None Calls For Justice

J O E L

H I L L I K E R C O L U M N I S T

None Calls for Justice November 25, 2009 | From theTrumpet.com

The decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as an American civilian fulfills a biblical prophecy.

A

fter 9/11, when terrorists killed more Americans than the Japanese did at Pearl Harbor, the

nation was united in the belief that we were at war. Not so today. America’s war against Islamist extremists—obscurely defined by the previous administration as a “war on terror”—has since been downgraded to an “overseas contingency operation.” Terrorists are no longer enemy combatants; they are merely criminals. Behold the resulting confusion. Attorney General Eric Holder now lumps the “holy warriors” who carried out 9/11 in with run-of-the-mill murder suspects. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (the “principle architect” of that horror, according to the 9/11 Commission) and four accomplices are now to be tried in New York in a civilian court, just like American citizens who run afoul of the law. War combatants who abide by the laws of war—such as identifying themselves as soldiers and not deliberately targeting civilians—are afforded protection by the Geneva Conventions if they are captured during a war. Terrorists, by definition, purposefully break those rules—and thus do not qualify for those protections. Nevertheless, allied forces in the “war on terror” fighting these terrorists have taken extraordinary measures to conduct a principled and “just war”—so much so that they are tying their own hands and making victory practically impossible. Now, the Obama administration has taken such thinking one drastic step further. It says that Mohammed and his ilk deserve even more rights than do uniformed enemy soldiers who are playing by the rules—that, in fact, they deserve the same constitutional protections that U.S. citizens have. The implications of this decision are huge, and all detrimental to the United States. This is another shocking display of folly by the folks who decided to put CIA counterterrorism operativesback on trial for behavior they were acquitted of five years ago. Much eloquent commentary has been written explaining the inanity and self-contradiction of this judgment. Some of its significant problems include: •

Evidence accumulated against the suspects will be impossible to admit into civilian court without trampling on the established rights of criminal defendants. These suspects were captured overseas

•

by military personnel unfamiliar with the rules of criminal law (such as Miranda rights), and have been in military custody, presumably under a different set of rules, for seven years. The process of discovery, uniquely rigorous in civilian trials, is certain to unearth mountains of government intelligence, the secrecy of which would then be compromised. Terrorists could learn, for example, how certain information was obtained, nullifying the effectiveness of covert counterterrorism operations. The precedent of terrorists receiving robust constitutional protections destroys the incentive for soldiers to behave according to the laws of war in the heat of battle, since that would only secure them the lesser protections of the Geneva Conventions. While putting Mohammed in New York (since the attack was on American soil), Mr. Holder

•

simultaneously relegated the terrorist who bombed the USS Cole to a military tribunal (since the attack was in Yemen). The message to terrorists: If you want more legal rights, attack American citizens rather than soldiers. Such a high-profile trial in the world’s media capital is guaranteed to become a jihadist propaganda

•

circus. The defendants plan to use the trial as a forum to explain “what happened and why they did it,” in the words of one of their lawyers, Scott Fenstermaker (watch this interview to see what kind of lawyer commits himself to defending such villains). They are sure to trumpet to the world all the evils of America’s foreign policy and of their treatment at America’s hands. The attorney general handed them the platform. Defenders of the decision say it is meant to strengthen America’s image abroad. In truth, whatever

•

•

the outcome, it is certain to batter that image. Why? Both the president and the attorney general have said the suspects are certain to be convicted, throwing out even “a pretense of respect for due process,” as the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto put it. Thus, a conviction will open the administration up to accusations “that the defendants were subjected to sham justice.” And if, as is entirely possible, they are acquitted over some legal technicality, what will the government do? Release these terrorists back into the public? If not, that too would invite fresh hatred and vitriol from America’s enemies. Despite Mr. Holder’s assurances of achieving “justice,” this trial is about to enter an oppressive thicket of legal challenges as the government tries to prove the defendants’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt while simultaneously guaranteeing them constitutional rights (and that retroactively, for several years, while they were military captives). While it is impossible to find a sound legal reason for the Obama administration’s decision to stop Mohammed’s military tribunal (which had already begun) in order to shift venues, it is easy to see its probable politicalmotives for doing so. Like the CIA trials, this will open Bush-era officials to intense scrutiny and possible legal action both domestically and abroad. The implications are chilling: It appears this administration is prioritizing the scoring of political points above both the nation’s war-making capabilities and its people’s safety. It is difficult to understand this decision any other way. The Prophet Isaiah, who recorded his prophecies specifically for our day, foretold perfectly the legal mess we would find ourselves in, of which this trial is just a single spectacular example. “None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth,” he wrote; “they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity” (Isaiah 59:4). Even thinking of a team of American lawyers putting their considerable intellectual talents toward seeking every possible legal advantage for these murderous terrorists, doing all they can to secure an acquittal, makes the heart sick and the blood boil.

“The way of peace they know not,” Isaiah continued; “and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace. Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness” (verses 8-9). While those behind this decision stump for peace, their actions invite ruin. Their sense of justice is twisted. Their judgment is absent. They simply have no idea of the way of peace. But that way exists. And just as Isaiah foretold of the widespread ignorance of that way during this end time—and of the disasters that would result—he also prophesied of a time just ahead of us, when justice will prevail and that way of peace will be followed worldwide. Read Isaiah 32:16-18, and request a free copy of our booklet Isaiah’s End-Time Vision to learn how the wonderful, utopian conditions that this prophet so eloquently described will come about. • Joel Hilliker’s column appears every Wednesday. To e-mail Joel Hilliker, click here. Please note that, unless you request otherwise, your comment may appear on our feedback page. To read more articles by this author, click here.

This content was printed online at: http://www.theTrumpet.com/index.php?q=6746.5269.0.0 Copyright © 2009 Philadelphia Church of God, All Rights Reserved.