As if the Americans didn't have enough controversy over their Guantanamo Bay detention centre for Islamic terrorists, now they want six of the most dangerous al Qaida plotters sentenced to death.
Assuming those six deserve to die for their roles in 9/11 that killed nearly 3,000 Americans (more than the Japanese killed at Pearl Harbor, or Americans who died on D-Day), it'll be years before anyone sentenced to die will actually be executed.
In the intervening years, protests, petitions and indignation will be generated by the worldwide Bleeding Heart movement on behalf of the perpetrators of terror rather than their victims.
A great indictment of the U.S. justice system is the slowness of implementing executions. Death row in all U.S. prisons are crammed with people who were sentenced to die up to 20 years ago, but who have been kept alive by technicalities and endless appeals.
The theme justice delayed is justice denied holds true for those sentenced to die, yet who are kept alive for years in a shadow world. After a couple of decades of appeals, the person ultimately executed may no longer be the same person who committed the original crime. That's unlikely in the case of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, former al-Qaida operations chief who masterminded the 9/11 attacks. But he's been in U.S. custody for five years and still no trial. Why the delay?
A case can be made for summary justice and a drumhead military trial for dangerous terrorists -- followed by a quick appeal and quick execution. But no. Anyone sentenced to death will likely be alive a decade hence.
It's been known for years that Khalid Mohammed is what he claims to be, a leading terrorist organizer. How about Mohammed al-Qahtani, allegedly the 20th hijacker who missed his rendezvous to hijack one of the 9/11 airliners. He certainly intended to kill Americans.
Most of the detainees at Gitmo are pretty hardline jihadists by now, long since brainwashed or indoctrinated by dominant incarcerated terrorists.
Some urge the closing of Guantanamo, and detainees ("unlawful fighters") dispersed to American prisons. But at Gitmo they aren't all criminals -- they are like prisoners until the war is over.
Where better to keep them than at Gitmo, at the far end of Cuba, which is warm, isolated and secure. Geneva Conventions prevail. Detainees are well fed (the average weight-gain is 18 lbs. a year), can pray to their heart's content, don't have to answer questions and, if they are good chaps, are occasionally rewarded with ice cream cones. Close Gitmo, and al Qaida detainees may claim cruel and unusual punishment.
By holding terror trials for those at Gitmo, the U.S. military is opening another Pandora's box of mischief.
At the trials, there'll be accusations of torture (waterboarding) to extract confessions. By the time trials are completed, there may even be a new president of the U.S. If, perchance, it is John McCain, it'll be further embarrassment for the U.S.
OPPONENT OF TORTURE
McCain, a man who endured horrendous torture while a prisoner of Hanoi during the Vietnam war, is a passionate opponent of torture -- and waterboarding. He is right. There are far better ways to extract vital information than waterboarding -- simulated drowning, which is primitive and questionably effective.
Waterboarding may not be torture in the category of extracting fingernails or genital electric shocks, but it demeans those who use it and has no place in a civilized justice system. Just ask McCain.
America shouldn't go that route. It reflects badly on the one country in a world of despotism and tyranny, that represents hope for human kind.
