Thursday, February 7, 2008
Abu Hamza al-Masri to be extradited to US
British courts have just ruled the al-Masri can be extradited to stand trial in the US. He is currently serving a prison sentence in England for "inciting racial hatred". In America he will be tried for a variety of crimes, including conspiracy to build a terrorist training camp in rural Oregon. I think this is very interesting. It shows that now, more than ever, western governments are willing to prosecute Muslim clerics who are outspoken extremists. I believe this is a good step in fighting terrorism. It seems like much of the hatred the radical Muslims have comes from their religious leaders. I think this sends a message to other Muslims leaders that they need to watch what they say. I'm wondering what the class thinks on this. Do you think that prosecutions like this can make a significant difference?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I could be wrong, but I believe he is being charged in the U.S. for the attempt to organize the training camp, and not for his outspoken views. Clerics have the right to speak out against the U.S. gov't and to preach their doctrines of hate. This is one of the ironies of our Constitution, but I agree that they have the right to do so. Even evil people that most Americans disagree with have certain constitutional rights. We should certainly monitor what these extremists are saying, but there is little we can do until their words can be considered a "clear and present danger".
I don't know how I feel about clerics being charged for radical speech. This is a really tricky situation because their speech does radicalize people and lead them to commit violent acts. At the same time so do rap lyrics. I think we must air on the side of caution and on the side of liberty (freedom of speech) and try to nail these guys on other charges (like the training camp). But as far as watching what they have to say, as much as I want them to stop talking, I'd rather us all be able to talk about anything we want then none of us be able to talk about anything.
I think it's a step in the right direction to make sure that people that are openly extremist in their views are monitored, but I think it's a dangerous thing to simply imprison someone for their words no matter how inciting to violence they might be. It's a slippery slop to imprisoning anyone that might have a differing view to what you think/believe. However, if he really was trying to build a training camp in Oregon, then hang him from the highest tree...
When you ask if it will make a "significant difference" i assume that you are asking if prosecuting al-Masri will deter other extremist from being too outspoken or trying to start training camps in the U.S. I don't think it is likely that it will deter many extremist. It doesn't deem like many terrorist mind the risk of dying or being imprisoned for their "cause." If anything I think that when we punish terrorist then it makes their terrorist friends mad and want to lash back at us. However, I still think it is a good idea to punish terrorist even if their is a threat of a lash-back.
Post a Comment