This cabal of criticism in opposition to the Obama Administration intent of trying the 9-11 Five at Federal Criminals Courts postures a couple of points purportedly as well reasoned arguments against the trials,
- The 9-11 Act was one of War and as such Civilian-Criminal Court is the wrong venue.
The clear response to this primary argument is simply this: If 9-11 was an Act of War, then it's Actors cannot and should no more be tried than the actors and orchestrator's of the Iraq War, Battle for Fallujah and if 9-11 was an Act of War, then the World Trade Center was a valid, legitimate, military target, one which America's enemies targeted. And enemy soldiers or "enemy Combatants" are not held accountable for Acts of War unless there is clear genocidal specificity as historic war accountability.
- The secondary and corollarial argument that a Civil-Criminal Court venue presents the 9-11 Five a forum to propagate their views.
Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" was a shock to the 18th century body politic, a positive shock because it put in stark contrast the relevant emotional resource.
At it's contemporary expense. Rudy Giuliani, those misguided 9-11 victim families and Republican-Conservatism opportunity have some how as Lemmings Going Over Cliffs lost their Darwinian motive and in a panic stricken flail substituted emotional irrelevancies as "Common Sense" simply for political opportunity and war mongering.
By Apropos
0 comments:
Post a Comment