---------------------------------------------------------------------------
**** http://www.GOANET.org ****
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy New Year Twenty-Ten
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 05:38:43 -0500
From: Venantius J Pinto <[email protected]>
You have not seen anything like this.
Observe the level of analysis, fact checking, quality of journalism.
++++++++++++++++Rachel Maddow rips apart Cheney, GOP attack machine
http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002459/index.html
Mario responds:
For anyone to concoct an "analysis" to try and show that President Bush and
Vice President Cheney were soft on international terrorism in any shape or
form, compared with the fierce warrriors [snicker!] of the Obama administration
would not even pass the smell test with most serious observers, who would LOL
at this notion!
Even before reading it I knew the contents of this link that Venantius has
posted on Goanet for reasons that escape me with respect to the Goanet Rules on
relevence to Goa and Goans were bogus, distorted, and taken out of context,
simply because of the reputation of the "analyst", Rachel Maddow, and the far
left wing blog the Daily Kos, who are both well known in the US for
deliberately distorted political spin from the far left wing taken out of
context to make it sound reasonable and logical.
After reading the so-called "analysis" I believe I am right.
One fact to remember is that anyone captured in the US, whether citizen or not,
whether friend or foe, has to be tried under the US Constitution in either
civil or criminal courts, with all the endless protections in favor of the
miscreant and against the prosecution.
Thus the Blind Sheikh who planned WTC-I in 1993, Richard Reid, Zacarias
Moussaoui and now Abdul Muttalab, must be tried under the most powerful
protections ever devised by a country for the bad guys.
What the Obama administration has changed is to give foreign enemy combatants
who were captured on foreign battlefields the same rights as those captured on
US soil, instead of trying them under military tribunals in Gitmo. These have
never been granted the full protection of the US Constitution before, which
includes full legal representation at taxpayer expense including appeals all
the way to the Supreme Court.
Here are some of the most egregious examples from this so-called "analysis" in
Quotes, followed by my comments:
Quote:
Dick Cheney’s comments today probably the worst among them. He said, quote, "He
seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer
up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war."
Unquote:
Comment: What Dick Cheney was talking about was foreign enemy combatants and
not those captured on US soil. He was criticizing the Obama administration's
lax attitude towards international terrorism, by calling the War on
International Terror an "Overseas Contingency Operation" and calling
"terrorism" a "man-caused disaster", all sophistries that are causing much
amusement among the terrorists.
Quote:
Remember Richard Reid, the so-called "shoe bomber"? Richard Reid was arrested
December 2001, when a man named Dick Cheney was vice president. The Bush
Justice Department let him, as they say, "lawyer up," and Mr. Reid later pled
guilty in federal court.
Unquote:
Comment: The Bush administration had no choice under the US Constitution, just
as the Obama administration has no choice with respect to Abdul Muttalab the
most recent terrorist who tried to blow up the Delta Airlines plane on
Christmas Day.
Quote:
Remember 9/11 co-conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui? Same deal. Given American
rights, tried in the federal courts and convicted, all while a man named Dick
Cheney was vice president.
Unquote:
Comment: Since Zacarias Moussaoui was captured in the US the administration
had no legal choice.
Quote:
What President Obama is doing right now with this case is the same thing that
was done with the same type of cases while Dick Cheney was vice president. But
Dick Cheney isn’t letting anything like that hold him back, saying, quote, "Why
doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? President Obama’s first object and his
highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are
at war."
Unquote:
Comment: The problem with this "analysis" is that Cheney's comments are taken
out of context. He was not criticizing Obama for trying people captured on US
soil under the US Constitution. He was referring to enemy combatants who were
captured on foreign battlefields being held at Gitmo
who did not qualify for trials on US soil under the US Constitution, like
Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and another five of his colleagues, until the Obama
administration decided to do so, with NO precedent in US history for doing so.
Quote:
The Bush/Cheney administration created the terror watch list system that
theoretically should have flagged the Christmas bomber this past Friday. As has
been noted, this is a list that has more than 500,000 names on it. Unquote:
Comment:
The Bush administration has been out of office for a year now. However, we see
this so-called "analyst" try to blame them for what happened last week. The
Obama administration tried to do the same. Can these people be taken seriously
after being in charge for a year now?
Quote:
The rallying cry now from Republicans is that we shouldn’t try the Christmas
bomber in civilian court — that, instead, he should be tried in a military
tribunal, declared an enemy combatant.
Unquote:
Comment: This is false as far as the Republican party is concerned because the
Christmas bomber has to be tried in US criminal courts since he was captured on
US soil. What this so-called "analyst" has done is taken comments by some
individuals and expanded it to cover all Republicans.
Quote:
....that, instead, he should be tried in a military tribunal, declared an enemy
combatant. I mean, what’s the value of a military tribunal here, other than
trying to make political hay out of this case? Really, what’s the justice,
anti-terrorist, counterterrorist value on this?
Unquote:
Comment: Here we see the so-called "analyst" pretend that there is no
anti-tarrorist, counterterrorist value in trying Abdul Muttalab in a military
tribunal. This is a standard tactic of far left wing "analysts". The reason
some observers have suggested that he should be tried in a military tribunal is
because he admitted, and Al Qaeda has confirmed, that there are hundreds of
terrorists being trained in Yemen to attack US interests. Being interrogated
by the military would result in information to combat this. Trying him in US
criminal courts does not allow for any such interrogation.
Conclusion:
The Obama administration has refused until very recently to even acknowledge
that there is an international war on terror going on. When they took over
power last January, they reclassified what Bush called the International War on
Terror, as an "Overseas Contingency Operation". The incompetent head of
Obama's Homeland Security Department reclassified the term "terrorism" as a
"man-caused disaster".
Ever since he became President, Obama thought that by reminding Muslims of his
own Muslim background, which he had denied throughout the presidential
campaign, but suddenly discovered thereafter, the Islamic terrorists would
become more compliant and reasonable. He has since discovered that he was
wrong.
We will soon see the tamasha that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad will put on in US
courts now that he has been given full legal rights under the US Constitution
by the Obama administration. This tamasha will include demands that will
involve classified national security information. Such rights had never been
previously accorded to any foreign enemy combatant captured on a foreign
battlefield in US history. The practice was for such enemy combatants to be
held captive until the war ended.
It will also be interesting to see what the Obama administration will do if any
of these terrorists are found to be not guilty under US laws which will not
allow much of their previous testimony and admissions of guilt to be used
against them because this was obtained under coerced interrogations and without
warning them of their Miranda rights.
