Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Mukasey: Executing 9/11 Suspects Will Make Them Martyrs

Posted by Steve Czajkowski, Jurist Legal News and Research at 10:55 AM on March 18, 2008.


The Attorney General claims to have a personal disagreement with seeking the death penalty against the Gitmo prisoners.
mukasey
mukasey

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Rights and Liberties in your
mailbox!

 

U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey told an audience in London Friday that he hopes those accused in the 9/11 attacks do not receive the death penalty if found guilty because it would make them martyrs. Mukasey made the comment in response to a question after a speech at the London School of Economics on Anglo-American law enforcement. Mukasey did say the punishment would be fitting if they are convicted of the crime, but he believes it would allow the accused to portray themselves as victims. He emphasized that he was merely expressing a personal opinion, not stating U.S. government policy.

The U.S. is planning military commission trials of the six men currently accused in the attacks at Guantanamo Bay. Those six include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid Bin Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, and Mohammed al-Qahtani. Mukasey defended the military commission process in his remarks Friday, saying:

The military commissions established by our Congress are closely modeled on tribunals that the United States uses in courts-martial to try U.S. citizens in uniform. They include all the protections that we regard as fundamental, they exceed those used at Nuremberg, and they compare favorably with international war crimes tribunals.

Under the Military Commissions Act, for example, the accused enjoys the right to counsel; the presumption of innocence unless guilt is proved beyond a reasonable doubt; and the right to a trial before impartial military judges -- the same military judges who preside at courts-martial -- and an impartial jury. The accused enjoys the right to see all of the evidence presented against him -- including any classified evidence presented to the members of the military commission. And the act ensures that the military judge deems statements admitted to be reliable and in the interest of justice.

Moreover, there will be no secret trials -- rather, all trials will be open and public, with only a narrow exception to protect national security. Finally, for those convicted, the Military Commissions Act provides several levels of appeal, including to our civilian courts, and ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court. Like many of the rights provided in the act, this access to our domestic courts for direct appellate review is an unprecedented protection for convicted war criminals.

We recognize that the use of military commissions has been regarded as controversial by some of our allies. But we hope that as the trials go forward--and the first of them, of a man named Hamdan, who served among other things as Osama bin Laden's driver, is scheduled to begin this Spring--some of the misimpressions about the system will laid be to rest, and the world will see not only the crimes of al Qaeda put upon display, but also a justice system fully consistent with our shared Anglo-American legal tradition as well as the standards of international law. That's why international conversations like this one are important, because they provide the opportunity for a discussion grounded in fact.

Military prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for those charged in the 9/11 trial, but a convening authority overseeing the trial must decide whether to accept it and then decide whether those charged are eligible. AP has more. Reuters has additional coverage.


Pay Equity: Raise Your Voice for Equal Pay for Equal Work
Democratic leadership in the House have vowed to push forward with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act.
Post by Christy Hardin Smith. January 8, 2009.
Oakland Residents Rise Up to Protest Brutal Murder By Police
"As I write this, rumors are flying and media is fanning the riot flames."
Post by Adrienne Maree Brown Brown. January 8, 2009.
In Gaza, Having to Choose Between My Pregnant Wife and My Mother and Siblings
Alaa is due any day now, but I also have the responsibility of my siblings, their kids and my mother, especially after my father was killed.
Post by Fares Akram. January 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
so can we just waterboard them again and send them home with a stern warning?
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Mar 18, 2008 11:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the 'justice' department. pfft! i wouldn't trust mukasey on the issue of paper or plastic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Executing" patsies is SOP for false flag operations
Posted by: LeftWright on Mar 18, 2008 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember Lee Harvey Oswald?

Perhaps Mukasey is starting to feel a bit squeamish about his role in murdering people he knows to be innocent of the crimes they are accused of.

Let the trials take place in an open court with all the standard rules of evidence. If the defendants are competent to participate in their own defense (highly unlikely as the Moussaoui case showed) and an impartial jury finds them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then give them life imprisonment.

Waterboarding alleged "terrorists" and then holding kangaroo courts with predetermined outcomes will complete the destruction of the already tattered reputation of the U.S.

How about having a complete and independent investigation into the events of 9/11/01 and then bringing charges against the suspected perpetrators Mr. Mukasey?

What a novel idea that would be.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gitmo lawyers and Naomi Wolf endorse Obama "Integrity has something to do with it."
Posted by: foreverhope on Mar 18, 2008 12:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barack is a constitutional lawyer. If anyone can and will get to the bottom of the GWB/CHENEY administration it will be Obama.

With that in mind I am reposting this info on the Gitmo lawyer's endorsement of Barack Obama for President in '08. From Naomi Wolf:

"What is leadership? Leadership means getting out in front of where people are and waking them up. Right now, given these violent possible threats to us and our families, we are sleeping.

Which is why I am formally coming out of the closet with my support for Senator Barack Obama. Of all the candidates running now, he is the leader on understanding the threat to the Constitution and actually taking action, not just mouthing soundbites, on the need to deny torturers space in our nation and to restore the rule of law.

