Justice in the Age of Terrorism

I have been trying for the last few days to write a piece about justice in the wake of the Ahmed Ghailani trial.  Ghailani went from being a suspected terrorist to a convicted felon last week.  He has yet to be sentenced, but he faces many years to life in a supermax prison.  Yet, he got off on the more serious murder and terrorism charges and, for many, this single count conviction was not good enough.  They are calling for terror suspects to be held indefinitely or to face military tribunals instead of federal prosecution.  I wanted to write about the need to support justice even in the worst of times, but doing so is proving more difficult than I thought.

Congressman Peter King, the incoming chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, was “disgusted at the total miscarriage of justice” and said the trial is evidence of the “absolute insanity of the Obama Administration’s decision to try al-Qaeda terrorists in civilian courts.”

On the Senate floor, Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) said the president should offer assurances that “terrorists will be tried from now on in the military commission system that was established for this very purpose at the secure facility at Guantanamo Bay, or detained indefinitely, if they cannot be tried without jeopardizing national security.”

Congressman King is known for saying outrageous things and his comments above are over the top.  It is hard to reconcile “a total miscarriage of justice” with the fact the government secured a conviction and it is likely Ghailani will never again be a free man.

Senator McConnell, on the other hand, makes a compelling point when he says the combatants held at Guantánamo Bay should be “detained indefinitely, if they cannot be tried without jeopardizing national security.”  These guys aren’t suspected bank robbers.  If they are the demons we suspect them to be; they are out to destroy our country, way of life, concept of freedom, and each and every person who stands in their way as well as innocents who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Most of the people being held at Guantánamo are immoral pieces of trash.  I cannot think about them without being reminded of the horrors of 9/11, the loss of life and the sacrifices made by our brave troops in the years since.  However, the weapons of those out to destroy us include anything that causes us to put limits on freedom.  Preserving justice in the face of evil is the safeguard of liberty.  Locking the degenerates up in Cuba and throwing away the key may keep them from doing further harm, but by denying Lady Justice a role in this, are we shortchanging the American promise of fairness?

The government came very close to losing the Ghailani case.  The Judge excluded a key witness who admitted selling explosives to Ghailani.  This explains, in part, why the jury was unable to pronounce Ghailani guilty of the murder and other charges.  I will leave it to the legal experts to delve into the Judge’s decision and determine if and why he was wrong.  But, this decision by a single judge in a single case should not alone justify throwing our justice system out the window.  Logic tells me we should endeavor to make sure the system allows for evidence and witnesses to be presented fairly in every trial.  In other words, let’s fix what is broken before we give up on justice.

Then, I allow myself to recall that bright September day in 2001 when monsters appeared out of a bright blue sky and the 1998 attacks on US embassies in which Ghailani took part.  I remember the gripping account of Petty Officer Marcus Luttrell in his book Lone Survivor about the heroes of Operation Redwing.  As a Navy Seal, Luttrell knows what it is to be given an impossible task and summoning the courage to do what needs to be done.  He talked about war being a series of unthinkable, but sometimes unavoidable acts.  His words stick with me.

I do not like the idea of U.S. armed forces scooping people up from distant corners of the world and hauling them to undisclosed locations where they are quite likely tortured.  I believe we should allow our system of justice to work so that we may set a shining example of how a free people are the strongest people.  Until, I am reminded black and white often fade to grey.

I tried mightily to mount my high horse and rail against Peter King and the others.  In the end, I still think he is wrong to imply justice has no role when it comes to enemy combatants.  When I consider our enemies have no limits to what they would do to harm us, it is hard for this imperfect person to put all of my faith in Lady Justice when I know she, too, has her shortcomings.  Even with the conviction, the Ghailani trial showed these shortcomings.

I am not ready to join Congressman King and Senator McConnell’s call to sideline justice in times of war, but I am willing to admit we face some very difficult choices ahead.  I have put my high horse away, but I will do my best to remember that liberty and justice lie squarely in our hands even (perhaps, especially) when we are pondering the fates of the wicked.

