What he was convicted of [not necessarily the same as what he did] was “not giving the FBI information that they might have used to prevent the attacks.” He was NOT convicted of taking down iconic structures, or trying to kill thousands, or even killing a flight attendant. He was convicted of not telling the FBI what he knew.
And I still have issues with considering the death penalty for not saying something. Death penalty for flying a plane into a building YES. Charge him with THAT and convict him of THAT. Death penalty for not telling the FBI “I know something” I don’t buy…

His crime was being part of a conspiracy to inflict mass death. In fact his actions rose beyond crime, and assumed the trappings of an act of war.

He’s way beyond crime, and he’s way beyond ordinary conspiracy, such as to knock over a bank, or engage in credit card fraud.

It doesn’t get any more serious than what he was involved in.

And it would be wise to recall, they weren’t looking to kill 3,000, they had to think that would be a way too low estimate. They were looking to slaughter about 25,000 to 35,000, all in a single morning.

They took down two iconic structures of American capitalism, attempted to decapitate America’s military, and intended to crash an aircraft through the Capitol Dome. Their attack resulted in ripping over a TRILLION DOLLARS from the American economy, threw the foremost industrialized economy on earth into a recession, threw many into the ranks of unemployment, and precipitated a world wide economic slow down, and for some, a recession.

This was serious stuff. This was way beyond crime.

This guy deserves death.

I don’t see how we can apply the ordinary formulas for conspiracy to him.

Assuming that’s true, then his crime was not incriminating himself. For a citizen, that would be using the death penalty as punishment for invoking the Fifth Amendment.
I believe strongly that life in prison without parole is appropriate for this pathetic excuse for a psychotic; the death penalty in this situation would not only be wrong but set a very dangerous precedent for executing people not for an action, but for speech [or lack thereof].

And I also remind myself that the name of the game is justice, not revenge.

I’m predominantly opposed to the death penalty. I do think in some cases it is warranted, but enough mistakes have been made in the past that I’d prefer that even those who deserve it (IMHO) are not put to death. I’d rather keep alive 100 criminals who deserve death than kill one innocent man.

Having said that, I *do* think this monster deserves death. But I’d rather he not be allowed to become a martyr. And I’d rather he not get all of the automatic appeals that a death sentence requires.

Throw him in the general population. If he wants to pray, let him pray. If he wants a rug, give him a rug. Let him get the same resources that any common criminal would get. No more, no less. Same showers, same cell, same guards, same emergency room medical care.

To further embarrass France, let’s remember that Cinco de Mayo is a celebration of Mexico’s victory over France.

chsw

What I see is a jury that found all the reasons necessary for a death sentence, but at the last minute, flinched from their obligations, and opted for a lesser sentence. What does this say about the willingness of the Champion of the West to wage war, to inflict casualties, and to sustain them. If we can’t find the moral fortitude to execute a member of the 9/11 plot, then who can we execute, how are we going to find the wherewithall for military actions that will result in death for many, and for collateral damage.

This is an ominous sign, that the moral dry rot of the post-modern era is deep indeed.