Peter Krupa

I find it deeply disturbing that members of a mainstream American political movement are arguing that the 5th Amendment should be suspended when dealing with certain kinds of criminals. Says some knucklehead over at National Review’s Corner blog:

A terrorist like Abdulmutallab is not a common criminal who should be told he has the “right to remain silent.” He is an enemy combatant, who tried to commit an act of war against the United States of America. He possesses vital intelligence about the terrorist network that deployed him to attack America, and may be planning still more attacks. The Obama administration has a responsibility to make him give up that information. Treating him like a criminal is an abdication of that responsibility, and puts our nation at risk.

Noted conservative luminary Sarah Palin also stated that:

It simply makes no sense to treat an al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring hundreds of people as a common criminal. Reports indicate that Abdulmutallab stated there were many more like him in Yemen but that he stopped talking once he was read his Miranda rights. President Obama’s advisers lamely claim Abdulmutallab might be willing to agree to a plea bargain – pretty doubtful you can cut a deal with a suicide bomber.

Lest you assume these opinions are limited to the right wing’s intellectual elite, small-town newspaper publisher and Browntown City, Minnesota, Councilman Chuck Warner had this to say:

“…perhaps action should be taken to reverse the decision to charge the alleged bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, in a civilian court, rather than a military tribunal. His is an act of war against this nation. It is asinine to give these terrorists the benefits reserved for American citizens.

The time has come to remove the silk gloves and treat international terrorists for what they are.

I laughed when Bush declared war on an abstraction. Now it’s not so funny. It appears people believe we are at war, and that therefore our enemies in the War on Terror (even suspected enemies) do not have rights under the U.S. Constitution.

This is quite the slippery slope. What about the War on Drugs? Can the U.S. government suspend habeas corpus for drug traffickers, just because the executive has declared “war”? What about the soon-to-be-announced War on Irresponsible Journalism? War on Sexual Predators?

I’m being facetious, but only slightly. Spooked by a few ounces of explosives that threatened a couple hundred lives, a large segment of American society is willing – clamoring, even – to tear at our most fundamental civil rights. I take this as an early warning sign that the United States is one major terrorist event away from becoming a very ugly, very dark place.

The AP is reporting that the Nigerian underpants bomber has been indicted on charges of “trying to use a weapon of mass destruction.” (Indictment PDF) Which is really weird, because I thought he tried to set off explosives (specifically, PETN). Aren’t weapons of mass destruction chemical, biological, or nuclear in nature, and therefore capable of, you know, destroying things en masse?

But nope, there it is, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113B (TERRORISM), Section 2332a: “the term ‘weapon of mass destruction’ means… any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title.” Which is to say, basically anything that goes boom, including guns with a bore greater than a half inch (shotguns exempt).

If I were a betting man, I would bet this is a recent (dare I say “post-nine-eleven”?) change in the criminal code, designed to make terrorists appear more sinister/dashing. And indeed, the Web site I cited indicates that Section 2332a (“weapons of mass destruction”) of Title 18 was modified by Congress on January 5, 2009.

I have no idea how one would go about digging up old versions of Title 18 to find out if this is a recent definition. The take-away, though, is that now you can build a pipe bomb (or what the hell, a cannon) and go around bragging that you’re hiding WMD. (Although you might have to be a Muslim for it to count.)