Kudos to Cohen for being able to write this through his fearful tears.

We lose when we erode the rule of law.

Bruce Schneirer:

Despite fearful rhetoric to the contrary, terrorism is not a transcendent threat. A terrorist attack cannot possibly destroy a country’s way of life; it’s only our reaction to that attack that can do that kind of damage. The more we undermine our own laws, the more we convert our buildings into fortresses, the more we reduce the freedoms and liberties at the foundation of our societies, the more we’re doing the terrorists’ job for them.

We are a nation of chickens, not laws.

David Foster Wallace, in November 2007:

“In still other words, what if we chose to accept the fact that every few years, despite all reasonable precautions, some hundreds or thousands of us may die in the sort of ghastly terrorist attack that a democratic republic cannot 100-percent protect itself from without subverting the very principles that make it worth protecting?”

Glenn Greenwald nails him:

All over the world, countries have put terrorists on trial in their largest and most important cities — London, Madrid, Mumbai, Denpasar (the capital of Bali). That’s because their countries weren’t flooded by meek, frightened little men like John Bolton who want to send their fellow citizens to bomb and invade as many countries as they can find in order to conceal and compensate for the suffocating cowardice revealed by both his life and these comments. It’s a natural human instinct to try to prove to the world that one possesses exactly those characteristics which one most lacks — which is why right-wing warriors of the type represented by John Bolton are so desperate to prove their Churchillian courage and resolve, always from the safest and most risk-free distances.

“This is a bad precedent that risks self-proclaimed terrorists making a mockery of the constitutional rights they will be given.”

How could we live with ourselves if Khalid Sheik Mohammed were to mock our constitutional rights?

Daniel Strauss explains:

Here, I’ll make Kirk’s life easier and predict the result of the study right now: The. Prisoners. Who. Will. Be. Locked. In. A. Maximum. Security. Prison. Will. Not. Endanger. Any. Tall. Buildings. Or. Airports. Anywhere.

The Association of Right-Wing Bedwetters Presents: 5 Extremely Compelling Reasons Not to Hold Terror Trials in New York City.

Bruce Schneier, back in 2006:

The surest defense against terrorism is to refuse to be terrorized. Our job is to recognize that terrorism is just one of the risks we face, and not a particularly common one at that. And our job is to fight those politicians who use fear as an excuse to take away our liberties and promote security theater that wastes money and doesn’t make us any safer.

Charles Krauthammer:

Apart from the fact that any such trial will be a security nightmare and a terror threat to New York — what better propaganda-by-deed than blowing up the courtroom, making KSM a martyr and turning the judge, jury and spectators into fresh victims? — it will endanger U.S. security.

Arizona Senator Jon Kyl:

“It’s an unnecessary risk to bring the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9-11 attacks to downtown Manhattan.”

Bill O’Reilly:

“I don’t care about the Constitution!”

At least he’s honest.

“It’s very painful,” he added. “We’re still having trouble getting over it. We still have been unable to rebuild that site, and having those terrorists tried so close to the attack is going to be an encumbrance on all New Yorkers.”

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
—Benjamin Franklin, 1755