Conason: What is So Patriotic About Fearmongering?
The loudest voices on the right never tire of telling us that they are the truest patriots. They claim to be the deepest believers in our system, the strongest defenders of our Constitution, the most upbeat, bold and courageous Americans anywhere. But now that the government is finally prepared to put the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 terror attacks on trial, these same patriots are the first to spread doubt, instigate anxiety and abandon constitutional principles.
When did fearmongering in a time of war become an act of patriotism?
Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try al-Qaida strategist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other residents of the Guantanamo prison in American civilian courts has provoked angry criticism from all the usual sources, from the Wall Street Journal editorial page to the Fox News airwaves. While some of the complaints are thoughtful, many are nothing more than demagogic appeals that seek to undermine the foundations of justice in a democratic society.
When Holder’s critics say that Mohammed doesn’t “deserve” an open and adversarial trial, they are misunderstanding the spirit of our laws. The right to a trial — indeed, all the rights afforded to criminal defendants under the Constitution — is not apportioned according to what the defendants supposedly deserve. What they deserve is, in fact, precisely what a fair trial is designed to determine.
The nation’s founders despised the passions of the lynch mob and the arbitrary penalties handed down by kings and despots. They were particularly appalled by the tortures and abuse inflicted on American Revolutionary soldiers by the British oppressor — and vowed never to do the same to America’s enemies.
When Holder’s critics say that we don’t dare try a criminal like Mohammed on the soil of the United States, in a New York City federal courthouse, that is a terrible concession to the terrorists. The same is true when those critics protest against incarcerating a figure such as Mohammed in an American prison, rather than Gitmo. Essentially, those arguments exaggerate the power of al-Qaida — which conservatives usually claim has been profoundly weakened over the past several years — and underestimates the strength of the American justice system.
In fact, we have been trying dangerous terrorists in American courts for many years, and then incarcerating them in American prisons.
According to a new study by the Center for Law and Security at New York University, the U.S. government has indicted 828 defendants on terrorism-related charges since 2001. Of those indictments, trials are still pending against 235 defendants — and of the remaining 539 defendants, 523 were convicted either at trial or via plea.
The single largest venue for terrorism trials is New York City, where 145 terrorism indictments have been filed. The center found in a previous study that the conviction rate in New York is higher than in the rest of the nation, and that sentencing in New York is also tougher. That is understandable — and may help to explain why the attorney general chose the Southern District of New York for the Mohammed prosecution. In the city’s federal courts, the conviction rate of individuals charged with terrorism involving a U.S. target is 100 percent.
When Mohammed is convicted (or pleads guilty, as he has previously vowed to do), the U.S. federal prison system is ideally equipped to inflict suitable punishment on him and his cohort. Better than providing him with martyrdom via execution, he should be buried in a “Supermax” prison, from which nobody has ever escaped, and left to rot.
The most basic challenge of the terror campaign waged by jihadi extremists is to preserve the differences between us and them — a challenge that the American government has failed at in far too many instances over the past eight years, through the use of torture, extrajudicial detentions, renditions to other countries, and various other violations of U.S. law and treaty obligations. Our own courts found that these acts by the previous administration were lawless and required them to be reversed.
As a nation, we should have the confidence to make the case against these murderers according to our laws and Constitution, without fear of their propaganda or violence. Every precaution should be taken to protect national security and public safety — and then our system will prevail over their perverse ideology.
Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer (www.observer.com). To find out more about Joe Conason, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM
Conason must have not heard the bungling and embarrassingly inept Attorney General Eric Holder at the hearing the other day.
I’ve wondered the same thing. Here we have all these blustering machomen going on about how brave they are (“These colors don’t run”), and now some little thing like trying terrorists in NYC has them wetting their underwear. I suppose we should have expected it. After all, whenever Cheney changed the threat from yellow to orange, sales of Depends went through the roof. And we have seen how a sorry Miami street gang that wouldn’t have been able to find Chicago on a map of Illinois have people in an uproar about how they were going to take out the whole Chicago skyline.
Forget everything you ever learned about the “home of the brave.” That went out when people decided that they needed a big daddy to protect them from the ghoulies and ghosties and things going bump in the dark.
And if you need more evidence that these people quiver in their boots at every little shadow that goes by, think about them insisting on their right to carry guns everywhere. Most Americans don’t feel that they need to be protected, but these little kids are so craven that they are afraid of just everything.
Texas Aggie must have not heard the bungling and embarrassingly inept Attorney General Eric Holder at the hearing the other day.
Texas Aggie, you think that we are afraid of what will happen when the Terrorists/Celebrities are tried under the same rights that we all afforded as U.S. Citizens, in fact we think that as a country we are too stupid and naive to realize what this will do to this country in the future. We are going to a place that will be unrecognizable in the next 15-20 years. Sorry, all you have to do is look at the big picture and know your history!
Attention Conason and other dimwitts; From John Hinderacker at Powerline Blog;
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his confederates are gearing up for a media spectacle:
A lawyer for one of five men facing trial for the Sept. 11 attacks says the men plan to plead not guilty and use the trial to express their political views. Attorney Scott Fenstermaker says his client Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali and the others will not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but will tell the jury “why they did it.”
He says the men will explain “their assessment of American foreign policy.”
Fenstermaker met with Ali last week at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay. He says the men, including professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, have discussed the trial among themselves.
Yes, I’ll bet they have. Eric Holder’s decision to give them a jury trial must have seemed like a gift from Allah.
Scott Fenstermaker is a criminal defense lawyer from New York who has represented a number of Guantanamo Bay detainees.
aggie,
Of course you are so right. Because there are so many many scared people. And they do not know what to believe in. Many see to much cheny medias and beleive those false stories. Any one can see that cheny has the people all scared. Indt is good to have conason talk to them about the truths. See how he knows that dissint is bad from the right winged ones. Conason knows that obama has promised the best. Lucky that so many common man people like obama. Unless the people loose the faith in obama they will be seeing the good of obama. Everyone knows that obama did not tell us false stories in his promises. Look at obama promises and see how he has kept all of them and on time. Even that sarah lady from alaska knows that obama has the best for the common man. See how she is asking oprah for help to get to meet obama so she can know how to do good for common people. So that as time goes obama will have more people to be for his promises.
art
Arto,
Besides you and one Texas Aggie, no one is defending our Dear Leader much anymore. I personally think Dear Leader is not so clueless, as he is doing exactly as he intends – ruining America. Regarding that Sarah lady from Alaska you speak of – “Palin’s Roanoke appearance, Thousands of fans camp out in 30 degree weather…” – don’t see it splashed all over those medias! I suppose Conason and MSNBPNSC think that is ‘astrofurfing.’ And I don’t mean what Bill Clinton used to do in the Astoturf lined bed in the back of his El Camino.
I say RUN SARAH RUN. She forces white guys like Conason into a fearmongering fobias. She must be doing something right. Actually she speaks the truth. She does not talk out of one side of his mouth like Dear Leader. She loves her country, unlike Dear Leader.