to explain that Due Process is sorta the name of the game.
Didn’t we all of this handwringing for Zacarias Moussaoui? And he is in jail forever.
We tried Moussaoi and Richard Reid more recently than 10 years.
I think the reason there’s also a military tribunal is that there are some detainees who can’t be tried in the U.S. courts because the evidence is so tainted by torture.
People who attacked Americans will be on trial on American soil in an American courtroom by an American judge according to American law.
I thought I wanted Bush, Cheney, and Gonzo to be charged with something for their role in torture.
But this is way better.
I think Obama/Holder are trying to do the best they can. They reviewed the cases and it sounds like they put them in 3 buckets: ones that have sufficient evidence for conviction in a federal court, people that are not dangerous and should be freed and those with tainted evidence but are dangerous. It’s that 3rd category that’s the problem – what do we do with those guys that are dangerous to us but their evidence is tainted by the way it was gathered?
Cassandra, I don’t recall this hand-wringing for Moussaoui. The times have changed, as per 9/11, and the terrorist attacks we have seen globally since.
My main point is that since KSM is an alleged war criminal, or as the Bush people put it, an [alleged] enemy combatant, he therefore can be tried in a military tribunal. That’s the alternative. Moreover, he is not an American Citizen. For these two reasons, unless I am mistaken, KSM does not, strictly speaking, come under the jurisdiction of the Constitution.
I still cannot help but wonder if it is worthwhile putting NYC citizens through this process, including the cost for the trial and of the security, to procede with the Holder/Obama recommendation.
Is there some higher principle, like due process, at stake in which it is worth this tortuous path to justice? In this case, isn’t justice served with a military tribunal?
And regarding your 3rd category, UI, the military tribunal route is the only alternative for their trials.
The only thing that has changed since Moussaoui is the name of the President. THE ONLY THING.
You know that Moussaoui is the so-called 20th hijacker right, Perry? The difference between him and KSM (other than the nature of the crime) is that Moussaoui (not an American citizen)was caught in the US.
NY citizens lived through the trial of the 1993 WTC bombers and one of the reasons they decided to do this in NYC had to do with the fact that they already have the security protocols.
Really, I wish I could understand how it is that so many of us could have so little confidence in our justice system.
DD, 9/11 happened!
I think the Bush Justice Department was such a departure from justice that recovery from it may not be complete. Holder/Obama have not yet had time to establish their footprint, so we are going on faith, so to speak.
Justice aside, security is an important issue, especially with regard to consideration of the sophistication of the 9/11 operation. Or, could another Nidal Hasan have his/her way. How easy is it for a suicide bomber to do his/her thing? You can bet there will be a number of volunteers. It may be easier for us, not being NYC residents, not having witnessed 9/11 up close, to pass on the fear factor. On security, has Obama been tested yet?
Look, I’m trying to work my way through this issue. I know what I want to believe!
Sometimes it is hard to do the right thing. That doesn’t excuse one from doing it. In fact, it makes it all the more imperative.
The Neo-cons wanted a war and saw 9/11 as an opportunity to declare war against the nebulous al Quida enemy and thereby the Arab oil-states, whichever Arab oil-state they chose. There is no country of al Quida and therefore no country to declare war upon. The War On Terror was a fabricated frame to enable BushCo to proceed with their imperialistic agenda in Iraq.
The al Quida terrorists are mass murderers, not enemy combatants. Granted, mass murderers on an unprecedented scale but mass murderers nonetheless. They should be tried, convicted and executed. NOW. We’ve been dithering around with the BushCo war frame long enough. It is time for pure and simple American justice, swift and mighty, to prevail.