May 04, 2006

Moussaoui--No 72 Virgins for you

There are a lot of people, particularly politicians, who are against the death penalty, but want to make exceptions for terrorists or mass murders. I believe that if you are against the death penalty, as I am, the time to defend that position most rigorously - perhaps counterintuitively - is in the moment that it is toughest to do so. That is when values and democracies are challenged the most. Not when it's easy, but when it's hard.

If you are in favor of the death penalty, I will keep trying my best to convince you otherwise, or at least to think about it. In this case, however, there are very practical reasons that life in prison rather than death makes sense.

Jihadists* like Moussaoui want to die in their battle against us so that they can be martyrs, with all that that brings in heaven, or so they believe. But being martyrs also brings power to their cause here on earth, in terms of recruiting and elevating the status of the family they leave behind.


For months, Moussaoui maintained he was not directly involved in the attacks in DC, NY and Pennsylvania on 9-11. He said he plotted other attacks. Prosecutors seemed to be having a tough time making the connection between Moussaoui and the heinous acts of 9-11. Without that tie, he would not be eligible for the death penalty.

Moussaoui told federal agents he didn't want to die in prison. Interestingly, when testifying, he changed his story from his being tangentially aware and involved (and he's backed up on this by much more testimony and interviews with Al Qaeda members) to being some sort of key player who knew all about the 9-11 attacks and kept quiet so that the attacks would go off as planned. Cold, calculating, a monster who was behind 9-11.

He then offered to testify against himself during the penalty phase; some pointed to his about-face and this request to prove he was crazy. I say, crazy like a fox: He wanted to be executed, martyred.

Without being put to death, he will be robbed of the martyrdom, the symbolic role he so desperately wants for himself.

If Moussaoui was as involved with 9-11 as he claims to be - which I doubt - he could prove far more valuable alive. Our fight against Al Qaeda and our search to put the pieces together of what went wrong on that terrible day will no doubt continue as he rots in a jail cell - a jail cell, I might add, at one of the nation's toughest prisons, with 23-hour-a-day confinement.

I for one would like to see if there is any information he can give us that is valuable. Not a sure thing, given his record so far, but 50 or 60 years is a long time, and people who are living can certainly talk more than those 6 feet under.

Average Americans, Citizen Hunters, sitting on that jury took the letter of the law and the mitigating factors very seriously and, I believe, made the right decision based on the facts of the case. Their decision also carries the fringe benefits I mention above. The jury showed the world that despite the terrorists' desire to break our will, they cannot take away our desire, not for unqualified revenge, but to be fair and hand out just punishment, and cradle some of the values that make this country great. Moussaoui said that America lost. I say America won, and big time!

So here comes the hard part, and I know I will lose some folks here, but stay with me please. We now know about all the special circumstances to this case. And we know about the sliver of doubt that always exists about the certainty of guilt of those on death row. Ex-Illinois Gov. George Ryan, a Republican, declared a moratorium on executions for this very reason. A report that examined almost 300 death penalty cases found that 33 people on Illinois' death row were represented by lawyers who had been disbarred or suspended and that nearly 50 other inmates had been convicted on the basis of testimony from jailhouse informants, often regarded as flimsy evidence.

Illinois is not the only state with a questionable execution record.

We know of many who are sitting on death row who were not fully able to grasp what they were being tried for, let alone capable of assisting in their defense. In fact, according to mental-health experts, there is a danger that the mentally retarded will admit to a crime because of their desire to please.

We know that there is no credible evidence that it deters crime. And we know it is given out inequitably.

But - and here's the hard part - even if we were 100 percent sure that every single person executed was guilty, even if Moussaoui was the so-called 20th highjacker, the death penalty would still be wrong because the only reasons for execution would be revenge and the belief that the guilty party was beyond redemption.

Personally, as a Catholic, I have been taught that seeking revenge against sinners is a paved road straight to hell. The belief that a life can be redeemed, while a part of my church's doctrine, is not exclusive to it. Indeed, all the great leaders of our time who were victims of the most heinous crimes believed that the hope for redemption lives within all of us. Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Pope John Paul II and Nelson Mandela are just a few.

One day, I hope to be a mother, and devote my life to my children. If my child and for that matter anyone in my family were killed, my first thought would most likely be that I should kill the person who did it with my own hands to avenge my loved one.

In that moment, I would be rejecting all the moral lessons I had been taught about the value of every human life. That is exactly why we don't allow victims to determine the punishment of the perpetrator.

It's also why no government should make decisions of life and death when there is an iota of doubt. Virtually all civilized nations have adopted this principle of redemption in their law, especially in Europe, which had seen the institutionalized nihilism of Nazi Germany. Amnesty International reports that worldwide, executions in 2005 fell by more than 1,500, as more and more nations decided to eliminate capital punishment.

This is not to say the U.S. should do something just because Europe and the rest of the world does. But on issues of morals, human rights and human dignity, the U.S. ought to lead the world.

It is time for people to demand that the U.S., a beacon of hope and freedom, reclaim its place as the world's leader in establishing real moral values in the way it operates. There would be no better way to set ourselves down that path than ending execution.

UPDATE: Fox News analyst reacts to the Moussaoui life sentence by calling for an elimination of Americans' right to a trial before a jury of his or her peers.

What a scary and un-American suggestion. Let a terrorist change our way of life and the freedoms and rights we hold dear? We should not undermine that which many brave men and women are fighting and dying for, democracy, here at home. I was disappointed to find out the analyst served our country in uniform. I thank him for his service, but think his comments serve none of the values I care about.

We don't need "professional" jurors - if anything this case showed that average Americans are fair and deliberate and take the nuance of the law quite seriously. Don't see how you can get more professional than that. At a few bucks a day and square meals I would say that is bargain basement prices for a valuable commodity, good old fashioned Citizen Hunters.


*I use this word since it is in the lexicon, but though I cannot speak for anyone who practices the Muslim faith. I did read the Quran as part of my religion studies in college and the word "struggle", jihad, was one I saw as the struggle within oneself to turn towards God or to defend and understand ones faith. I know that it has come to mean something violent and that many point to passages within the text to prove that that is its true meaning. As a Christian, however, I have seen many folks quote my faith's text in ways that I disagree with, to defend actions I find reprehensible, so I am somewhat skeptical, to say the least.

(Back to the beginning of this column)



Link to this page