|
Peter Lemiska
Obama's Gift to Osama
November 18, 2009
Whoever suggested that Barack Obama is not a Christian? Obama’s decision
to try those Gitmo prisoners in New York is the perfect gift for Osama
bin Laden and just in time for Christmas. We can only imagine those
non-alcoholic champagne corks popping in some remote cave in
Afghanistan.
While al Qaeda and the far left celebrate the Obama-Holder decision, it
has shocked and outraged most Americans. They are outraged because these
men were captured in a war on terror; and should be treated as enemy
combatants. And because prosecuting them in a civilian court rather than
by military tribunal will undoubtedly reveal classified information and
investigative techniques that will help our enemies; and because it will
require extraordinary security measures at an astronomical cost to
taxpayers; and because it will likely increase the risk of another
terrorist attack in New York. They also know that, due to the magnitude
of these cases, witnesses and the jury pool could become targets of
intimidation or worse, and that the defendants will do their best during
the trial to create a circus atmosphere and exploit their public
platform for propaganda purposes.
But the left refuses to consider any of that, arguing that our justice
system is the best in the world, and will certainly prevail against
these common thugs. Their newfound respect for anything American is
refreshing, given their propensity to condemn this country. They call us
arrogant and imperialistic, and compare our soldiers to Nazis. They
denounce our capitalist economy and our health care system, pointing
with envy to socialist Europe. Obama, himself, spent the first six
months of his presidency apologizing for the country he was elected to
lead, and his own wife admitted during his campaign that she had never
before been proud of America.
So now they’ve found something they like about America, proclaiming
their utmost confidence in our system of justice. But are they really
confident that it will convict these terrorists or that it will expose
some mistreatment of callous killers by the previous administration?
In fact, our justice system is the best in the world, but it is far from
perfect. It is designed to afford the accused with every far-reaching
benefit that liberal judges can divine from our Constitution. There is
the Miranda admonishment, the right to a speedy trial, the various
exclusionary rules that often bar damning evidence. Convictions require
the unanimous decision of 12 jurors, and because of their daunting task,
prosecutors often accept plea bargains to reduced charges.
How many hardened criminals are walking the streets today because a
prosecutor or police officer neglected to cross a “T” or dot an “I”, or
because a single, wide-eyed juror was taken in by the slick patter of a
high-priced defense attorney? And these particular defendants will have
the best attorneys money can buy.
The problem is compounded by Obama’s decision to change horses in the
middle of the stream. Even those who reject the concept of a war on
terrorism must surely understand that re-designating enemy combatants as
criminal defendants has made the prosecutor’s job almost insurmountable.
Were they read their Miranda Rights? What about their speedy trial? Were
they subjected to mistreatment? These issues and others will certainly
be vigorously attacked by the defense attorneys.
No one, not even the 9-11 survivors, wants to see an innocent man
convicted of a crime, and even though Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his
confederates have admitted their roles in the terrorist attacks, they
are entitled to a fair and impartial hearing. The military tribunal that
was to have taken place would have accomplished that without the
problems associated with a public trial.
Eric Holder has stated that he is confident these men will be convicted
and face the "ultimate punishment." Those who watched the O.J. Simpson
trial are not so sure. Government prosecutors have become so encumbered
with liberal court decisions benefitting the accused, that even solid
cases can be difficult to prove. Our criminal justice system is a good
one, but it is flawed and not intended for international terrorists. It
is founded on the principle that it is “better that ten guilty persons
escape than one innocent suffer.”
What if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is one of those ten? |
