Why is the Media Panicking About the 9/11 Trial?

by Chris Cassidy · 2010-01-31 15:53:00 UTC
Topics:

It turns out that the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other 9/11 conspirators will not be held in lower Manhattan. And now, the mainstream media seems dead set on making us believe that, somehow, this development is a setback for the rule of law. It's enough to make your head hurt.

Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg initiated a domino effect by rescinding his prior support for having the trial take place in a New York courthouse once overshadowed by the Twin Towers. With recent cost estimates for the trial's security reaching up to $1 billion, and growing concerns about the disruption it would cause residents, Bloomberg's change of heart is hardly unreasonable or disappointing. His suggestion that the trial be moved to a cheaper, less disruptive venue makes sense, given his constituents' increasingly vocal concerns.

By contrast, though, the reaction of the mainstream media -- who rushed to transform the development from a mole hill to a mountain -- was disappointing.

Several sources over-sensationalized the development. Politico, for instance, characterized the likely change of venue as a "dramatic shift." This description of the "shift," though, is the only thing "dramatic" about it, as I'll  explain.

Many news reports jumped to questions about whether the trial would even occur, suggesting that shift in the trial's location made it uncertain if it would even take place at all. First reports, like this Financial Times story, almost uniformly framed the possibility of the trial's relocation as a blow to the Obama administration's attempts to bring the 9/11 terrorists to justice. Only thorough readers (after wading through an overblown narrative about the fabricated controversy) would have seen the final paragraph, which explained a number of courthouses are actually available for trying 9/11 conspirators.

In fact, the Attorney General has several options for where to try these terrorists. In the Southern District of New York alone -- the initial jurisdiction considered, which includes Manhattan -- the administration may select from Governors Island, West Point Military Academy or Stewart Air National Guard Base in nearby Newburgh, NY. Other districts where the 9/11 attacks inflicted harm may also have jurisdiction, including the Eastern District of Virginia, home to the Pentagon, and the Western District of Pennsylvania, where heroes grounded United Flight 93.

Why the mainstream media was so eager to invent a controversy where one did not exist may seem puzzling -- that is, until you consider the consistent barrage they suffer from torture apologists who continue to zealously challenge having domestic trials occur for Guantanamo detainees at all. Ah ha. That might explain it.

Photo Credit: davehat

Chris Cassidy writes on law, judicial nominations and the Constitution as they pertain to criminal justice reform and women's rights.
PREVIOUS STORY:
One in 12 Women Face Stalking
NEXT STORY:
DJJ Won't Let Youth Into Meeting about Prison Conditions

COMMENTS (2)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.