Lawyers, Guns and Money, by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise

November 21, 2009 Martha Thomases 3 Comments

I read the news today.  Oy vey.

The latest political kerfuffle arises from Attorney General Eric Holder’s desire to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four of his co-conspirators in Federal Court in Manhattan.  Mohammed and his pals are accused of planning and executing the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Manhattan’s Federal Courthouse is just a few blocks away from the hole where the World Trade Center used to be.

The arguments, both for and against holding the trial here, are kind of onion-esque.  There are layers upon layers of reasons, emotions and political manipulations.

As nearly as I can tell, the arguments against holding the trial in a civilian court (as opposed to a military court) are two-fold: first, that these men don’t deserve a trial that grants them the same legal rights as other defendants; second, that it’s too dangerous to New York to have the trial here.

Let’s look at these arguments in reverse order.

New York City is a dangerous place.  In the last few years, it’s been safer, but it’s not safe.  There are kids getting shot on the way to school, and grandmothers shot running errands for their neighbors.

New York City is already a primary target to the terrorists.  We’ve been hit twice.  We’ve been threatened repeatedly.  This has not escaped my notice.  I’m reminded by the soldiers, heavily armed and in uniform, who patrol my transit system.  I can’t go to High Holy Day services at my synagogue without walking past armed guards and concrete barricades, and I must also allow my purse to be searched to make sure I’m not bringing in weapons.  And, of course, there is the nasty hole in the skyline I see from my windows.

So threats like this miss the point.  We’re already living with fear of the terrible.  Another trial of al Queda defendants (and 23 of them have had their day in court) won’t make things any worse.

(I don’t think New York is the only place attractive to terrorists, as this story demonstrates.  For that matter, so does this story.)

Do terrorists deserve a civilian trial? I think so.  I think giving them a military trials demeans their victims by granting the defendants a status (military) that they don’t deserve.

The attacks of September 11 were criminal acts.  The people who perpetrated these attacks are gangsters and thugs (and, no, I’m not hip-hop enough to mean that as a compliment).  They should be tried as criminals and sentenced like criminals.

Cowards like this should stop demeaning the idea of the military, the nation-state, and war.  I’m not crazy about any of those three things, but I recognize that they imply a code of conduct and honor that is absent from fundamentalist terrorists.

We are a nation of laws.  We believe in justice, reason and law.  Those of us who believe in non-violent civil disobedience do so because we think it’s the best way to change bad laws.  That’s why we’re better than al-Queda.

Trying them in civilian court shows the rest of the world what we mean by Truth, Justice and The American Way.  It should be about our best, not about our worst.

Media Goddess Martha Thomases hopes you all have a lot to be thankful for this week, and always.