I saw this question posted on a forum. I’m sorry that I can’t remember which one so that I can give credit to the person that asked it.
“If Obama were a Manchurian candidate or Muslim sleeper agent, and his mission were to demoralize and destroy America and deliver us into the hands of our enemies, and to do this as quickly but as smoothly as possible, WHAT WOULD HE BE DOING ANY DIFFERENT?”
It’s funny how Barack Obama (D-Kenya) denounces America’s humane interrogation techniques as “illegal torture” and yet he laughs it up with his new pals Chavez, Noriega, and Castro who all have long records of very real and brutal torture.
WITH the ugly sanctimony of those who never had to make hard decisions, the American left demands show trials of those who kept us safe after 9/11. Wrapping themselves in repugnant self-righteousness, the MoveOn.org set wants political prosecutions. Should President Obama acquiesce, he won’t be furthering the rule of law, but dismantling it.
Show trials have long been popular with leftists. Those who don’t conform to each jot of doctrine become “enemies of the people.” From Stalin down to Putin, and from Mao to Castro, vengeance disguised as law has been a mega-hit.
Those on the left don’t want justice. If they did, they’d be protesting the murderous torture prevalent in Iran, the Gaza Strip, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela and Russia. Instead, our leftists want us to show the leaders of those terror states more respect.
The left is out for revenge. It always is. Hatred of those who think differently is the left’s unifying principle. Leftists don’t need God, but they see devils everywhere.
When President-for-Life Hugo Chavez called President George W. Bush “el Diablo,” our leftists agreed. Hatred of the last administration grew so irrational that any terrorist, no matter how monstrous, became no more than a victim of Bush-Cheney.
Now the left wants an Inquisition for heretics who failed to share its worldview. Men and women who, in their capacity as public servants, wrestled with difficult legal issues in the course of our battle with terrorists are now to be tried and shamed because the left disagreed with their legal opinions and actions. No matter that most Americans wouldn’t view the methods of our interrogators as torture when applied to hardened terrorists (despite the media’s ceaseless effort to convince us otherwise). No matter that foreign leaders championed by the left use vastly more brutal techniques.
No matter that interrogators differ on the utility of “harsh” methods or that the information gleaned indisputably saved American lives. No matter that our system of government functioned as it was designed to.
The left just didn’t like the results the system produced. Law has nothing to do with this cry for vengeance. This is purely about political differences. During the Bush administration, leftists warned repeatedly that actions they didn’t like put our country on a “slippery slope.” Well, once we initiate show trials of government officials who did their best to protect us, we’ll have skipped the slippery slope and leapt to the bottom.
If Obama agrees to any form of show trial, he and his own team will live to regret it. His party won’t always be in power, and he’ll have set a hideous, un-American precedent.
If the Obama administration fails to keep us safe and our citizens are attacked at home or abroad, shall we then prosecute those who dismantled our safeguards and gutted our intelligence effort?
As countless leftists learned in the course of the 20th century, today’s witness for the prosecution is tomorrow’s enemy of the people.
The rule of law is paramount. When we pervert the law for political ends, we attack our deepest foundations. Where would such show trials stop? Will we try Supreme Court justices for issuing legal opinions with which a future administration disagrees?
There are plenty of genuine crimes worth prosecuting in Washington, DC. Corruption abounds. Not a few members of Congress — from both parties — should be in jail. But corruption isn’t taken seriously. Politics are.
If the left gets its People’s Court to destroy the lives of patriots who did their human, imperfect best to defend us (and who succeeded in that effort for seven years), we will do more damage to the United States than all the dictators our president longs to embrace could do together.
The left has nothing against torture. It just wants to choose the victims.
Meanwhile, that great bogeyman beloved of left-wing propagandists and Hollywood (sorry for being redundant), Sen. Joseph McCarthy, is grinning from ear to ear in hell: He’s become the left’s new role model.
Now Barack Obama (D-Kenya) apparently is going after those to reload their ammunition.
Trojan Horse!
If you reload your own ammo you may find yourself engaged in “Illicit Manufacturing” of ammunition under an arms control treaty that President Obama started pushing last week in Mexico. The treaty itself is not new. It was written back in the 90’s and signed by President Clinton, but never ratified by the U.S. senate. According to an AP article from Mexico City last week “Administration officials say President Barack Obama will push for Senate ratification of a Latin American arms trafficking treaty.”
Virtually everyone that supports the 2nd ammendment or has an interest in firearms has heard the numerous recent reports of ammunition shortages. The shortages have extended to reloading supplies that many folks rely on to keep their shooting costs down or to assemble exotic or hard to find ammunition. Many shooters have considered reloading their own ammo as insurance against limited supplies should legislation be enacted that would make ammo more scarce or dramatically more expensive. Those thoughts may be in vain if the current administration is successful in getting the “INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS” treaty passed.
In previous reports on this treaty I have found no mention of the impact that the treaty would have on ammo reloaders. The first definition under Article 1 of the treaty states(emphasis added);
1. “Illicit manufacturing“: the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives,and other related materials:
a. from components or parts illicitly trafficked; or
b. without a license from a competent
governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly
takes place; orc. without marking the firearms that require
marking at the time of manufacturing.The section above clearly identifies ammo reloaders that are not licensed by the government as “Illicit Manufacturers” of ammunition. Now that we have reloaders properly labeled, lets move down to Article IV to see what we should do with them(emphasis added);
Article IV
Legislative Measures1. States Parties that have not yet done so shall adopt the
necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offenses under their domestic law the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.Again, this is pretty straightforward. If you reload ammunition without a license after the treaty is signed you will be a criminal.
I’m all for this if they are going to released at about 40,000 feet above the Nevada Desert without a parachute.
This is just more evidence that a Trojan Horse is running this country.
Some of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners could be released into the United States while others could be put on trial in the American court system, Attorney General Eric Holder said on Wednesday.
Holder, who was chosen by President Barack Obama to lead the administration’s efforts to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba within a year, said the review of what to do with each of the prisoners had begun.
About 240 terrorism suspects, including suspected planners of the September 11 attacks, are being held in the prison. Many have been detained for seven years without charges and some were subjected to interrogation techniques denounced by critics as torture.
The administration faces intense political resistance to the idea of bringing the prisoners to the United States as part of closing the detention camp. The administration seeks to transfer some detainees to Europe or other countries while freeing others.
Holder told reporters at the Justice Department that the administration’s review, made on a case-by-case basis, would determine whether the prisoners need to be put on trial or whether they can be released.
“For those who are in that second category, who can be released, there are a variety of options that we have. Among them is the possibility that we could release them into this country,” he said.
There is no other reason for this other than President Hussein trying to sabotage the system intentionally in order to use our warriors in the military who defend our freedoms as a tool to advance a socialized Universal Health Care agenda.
Repeat after me… Trojan Horse!
The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
“It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”
The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, “This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ‘ to care for him who shall have borne the battle’ given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm’s way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America’s veterans!”