9-11 trial

I've been reading all the press about where to hold the trials for the idiots who planned the 9-11 crashes. Should it be in regular civilian courts or in a military tribunal? So many Republicans want it to be in a military hearing. I think the biggest reason I've heard that is because it's going to take so much security, etc.

But I have a problem with holding them up to a military tribunal. There are different laws at play in a military hearing. These aren't meant to hear cases against the country but against military people who have a fully different set of rules than non-military people. They won't be heard by everyday people or argued in front of everyday people, the same types of people who were hurt the most by the events of 9-11. It will be military personnel making all the decisions and the final outcome, people who don't always think the way everyday people think and feel.

This wasn't a crime against our military, no matter what legislators say. It was a crime against the people of the United States of America. You want to deal with security, fine. Hold the hearing where they're being held, in Guantanamo Bay. But have it a non-military hearing, with a jury of everyday people. Expand the jury so that it's not just 12 people. The largest number of people killed were New Yorkers, so let the largest number of people on the jury be from NY. Let the remainder of the jurors be from Pennsylania and the military. Let the judge be one of the Judges from the highest court in the country, picked at random by a Native American. If they are found not guilty, release them in NYC, with the date and time of their release made public a week before the release. If they're found guilty, they get one appeal and then are put to death. Anything less would not be justice. And that's from a person who is most definitely against the death penalty.

JT's Bottom Line: Their crime was against the citizens and the citizens should be the ones to judge them, not the military.