###

(Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com)

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

All Politics Aside, Gen. McChrystal had to Go

Today, President Obama sacked Gen. Stanley McChrystal. The President said McChrystal’s comments in this week’s Rolling Stone magazine, “do not meet standards that are needed and expected, or adhere to military code of conduct for comments.” President Obama had little choice in the matter. The Rolling Stone article revealed McChrystal and his team hold a shocking arrogance and contempt for the chain of command. Leaving them in position during this critical time in the war would have been nothing short of irresponsible. They had to go in order to preserve the integrity of the US mission and the order and discipline of the best trained military force the world has ever known.

General McChrystal and his subordinates appear both reckless and foolish in the Rolling Stone piece. Whether it was arrogance or bravado that compelled them to say such things to the reporter may never be known. It didn’t matter to the President and shouldn’t for the rest of us, either. Those guys were a team out of control and leaving them in place was not an option when so many lives hang in the balance.

In the hours after the Rolling Stone story broke, I watched some conservatives and others opposed to President Obama rush to “like” General McChrystal on Facebook and to jeer how great it was to see somebody stand up to Obama’s Chicago-style politics (whatever that means). I fear in this day of “your guy sucks” political banter we are at risk of losing sight of what being an American means.

President Barack Obama Nominates General David Patraeus as the top commander in Afghanistan. Photo courtesy of Doug Mills/The New York Times

General McChrystal is a decorated and proven military leader. While it is not his role to blindly follow the will of elected political leaders, his scorn for the chain of command cannot be tolerated either. It is important to point out that there was no apparent disagreement over military policy revealed in Rolling Stone. What the article did reveal was a complete lack of respect by McChrystal and company for nearly every other member of the US team assembled to guide us through this war.

Freedom of speech is one of our most precious American rights. But, it comes with a responsibility to show respect for those with whom we disagree but who share our common goal to preserve and protect this nation. We should never lose sight of what makes us the same and what makes this country great. The article shows General McChrystal did for a moment and he has paid a price for it. There is a lesson in this for all of us. At some point, name calling becomes more than political posturing and begins to hinder our collective ability to move forward. I join the President in thanking the General for his service and showing gratitude for what he has contributed. They both made the right decision today. Let’s hope the rest of us remember our patriotic responsibility as well.

In a closing note, as a PR guy, I cannot help but address the obvious gaffe made by General McChrystal and his officers. They become about the 2 millionth people to learn the hard way that the journalist you invite to shadow you is there to report on you, not be impressed by you or be a laugh track for your jokes. Just like you, he has a job to do. Whatever you say and do is newsworthy, especially when you are in charge of a war. What your mother used to tell you still applies, think before you speak.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

If Bush had done that…

Some supporters of former President George W. Bush, conservatives and others like to ask rhetorical questions that begin with the phrase, “Can you imagine the outcry if Bush would have…,” or something similar in an attempt to show President Barack Obama is getting an easier ride with the media. These anguished cries remind me of those made by a comic strip teenager who thinks his younger brother gets softer treatment than he did.

Before you fire off that angry email to me, let me explain.

President Bush did get a lot of criticism – some of it he earned, some of it he did not. It is now President Obama’s turn to travel down this presidential road of unequal criticism. However, the circumstances surrounding these two presidents are different, making the “what if” comparison difficult, if not impossible to apply with any accuracy.

Nine months into his presidency, President Bush was leading a nation that had suffered gruesome terrorist attacks. Eight years and three weeks ago today, American men and women were sent to war in Afghanistan. We were rallying and a patriotic fever spread across the nation. President Bush was boldly leading and Americans stood firmly behind him. There was no time for partisanship. We had to stand together and face this unknown and evil threat. Bush’s popularity surged.

President Bush faced obstacles his predecessors could have never imagined. It would have been foolhardy to try to equate his first nine months in office to those of President Bill Clinton. Our country had never been through anything like this before. Clearly, the same can be said for President Obama. He took office during an economic crisis unlike any our country had seen and we are waging a war on two fronts. It is not feasible to develop a scorecard that could determine which president faced the more daunting tasks. More important, there is no point in trying to do so.

