Flirting With the Enemy
On 9/11, the US had an IN-YOUR-FACE encounter with a group of Jihadis who do not have our best interests at heart. After the dust settled and air travel restored, our incumbent President sought to understand the threat and identified the overwhelming challenges, and then did his best to swing the pendulum back to our side. His enemies were however, were not just those who sought to kill every American standing, but career politicians who were rooted in his opposition. What they didn’t get then, and what our current administration still doesn’t understand is Islamic terrorists are not concerned with party affiliation; yet our President continues to flirt with the enemy; giving them constitutional rights, and the protection from the laws we hold dear. If one person believes these terrorists give an ounce of credence to our constitution, please take the time to watch and learn.
Here is an excellent Video of just who we are struggling against.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!Posted: November 18th, 2009 under Obama, Religion of Peace, War on Terror.
Comments
Comment from kris
Time November 19, 2009 at 6:32 am
it doesn’t matter what the other kids do – we live by the Rule of Law.
The Executive doesn’t get to make it up as it goes along. So said SCOTUS in Boumediene v. Bush.http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1195.pdf
Comment from Gawfer
Time November 19, 2009 at 7:04 am
I’m not following you, Kris. Are you arguing that they should be tried in civilian court and afforded US Constitutional rights?
Comment from Gawfer
Time November 20, 2009 at 8:44 am
great points by Charles Krauthammer:
Really? What happens if KSM (and his co-defendants) “do not get convicted,” asked Senate Judiciary Committee member Herb Kohl. “Failure is not an option,” replied Holder. Not an option? Doesn’t the presumption of innocence, er, presume that prosecutorial failure — acquittal, hung jury — is an option? By undermining that presumption, Holder is undermining the fairness of the trial, the demonstration of which is the alleged rationale for putting on this show in the first place…
…Alternatively, Holder tried to make the case that he chose a civilian New York trial as a more likely venue for securing a conviction. An absurdity: By the time Obama came to office, KSM was ready to go before a military commission, plead guilty and be executed. It’s Obama who blocked a process that would have yielded the swiftest and most certain justice.
Comment from kris
Time November 20, 2009 at 9:16 am
My point (nod to DTO!) is that the SCOTUS case I’ve linked to above makes it clear. It’s not up for discussion. SCOTUS says we control GITMO and thus US Fed jurisdiction and rules go there too.
It’s like when I was on the blower to Jenn the other night/morning: I don’t make this shit up as a debating point – it’s the law. I don’t make the law…
But here’s another point: All of the Fed terror trials have resulted in convictions an proper sentences.
And what happened at the last military tribunals? The tribunals you long for? Didn’t Osama’s driver get a pass?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/19/AR2009111903470.html
Further, and with these half-baked military tribunals, guess what? They can appeal to the Feds. When you’re already being dealt with by the Feds, you’ve used up your life-lines.
It’s a clever move. It’s one I’ve picked up over the years. You give the other side the red carpet treatment – you want lawyers, you get lawyers. You want to know the charges against you (after 7 years!), I’ll spell them out for you. You want transparent, Rule of Law compliant and impartial judges and a jury – let me roll it out for you.
Then, when you lose – nobody has a hell of a lot to complain about because you’ve showered them with every resource and opportunity.
I wouldn’t worry Gawfer. These jackasses are going the way of the retarded Shoe Bomber, Moussaoui and the American Taliban boy.
Comment from Gawfer
Time November 20, 2009 at 9:43 am
More from Krauthammer:
“…That’s precisely what happened during the civilian New York trial of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. The prosecution was forced to turn over to the defense a list of two hundred unindicted co-conspirators, including the name Osama bin Laden. “Within ten days, a copy of that list reached bin Laden in Khartoum,” wrote former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, the presiding judge at that trial, “letting him know that his connection to that case had been discovered.”
Finally, there’s the moral logic. It’s not as if Holder opposes military commissions on principle. On the same day he sent KSM to a civilian trial in New York, Holder announced he was sending Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole, to a military tribunal.
By what logic? In his congressional testimony Wednesday, Holder was utterly incoherent in trying to explain. In his Nov. 13 news conference, he seemed to be saying that if you attack a civilian target, as in 9/11, you get a civilian trial; a military target like the Cole, and you get a military tribunal.
What a perverse moral calculus. Which is the war crime — an attack on defenseless civilians or an attack on a military target such as a warship, an accepted act of war which the U.S. itself has engaged in countless times?
By what possible moral reasoning, then, does KSM, who perpetrates the obvious and egregious war crime, receive the special protections and constitutional niceties of a civilian courtroom, while he who attacked a warship is relegated to a military tribunal?…”
SCOTUS was wrong. The issue is not human rights, but Constitutional rights that are reserved for those who live under the authority of our laws. It is stupid to assume human rights are equivelant to US Constitutional rights.
And based on the first eleven months of this administration, I am worried Kris. I am worried that common sense will be forfieted for the “rule of law” and we will relive another 9/11… or worse.
Comment from kris
Time November 22, 2009 at 4:26 am
“SCOTUS was wrong”.
So you say.
Think about the implications of the Executive defying SCOTUS. Have the mil tribunals only to be appealed to SCOTUS?
Honestly, I’ve never seen so much emotion – except from jihadi rage boys.
Either we are a nation of laws or we are not.
Comment from Gawfer
Time November 22, 2009 at 7:52 am
Kris,
I agree we are a nation of laws. I as an American live under the protection of our constitution. KSM did not and does not. He is not an American; in fact his admitted goal is to kill as many Americans as possible. He does not get to enjoy the same rights as I do.
You and I both served to defend the rights of every American; we did not however, serve to offer those same rights to our enemies.
It is an absurd notion to think we offer “equal rights” to every living soul on the planet. We do not and we should not. We are a sovereign nation unto ourselves. We offer a constitution filled with rights and freedoms for those who chose to live by our laws. Those who seek to destroy us will be destroyed.
Honestly, I don’t understand why you can’t see this difference between Americans and America’s enemies.
Oh, and thanks for comparing me to a terrorist. Your welcome is waning.
Comment from Bloviating Zeppelin
Time November 23, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Those past trials in which Kris makes reference will not be THESE trials, during THIS administration and with THIS amount of purposeful notoriety focused by the DEM/MSM. Just about any civilian defense attorney worth their salt should be able to get these trials thrown out in a civilian preemptory series of motions on just about any issue: Miranda; length of holding time; torture; sources of intelligence, etc.
That was then; this is now. And further: what if any one of these defendants are found not guilty? What then?
This is quite terrible precedent to set.
BZ
Comment from Gawfer
Time November 25, 2009 at 10:36 am
I’ve gotten caught up in the non sequitur of winning and loosing, but the issue is about making a mockery of our laws. Even Holder stated ‘loosing is not an option’ which indicates the determination of guilt has already been made. If it’s already been made, then why waste the time and force us to relive 9/11 again?
This is a comment made on another blog I read that slapped me back to reality:
No one is afraid of trying KSM for his misdeeds, but this is not a trial for what he did when he murdered 3000 of our countrymen. This is a show trial to put everything done to protect this country on trial; even the former administration. This isn’t about justice, its about taking this country down another notch to prove to the rest of the world that we are as worthless as they are.
After all, cowtowing to the enemy seems to have become the popular thing to do.
Foxx
Comment from TexasFred
Time November 18, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Wow… Just, well, WOW…