Military Report on Guantanamo
Highlights Danger of Al Qaeda
By Richard A. Serrano, LA Times Staff Writer
You're going to have to forgive me here, but this is one frustrated rant below...
As ACLU and other civil rights lawyers work feverishly to undermine the US military attempts to collect intel on AQ at Gitmo, the military tribunals have been completed and the results compiled on a comprehensive report. And that report, to no surprise, reveals the continued hatred and determined goal of genocide of all infidels.
According to the report, captives have described how Al Qaeda trained them to spread deadly poisons, and at other times armed them with grenades stuffed inside soda cans, bombs hidden in pagers and cellphones and wristwatches that could trigger remote control explosions on a 24-hour countdown.
The report also showed that not all those being held were suspected of being front-line soldiers and that 1 in 10 of the captives were well-educated — often at U.S. colleges — in fields such as medicine and law.
More than 20 detainees have been positively identified as Osama bin Laden's personal bodyguards and one as his close "spiritual advisor," according to the report. Another is listed as the "probable 20th 9/11 hijacker" — a Saudi man named Mohamed al-Kahtani who made it to Orlando, Fla., before being deported just a month before the Sept. 11 attacks.
One detainee vowed to his captors that U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia "will have their heads cut off." Another prisoner, this one with strong ties to Bin Laden, the Taliban and the Chechen mujahedin leadership, said of Americans everywhere: "Their day is coming…. One day I will enjoy sucking their blood."
Segments of additional findings are strewn thru out this article. But what will remain of the utmost interest to me is the ultimate fate of these detainees. The battle between the feds and civil rights lawyers heat up as the military touts the vast amount of intel secured from the Gitmo interrogations as a significant success, and strives to keep Camp Delta free from outside intervention to continue intel collection.
The civil rights lawyers, however, have something different in mind for the detainees than continued incarceration. Since the Supremes have ruled the Gitmo detainees have the right of access to American courts, the lawyers are pressing hard for the cases to be moved to federal jurisdiction Stateside.
Am I crazy or does any of this seem surreal to anyone else but me? Here we are expending all efforts to protect our borders, and the civil rights lawyers want taxpayer funds to bring terrorists here so they can use our legal loop holes to set them free. Say wha...?
We've already witnessed similar mock trials in Germany and the Netherlands, duty bound to acquit the terror suspects for lack of a specific time or date of assault under existing laws. Do we truly expect much different from American justice, famous for erring on the side of the accused when evidence has "reasonable doubt"? Our existing laws are no more set up for this era of terror than the Euros.
And should the terrorists be acquited, are they then ushered out of the country? Or do they get to remain and collect unemployment and health benefits while planning their next bombing? Or even more insane, file civil suit and collect money for wrongful arrest so they can then buy more weapons for their intended genocide?
There is just something so inherently wrong with all this that I truly wonder if I still belong on this planet. I vehemently resent our American justice, so distained by these detainees, being offered up to those captured on a foreign battlefield shooting at our troops, held on foreign soil, and classified as a "guerilla" status and a stateless militia. And all on my tax dollar to boot. Needless to say, it's obviously far more cost effective to just wipe them out on the battlefield.
Even more baffling is how seemingly do-gooder legal eagles - instead of seeing vicious, cowardly and heartless terrorists who are bent on exterminating anyone not a fundamentalist Muslim - can't seem to grasp the reality that their own clients would be just as happy to slit their counselor's throats the moment they achieve freedom.
There could not be a more intolerant attitude than that of these fundamentalist Islamics. There is no room for infidels on the planet. Democracy is anti-Islamic in their teachings. And yet none of this is construed as unacceptable bias to the civil rights types. It begs pointing out that these same civil rights advocates generally do not race to the aid of neo-Nazis or blatant racist suspects accused of crimes here in the US, let alone foreigners. Evidently there are some biases that are more politically correct than others in the civil rights world.
How this is handled will be a bigger story than the much inflated Abu Ghraib story. And I, for one, will be very curious to see not only the outcome, but the public opinion on freeing these terrorists after a trial on our soils.
No comments:
Post a Comment