Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- When In Rome...?
- President Obama Shakes Hands with Qadaffi
- More Qs for O's WH - 7/9/2009
- President Obama Urges Major Economies Forum Nations to Act on Climate Change
- Today's Qs for O's WH - 7/9/2009
- Whom Should the White House Invite to Its 2010 Nuclear Non-proliferation Summit?
- Is the Stimulus Working?
- First Ladies Visit Quake Zone
- Hoopster-In-Chief Plays "Horse" In Italy
- President Obama to Brazil's Lula: 'Next Time We Won't Give Up a 2-to-0 Lead'
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Campaign Clarifies "Martyr" Comments on OBL
June 19, 2008 2:35 PM
McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann today on a conference call noted that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said he didn't want to make Osama bin Laden a martyr.
"The last I checked, a martyr is someone who dies for a cause or someone who is killed for a cause," Scheunemann said. "It seems that Senator Obama is ruling out capital punishment."
The Obama campaign says Scheunemann's interpretation is dead wrong.
**
Yesterday, Obama was asked if he were president and Osama bin Laden were captured, how would he want to proceed?
"First of all, I think there is an executive order out on Osama bin Laden's head, and if I'm president and we had the opportunity to capture him, we may not be able to capture him alive," Obama said. "I think it does not make sense for me to speculate in terms of what the best approach would be in trying him and bringing him to justice. I think what would be important would be for us to do it in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he's engaged in and not to make him into a martyr and to sure that the United States government is abiding by the basic conventions that would strengthen our hand in the broader battle against terrorism."
Obama went on to say, "you know I've used this analogy before but one of the hallmarks, one of the high water points, I think, of US foreign policy, was the Nuremburg Trials. Because the world had not seen before victors behave in ways that advanced a set of universal principles. And that set a tone for post-war reconstruction and creation of an international order that I think was extraordinarily important."
So what does that mean, that Obama wouldn't want to make bin Laden into a martyr?
Without getting into the history of martyrdom in Islam and Sumayyah bint Khayyat, let's postulate that to bin Laden, at least, it seems that the concept of becoming a martyr involves dying or his demented struggle.
So Scheunemann assumed that Obama was ruling out capital punishment for bin Laden.
But the Obama campaign says that what Obama was referring to was making sure that the world sees that there is a judicial process for bin Laden.
Asked about this by the Associated Press last year , Obama said the "first thing I'd support is his capture, which is something this administration has proved incapable of achieving. I would then, as president, order a trial that observed international standards of due process. At that point, do I think that somebody who killed 3,000 Americans qualifies as someone who has perpetrated heinous crimes, and would qualify for the death penalty. Then yes.”
Now while that might sound a tad professorial to some, the Obama campaign insists it's a clear statement that the senator would pursue putting bin Laden to death for his crimes -- after a trial that follows, in principle, the example set at the Nuremberg trials.
- jpt
UPDATE: Sensing, perhaps, a need to be more declarative, Obama spox Bill Burton emails to say: "As president, Barack Obama will do everything within his power to kill or capture Osama bin Laden. If captured, he will pursue the death penalty for him."
June 19, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (54)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
You make martyrs when you allow your commitment to principles of justice to be distorted. A perfect example is Guantanamo Bay. This whole, "we don't care what anyone thinks" attitude of Bush and McCain makes martyrs. If we handled those prisoners well then they would not be martyrs. That is, it would be less effective for Islamist demagogues to invoke them in their rhetoric.
The McCain camp is just doing the typical rightwing thing and looking for an angle to attack from, but I think Obama's got the edge in this debate. His position makes sense. If we had pursued it from the start in going after bin Laden our standing would be a lot better. Even if we had killed bin Laden trying to capture him we would have had many open trials to show the world that we were acting in accordance with our principles of justice.
The Bush administration has not acted in accordance with any kind of principle but the Nixon principle. If we do it, it's justice. That's a dangerously authoritarian attitude to have. Of a recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision upholding the principal principle of justice, habeas corpus, McCain said it was one of the worst in the Court's history. Upholding habeas corpus is really that bad? We've had 8 years of a dull minded, theocratic, authoritarian. We don't need to follow on that with a short-tempered authoritarian that has neocon advisers whispering in his ear when he can't keep his facts straight.
Posted by: Jeremy | Jun 21, 2008 1:22:33 PM
Interesting since Obama has publically and often denounced the death penalty in any circumstances...
Posted by: Jackie | Jun 21, 2008 5:03:08 AM
If our current policy is not working, and most nations don't like us, why then have there been fewer terrorist attacks on our soil during Bush's term than Clinton's?
