Leonard Pitts Jr.: Terror trials can become nation's defining moment

By Leonard Pitts Jr. 4:06 PM Friday, November 20, 2009

“We (should) wrap him in bacon and deep fry him at a state fair while Lee Greenwood stabs him in the face.”

— Jon Stewart of  “The Daily Show” on confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed

And seriously now, who doesn’t agree?

You’d have to be defective in your humanity not to. Mohammed plotted the greatest act of mass murder in American history. Who among us wouldn’t like a piece of this guy?

Indeed, if critics of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try him and his terrorist confederates in a New York City courtroom would be honest with themselves, they’d admit that this is what drives their condemnation, not questions of security, fears of acquittal or other obfuscatory concerns they’ve raised.

No, the baseline here is the understandable belief that these thugs, these gangsters of Islam, have no right to a trial, that the American legal system, with all its protections for the accused, all its rights and procedures, is more than they deserve.

Americans have always been ambivalent about the ability of our justice system to give bad people what they’ve got coming. That’s why action movies end with the bad guy shot, impaled or fed into a wood chipper: seeing him led away in cuffs simply doesn’t offer the same visceral sense of just deserts.

But you have to wonder: are our emotional needs the most important consideration here?

It’s worth remembering that even the architects of the greatest barbarism in history had their day in court. After burning away 11 million lives, the leaders of the Nazi regime found themselves facing not summary execution, but a trial before a military tribunal in Nuremberg, Germany.

As prosecutor Robert Jackson put it: “That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury, stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that power has ever paid to reason.”

And when the trials were over and the verdicts delivered — death or imprisonment for most, three were acquitted — the New York Times editorialized as follows: “These sentences can neither atone for all the evil these men have brought into the world nor undo any part of it. But they help to assuage the conscience of mankind and to restore to honor the concept of the dignity of man which cannot be violated with impunity.”

Compare that with the Bush administration’s original, Supreme Court-rebuked vision of justice — minimal rights for the accused, torture allowed, the government’s thumb on justice’s scale — and maybe you’ll agree: we need this trial more than Mohammed does. For all its risks — and they are real — it offers a prize worth risking for: the promise of feeling like Americans again.

That feeling is arguably the most significant casualty of Sept. 11. On that day, we elevated a mob of stateless criminals, a mafia in cleric’s clothing, to the exalted level of rogue nation. But they were never that, never a threat to our national existence; they lacked the forces to take even one square inch of American soil. What they could threaten — and take — was our sense of ourselves as a brave, reasonable and civilized people, inhabiting a nation of laws. They beckoned us into the mud with them, and we leapt.

It’s not the first time. Periodically, we have shed the burden of bravery, reason, civilization, laws. Always, it happens in moments of national stress, moments of overwhelming confusion, anger or fear, moments that make us prey to demons of expedience and moral compromise. Moments when we wonder if we can still afford to act like America.

But we face a band of bloodthirsty hoodlums whose dearest wish is to make us just like them. So maybe the better question is this:

Can we afford not to?

Leonard Pitts

writes forthe Miami Herald. E

-mail address

lpitts@

miami

herald.com

Share this article

ADD COMMENT

Comments feed

It is nothing short of tresonous to give these demons, the rights of an American in court, and only American hating communist, like Holder and Dumbama, would do so. If we have another terrorist attack while KSM and Obama and Holder are busy trashing the country, which they love to do, watch their ratings nosedive.

Kurt
6:11 AM, 11/25/2009

REPORT ABUSE

Pitts reflects liberal elitism at its highest form. I don't doubt NY can handle security and most likely there will be a conviction, but at what price? Creating a precedent giving enemy combatants the rights of an American citizen? Providing the platform for these guy to sprew their radical views. Oh, sure civilized people can easily refute their hate filled theology; but, KSM won't be speaking to that crowd - he will be speaking to those who are open to hearing him and that could be millions.

TRS
4:54 PM, 11/23/2009

REPORT ABUSE

Leonard seems to not understand that a Military tribunal is not a part of a judicial court it is a military court. That is where these combatants need to face their accusers in a military court not New York with an attorney paid for by the American taxpayer. Skip the trial and plug them into the wall. These are not citizens therefore have no constitutional rights.

Tom
2:07 PM, 11/23/2009

REPORT ABUSE

We welcome your comments. Please remember this is a public forum and behave appropriately. Your comments must conform to our visitor's agreement.