The Wall Street Journal has reported on some of what it described as the "chaos" in the arraignment of the terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attacksin a military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. One element was particularly striking the terrorists' demand (through one of their lawyers) that the U.S. court system pander to their barbarian prejudices. Instapundit extracts and summarizes it this way:
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION? WOMEN LAWYERS AT GITMO TRIAL SHOULD WEAR THE HIJAB TO PROTECT THE SOULS OF THE 9/11 ACCUSED: Really? If it were me, I’d wear the highest heels and shortest skirt I could find. The Wall Street Journal reports, “Cheryl Bormann, a lawyer for Mr. bin Attash, was dressed in an abaya, a loosefitting garment worn by observant Muslim women, leaving only her face exposed, and suggested that women on the prosecution team follow her example. They should dress modestly “so that our clients are not forced to not look at the prosecution for fear of committing a sin under their faith,” Ms. Bormann said.Personally, I think the military judge in this tribunal should have ordered Ms. Bormann to leave the courtroom, and return when she was properly attired for a U.S. court. There is no reason at all for any court to pander to terrorist mass murderers.
Further, if the terrorists insist on the kind of disruptive behavior they showed at the arraignment, the judge should leave them in separate solitary cells with video monitors and audio for the simultaneous Arabic translation outside the cells so they cannot damage or destroy them, and proceed with the court process in the courtroom. That sort of process is used with ordinary criminal defendants. If it's good enough for ordinary criminals, it's more than good enough for these confessed terrorists.