As President Bush’s first term continued, he made decisions that some would laud and others would decry. His political opponents tried to vilify and belittle him. He won reelection and he made some mistakes. His detractors became louder as his once skyrocketing poll numbers became a distant memory. Americans appraised President Bush for how he led and few were those who tried to compare Presidents Bush and Clinton. They are their own men and they were different leaders in dissimilar times.

Those in the media have a job to do and most of them are committed to trying to seek the truth and report it. As the circumstances, personalities and world events faced by Presidents Bush and Obama are disparate, so too are today’s media and that of the Bush era. As the news industry enters a new age, news rooms that were once crowded seem empty. Many newspapers have disappeared as consumers adapt to a still evolving array of electronic mediums. Perhaps, President Obama has been received by some reporters better than was President Bush. I do not know, nor do I care. For I, like most Americans, see it as my duty to seek out the truth and wade through the ever present biases on my own.

President Obama has an agenda and a leadership style that is starkly different from President Bush. Only time will tell what Mr. Obama is able to accomplish with his presidential opportunity. The American people will likely shake off the cries of “what if” and appraise Mr. Obama on how he does the job. Just like the comic strip teenager, the sooner we focus on what is the best way forward and cease worrying about who “momma likes best,” the sooner we can begin to make headway as a country.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

The State of the Nation

The other day a friend asked me to give him my impression “of the state of the nation, President and overall feelings of where we are headed.”

OK, let’s start with the state of the nation. The U.S. faces obstacles that could not have been imagined a decade ago. That being said, I have great confidence in our capacity as a people to prevail. Our hope and our very successes lie in our ability to debate openly, to disagree when we must and, most important, to unify as a country to move forward.

It has been nearly eight years since 9/11. These acts of terrorism brought us real war on two fronts, incalculable economic costs and effects, and forever altered our relations in the world community. The pullback of troops in Iraq has begun, but as this week’s increased violence there demonstrates, this country will be a source of concern and will cost us dearly for many years to come. Afghanistan is increasingly violent and appears as far away from a peaceful resolution as it ever was. The Taliban’s capture and unlawful holding of an American serviceman there is evidence that the Taliban threat is real and alive.

The events of 2001 changed the course of our country. I am not interested in a political parlor game of whether the Bush Administration made matters better or worse by the actions they took and/or how they lead. In looking to the future, pointing fingers at the players of the past or comparing them to the current players is not productive. The fact is the economy was in a nosedive and the US faced an unprecedented international crisis when the new President took the Oath of Office on January 20. I am sure we agree it would have been unreasonable to expect any of these problems (war, terrorism, or the economy) were going to be dispensed of within six months time.

President Reagan took office during dark economic times. Depending on how you measure such factors, the country hit an economic low point a full year after Reagan became President. Fans of the “Gipper” will tell you it took time for Reaganomics to have an effect. The timing of his lowest public approval numbers were impacted for a period by the economy and situation he inherited. He needed time to lead and Americans needed time to evaluate his performance. Six months or a year are only a snapshot of a presidency.

But, that serves as an excellent segue to providing my opinion of where we are headed. I believe we are headed toward brighter days. However, I think the country will emerge remarkably different economically. Further, I think the United States’ place and influence in the world will be altered in ways good and bad as well.

The financial bailouts provided to corporations have placed the federal government in the position of what I would have once described as hyper-involvement in the marketplace. Few of us could have imagined the collapse of a giant international entity like AIG, the potential crash of a once thriving U.S. banking industry, and an economic slowdown of the magnitude we were facing in 2008. Fewer still could have calculated that all this would have occurred while we were pouring billions (dare I say, trillions) into a far flung military offensive.

If the majority of bailout dollars are repaid to the government (we will never recoup all of it) and if that recovered money is not re-spent (which is government’s usual inclination), we may come out of the bailout mess ahead of the game. If this money remains unpaid, or is repaid and spent on other government programs, the bailout will serve to drive up our national debt over the long term and we will find ourselves in a deeper hole than when we began. Members of Congress and the Administration need to continue to redefine, monitor and work with those corporations who received bailout funds to ensure the money is repaid.

