On-line Opinion Magazine…OK, it's a blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Do They Own A Dictionary?

CNN has a poll on the Moussaoui sentence with 64% agreeing with the jury.

The BBC explored the sentencing with Jonathan Turley, professor at the George Washington University Law School, and Frank Gaffney, the Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy.

Mr. Gaffney complained that the death penalty in this case would have acted as a deterrent to the terrorists.

I would suggest that the death penalty would have had absolutely no effect on the 19 men who chose to fly aircraft into buildings on 9/11. Exactly what part of the role of “suicide bomber” does Mr. Gaffney fail to understand?

9 comments

1 larkohio { 05.04.06 at 1:33 pm }

I do not think he should have gotten the death penalty. It was what he wanted, and the appeals alone would have cost a great deal of time and money. He can spend the rest of his life in prison, he will not enjoy it. I do not think he is a big fish in the pond, probably just a little minnow with mental health problems.

2 larkohio { 05.04.06 at 1:35 pm }

I am glad he did not get the death penalty. It was what he wanted. The appeals alone would have cost a great deal of money. This is better, he will hate prison.

3 Bryan { 05.04.06 at 1:42 pm }

He’s off the street, and he has already cost us too much money.

4 Jack K. { 05.04.06 at 2:39 pm }

…let’s face it; people like Mr. Gaffney are never going to ‘get it’. They’ll just keep rehashing the same old catchphrases and talking points because they are ill equipped by background, culture, or intellect to grasp the nature of the subject at hand…

5 Bryan { 05.04.06 at 2:50 pm }

I wish they would just admit that they want revenge, not justice. Moussaoui will now fade into obscurity in a SuperMax, which is as it should be.

6 NTodd { 05.04.06 at 6:22 pm }

What, killing a “suicider” isn’t a deterrent? That’s crazy talk!

7 Bryan { 05.04.06 at 9:43 pm }

I think the guy received a lot more credit for being a “terrorist threat” than actually existed. He and Richard Reid [the guy who couldn’t figure out how to use matches] can impress each other in the Federal SuperMax.

8 Steve Bates { 05.04.06 at 10:02 pm }

I think the guy received a lot more credit for being a “terrorist threat” than actually existed.

Bingo. Hence LWOP was the right penalty. He was a terrorist wannabe; killing him would have provoked a reaction all out of proportion to the threat he posed. Out of sight, out of mind (in more than one sense), out of trouble… the jury got it right when it ruled LWOP for… um, what was his name again?

9 Bryan { 05.04.06 at 10:48 pm }

We wasted millions on this stupidity. Richard Reid was stopped in the middle of actually attempting to blow up an airplane and he is already sitting in SuperMax.

The judge deserves a medal for putting up with this charade.