Charles Krauthammer, as always, is one of the best writers and best thinkers of our time and this piece proves it yet again (as if we needed more proof?)

On Zacarias Moussaoui and the death penalty he avoided:

Does Zacarias Moussaoui meet that kind of high standard? I think not. Had I been on the jury, I, too, would have voted for life in the Colorado Supermax. But not for the reasons most of the jury cited.

In the Moussaoui case, there were three plausible grounds for mitigation: insignificance, lunacy or deprivation. Insignificance would have been my choice. Moussaoui was hardly even a cog. If he had any role in Sept. 11, which is doubtful, it was extremely peripheral. He was a foot soldier in an army of evil, but he never got a chance to practice his craft. That warrants life, not hanging.

Krauthammer makes note that this has nothing to do with the idiotic claim that he had a tough family life, and he doesn’t mention martyrdom, but his point about Zacarias not deserving the death penalty is well-taken.

Frankly, I’m not even 100% convinced that he actually was connected in any real way to the events of that day, but that’s a whole other story.

Technorati Tags: krauthammer, moussaoui