If they dislike us why do so many want our business, invest in our country, immigrate both legally and illegally. So we are so arrogant that we provide freedom to millions of people who want a better life, one where they do not get stopped by police on their way to vote, one where if you do not bribe the local government they shut down your business. One where they get to express their religious beliefs (except if they are standing behind the Democrats nominee)
I like most of my veteran brothers and sister believe that diplomacy first, second and third, when all has failed war, but let it be ruthless and effective. This is one of the painful lessons McCain learned in Vietnam(a war brought to you by the Democrats) and I have sadly seen that when Barack Obama has commented about our service members he is very nonchalant and glib. The more he who's his true colors the more and more I distrust him to represent the American values I hold dear to my heart, and have sworn to uphold in oath.
But because our enemy does not give in we should just pack up and go home give up the fight.
9/11 happened on Bush's watch but the planning and opportunity to stop it happened under Clinton's ever so vigilant eye, oh wait he was to busy with cigars, interns, impeachment proceeding, and his wife own financial woes. To take care of the hardest job on the planet.
Posted by: J Newcomb | Jun 20, 2008 11:52:12 AM
Why doesn't Obama want Larry Sinclair to have rights which he would give to Bid Laden?
Posted by: geevill | Jun 20, 2008 9:14:22 AM
Has Barry yet spelled out just what he will do to stop the terrorists before he gets a chance to put them on trial?
Seems to be a bit of a disconnect here.
A small change two bit politician (Barry) from the streets of Chicago probably doesn't understand that he needs to have a large scale plan. Combining that with his obvious radcialism is dangerous.
More dangerous than anything Bush has ever done.
Bush hired people that had been there before, Barry doesn't seem to get that that should be what he needs to be doing. I see fringe characters and nuts in his circle.
GRAVITAS. GRAVITAS.
Posted by: Rev Dr. E Buzz Miller | Jun 20, 2008 9:05:02 AM
bama will continue to get away with junk like this simply because the media favors him! can you imagine him as president, clarifying why he didnt mean to embarass the nation!
Posted by: 1111 | Jun 20, 2008 3:39:33 AM
Re "uncledaddy"
I thought you might be a Rhodes Scholar
in hiding.
Posted by: oddfellow | Jun 19, 2008 10:48:06 PM
Let us all resolve that every day Obama will have a press conference to "clarify" things. M'K.
Posted by: CMS | Jun 19, 2008 7:03:37 PM
J Newcomb...
Can you get that quote that democrats believe all terrorism will end with the capture of Bin please????
We were attacked my friend by Bin and his crew. They declared war on us. But we keep declaring victory because they take a month or two off. We said we will go where ever they hide. Well? Why didn't we go into Pakistan???? Because they have WMD!!! This was yet another hint for our people to realize the Iraq information was false. We have the technology and ability to celebrate the capture of Saddam for the killing of HIS OWN people, but we don't have the same drive for going after a man who was responsible for killing OUR PEOPLE???? Remember it took them OVER 10 yrs of planning for the 9/11 attack.
We are coming up on 7 yrs my friend.
Do you want to sit idle and wait 3 more years out and see what happens?
The suffering that our military and their families are dealing with along with the LACK OF SUPPORT from this administration.... LACK OF SUPPORT from a veteran who believes in toture, who refuses benefits unless you meet are involved in combat (because that is what it is coming to I promise you)... deserve much better.
Posted by: Greg | Jun 19, 2008 6:53:34 PM
Now while that might sound a tad professorial to some, the Obama campaign insists it's a clear statement that the senator would pursue putting bin Laden to death for his crimes -- after a trial that follows, in principle, the example set at the Nuremberg trials.
Hmmmmm. A tad professional?
I do not remember it ever being said of Bush. I guess the MSM doesn't much care for professionalism.
Imagine that; Professional.
Posted by: Thinking | Jun 19, 2008 6:40:03 PM
"Help me out here. Did the Supreme Court not just rule AGAINST a Nuremberg type proceeding?"
No. The Supreme Court struck down "trials" where detainees had no lawyers, were not charged with crimes, could not call witnesses, could not cross examine gov't witnesses (the gov't called no witnesses), could not see the evidence against them, and if they were found innocent, the gov't held a do-over. They were called the CSRTs, and they resembled Stalinist show trials more than Nuremberg. (These are NOT the same thing as the Military Commissions of the high level terrorism suspects--those are inadequate too, but not as much of a complete joke as CSRTs.) At Nuremberg, there were lawyers, at witnesses, and evidence, and cross examination. The overwhelming majority of people in GTMO have never had any process remotely resembling this, & the Bush administration had no plans to ever charge them. You are repeating GOP talking points without the faintest clue what you are talking about.
