9/11 Victims on the Mohammed Jury?

Last Thursday I had a conversation with Silvio Canto Jr., as a guest on his blog radio show out of Dallas. We discussed my AT article, “Obama’s NYC Show: Starring Khalid Mohammed.” We touched on the issue of jury selection and this piece flushes out some thoughts on the topic a little more.

Barack Obama says he wants “fair” trials for 9/11 terrorists (while announcing guilty convictions in advance), but many have suggested that it may be impossible to select a fair jury in New York City. I argue that it is impossible to legally impanel a jury anywhere in the United States.

On the subject of finding an impartial jury, the ramifications of 9/11 relate directly to jury selection. If 9/11 was an act of war, which Obama and Holder don’t deny that it was, then we have a major problem.

September 11 was an attack against the American people and every American citizen has been aggrieved. Every American suffered emotional harm.

Of course, those killed were the obvious victims. And the surviving families and friends suffer irreparable injuries. But all Americans suffered from the attack on America.

No American was specifically targeted for death and any American could have been killed on 9/11 by virtue of where the particular citizen happened to be.

Yet, all Americans were targeted as recipients of fear and terror regardless of where they happened to be on September 11, 2001. Terror was intended to strike the heart of every American.

Someone who goes “postal” and shoots up a business, mall or school differs from an Islamist terrorist. Radical Islam is at war with America by its own admission. A goal of the terrorists is to weaken America aggregately. The goal is to make all Americans fear. The ultimate goal is to overthrow America. The snapping of a rogue killer might occur for any number of psychological reasons. But the acts of the perpetrators of 9/11 were caused by an associated war on America.

Terrorists do not kill because of psychological reasons, but ideological. And part of that ideology happens to be the overthrowing of America.

Eric Holder recently admitted, “I know that we are at war.” That’s an interesting admission in light of “his” decision to try those having committed war crimes in civilian court. Those non-uniformed combatants do not even qualify for the protections of the Geneva Convention; and especially do not come under the protections of the U.S. Constitution.

In their quest to fundamentally transform America, Obama and Holder apparently have no problem making a mockery of our cherished rights for which many brave patriots have died.

We are at war and no impartial jury could ever be found in the U.S. to try the Islamist combatants. No juror can overcome the inherent conflict of interest. Ethically and legally, a victim cannot be seated on her perpetrator’s jury.

Islamist terrorists must be tried by military commissions without show and constitutional rights. Ironically, that’s the venue in which Mohammed wanted to plead guilty and accept the penalty of death.

Last Thursday I had a conversation with Silvio Canto Jr., as a guest on his blog radio show out of Dallas. We discussed my AT article, “Obama’s NYC Show: Starring Khalid Mohammed.” We touched on the issue of jury selection and this piece flushes out some thoughts on the topic a little more.

Barack Obama says he wants “fair” trials for 9/11 terrorists (while announcing guilty convictions in advance), but many have suggested that it may be impossible to select a fair jury in New York City. I argue that it is impossible to legally impanel a jury anywhere in the United States.

On the subject of finding an impartial jury, the ramifications of 9/11 relate directly to jury selection. If 9/11 was an act of war, which Obama and Holder don’t deny that it was, then we have a major problem.

September 11 was an attack against the American people and every American citizen has been aggrieved. Every American suffered emotional harm.

Of course, those killed were the obvious victims. And the surviving families and friends suffer irreparable injuries. But all Americans suffered from the attack on America.

No American was specifically targeted for death and any American could have been killed on 9/11 by virtue of where the particular citizen happened to be.

Yet, all Americans were targeted as recipients of fear and terror regardless of where they happened to be on September 11, 2001. Terror was intended to strike the heart of every American.

Someone who goes “postal” and shoots up a business, mall or school differs from an Islamist terrorist. Radical Islam is at war with America by its own admission. A goal of the terrorists is to weaken America aggregately. The goal is to make all Americans fear. The ultimate goal is to overthrow America. The snapping of a rogue killer might occur for any number of psychological reasons. But the acts of the perpetrators of 9/11 were caused by an associated war on America.

Terrorists do not kill because of psychological reasons, but ideological. And part of that ideology happens to be the overthrowing of America.

Eric Holder recently admitted, “I know that we are at war.” That’s an interesting admission in light of “his” decision to try those having committed war crimes in civilian court. Those non-uniformed combatants do not even qualify for the protections of the Geneva Convention; and especially do not come under the protections of the U.S. Constitution.

In their quest to fundamentally transform America, Obama and Holder apparently have no problem making a mockery of our cherished rights for which many brave patriots have died.

We are at war and no impartial jury could ever be found in the U.S. to try the Islamist combatants. No juror can overcome the inherent conflict of interest. Ethically and legally, a victim cannot be seated on her perpetrator’s jury.

Islamist terrorists must be tried by military commissions without show and constitutional rights. Ironically, that’s the venue in which Mohammed wanted to plead guilty and accept the penalty of death.