What else could it be? I find it very hard to believe that the two are stupid.  Holder is not someone Obama picked up on the side of the road and offered the Office of Attorney General. He's a seasoned lawyer, in fact he has a conflict of interest when it comes to putting terrorists on trial, his law firm defended some of them. He knows better than to try the mastermind of 9/11 in a civilian court. So then why is he going to do it? Why did he go to Capitol Hill to defend this? I heard the audio of him stumbling over himself with no answers to very basic questions concerning this issue at the Senate. He didn't have an answer other than "to show the world that our system of law works" What the hell does that mean? Someone please write me and let me know because I can't figure that one out.

     As a matter of fact the number of enemy combatants captured in the field for "war crimes" and tried in civilian court in our history is zero. We have had 233 years of the most carefully fair jurisprudence the world has ever seen and he is going to be the first to try enemy war criminals in courts reserved for Americans. That is what he thinks of your rights as an American. Don't think for a second it is all Eric Holder either. Nothing happens this controversial in any executive cabinet that the President hasn't already approved. This is Obama's show and Eric Holder is a willing active participant. They both hate America and hate that you have the rights that you have. If it were up to them you would have no rights. Trust me on this.

     This entire fiasco is an incredible learning moment for anyone that doesn't have a clue but would like to understand. The majority of people I talk to seem to have no problem with this and that is sad. First and foremost these people are foreigners and do not deserve our rights given to us under the Constitution. If an American had been the mastermind of 9/11 they would get a trial in our courts with all of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution because they were American. A foreign enemy murderer of American civilians by all precedents is always tried by a military tribunal. Killing innocent civilians for the sake of terror is a war crime and not a civil crime.

     The Geneva convention, which the U.S. is a signatory, guarantees the terrorists are being treated properly with a fair military trial. They do not get American rights because they are not American. I keep hearing from leftists and liberals that this is ok because it will show the world that we have a fair and just system of justice. We do have a fair and just system of justice. The problem with putting terrorists on trial in civilian court is that the Marines and soldiers that captured them never ever have had to follow police rules. The military never gave the terrorists Miranda warnings because the terrorists were not American and the military has never ever had to do that. The chief terrorist of the group among others was water-boarded to get information from. Those techniques used to get information from them along with the lack of Miranda warnings are grounds for dismissal of the case in civilian court.

     If you don't think there are judges in the federal system that would throw the case out on a technicality you are mistaken. If that happens, then what? You can't retry them or you have double jeopardy issues. So then they have to be released according to U.S. law. Released where? Obama and Holder say not here, then where? The fact that there is a chance that these people could escape justice because Eric Holder wants to try them in civilian court is an outrage. Leftists and liberals who think that this is going to reflect good on us are stupid at best. 

     In fact it is going to make us look like a banana republic, because by our civilian court laws the case should have been thrown out due to the lack of Miranda warnings and the water-boarding to extract information. Then if the case is thrown out or they are acquitted we have to let them go. If we don't we will look like hypocrites in the eyes of the world. Plus how fair is a civilian court trial with a predetermined outcome? What if the jury is full of sympathizers or leftists nuts that acquit them. It's not fair to the families of the 9/11 victims for terrorists to have a civilian court trial with the same Constitutional rights as their fallen family members.

     I cannot believe that there is not more of an outcry against this. Khalid Sheik Muhammad has already confessed and is proud of what he did. He wants to die and be martyred. A military trial would have granted him that immediately and without the lengthy appeals process in civilian court. Not to mention the enormous costs involved with trying them in New York and the incarceration and the appeals etc. Obama and Holder are not fit for the offices they currently hold. Neither of them seems to have a clue what they are doing other than following their leftist plan to the letter. Another tidbit in all of this is the right to discovery. Discovery is the right of the defense to view and investigate all of the evidence against them. This opens up top secret and classified material to the entire world. This will destroy our intelligence gathering capabilities because the defense will use anything to get their client acquitted. Including exposing methods of capturing them etc.

     No President in history would have done this. Obama and Holder are doing it for a reason. They are quickly trying to dismantle this country at every level and in every corner. They want to make the Bush administration look bad, which is foolish because Bush followed all the laws to the letter. How do I know this? If Bush had not, the leftists would already would have had all of them in court. This is just another example of leftists in control without any checks or balances. For the leftists it is just one more step to totalitarian socialism. Who are they to break the law of the Constitution? I wonder if Obama's hero Franklin Roosevelt would have tried Adolf Hitler in civilian court if we had captured him? The answer is no he wouldn't have. Roosevelt would have never taken the chance of a dismissal. People that are ignorant in this country need to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and start educating themselves. 2010 and 2012 cannot get here fast enough!