« Rough Childhood I | Main | High School Confidential »
May 05, 2006
Rough Childhood II
This is an excerpt from Daniel Heninger's opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal.
There is reason to believe that pre-9/11 thinking will in time return and prevail.
Defenders of Moussaoui's life sentence say he will "rot in prison." Perhaps in a better world Zacarias Moussaoui would share a cell with Hannibal Lecter. But if our moral betters aren't going to let Saddam's torturers rot in Abu Ghraib, if they aren't going to let the CIA's most important al Qaeda captives rot in "secret" foreign prisons, they certainly aren't going to let Moussaoui rot in Florence, Colo. He will be treated more than well.
Not to mention the Moussaoui trial itself. We arrive at the end of these interminable trial circuses of procedural delay and then claim "the system works" and "justice" has been done. No, it has done damage to the normal idea of justice. He saw the game early on and made a mockery of it. Moussaoui achieved a two-year delay in his trial by demanding to interview al Qaeda detainees. But our moral betters insist that the whole lot of Guantanamo detainees be given access to this same system of justice. They would diminish and crush it.
The odds were strong, as Moussaoui's lawyers knew and the government's should have known, that 9 of 12 jurors would vote that Moussaoui's childhood was "dysfunctional" and "mitigating." This is the therapeutic vocabulary that the West has developed to explain anything in the years from the postwar period to, say, September 11.
For quite awhile after September 11, we were a people united in the war on terror. By now we have let the adrenal pleasures of political fighting over the presidency dissipate the difficult emotions of staying united against a real enemy. The war in Iraq has contributed, but you can't lay it all off on Iraq. The ambiguity of the Moussaoui jury is a portent. See "United 93." It is very difficult. It should be.
***
Let me add this: ZM and all Jihadists should be tried by military tribunals. Our justice system is broken, it is under the thumb of the Democratic party and one of its biggest contributors, the Trial Lawyers of America. They have no interest in justice, only in advancing their liberal agenda--oh, and lining their pockets.
The Jihadists have declared war on western civilization; they target non combatants; they do not wear uniforms; they do not fight under any national flag but the bloody flag of Jihad. We are foolish and self destructive to give them civil rights they do not deserve and which they are so intent on destroying.
This trial was a shambles and our struggle against the barbarians at our gates has been made that much weaker for setting a terrible legal precedent.
Karen and I wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at May 5, 2006 10:06 AM
Comments
Seraphic Secret is private property, that's right, it's an extension of our home, and as such, Karen and I have instituted two Seraphic Rules and we ask commentors to act respectfully.
1. No profanity.2. No Israel bashing. We debate, we discuss, we are respectful. You know what Israel bashing is. The world is full of it. Seraphic Secret is one of the few places in the world that will not tolerate this form of anti-Semitism. That's it. Break either of these rules and you will be banned.
Unfortunately, it's too late to change the verdict, but maybe the judges will be wiser next time around.
Shabbat Shalom!
Posted by: Irina at May 5, 2006 02:52 PM
Robert, I have been so angry about this verdict and have had many heated discussions about how this should have been at a military tribunal. I fear for our country and the softening of our bellies.....actually the feminization of our national psyche.
Posted by: suziannr at May 5, 2006 03:35 PM
Irina:
The judge had no choice in delivering the sentence after the jury delivered their verdict. In fact, the judge was clearly annoyed by the verdict. Clearly she expected the death penalty. The jury failed as they have failed so many times. Have a lovely Shabbos.
Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at May 5, 2006 04:26 PM
Suz:
"...the feminization of our national psyche." Ah, what an appropriate phrase, and so politically incorrect. Thanks so much for the perfect clarity of thought.
Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at May 5, 2006 05:21 PM
Well, this female would have voted for the death penalty. Screw his rough childhood!! (does that count as 'profanity?') lol Lots of us had 'rough childhoods!' It wasn't that which caused him to join jihad but his indoctrination by Islamic fascists! Yes, a military tribunal should have tried him.
Shavua tov.
Posted by: Chaya at May 6, 2006 12:01 PM
Chaya:
Not to worry, does not count as profanity. Shavua Tov.
Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at May 6, 2006 10:35 PM
Could it be that the jurors may have been afraid for their lives if they did give him the death penalty? Or is defending the indefensible just an "in" thing?
Either way, to give him mercy over his difficult childhood, is bogus. Is Moussaoui (or his lawyers) claming that if he had a rosy childhood, that terrorism wouldn't have crossed his mind? That terrorism an inevitable part of a difficult life? He just cannot 'help' or control himself? I don't hear him saying that terrorism is a bad idea. I don't hear him saying that we should save abused kids so that they don't follow in his footsteps. I don't buy it!
Shavua tov-
Posted by: Rachel at May 6, 2006 10:37 PM
Rachel:
I don't think the verdict had anything to do with the juror's being afraid for their lives. I'm afraid it's as they said: They felt ZM was a "victim of racism" when he was a child.
Let's face it, some people are just dumb, and lawyers count on getting such jurors to get the best outcome for their murderous clients.
Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at May 7, 2006 11:05 AM
Robert,
You know how they have signs at the amusement park that say 'you must be this tall to ride' - they should have the same thing for jurors: 'you must have at least this much sense to be a juror'.
Feh!
Have a great day,
Rachel :)
Posted by: Rachel at May 7, 2006 11:14 AM
I don't know if anyone saw this, but the latest reports showed that it was only ONE JUROR who favored the life sentence while the other 11 wanted death. Somehow, he held out long enough and life was the verdict.
The lesson here is that as usual, the American people are a million times better than the pundits usually think they are. The truth is, marginal partisans of the Left and the Right actually hate ordinary Americans... mostly because 90% of us aren't as marginally partisan as they angry folks who pretend to love Americans, but really resent them. It reminds me of the the right-wingers who malign Americans who "just won't do certain jobs," (yeah, like the ones that pay $1-an-hour), and left-wingers who think everyone in the red states is a racist Bible-thumping moron.
As we can see from this Moussaoui case, 11 good Americans got trumped by one jerk. Too bad they were all forced to take so many knee-jerk attacks from their fellow "more-enlightened" Americans on the radio/Web.
Posted by: Jake at May 14, 2006 04:42 PM
Jake:
The lesson is: the jury system is broken.
Posted by: Robert J. Avrech at May 14, 2006 08:25 PM