Despite wingnut Protests, Bin Laden’s Son-In-Law Convicted By Civilian Court

On Wednesday, Osama Bin-Laden’s son-in-law, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith was found guilty of conspiracy to kill Americans by serving as an Al Qaeda spokesman following the 9/11 attacks. Ghaith is the highest ranking member of Al-Qaeda to face trial under our system of justice since 9/11.
It was an open civilian trial, in a New York courtroom with jury comprised of civilians. It was covered by news outlets like CNN, the BBC, the New York Times and NPR.  Ghaith had the same rights as any defendant under our legal system.  Rights like the right to counsel, to remain silent, to be tried by a jury of his peers and the right to challenge the evidence against him.  The prosecution presented jurors with evidence, including videos of Ghaith threatening America with “storms of airplanes”   Ghaith testified in his own defense, denying that he had any prior knowledge of the 9-11 attacks.
The proceedings lasted 3 weeks. After six hours of deliberation over two days,  the jury found him guilty. It’s likely that Ghaith will be sentenced to life in prison.
When we learned that Ghaith would be tried in New York, at an open civilian trial complete with constitutional rights, repugicans and some Democrats used the same fear tactics they used to block President Obama’s efforts to close Guantanamo Bay.
They condemned the idea of allowing the civilian courts to try terror suspects because that would mean affording them the same rights to foreigners that anyone has, under our legal system.  It’s as if they thought prosecutors couldn’t secure convictions unless the trials and evidence were secret, and the rights of the accused were, relative to our legal system, minimal.
That’s despite the fact that our legal system successfully tried and convicted terrorism suspects before 9/11.
One might think that repugicans don’t trust a civilian jury of American citizens to weigh the evidence as well as a jury comprised of military officers.
The repugicans also tried to plant seeds of doubt in our penal system’s ability to hold terrorists and therefore keep us safe. Senator Richard Shelby’s comments at the time, reflect the doubts that many repugicans expressed about the security of our penal system.

All of the prisoners housed at Guantanamo are terrorists … They pose an obvious threat to our national security, and they should not be allowed to set foot on our soil.

The repugicans stoked doubt and fears about our penal system even though terrorists have never escaped nor have they attacked our super secure prisons.
Despite the repugican fear mongering, Ghaith, who was captured in Jordan last year, was brought to American soil, tried and convicted.
The real reasons repugicans melted down when they learned that Ghaith would be tried in New York is it would prove that we don’t need an expensive prison in Cuba to be safe.  We can also try and convict terrorism suspects in open court and with those suspects having the same rights as anyone else who faces the criminal justice system. It also proved that President Obama has more faith in the American system of justice than repugican “patriots” do.