"Lawyers for Gitmo detainees endorse Obama," read a recent headline on the Boston Globe's political blog. In the article, reporter Charlie Savage notes that "More than 80 volunteer lawyers for Guantanamo Bay detainees today endorsed Illinois Senator Barack Obama's presidential bid. The attorneys said in a joint statement that they believed Obama was the best choice to roll back the Bush-Cheney administration's detention policies in the war on terrorism and thereby to 'restore the rule of law, demonstrate our commitment to human rights, and repair our reputation in the world community.'"

The lawyers who signed this letter -- prominent names on the list included Washington lawyer Thomas Wilner, retired federal appeals court judge John Gibbons, and retired Rear Admiral Donald Guter, who was the Navy's top JAG officer from 2000 to 2002 -- applauded Obama for having stood up in 2006 against aspects of the Military Commissions Act. Unfortunately, his fight was ultimately unsuccessful -- which is why we are all still in danger. But unlike other candidates he truly fought and he understood the nature of the danger: "When we were walking the halls of the Capitol trying to win over enough Senators to beat back the Administration's bill, Senator Obama made his key staffers and even his offices available to help us," the lawyers wrote. "Senator Obama worked with us to count the votes, and he personally lobbied colleagues who worried about the political ramifications of voting to preserve habeas corpus for the men held at Guantanamo. He has understood that our strength as a nation stems from our commitment to our core values, and that we are strong enough to protect both our security and those values. Senator Obama demonstrated real leadership then and since, continuing to raise Guantanamo and habeas corpus in his speeches and in the debates."

Remember: when activists started to push hard to raise awareness of the dangers of torture and indefinite detention, many on the Hill were scared to join the fight because it was then politically unpopular. But to me, if you are not really against torture -- always and under every political change in climate, and let us note that former torture victim and prisoner of war John McCain shamefully dropped his fight against the torture loopholes in the law as well -- then you are not really, in my view, fit to be an American President.

Gender has nothing to do with it. Race has nothing to do with it.

Integrity has something to do with it.

That is why Barack Obama has my vote. Of all the leading candidates, he is the only one on these issues who has consistently acted like a true American."


Naomi Wolf is the author of The End of America (Chelsea Green) and the co-founder of the American Freedom Campaign.

linked text

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mukasey's fairy tale..
Posted by: zipper696 on Mar 19, 2008 5:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quote:

"..the right to a trial before impartial military judges -- the same military judges who preside at courts-martial -- and an impartial jury"

How impartial can a military judge be when he answers to the Commander in Chief ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mukasey's fairy tale.. Posted by: Quannah
Can someone please tell me why...
Posted by: 2dogarage on Mar 19, 2008 10:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...these people are imprisoned in the first place? We invaded Afghanistan and then Iraq, picked up some people on their own soil who we are blaming for the events of 9/11 while we allow the bin Laden issue to go completely cold. I guess that's because they know he's already dead, now there's an inconvenient truth!

Of all the heinous atrocities being committed as a result of the false flag operation of 9/11 the capture, torture and imprisonment of alleged "enemy combatants" is one of the most egregious.

The truth that the history books won't mention is that the U.S. blatantly lied it's way into at least two major wars -- the provoked and entirely preventable attack on our sitting-duck naval installations in Hawaii (FDR) and the completely-fabricated Gulf of Tonkin incident (LBJ).

Enough is enough. No one is free from the brutality of this or any war even if they're too distracted or brainwashed to know it. It's time to rebuke the evil agenda of the moneyed elite and transnational corporations that think they have the right to invade sovereign countries, massacre and displace their civilians and imprison their citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... don't be fooled...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Mar 20, 2008 2:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Islamic jihadist's are more concerned with killing innocent civilians than military targets all just for "MORE" press coverage...

Usama Bin Laden actually encourages Jihad against civilian targets in Europe and North America... we needed to cut this Medusian head off back in 2002 when we actually had a chance to kill this Fun-da-mental-ist monster [and his ministry]... Unfortunately BushCo was too inept to finish the job!

These Fun-da-mental-ists deserve everything they get...
but I would be more comfortable if the World Court at the Hague was dealing with this situation... after all 9-11 affected the entire free world and had claimed the lives of civilians of many different nationalities not just Americans...
so what if it was on US soil... its a world wide issue now!
You cant have free world inclusion by holding unconstitutional show trials and by executing a military judgment offshore in another country [Cuba]
...it just isn't the right way to deal with it!... [if I was Cuban I would be highly insulted that this form of fronter lynch style justice is being done on their territory.]

Don't get me wrong... these terrorists are a cancer to all of humanity and need to be dealt with severely and uniformly under the worlds watchful eyes... then punished under the world court as true examples of consequence!
as they are being held responsible for their actions... while identifying that the death of innocence is accountable and non martyr able to all would be copycats with a similar mindset

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ... don't be fooled... Posted by: donl51
So you mean
Posted by: donl51 on Mar 21, 2008 1:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if we executed Bush and his perpetrators for the 9/11 destruction, they'd be martyrs? hhhmmmmmmmmmm...ok!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]