By Craig Ziemba
The Meridian Star
MERIDIAN — The jurisdiction struggle over where the trial of Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day airline bomber, should be held reveals the underlying fallacy of the Obama Administration’s efforts to try terrorists in civilian courts. This basic question of whether or not non-U.S. citizens have the Constitutional right to trial by jury, defense counsel, and due process is an important one because it directly affects our ability to defend ourselves against the Islamic jihadists who repeatedly attack our homeland.
The first sentence of the Constitution reads, “We the People of the United States, in Order to …..secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution…” Clearly, our Constitution and Bill of Rights applies to U.S. citizens only. I’m not sure where the idea originated that foreign terrorists captured on a battlefield or in the attempted act of blowing up an airliner deserve equal rights under the law as U.S. citizens. But it’s pretty easy to see where this is headed.
Rather than treating him as the Al Queda enemy combatant he was, the Obama Administration ensured that Abdulmutallab was read Miranda rights and advised to lawyer up. Now he’s in the driver’s seat deciding when and what to reveal, if anything, about his terrorist training and future plots against American citizens (the ones whom the Constitution is actually supposed to be protecting).
What did we the people gain by extending the rights of citizenry to this attempted mass murderer? Nothing. What did he gain? The right to a trial by jury in the State and District the crime was committed; defense counsel; protection from self-incrimination; due process; protection from double jeopardy; the right to subpoena witnesses; and the requirement (via the Brady Rule) for the government to provide him and his lawyer any evidence that might be exculpatory.
Why would we do this? We certainly didn’t need a confession. The hundreds of passengers he attempted to murder were witnesses. Does the Administration actually believe that elevating terrorists to the same level of U.S. citizens will make us appear so noble that Al Queda will beat their AK-47s into plowshares? Please.
The Fifth Amendment, (which again only applies to our Citizens) states that, “no one shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger…” If our own military members are exempt from Grand Jury due process and subject to military tribunals, can anyone reasonably claim that the enemy we’re fighting should be granted more rights than they?
The Obama Administration points out that our civil justice system has convicted several terrorists including Zacarias Moussaoui, the admitted 9-11 conspirator. That conviction took three and a half years and untold millions. Is that supposed to deter Al Queda? After seeing how we’re handling his minions, Bin Laden probably has a tassel-loafered lawyer on retainer to ensure that any Marine cornering him in his cave properly reads him his Miranda rights and offers his sat phone for a courtesy call.
But terrorists don’t have Constitutional rights. They’re not “we the people”. They’re nothing more than un-uniformed cowards in a death cult who routinely shield themselves with innocent civilians. We do our Constitution and our citizens a disservice by pretending they’re anything else.
Craig Ziemba is a pilot who lives in Meridian.
