Why don't we just stone him to death in Times Square?

*

My man Cal Soldier actually commented on this next topic and made me decide to blog about it tonight. I am talking, of course, about the upcoming trial of alleged 911 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Yes it seems that his O ness has decided to put my man on trial just blocks from where he allegedly slaughtered over two thousand people. Folks, if you think the O.J. trial was a circus, just wait until this one gets going.

I can't say I blame his O ness. This is, after all, a country of laws. At least the last time I checked it was. The folks over at Radio Rwanda and on the right are proclaiming that this is a civil trial, -as if we were suing the guy for money or something- but it's actually a civil-ian trial. Which means it will not be in secret or in a military court. But it's funny how some people play with words. "Civil" trial sounds so much softer.

But field, think of all the security that will be needed to try this guy, why even go through with all of this? Yes, you are right, maybe we should have just taken him out and shot him like Glen Beck recently suggested on his radio program. I guess that's the right wing way of doing things. It worked pretty well for them back in the day when those "strange fruits" were hanging from trees. Or, maybe we could just stone him to death like they would do in some of those countries where his Muslim brothers reside.

Over at Radio Rwanda they are terrified that Mohammed could actually be found innocent. And, that somehow the trial won't get the correct result that we are all seeking. (??????) Wait, it's a trial, which means that if there is a possibility that he is innocent he should be found not guilty. I mean that is how A-merry-can jurisprudence works, right?

But field, why should this guy be treated like any other ordinary criminal? He is a terrorist. We don't need a show trial to fire up the terrorist. This guy wants to die.

Because he is an alleged criminal and a murderer, and, if convicted, he will be put to death. Besides, if he wants to die [as some are suggesting] maybe he will confess to the whole thing and save us all the trouble of a trial.

"Mr. Holder said he would instruct prosecutors to seek death sentences for Mr. Mohammed and four accused Sept. 11 co-conspirators who would be tried alongside him."

Yep, I would say that if found guilty he would suffer the same fate he would if he was tried in a military court and found guilty. Unless, of course, the military has some other way of administering the death penalty that would make him even more dead.

"We should not be increasing the danger of another terrorist strike..."

So says republican Peter King of new York. And how exactly, Mr. King, is having a trial in new York going to do that? You mean as opposed to invading a country [that had nada to do with 911] and killing a bunch of Muslim women and children? Look, I know that my republican friends lost interest in verisimilitude a long time ago, but Mr. King, that is one hell of a reach.

Still, I get it, it's politics as usual. We always have to score cheap political points at any cost. Even at the expense of one of the tenets on which this country was built: The rule of law.

*Pic courtesy of the AP and lifted from The NY Times.