Link to Archive of Weekly Issues Retaliation?

Dear Habermas Logo and Link to Site Index A Justice Site

Retaliation?

Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP

Caliifornia State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Created: September 17, 2001
Latest Update: September 17, 2001
E-Mail jeannecurran@habermas.org
E-Mail takata@uwp.edu

Seeking Bin Laden

Copyright: Jeanne Curran and Susan R. Takata and Individual Authors: September 2001.
"Fair use" encouraged.

On September 17, 2001, the Hoover Institute of Stanford highlighted this piece by Abraham D. Sofaer, one of its Fellows. There's also an article by Shelby Steele on a comparison between the events of September 11 and the Durban Conference of Racism, but that's in the Wallstreet Journal, which does not permit free access.

MIGHT OR RIGHT: Stop playing games with terrorist by Abraham D. Sofaer, Fellow Hoover Institute of Stanford. San Francisco Chronicle, Monday, September 17, 2001.

Discussion Topics

    Here's a piece of what Sofaer says about the issue of terrorism and criminal law:

    In reality, our policy of fighting terrorism with criminal-law procedures is uncomfortably like playing "Where in the World Is Carmen San Diego?" In the computer game, player-investigators are assigned cases involving spectacular crimes -- for example, stealing the Golden Gate Bridge - committed by members of Carmen's extensive gang. Investigators then dash off to collect evidence, flying from place to place, based on clues received from witnesses and documents.

    If successful, an investigator gradually puts together enough evidence to establish probable cause. The investigator must secure a warrant and then is allowed to arrest the correct person when he or she appears on the screen. Every successful arrest is a win, even though the boss -- the daring and elusive Carmen San Diego -- remains at large, arranging for other gang members to commit new crimes.

  1. Can we translate this into some of the theoretical difficulties in fighting terrorism with the criminal law?

    jeanne's comments:

    Consider wicked little unstated assumptions:

    • One set of rules of engagement requires direct confrontation, in which the one with the most guns, or willingness to use them, wins.
    • Another set of rules of engagement requires indirect attack and withdrawal. The ability to move quickly and creatively carries greater weight than the number and size of weapons.
    • There is a certain medieval honor to "war." The enemy proudly flies his/her flag. There is no such requirement in the new rules of engagement.
    • "Where in the World Is Carmen San Diego?", as Sofaer describes the game, is played by the new rules of engagement.

    Are these the only possible rules of engagement? Could we come up with others that might permit us to begin some kind of discourse? Tom Bridges says that no civil discourse is possible between us. I hope to post that soon. But Raul Rodriguez responds that he misinterprets the controversy here.