Posted by: Katherine | Jun 19, 2008 6:12:33 PM
A tad professorial? He says there will be a trial & very strongly implies prosecutors would seek the death penalty; he does not make "sentence first, then capture & try" promises like McCain, but then, that's grossly inappropriate demagoguery. But the press thinks we're idiots, so it reports favorably on demagoguery & treats responsible statements are "overly professorial."
Posted by: Katherine | Jun 19, 2008 6:08:26 PM
hmmm...interesting scenario. How could anyone be sure?
Posted by: Dean | Jun 19, 2008 5:47:37 PM
Let's call a spade a spade, ( I am a black man, so REALLY, no pun intended)the reason that Senator Obama has to explain every nuance of every statement, is BECAUSE you can't attack him on race. This is simply a game which only he can lose if he allows innuendo to rule the discussion.
The truth of the matter is, everything is answered to the thinking man. Some process other than angering the supposedly "righteous" has to take place in order for the ritual of justice to manifest itself. Martyrs are created by zealous belief that one is right, to the point of death. Any ritual which is guaged to test the premise of that righteousness is necessary to show us even that the reprisal we call justice is merited. I know this and I'm only a high-school grad.
Posted by: uncledaddy | Jun 19, 2008 5:41:15 PM
This is yet another hypothetical issue. The chances of anyone catching a single individual like Bin Laden and putting him on trial are almost zero.
Posted by: nazcalito | Jun 19, 2008 5:40:48 PM
Barack Obama's comment coincides with a widely held view in the intelligence community that killing OBL would increase his standing among jihadists and almost certainly lead to a string of terrorist attacks against Americans. Hard to imagine that this is what Senator John McCain wants.
BTW I am pretty much convinced OBL has died already and the Bush admistration uses fabricated speeches of him for political propaganda (google for e.g. "fat nosed Bin Laden video 2001") very much like the fictitious dissident "Emmanuel Goldstein" is used by the totalitarian regime of "Nineteen Eighty-four" (as a propaganda ploy for the "perpetual war". Sounds eerily familiar doesn't it?
Posted by: hanswall | Jun 19, 2008 5:29:35 PM
I can see it now...OBL walks away scott free after scoring a legal technicality during his court date. After all, he deserves the same rights as Americans right? Who can I thank if that happens?
Posted by: Dean | Jun 19, 2008 5:28:03 PM
From one concerned citizen of U.S.A,
Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and presidential Nominees,
Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics.
The critical differences between the two of these presidential presumptive nominees in my opinion are as under:
1. Presidential "Temperament and Caliber".
2. Little Washington "insider Versus outsider" experience.
3. "Vision and mission" for our nation future rather than past.
4. American policies, " first U.S.A Centric" than any other country [ ies ] centric.
In my professional opinion Senator Obama leads in all above qualities and attributes.
Senator Obama and his administration along with congress will address all the critical current and future domestic and foreign issues, challenges, and opportunities in coming years.
Let us remember and recite following concepts:
" Family, Friends, Fellows, Faith, Funds, Foundation [s], Fun, with Freedom & Fairness and without Fear, Favor, & Failure" . It applies to every citizen of our Greatgrand Nation.
Please stay involved, stay engaged, and stay informed. Please do not allow any seduction, deception, and or confusion by some partisan media and leaders effect your vote [ Psychological Terrorism ]..
Yours truly,
COL. [retd] A.M.K.
Disabled American Veteran
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas
PS: Please talk about the " Presidential Temperament And Caliber " of our presumptive presidential Nominees. We do talk about the "Judicial Temperament" of our Supreme Court Justices nominees and so far we have failed to talk about the " Presidential Temperament " of our presumptive presidential nominees. The " Presidential Temperament " is the ultimate and in my opinion only requirement of our president as that effects every living soul here and around the world.
Thanks again.
Posted by: COL.[retd]A.M.K. | Jun 19, 2008 5:16:28 PM
Why do so many people continue to think oil prices are tied to "Bush and his cronies - the oil companies greed!!!"???
From today's CNNMoney story - "Oil prices sank nearly $5 on Thursday after China said it would raise gas prices by lifting subsidies that have been blamed for driving oil prices higher. The move could curb demand from the country's rapidly growing economy."
PLEASE try to grasp the basic fundamentals of the world economy!!!
Posted by: Dean | Jun 19, 2008 5:05:18 PM
What is truly amazing is that Democrats place all this faith in the fact the "IF" bin laden were to be captured it would magically end all terrorism. You for get how "those rural people who cling to god and guns get bitter" well answer me this would we be under British control if they had captured and killed say General Washington? NO! That would have galvanized the belief of the followers, and they would have attacked harder, faster, and more ruthless. Lest you forget a Democrat President had a chance to take care of bin laden before 9-11. You can look to our situation in Iraq after Saddam was captured/killed did peace break out?
Posted by: J newcomb | Jun 19, 2008 4:57:05 PM
Post a comment

