Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Innocent Does Not Mean Innocent If You Are An Acquitted Terrorist

When the Senate Judiciary Committee recently asked our Attorney General what would happen if Kahled Sheikh Mohammad -- the 9/11 orchestrator, was acquitted of charges in the upcoming New York trial, he had some interesting comments:


Seeking to allay acquittal concerns, Holder insisted the suspects will be convicted, but even if one isn't, "that doesn't mean that person would be released into our country."

So let me get this straight...we are willing to move about 200 of these detained terrorists to a prison in Illinois permanently or at least while they await trial, but if one of the most disgusting ones (Kahled Sheikh Mohammad) is found innocent, he'll be kicked out of our country after we gave him a red carpet in the American civil court system?

This makes no sense. I thought if people were innocent, they should go free? Why would we hesitate to treat him with anything but graciousness if he were found innnocent? Afterall, that is why we have been told the military tribunals would not be used for trying the Guantanamo terrorist detainees -- because it was unfair. If someone is found innocent, isn't that person "free" to live wherever his peaceful heart desires? ...apparently not, Mr. Holder, if it means you would have to sacrifice your political aims in favor of honesty and logic. Shameful...

No comments:

Post a Comment