EDITORIAL The world six months later

Two towers of light now illuminate the Manhattan skyline. 6 months ago that space was occupied by the gigantic World Trade Center buildings. Things have changed.

Last Sunday CBS aired the first footage from inside the towers during the attack. The footage brought a new level of terror to an already frightening situation. The film, shot by two French filmmakers who were documenting the _lifeof a rookie fireman, was opposed by many of the families who had lost someone in the attacks. The film was then carefully edited to remove fatalities and any scenes showing explicit gore.

It was a reminder that what happened wasn't a dream but an ongoing nightmare. So much has changed over the past six months that it is becoming hard to keep track. The anthrax scares, which consumed and horrified the nation, are old news. The hope that we will capture bin Laden tomorrow and put an end to this war is gone. Reality has set in, this war will not end overnight. And an innocent journalist was captured and brutally murdered. These are not situations that we expected to be dealing with at the end of last summer.

No matter, here we are. Soon we will be remembering the one-year anniversary of the World Trade Center attacks. What will happen between now and then is unforeseeable. But we can go into the next six months with a sense of optimism. The Untied States has pulled together and has showed, once again, why it is the strongest country in the world.

- A bronze statue that stood outside of the Twin Towers has been made into a temporary_memorial for the victims of 9-11.

On Monday, a moment of silence was lead by Mayor Bloomberg in New York City at 8:46 am, the exact time the first plane slammed into the first tower. Another moment of silence was held at 9:03, the time of the second attack. The towers of light were switched on Monday night by 12 year old Valerie Webb, an orphan, and will remain lit until April 13.

This editorial was chosen by a vote of 9 to 3

The editorials, viewpoints, opinions and letters to the editor published in Loquitur are the views of the student editorial board and the individual writers, not the entire student body or the faculty and administration.

Leanne Pantone assistant a&e editor

We say that we have equality, which seems to be true, but only in theory. In reality, there are injustices everywhere you tum. It appears that everything is a barrier. Women do not get paid as much as men. Skin color might decide the job that a person gets, even if he or she is the less qualified person. Many injustices are apparent in the courtroom. For example, the whole d~ with insanity. As far as I understand it, if someone is declared insane by a court of law, then he or she is given treatment in an institution. That's great for the convicted person, but what happened to the crime that was committed? It doesn't just disappear.

ff someone who is not insane commits a crime like murder and is found guilty, a sentence must be paid There is not any treatment or arrangements made. The punishment that is given to the defendant stands.

Why isn't that the case for someone who is insane as well? Let's say that another murder was Commentaries and letters to the editor may be submitted by the entire Cabrini campus community to Theloqultur_ @hotmail.com or The Loqulfur 810 King of Prussia Road Radnor,Pa. 19087 committed and the person who killed someone was declared insane. Therefore, treabnent for the insanity is given. However, what happened to the crime? It is still there. It was still committed. I do not understand why the person who is found guilty by reason of insanity is excused for a crime that he or she committed.

•Requirements: Names will not be withheld from lettersanda phone numbermustbe provided.

Although insanity is rarely used in trials, I still do not think it is okay. It is not fair to the victims or to the rest of society. Once a person is diagnosed insane and committed to get help, he or she is free to be out on the street after reaching a sane state. I do not think it is right and I have a problem with it, especially in the recent case with Andrea Yates, who was recently found guilty but tried to use the insanity plea.

This woman drowned her five children in the bathtub in Texas. Obviously there is something wrong with her. Apparently, she suffers from postpartum depression, which is no surprise for anyone. The lawyers said she did not know what she was doing when she killed her kids.

I do not think this excuse pardons someone for his or her actions. Just because someone was unaware or did not know what was being done ignores the fact that a crime was committed. I do not care if the person is insane or not, he or she is a threat to society, and I think that criminal charges should apply.

With Yates, I am happy that she was convicted of murder because that is the crime that she committed. She was tried just like anyone else would be, and she should pay the price. ff she is declared insane, then let her get treatment in the jail cell and remain there until her time is up, even if during her treatment she becomes sane.

Nevertheless, I do not think that insanity should be a legal term. I believe that everyone should be tried equally for the crime that they commit. The mental state of that person should not be a factor in the trial. Let him or her get treatment in prison and remain there even if the person becomes sane.

The potential for someone who commits a crime to be able to return to society after they become sane is not fair. I think that people wouldn't feel safe if that happened somewhere near where they lived. I personally just do not think that justice is served by doing that. It is almost as if it's better to be found guilty by reason of insanity because you get treatment, then you are off, free. I don't think it's right, and I don't think that our country should use the legal term insanity any longer.