LOS ANGELES, April 22, 2013 — In a decision that may very well have far reaching consequences, Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhav Tsarnaev is charged with using an IED to destroy lives and property, a federal crime that carries a potential death sentence.
The affidavit outlines why the FBI believes it has the right man. Tzarnaev will be tried in a civilian court of law. He will not be subjected to a military tribunal.
ACLU liberals will hail the decision, while many other Americans are already shaking their heads (and their clenched fists) in disbelief believing, instead, that the 19-year-old should be tried as a terrorist and by miltary tribunal.
President Obama declared the April 15th bombings to be acts of terror. If Tsarnaev lived overseas, Obama would have had zero problems employing predator drones as he has with al Qaeda.
Since droning an American citizen on American soil is not an option, Obama was cornered the minute Tsarnaev was captured alive. Political considerations came into play as his ideology met in a head on collision with the reality of the world we live in now.
As is the case far too many times with Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, ideology won. The rest of us lost.
Civil libertarians will insist that Tsarnaev is the exact reason the Constitution and its Bill of Rights exists. The libertarians could not be more wrong. Constitutional exemptions exist, and Tsarnaev is the exact type of person that these exceptions were made for.
Tsarnaev took up arms against America and that makes him an enemy combatant. He was influenced, even if via his older brother, by radical Islam. The degree of this influence is being debated, but to deny any influence is to deny reality.
Enemy combatants are not entitled to constitutional protections.
Radical Islamists are not entitled to civilian trials in American courts paid for by American taxpayers.
After initially deciding to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in this manner, Obama bowed to political outrage and reversed gears. The very concerns about a trial of KSM apply to Tsarnaev.
What if Tsarnaev is acquitted?
Liberals will scoff that the evidence is overwhelming, but declaring a conviction a foregone conclusion is sheer folly. What if this young man who has been described by friends as likable is able to charm one juror?
How does one even obtain a jury? What if Muslims are rejected from serving on the jury for fear of one of them being sympathetic to Tsarnaev? Would this be bigotry? Could those jurors sue prosecutors for using peremptory challenges? What if one of those jurors actually is sympathetic?
Where is the trial held? It cannot be in Boston. Tsarnaev could not get a fair trial there. What city would want this trial? It would be a media circus, and no town would want the disruption. Would cameras be allowed in the courtroom? If so, forget a speedy trial.
Tsarnaev would have a public forum to air his grievances if he chose to do so.
What if prosecutors make a mistake? What if prosecution witnesses die before the trial from injuries sustained in the bombings? What if a liberal judge dismisses the case on a technicality?
Every trial is a roll of the dice.
Liberals will claim that the prosecution of the 1993 Times Square bombers proves that the law enforcement approach with terrorists can work. This is false. While in prison, the terrorists had access to all the tools necessary to help plot 9/11.
A public trial of Tsarnaev is going to turn him into a hero of radical Islamists across the globe. Killing terrorists does not create more of them. Prosecuting them for the world to see does. The idea that a civilian trial will show how open-minded and tolerant we are is the least successful train of thought in the entire leftist approach to terrorism issues.
The terrorists will not be be impressed. They will rightly see America’s kindness as weakness.
Those who truly care about the Constitution should remember the key provisions about the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” All three of those rights were violated when Americans going for a jog on a pleasant afternoon were blown to Kingdom Come.
The Boston Marathon bombings were an act of war. Our government is not acting honorably by treating Tsarnaev as a common criminal. The highest responsibility of President Obama is his role as Commander-in-Chief, protector of the homeland.
Between the Fort Hood “workplace violence” incident and the Boston Marathon bombing, protection attempts have failed.
A leader obsessed with an ideology that portrays weakness and invites more aggression has guaranteed that there will be more terrorist attacks against America.
The best way to prevent this scenario is to remember that America is locked in a Global War on Terror against radical Islamists. Homegrown terrorists are still terrorists, and the rules of war must apply to them.
It is still not too late for a repeat of the public backlash that followed the KSM decision. Americans want peace and quiet. That starts with a quiet military tribunal for Dzhokhov far away from cameras, ACLU lawyers, voyeurs, and others putting ideology and spectacle above justice and saving lives.
Or we may, again, find Americans paying the ultimate price.
Brooklyn born, Long Island raised, and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian. Eric is the author of the book trilogy “Ideological Bigotry, “Ideological Violence,” and “Ideological Idiocy.”
Eric is 100% alcohol, tobacco, drug, and liberalism free. Follow Eric on Twitter @TYGRRRREXPRESS.