9/11 Victims Deserve Transparency, Not Plea Deals with Terrorists

On July 31, 2024, a letter from the Department of Defense’s Office of the Chief Prosecutor for Military Commissions revealed a troubling development: the U.S. government had agreed to a plea deal with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and several of his 9/11 associates. This arrangement aimed to eliminate the possibility of the death penalty, representing a significant setback in the quest for justice for the 9/11 community.

Fortunately, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin intervened to block this deal, marking the second instance in two years where officials have pushed back against plea negotiations that compromise the pursuit of full justice.

The proposed plea agreement would have allowed the individuals responsible for the attacks to avoid a complete trial and the death penalty. Such a resolution is profoundly concerning, regardless of one’s beliefs about capital punishment. The Office of the Chief Prosecutor only consulted “verified victim family members” regarding the plea deals.

This approach raises questions about the scope of consultation. What about the over 37,000 certified 9/11 victims currently suffering from cancer and other serious illnesses? Shouldn’t their voices be heard in discussions about plea arrangements?

The terrorist attacks nearly 25 years ago resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 individuals and left many injured at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. As of March 2024, more than 130,000 people have received diagnoses of cancer or other 9/11-related illnesses due to exposure to toxic air in Lower Manhattan, according to the World Trade Center Health Program.

This contaminated environment was laden with cancer-causing substances: asbestos, pulverized building materials, dust, soot, microscopic glass shards, silica, dioxins, heavy metals, and thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel that sparked fires for months. The mounting number of deaths among those enrolled in the WTC Health Program now exceeds the fatalities on the day of the attacks.

As an attorney representing individuals with claims before the federal 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, I can attest that none of my clients have been approached by the Office of the Chief Prosecutor for their opinions regarding potential plea deals for the terrorists. This oversight in reaching out to the broader 9/11 community is unacceptable.

The chief prosecutor could easily connect with both the federal WTC Health Program and the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund to implement effective outreach. These two programs excel in making contact with victims.

The Office of the Chief Prosecutor must recognize that the entire 9/11 community deserves full transparency and involvement in discussions about plea agreements. Conducting proceedings in secrecy tarnishes the memory of the victims and insults those currently suffering from health issues.

The only just path forward is to proceed with a full trial, maintaining transparency for the families of all victims while allowing the judicial process to fully address the severity of the crimes committed.

The upcoming presidential administration must demand nothing less than that, and it’s imperative for both presidential candidates to clarify their positions on negotiations with 9/11 terrorists.

This ongoing suffering underscores the demand for justice that accurately reflects the magnitude of the events of 9/11. The plea deal, by sidelining a full trial and the death penalty, risks trivializing the gravity of the attacks and overlooks the persistent pain experienced by victims and their families.

Justice is demanded not only for the 2,977 lives lost on that fateful day but also for the countless individuals whose health and lives have been adversely affected in the years since.

Moreover, the plea deal raises serious concerns about transparency. Speculation regarding potential involvement by international players, such as Saudi Arabia, complicates the narrative of the 9/11 attacks. The urgency for a swift resolution may stem from a desire to shield certain uncomfortable truths that could disrupt diplomatic ties with a key ally. Such motivations are unacceptable; the facts surrounding 9/11 must be thoroughly examined and revealed, rather than concealed to appease political interests.

The U.S. government’s history concerning this case has been marred by delays and contentious issues. The plea bargain adds yet another troubling chapter to an already complex saga. Choosing to circumvent a full trial and the death penalty signifies both a legal and a moral failure to confront the extent of the tragedy and its ongoing impact.

Secretary Austin’s decision to halt the plea deal is a step in the right direction, reinforcing that the families of 9/11 victims deserve total transparency and justice. A plea bargain that sidesteps the death penalty and risks withholding vital information cannot be considered a resolution that serves justice or honors the memory of those affected by the events of September 11, 2001.

Justice in such complicated and politically sensitive cases is always challenging, yet it remains crucial. The complete truth about 9/11 must be revealed, and those accountable must face the full weight of their actions. Only then can the 9/11 community begin the process of healing and ensure that such atrocities are never repeated.

Source: USA Today