Tuesday, March 6, 2012

BloggeRhythms 3/6/2012

A headline this morning on Fox News' website, and a similar one on the Drudge Report, caused me to  re-read both items several times to be sure I was clear on the subject matter -because it was such a shock. But now I’m convinced I haven’t lost my marbles.

What completely surprised me was that, according to Washington Post writers, Peter Finn and Sari Horowitz, Attorney General, Eric Holder, stated yesterday that "the U.S. government has the right to order the killing of American citizens overseas if they are senior al-Qaeda leaders who pose an imminent terrorist threat and cannot reasonably be captured." And what that means to me is that the present administration may have finally done something that's in the best interests of the United States, which I find to be simply incredible, and to my knowledge -a first.

In a speech at Northwestern University law school in Chicago, Holder addressed some of the factors the administration reviews before deciding an individual represents an “imminent threat.” Including critical factors such as the “relevant window of opportunity to act, the possible harm that missing the window would cause to civilians and the likelihood of heading off future disastrous attacks against the United States.” He also said the president is not required by the Constitution to delay action until some “theoretical end stage of planning -when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear.”

As for me, I wanted to include Holder's remarks because I think it's the right thing to do considering how often I complain about nearly everything the administration's done for the last three years. So I think it's only fair to mention something they finally got right.
 
There was something else in the Fox posting though that really got me to thinking, however. Because it seems that civil libertarians object to the administration’s decision, believing that the Constitution's due process protections require the president to get permission from a federal court before taking lethal action.

And to that I have to ask, exactly who are these loony tunes and where do they come from? Beyond that, how much damage do terrorists have to do to our nation, how many of our folks do they have to kill, and how much peril do they have to put us in before we can retaliate in kind without giving these murdering SOB’s a day in court?

 
As for me again, I’d also like to find out exactly who these “libertarians” are and ask them where they think our nation goes wrong in trying to defend itself and its citizens from deadly harm, and why they hate the nation in which they live to the extent they do. My guess is there not libertarians at all but much more likely subversives on enemy’s payrolls, so while Holder’s finally chasing terrorists as he should, he ought to shoot them too.

That’s it for today folks.
 
Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment