Conviction of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith: What Does this Mean for the Future of Guantanamo Bay

Today, Osama Bin Laden’s son in law, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, was convicted of “  …conspiring to kill Americans and providing material support to terrorists” as written in an article published in the New York Times. Abu Ghaith is an Islamic cleric who after 9/11 gave speeches on his father in law’s behalf as well as assured that there would be more terrorist attacks in the future. What struck me most about this article is that his lawyer, Stanley L. Cohen, believes that the guilty verdict reached by the jury is not entirely right and that there are grounds for appeal. When Abu Ghaith took to the witness stand, he claimed that Bin Laden asked him to “deliver a message to the world” about what had happened on 9/1. This message came in the form of a video that Cohen is arguing cannot be used to tie Abu Ghaith to Al Qaeda. He believes this video simply portrays a man doing his duty as an imam, or Muslim “theologian”, not a man being a messenger for Al Qaeda.

 

Defense Attorney, Stanley Cohen (source)                                               Sulaiman Abu Ghaith (source)

His trial also poses another critical question and that is whether or not people being held in Guantanamo Bay should have their trials at the prison before a military tribunal or on U.S. soil in civilian courts. The Obama administration has made this change from suspected terrorists being tried at Guantanamo Bay to being tried in the U.S. This change is seen as step towards closing the prison. The article states, “…the lightning speed from his arrest to verdict — would seem to serve as a rejoinder to critics of the Obama administration’s efforts to try suspected terrorists in civilian court, rather than before a military tribunal.” Personally, I am in support of the closure of Guantanamo Bay (on humanitarian grounds), but I understand the arguments of those who oppose the closure. However, I do hope that Abu Ghaith’s case, whether or not his conviction(s) get appealed, will set a precedent for future cases and begin to move more and more of these suspected terrorists trials into the U.S. courts.

Guantanamo Bay (source)

 

 

Are Americans Apathetic to the Crisis in Syria? Or significantly uninformed?

I am the first to admit that while at school I do not keep up with the news as much as I should in order to be considered a well- informed member of society, who can give well-informed opinions on the happenings of the world. However, last week while home on break, I was able to play some news-catch up and during a segment featured on NBC Nightly News my eyes were opened to just how disastrous and detrimental to the effects of the ongoing conflict in Syria have been on the population, but specifically on the Syrian children.  The segment was called “Forgotten? Syria’s Children of War” and while watching the horror unfold before my eyes I could not help but think, “How is it possible that a crisis of this magnitude is occurring and there is not a constant dialogue going on about it at school?” This question led me to a BBC article, “Wars, Public Outrage and Policy Options in Syria”, written by Kim Ghattas. This article deals with the overall apathy of the American people when it comes to conflicts that do not directly affect them. Ghattas writes, “The world inevitably tires of complex, long conflicts where there are no clear answers about how to end the violence”. This unfortunately is too true.

 

Photo

But how is this possible?  How do the faces of millions of suffering children not infiltrate the America media and create a movement to end this great injustice? Are the American people really that self-involved? Ghattas writes that part of the reason why Americans appear to be apathetic to the Syrian situation is because the Obama administration, “…repeatedly point to the fact that Americans have bigger concerns closer to home and that President Barack Obama is very mindful that the public has no appetite for interventions abroad, no matter how limited”. Yes, we have issues that need immediate attention here in the United States, but do we have any issues as pertinent and time-sensitive as innocent adults and children dying? I do not believe we do. Ghattas continues by saying that, “Lack of public pressure conveniently reinforces Mr. Obama’s conclusion that it’s too difficult and politically too risky to take action in Syria, but it’s in fact up to the president to galvanize public opinion”. I could not agree with her more on that point. Yes, the responsibly to stay informed as much a possible on current international affairs is in the hands of the individual, but the president is someone who the citizens elect to bring to light and help to fight against injustices (in what ever way possible), whether they be home or abroad. 

 

 In the coming weeks I plan to do what I can to get the word out on the crisis in Syria and I hope that I can make at least a little difference by spreading the word to my friends and families. I hope in the coming weeks and months that news stations do what NBC has done and broadcast to the American people the travesties being committed in Syria. In turn, I hope this creates a public outcry for action and that those who have the power to make a change in Syria will hear this cry and act on it.