“We the people of the United States” are the first words of the Constitution. The basic law of this country was not meant to be the basic law of the world. Now strangely the Attorney General wants to bring Khalid Shaikh Mohammed who is part of a sworn enemy of this nation to New York City for a trial. He was captured in Pakistan. Attorney General Holder argues, along with others that support his views, is that this trial will send a message to the rest of the world that we treat everyone the same. The argument is both flawed and erroneous.
First, the United States has never treated enemy combatants as law breakers. No enemies from other wars have ever been put on trial as law breakers. Those Prosecuted for war crimes have been convicted in military trials. Nuremberg felons are the leading example.
Second, the calls for dismissal of charges against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed will be based upon the fact that he was not read his Miranda rights, was not charged with any crimes in a reasonable period of time, and was the victim of torture while held in a prison for more than five years. I am not a lawyer and I understand these realities. It is not hard to imagine that a lawyer will have many other reasons to move for dismissal of this case.
Third, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed has admitted guilt and under American civil law those pleading guilty are not put on trial. There is not presentation of evidence in cases where the accused pleads guilty. A judge issues a sentence.
For those who would argue that there is no war I ask: if there is no war why has the United States placed over 100,000 troops in Iraq and another 68,000 troops in Afghanistan?
Coast Contact 