National Security Goes To Trial In New York City

That handsome devil you see in the picture is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, chief terrorist and planner of the September 11, 2001 attack on New York City. Barack Obama has planned a big circus for the mass murderer's arrival on the scene of his greatest victory. It will be called a "civilian trial," but circus is a much better description.

For the past few days I've heard all kinds of ridiculous logic emanating from the mouths of liberals and Obama Democrats about what a brilliant idea this is. Bringing a criminal to the scene of his crime to be tried by the people he tormented but didn't kill. A great opportunity to prove the efficacy of the American system of justice. A chance to get to "the truth" and have a public forum for convicting a dangerous criminal.

Nonsense, all dangerous nonsense. To start with, he is not a criminal, and doesn't belong in an American civilian criminal court. He is a terrorist and a foreigner, caught in a foreign land near a battlefield brought on by his actions which violate nearly every civilized rule of war. He is not an American citizen, and he wasn't captured on American soil. As a prisoner of war, he is susceptible to the rule of being held in a prisoner of war camp until the war is over. As a war criminal, he is entitled to a military tribunal, not a civilian trial on mainland American soil.

If bringing him to trial in a traditional civilian criminal court for the purpose of demonstrating impartial American justice is the goal, why take him to the one place where nearly every local citizen was impacted personally in some dreadful way by his actions? And the constant mantra of the Obamists that Mohammed will be found guilty ("no way is he going to be found not guilty") smacks of a fixed game rather than an impartial imposition of justice. The action also strongly implies that a military tribunal would not get at the truth. And as for demonstrating the wonders of the American civilian justice system, it will in fact prove the damned foolishness of trying to conduct a genuine trial of a highly-political, foreign terrorist in a traditional criminal trial setting. The Zacarias Moussaoui trial already demonstrated what a foolish exercise this is, and Moussaoui was at least captured on American mainland soil.

None of those are the actual reasons behind the nefarious and dangerous decision of the Obama administration to bring the trials to the mainland in a civilian court. The true meaning of this action is a chance for the Obama to exercise its obsession with the superiority of the "criminal model" over the "war model" for trying mass-murdering terrorists, along with the opportunity to put his predecessor on trial in absentia for violating the "constitutional rights" of foreign terrorists. And juiciest of all, it will give the loathsome Eric Holder his big chance to attack Congressionally-approved enhanced interrogation techniques. And if enhanced interrogation forced information out of the terrorists, doesn't Miranda prevent the use of any of the evidence against them as fruit of the poisonous tree? No matter, it's the principle that counts.

Jacob Laksin says in FrontPage magazine: "In the annals of poor political judgment, the Obama administration's decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay-based terrorist detainees in a New York City federal court may yet rank as a blunder without peer in American history." The administration has put America on trial and potentially endangered the country to score a political point against his predecessor.

We all know that the defense attorneys will attempt to obtain a dismissal on the ground that the terrorists were "tortured," a loaded political expression which the left has been bandying about for years. Waterboarding, a very successful technique used against Khalid Mohammed, was sanctioned at the time, but is now considered torture. It would never be allowed by any administration for use against an American citizen on American soil, but Mohammed doesn't fit either description. In the long run, that may not matter. So don't be too sure that either at trial or on appeal, the terrorists will not walk.

As in the Moussaoui trial, this thing will drag out interminably, with multiple opportunities for Mohammed to get his terrorist messages out to the public. There will be grandstanding, dismissal of attorneys, demands to represent himself, motions for change of venue and suppression of evidence, and TV coverage galore. In the meantime, secret documents and national security information otherwise forbidden to the defense in a military tribunal will be demanded and obtained by the civilian defense. And they can promise from now until doomsday that it will all remain confidential, but you're likely to read much of it on the front page of the New York Times within hours. American soldiers and CIA operatives overseas will be endangered and killed as a result of the leaks of military secrets.

But it's all worth it if Holder can play "gotcha" with the Bush people, right? And if he is convicted, Mohammed will get his shot at martyrdom. Not quietly in a military prison far away from the press, but in an American forum, with all the trappings of civil martyrdom. All that will be missing is the elephants and the high-wire acts.