Perspective on Terrorist Rights
The Wall Street Journal brings some much needed perspective to the latest so-called “torture scandal,” which has much of Europe and the American left in a tizzy over allegations that the CIA transported terrorists to covert prisons:
It is difficult to comment on the substance of the allegations because there isn’t much substance at the moment. Both the Romanian and Polish governments have denied the reports, while Washington promised to look into the case. So for the time being, there are only allegations and a lot of moral outrage. That moral posturing, though, deserves a closer look.
* * *
In much of Europe’s public debate, the true meaning of human rights has degenerated into a tool that gives anti-Americanism an aura of legitimacy. The real, horrendous human-rights violations in the Middle East, North Korea, China, Cuba, etc., are largely ignored or relegated to news blurs on the back pages. For front-page coverage, you need an American angle.
I’d be shocked and outraged if the CIA wasn’t covertly nabbing terrorists and holding them in secret prisons. Isn’t that what they’re supposed to be doing?
related articles
- Six Years Later: War, Not Tragedy (September 11th, 2007)
- D’Souza Smackdown (August 29th, 2007)
- The War Within (July 1st, 2007)
- Livingstone v. Blair (July 1st, 2007)
- The Clash of Civilizations (June 9th, 2007)
December 5th, 2005 at 12:29 am
“I’d be shocked and outraged if the CIA wasn’t secretly nabbing terrorists and holding them in secret prisons. Isn’t that what they’re supposed to be doing?”
Is that morally right?
December 5th, 2005 at 10:19 am
Perhaps you could tell us what’s immoral about arresting terrorists and putting them in prison, Rex.
–
December 5th, 2005 at 8:51 pm
There is nothing immoral about arresting and imprisoning terrorist if they have been given a fair trial and found guilty by a jury or judge according to the law.
But if the CIA has to do this “secretly” then there seems to be someting wrong or else why would they need to do it in secret.
Further, if the CIA is secretly nabbing suspected terrorist, are those being arrested being tried and convicted or are they just being held indefinitely? While in custody, are those under arrest being treated in a humane manner? If the answer is no to either question, then there seems to be a big moral/ethical issue.
I am all for the arrest and prosecution of those who committ acts of terror, just as I am for someone who committs bank robbery. But those who are arrested as suspected terrorists should be tried and found guilty or be released — because that is one of the strong values of the American legal systen — that a person is innocent until found guilt, has a right to a speedy trial, and can only be sentesed to prison if they have been found guilty under the statutes of the law.
(if my breif summary of the American law is wrong, extremist can correct me).
December 6th, 2005 at 6:11 pm
Rex,
Terrorists are unlawful combatants, and are not protected by the American legal system or even the Geneva Convention.
–
December 6th, 2005 at 8:45 pm
Rex,
In World War II, did the Nazi soldiers deserve to be tried in American courts or released?
If not, what is the difference?
If so, are you serious?
December 6th, 2005 at 9:13 pm
Of course, Jeff is right. There is nothing illegal or “immoral” about covert action to capture and interrogate terrorists without the full panoply of procedural rights afforded to ordinary rapists and murderers in the U.S. In fact, it would be immoral not to try to do so.
Terrorists are not just criminals. They are unlawful combatants planning and executing acts of war on innocent civilians. Atta was trying to kill 100,000 average people going about their daily business. But, the difference between Mohammed Atta and Charles Manson is much more than just the numbers of their victims. It’s a qualitative difference, not a quantitative one.
It was Bill Clinton’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge this after the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 that gave the terrorists an eight-year head start. The government treated it like a crime rather than a act of war. In short, we didn’t take it seriously.
December 6th, 2005 at 9:59 pm
Does moral obligation have a ceiling?
Of course the there was no legal obligation to try the Nazi in an American Court or according to American law, but there was an obligation to give them there fair due in a court of law (and too my knowledge, the Nazi’s were given fair trials in a court of law).
I never meant to claim that terrorists must be tried in American courts or by the American legal system, but they do deserve the right to be convicted in a court of law (even if they would not give us the same right).
To kidnapp, detain, arrest (whatever word you wish to use) without the intention of bringing a person to justice in a court of some kind is unacceptable. The only difference between such practice and the practice of Al Queida kidnapping “there enemies” is that they are then executing those people without trial (which is immoral too) and we at least, to my knowledge, are not chooping the heads off of our detainees, filming it, and broadcasting it on television.
But in case you didn’t know, the U.S. committs in own share of “terrorism” around the world (either present or past) but when we are the one committing such acts it becomes ok. I know, you are asking what in the world am I talking about. Well presently we use economic sanctions against our enemies, which effect innocent civilians too. Secondly, while we believe it is wrong for some country to take another country over by force, our own U.S. history is a history of gaining land by military force against the Indians, Spanish, etc… and also one where we stood by and have said nothing about the European countries that took over many African countries. Oh yeah, when it is us or our allies doing the aggression for our own selfish gain, it is alright.
Folks, morality does is not limited to our laws. God defines morality. So lets face it, some of the very things we decry about the terrorsit our own government and its allies is guilty of either in the present or in the past. And that is the biggest hypocricy of it all. But that is allright because when Jesus returns, the U.S. will be just one more self-centered power crushed and bowed to the feet of the only Righteous and Victorious One.