The Washington Examiner’s editorial this morning highlights the idiocy of the Obama administration’s plans to try terrorists as civilians. This is pure insanity.
Two men have been charged by law enforcement authorities with committing criminal acts on Christmas Day 2009. The first, Joseph T. Knox, 43, of 6092 North Main St. in Sandy Creek, N.Y., was charged with attempted first-degree felony robbery of the China One restaurant, located next door to his residence. New York State Police said Knox brandished a knife during the bungled robbery. Bail was set at $10,000, and, if convicted, Knox could face up to 25 years in prison.
The second, Nigerian national Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, of no known permanent address, was charged with attempting to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 bound for Detroit from Amsterdam. If convicted, Abdulmutallab could face up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
In other words, in President Obama’s America, a man charged with brandishing a knife during a failed attempt to rob a local eatery could get more prison time than an aspiring suicide bomber who tried unsuccessfully to ignite explosives that would have incinerated him and nearly 300 other passengers and crew members on board Flight 253. This disparity unmasks the illogic of dealing with Islamic terrorists as if they are mere criminal defendants deserving of the same constitutional rights as common thieves.
Like Knox, Abdulmutallab was told he had a right to remain silent, and he took full advantage of it. Then, as if to turn terrorism into the moral equivalent of shoplifting, prosecutors offered Abdulmutallab a plea bargaining deal in return for his cooperation. This was done, according to White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, so that Abdulmutallab would know “there are certain things that are on the table, and if he wants to engage with us in a productive manner, there are ways that he can do that.” ……
Terrorists with no uniform aren’t entitled to protection under the Geneva Convention, let alone the US justice system.
You’re right. This is pure insanity. But they don’t seem to care.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Unfortunately LC, SCOTUS did not see it quite that way a few years back. Let’s just pray that “Dear Leader” doesn’t get any more chances to stack the court in this (and hopefully last) term. This last “wise Latina woman” voted on the court, is just another vote from a constitutional voice that the founders never intended for them to have in such volume; or term limits they would have included. The founders of our country in their wildest dreams could never imagine what exists as American political forces in some citizen’s minds today.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, we all want the UndieBomber to get his just desserts, but let’s think about this a moment: Do we really want to submit to the Federal government’s claim that it has the power to deny ANYONE the right to a trial, habeas corpus, and an attorney? An American citizen (remember Padilla?) can be reclassified as an enemy combatant on the say-so of the president or the attorney general, and POOF! there go the Bill of Rights.
I’ll stick to the expense and time of a trial, thank you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0