A Mock Trial for a Mock President


A non-citizen, non-resident commits an act of war by hijacking and slamming a pair of airliners into American buildings and our President decides that rather than an act of war, which it was declared as being by the perpetrators, it was a criminal act.

This. Is. Absurd.

These terrorists are getting high end, hard-left attorneys whose jobs are to get this case thrown out and this man set free. Given the nature of the attack and the response to it, the ongoing war, etc., you face a variety of challenges in trying to actually prosecute this man according to US law: chain of custody on the evidence, proper venue, bringing national security secrets into the open – and all for a man who has no legal right whatsoever for this kind of trial?

Not to mention the media! Oh, the media will have a field day with this. Expect this to be the top story every night and the top headline every morning, as they give this raving lunatic a national platform to spew his hate and his disgusting rhetoric all over the ears and eyes of any American foolish enough to turn on the TV. This goes beyond the realm of irresponsibility and into the territory of either insanity or outright contempt for justice and the nation. Obama has thoroughly mishandled this and discredited himself even on this most basic, black-and-white issue and proven that when it comes down to it, he’d rather give a mass murderer the chance to walk free and do it all over again than let people actually say that this was Islamic terror. He is enabling murder in the name of political correctness, and getting away with it.

The madness has to end somewhere. In the meantime, I’ll be writing my left-wing nutjob of a representative, because I know that my Senators won’t hesitate to call this the insanity that it is. (EDIT: a quick Google search revealed that they already have spoken against it. Thanks, guys.)

Rudy Giuliani lets loose, it’s a rather long clip but it’s worth watching:

“First they use our planes against us, now they’re going to use our criminal justice system against us.”

He notes that this might be a way to get Bush put on trial by proxy here, and this could be a win/win for Obama. If so, this is only that much more revolting.

Further links on the insanity:

Historian Fabio Paolo Barbieri on why politicians act this way.

John C Wright on the utter folly of this disgrace.

And last but not least, the inimitable Sarah Palin.

Best President Ever

I mean, in October, al Qaeda was “resurgent, stronger now than at any time since 2001.” But after only two weeks in office, it now comes out that al Qaeda is “decimated” to the point “that it is now possible to foresee a “complete al-Qaida defeat.” Man, he is so good. Why didn’t we just let him take over back in November?

Wait, the reason that al Qaeda is in disarray is due to air strikes over the past six months plus? Well, that doesn’t matter either. See, Obama’s secretly been President for months, you just didn’t know it yet.

A couple days ago the AFP reported, “US President Barack Obama has already used experts within the last few months to hold high-level but discreet talks with both Iran and Syria, organizers of the meetings told AFP.” That’s funny, because in December he was very insistent to point out that he wasn’t President yet, and there was only one President at a time…

“I will continue to insist that, when it comes to foreign affairs, it is particularly important to emphasize that there is one president at a time,” Obama said Monday. “There are delicate negotiations taking place right now and we can’t have two voices coming out of the United States when you have so much at stake.”

Man, it’s a good thing he’s soooo awesome or else this might be a little alarming, don’t you think?

(h/t: Patterico)

Weekend update and link round-up

Sorry about the lack of posting the last couple of days – I’ve been busy and somewhat out of sorts. On the other hand, my birthday’s coming up this week so I’ll be at least having a little bit of fun for that. So because I’m feeling totally out of the posting loop, here are a few things to check out from around the web in lieu of my usual posting spree:

Have a good weekend, all.

Change we can believe in

Here we go, now this is some pleasantly surprising change for you guys. Via Lawdog, it seems that the local Muslim graveyards are refusing the bodies of the Mumbai terrorists. A spokesman for the Trust running the graveyards said of the terrorists, “People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim. Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime.” The Australian also reports that the Indian Muslim Council has said they should not be buried anywhere on Indian soil.

This is exactly the kind of thing the world has been looking for from Islamic authorities in reaction to these events. While a lot of people may see this as an extreme response there are two things to consider here: first off, the Muslim traditions surrounding burial are much more elaborate than most western traditions. In addition to the importance of the ritual method of preparing the body for burial, and the manner in which they are buried, Muslims believe that the deceased is questioned by angels at their burial about their life and their faith in Allah, which is why their family will stand and pray for them to answer correctly. To be denied this sort of end is a grave insult (no pun intended) and if this becomes a more commonplace threat to potential terrorists, it may give them pause.

Second, they are denying that the attacks are even the actions of faithful Muslims. This is a big one for the rest of the world. We need more of this. People hear from news outlets and blogs and other third parties that it is a minority of Muslims who believe in the jihad, who would participate in these sort of atrocities. And while most people agree that it is true that it is a minority executing these attacks, the fact that we have a huge number of these attacks being committed all over the world with little to no outcry from prominent Muslim leaders tells a story that most Muslims don’t want told: that Islam is a religion that condones, if not supports, this sort of terror. The silence is deafening. As Edward Burke was famously quoted, “all that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.” When these leaders speak up against terrorist actions in the name of Islam, it gives credibility to the idea that the jihad is a war being waged by a few extremists, which in turn gives credibility back to the religion and followers of Islam as a whole. When these leaders speak up, they are fighting these terrorists on a different platform than we ever can, and we need to give our support to those who do, because the other side will not tolerate it.

Dodging lions

Prester Scott brings up an interesting point in the light of the Mumbai attacks about the nonsense being propagated by the TSA et al:

Buying insurance against very specific, very rare, but catastrophic threats is not necessarily a bad idea in itself, but when it costs a lot of money and time and effort that could be better spent elsewhere, it becomes a bad idea. No one wants to be attacked by a lion. I might be able to convince you to buy some lion repellent. But (unless you’re an individual who walks around in the veldt in sub-saharan Africa every day) you’d have to be pretty dumb to spend a large portion of your income on it.

He has a point. It seems much more likely that we’d end up dealing with a Mumbai or Beslan-style attack than that someone might sneak onto an airplane with a ziploc full of anthrax – but which have you heard about more? And where do the funds go?