Did the bailouts work? We may never know. Wells Fargo Bank, in example, received $25 billion in bailout money and reported a $3 billion profit last quarter, up some 80% from a year ago and nearly 30% from last quarter. I am not sure how we taxpayers calculate our payback on our “loan” to Wells Fargo, but few of us ever see a profit increase like that in tough times. Either the taxpayers won a huge gamble, or we got snookered by a company who just made a huge gain based on our largess. Maybe the jobs at the new GM will be worth it, but I doubt many of the former GM investors and car dealers feel too ‘stimulated’ today. Only time will tell.

The political maneuvering on healthcare has reached a fever pitch. Most of what is left is posturing and gamesmanship that has less to do with fixing a problem(s) than it does with scoring political points against the other team. Truthfully, I do not think we have even come to an agreement as to what the problem is. As a small business owner who pays 100% of his health insurance premium, I can tell you the current system is too costly and is stifling economic growth. Let me buy into a bigger pool and put some controls on skyrocketing costs and you make a difference for me. I would like to see the GOP and the Dems dial back the rhetoric and start over. First, let’s agree on what we are trying to fix and then let’s work on a solution. This talk of “breaking” the other guy or “winning this fight” is harming all of us, because all it produces is hot air.

This leads to my assessment of the President. As stated earlier, President Obama has been in office for six months, a little more than 10% of his term. He has delivered on some things and has yet to deliver on others. On those where he has yet to act, I am willing to give him time. If he fails to keep his word; I, like most voters, will judge him for it. But, that comes later. For now, Americans are well served to vigorously debate how to move forward and stop trying to label the President and/or those with whom he disagrees just for the sake of winning the next election.

Arguably, the challenges our country confronts are unlike any new president has ever faced (some have tackled worse, like Lincoln and a nation headed toward Civil War; others, like Eisenhower, came to power during peace and a bright economic picture). The President has been accessible to the public – he holds his fifth news conference today. And, he has been forthright about his agenda (whether you agree with him or not). He has also, however, chosen to withhold action on some items in an effort to prioritize a full agenda. I am partly and, in a few cases, significantly disappointed in this prioritization. But, as a leader, the President has the right and responsibility to do much of this on his terms.

In example, like many Americans I supported President George W. Bush’s decision to enter into war with Iraq. I trusted and had faith that we needed to face the evil that had wrought terror and posed an imminent threat to our country. I had a responsibility as an American to learn what I could about this threat and to form an opinion about what my country should do. I did not support President Bush’s decision because the 2004 election loomed. I did so because I believed he was leading us well and making informed decisions. Time may or may not prove that this war was a good decision and my opinion in 2009 as I write this is not pertinent to an answer about this President. As we look to the obstacles that stand in our way, we must learn from the past and demand that our leaders provide us with the facts and make decisions in the open. In many ways, the Obama Administration is doing well on this front. In others, they have made unfortunate and harmful decisions to continue business as usual.

The United States faces limitless opportunity and daunting impediments to reaching the shining city on a hill that has been envisioned in varying forms since John Winthrop spoke of it to his Puritan followers not long before their arrival in New England in 1630. Ronald Reagan evoked these words to describe his vision for America in the 1980’s and today you and I may see yet another gleaming city for which we should strive. But, now as in times past, Americans must do what we have always done. We must find a way to get past partisan, selfish and petty goals to ensure the country as a whole survives and thrives.

President Obama has some 40 months to go before he stands for election. We must give him time to do the job he was elected to do. We must give those elected officials who oppose this policy or that the opportunity to debate and swing public opinion to their point of view. However, if we allow our American political process to resemble a sporting match where we each select a team and victory is only achieved when one party scores the most points, America will have lost.

I believe President Obama is a person of great integrity who is interested in serving his country. I may disagree with him on some issues, but in these few short months of his term, I have never seen anything to make me question his ability to lead his countrymen in the direction of that shining city on the hill.