Anatomy of a Murder

Once again, the people who claim to love America the most conspire to portray one of our greatest strengths as a weakness of spineless Liberals that will bring destruction raining down upon us. In this instance it is trial by jury that is under assault by the hyper-patriots, who apparently believe that any adherence to principle is a show of weakness that will be exploited by our implacable enemies. In this instance, the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four lesser known conspirators for their involvement in the murderous attack on the World Trade Center has become a point of contention with the Fox News crowd. Apparently Al Qaeda scum like the Sheikh don’t deserve fair trials, and the risks of letting these morally challenged mass murderers have their day in court outweigh the value of our nation’s hard won freedoms.

I will be the first to concede that the whole issue of where these douche-bags fall on the defendant spectrum is legally complex, but in my simple mind it boils down to a clear binary choice; either they are prisoners of war and are entitled to whatever legal protections that affords them, or they are just common criminals who happen to allegedly be the most despicable of mass murderers, but who are, nonetheless, entitled to the tender ministrations of the American justice system. There would not appear to be any third option, as favored by self-proclaimed true patriots, which is characterized by dragging the accused out in the alley and shooting them without benefit of legal process. I don’t think that anyone is suggesting that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and those other walking turds are candidates for Citizen of the Year, but our courts deal with thousands of miscreants each year who are every bit as wretched as the five accused, if just not as notorious.

One of the issues raised by those opposed to open trial for these gentlemen is the risk that they will make the process a platform for their political views, as if killing those who disagree with you can be characterized as a political view. My reaction to this is, so what? We are bombarded daily with inane political messages masquerading as news, fact or entertainment; the only difference would be that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s will be slightly more ridiculous and offensive than most. But guess what; nobody has to watch or listen if they aren’t so inclined. However, you can be sure every ignorant and vituperative statement will be endlessly repeated and analyzed by our stalwart news media, including Hannity, O’Reilly and Van Susteren. I have for some time been laboring under the impression that our nation has long since determined that the risk of dangerous ideas pales in comparison to the risk of allowing government to sensor what people can say, even accused criminals. I hope I am still correct.

As the voices of ignorance and intolerance become increasingly shrill, I have less and less enthusiasm for writing pages and pages of imagined refutation and find myself drawn more to whimsical musing upon odd sea creatures and introspective analysis of my own human failures. I even find myself watching Keith Olbermann less because I just can’t stand the air of indignation and hostility, even when I agree with the commentator. I am getting weary of the constant metaphysical war for America’s soul and I suspect that many Americans have beaten me to the punch by ceasing to pay any attention a long time ago. It is, nonetheless, critically important that we remain actively committed to the founding principles of this nation, even when it is inconvenient, painful or dangerous. If we compromise our principles for asses like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then he wins and we all lose.