There's been a lot of controversy over Obama's plan to close Guantanamo Bay, and quite frankly, I don't understand it.
According to USA Today, "The American people and a bipartisan majority of the Congress have already rejected bringing terrorists to U.S. soil for long-term detention, and current law prohibits it."
This seems silly to me. I would feel more safe if the suspected terrorists were held in the United States, for the sole reason that it would force the government to give them a trial.
It doesn't matter what someone does, or is suspected to have done; they deserve a fair trial. Because what if we've been holding innocent people who aren't given the opportunity to speak their side? What if we're wrong?
The reason I would feel safer with them getting fair trials in the US is this; it bodes well for the future of Americans. If my government uses loopholes to get around putting a suspected terrorist on the stand, then who is to say that they won't use similar tactics to me? Maybe I will someday be suspected for treason. What then?
The operative word in this scenario is suspected. Suspected terrorists. Not terrorists, suspected terrorists. That one word plants doubt in my mind, and it worries me that it doesn't plant the same seeds in the people who are allegedly trying to keep me safe. Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty?"
Yes, these people are potentially dangerous. Yes, they may have had large parts in plotting to kill Americans. Yes, they may not have anything to lose. But we don't know any of this yet. Not until we give them a trial. And the only way a trial will happen is if they're in the United States.
So bring 'em on, I say, and clear the doubt from the air.
No comments:
Post a Comment