Khalid
Shaikh Mohammed’s Trial Will Convict Us All
26 November 2009By
Paul Craig Roberts
Republican members of Congress and what masquerades as
a "conservative" media are outraged that the Obama
administration intends to try in federal court Khalid
Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11, and
four alleged co-conspirators.
The Republican and right-wing rant that a trial is too
good for these people proves what I have written for a
number of years: Republicans and many Americans who
think of themselves as conservatives have no regard
for the US Constitution or for civil liberties.
They have no appreciation for the point made by Thomas
Paine in his Dissertations on First Principles of
Government (1790): "An avidity to punish is always
dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to
misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws.
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard
even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates
this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach
to himself."
Republicans and American conservatives regard civil
liberties as coddling devices for criminals and
terrorists. They assume that police and prosecutors
are morally pure and, in addition, never make
mistakes. An accused person is guilty or government
wouldn’t have accused him. All of my life I have heard
self-described conservatives disparage lawyers who
defend criminals. Such "conservatives" live in an
ideal, not real, world. They desperately need to read
The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Even some of those, such as Stuart Taylor in the
National Journal, who defend giving Mohammed a court
trial do so on the grounds that there are no risks as
Mohammed is certain to be convicted and that "a
civilian trial will show Americans and the rest of the
world that our government is sure it can prove the
9/11 defendants guilty in the fairest of all courts."[
No Need To Fear A Manhattan Terrorist Trial, November
21, 2009]
Taylor agrees that Mohammed deserves "summary
execution," but that it is a good Machiavellian ploy
to try Mohammed in civilian court, while dealing with
cases that have "trickier evidentiary problems" in
"more flexible military commissions, away from the
brightest spotlights."
In other words, Stuart Taylor and the National Journal
endorse Mohammed’s trial as a show trial that will
prove both America’s honorable respect for fair trials
and Muslim guilt for 9/11.
If, as Taylor writes, "the government’s evidence is so
strong," why wasn’t Mohammed tried years ago? Why was
he held for years and tortured—apparently water
boarded 183 times—in violation of US law and the
Geneva Conventions? How can the US government put a
defendant on trial when its treatment of him violates
US statutory law, international law, and every precept
of the US legal code? Mohammed has been treated as if
he were a captive of Hitler’s Gestapo or Stalin’s KGB.
And now we are going to finish him off in a show
trial.
If the barbaric treatment Mohammed has received during
his captivity hasn’t driven him insane, how do we know
he hasn’t decided to confess in order to obtain for
himself for evermore the glory of the deed? How many
people can claim to have outwitted the CIA, the
National Security Agency and all 16 US intelligence
agencies, NORAD, the Pentagon, the National Security
Council, airport security (four times on one morning),
US air traffic control, the US Air Force, the military
Joint Chiefs of Staff, all the neocons, Mossad, and
even the formidable Dick Cheney?
Considering that some Muslims will blow themselves up
in order to take out a handful of Israelis or US and
NATO occupation troops, the payoff that Mohammed will
get out of a guilty verdict is enormous. Are we really
sure we want to create a Muslim Superhero of such
stature?
Originally, according to the US government, Osama bin
Laden was the mastermind of 9/11. To get bin Laden is
the excuse given for the US invasion of Afghanistan,
which set up the invasion of Iraq. But after eight
years of total failure to catch Osama bin Laden, it
became absolutely necessary to convict some culprit,
because the 9/11 Truth Movement is becoming too
strong.
If Mohammed is really the mastermind who defeated the
best that America has to offer, including the
thousands of intelligence agents and strategic
thinkers with the responsibility of protecting our
country, Mohammed is a first class genius.
What a waste to execute him! Shouldn’t we first try to
turn him? If we had a guy like Mohammed on our side
running Homeland Security, we would forever be safe.
Allegedly, Arabs are corrupt and easily bribed. If we
can pay the rulers of Egypt, Jordan, and Pakistan to
operate in our interest against their own kind, how do
we know we can’t sign up Mohammed? I can see this guy
as a highly paid consultant to Homeland Security. In
addition to money, we could make some other
concessions, such as ceasing to persecute Muslim
charities and the innocent people who contribute to
them. Using Stuart Taylor’s reasoning, this would be a
good "pragmatic" move.
Unfortunately, there will be no such sensible outcome.
David Feige has told us what the outcome will be (The
Real Price of Trying KSM, Slate, November 19, 2009.)
The prosecution doesn’t need any evidence, because no
judge and no jury is going to let the demonized
"mastermind of 9/11" off. No judge or juror wants to
be forever damned by the brainwashed American public
or assassinated by right-wing crazies. Keep in mind
that the kid, John Walker Lindh, termed "the American
Taliban" by an ignorant and propagandistic US media,
was guilty of nothing except being in the wrong place
at the wrong time. Despite the complete trampling of
his every right, he got 20 years on a coerced plea
bargain.
The price that Mohammed will pay will be small
compared to the price we Americans will pay. The
outcome of Mohammed’s trial will complete the
transformation of the US legal system from a shield of
the people into a weapon in the hands of the state.
Feige writes that Mohammed’s statements obtained by
torture will not be suppressed, that witnesses against
him will not be produced ("national security"), that
documents that compromise the prosecution will be
redacted. At each stage of Mohammed’s appeals process,
higher counts will enshrine into legal precedents the
denial of the Constitutional right to a speedy trial,
thus enshrining indefinite detention, the denial of
the right against damning pretrial publicity, thus
allowing demonization prior to trial, and the denial
of the right to have witnesses and documents produced,
thus eviscerating a defendant’s rights to exculpatory
evidence and to confront adverse witnesses, The
twisted logic necessary to disentangle Mohammed’s
torture from his confession will also be upheld and
will "provide a blueprint for the government, giving
them the prize they’ve been after all this time—a
legal way both to torture and to prosecute."
It took Hitler a while to corrupt the German courts.
Hitler first had to create new courts, like President
George W. Bush’s military tribunals, that did not
require evidence, using in place of evidence hearsay,
secret charges, and self-incrimination obtained by
torture.
Every American should be concerned that the Obama
administration has decided to use Mohammed’s trial to
complete the corruption of the American court system.
When Mohammed’s trial is over, an American Joe Stalin
or Adolf Hitler will be able to convict America’s
Founding Fathers on charges of treason and terrorism.
No one will be safe.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term.
He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He
has held numerous academic appointments, including the
William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and
International Studies, Georgetown University, and
Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford
University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by
French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author
of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of
Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet
Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and
is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The
Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and
Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name
of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes
Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent
epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments