WASHINGTON Unfortunately, the government's decision to prosecute the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in a civilian court and the prospect of an eventual traumatic trial of the mass murderer of 13 persons at Fort Hood, Tex., hold the distinct possibility of exacerbating already virulent anti-Muslim sentiment in this country.
The New York courtroom drama that is expected to play out in the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could go on for months in a tense atmosphere of enormous security and uncertain outcome given his years of military confinement and record of torture by the CIA that will test the U.S. judicial system as few cases before it. Those who know him warn that he is capable of turning the entire process into a circus.
At the same time, the eventual prosecution of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, whose own motives in the deadly Army base rampage aimed at his fellow soldiers also may be embedded in religious fanaticism, could further inflame Americans who have been wary of Muslims generally since 9/11. That feeling has been enlarged by a continuing bombardment of rhetoric from talk radio hosts on the right who have declared the Islamic religion one of violence and hate.
President Barack Obama has promised that the government will investigate fully the motives, views and contacts of Hasan. Tragically, the Fort Hood massacre, as in the case of 9/11, could have been avoided had the authorities paid attention to warning signs. Hasan had been in touch with a radical Muslim cleric in Yemen and the Army psychiatrist's own ministers had been increasingly concerned about his attitude. Army officials apparently chose to overlook his sketchy performance and possible growing instability. This reluctance to take any action may have stemmed from official concern about being accused of ethnic profiling. Whatever the case, it was a bad decision.
It would be far better for the loved ones of those he killed and wounded to bring him to a swift and certain judgment. But the very fact that he is a Muslim dictates a thorough process to determine whether there is any formal link to terrorism or if he is the worst of all possibilities - a radical who took it on his own to carry out a personal Jihad. U.S. security officials have been concerned for years that this lone terrorist syndrome would replace the more organized variety.
Mohammed and four others to be tried in civilian court are another story, of course. Mohammed has confessed, even openly relished, his leading role in the 9/11 attack, which he claimed more credit for engineering than Osama bin Laden. But his overall treatment by the CIA, including water boarding, goes against all rules governing the American system of justice. It has been outlawed by the current administration and has been a huge political bone of contention between Republican and Democrats. All this mitigates in favor of those who contend that shifting the prosecution from the military tribunals, where there is better leeway, to the civilian courts is a mistake.
