Sunday, November 22, 2009

Defending Jihad

The spectacle hasn't even begun and yet, it has begun:
A lawyer for one of five men facing trial for the Sept. 11 attacks says the men plan to plead not guilty and use the trial to express their political views.

Attorney Scott Fenstermaker says his client Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali and the others will not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but will tell the jury "why they did it." He says the men will explain "their assessment of American foreign policy."
Meanwhile, the lone nut who used Islam to justify killing 13 soldiers will likely plead not guilty:
Asked if he was considering an insanity plea for his client, who faces 13 counts of premeditated murder, Galligan said, "I'm fairly confident that that's going to have to at least be examined. And that's problematic. But we haven't reached that stage yet."
At least according to his attorney, who was whining about having to conduct a hearing in the ICU (Hasan is paralyzed from the waist/chest down). Don't bet the ranch on this, since an insanity plea would essentially mark all suicide bombers, jihad fighters and even sympathizers such as Aafia Siddiqui as clinically nuts, along with the Imams who encourage them.

In other words, fundamental Islam itself may end up on trial, which could open a huge can of worms. We'll see. Eric Rudolph bombed in the name of Christ, which is pretty nuts, and he's now serving time in the Supermax beside Richard Reid, who was not only nuts but stupid to boot. Who doesn't think all 21 9/11 bombers weren't nuts? Flying planes into buildings is not the mark of an adjusted mind.

Meanwhile the Cole bombers must still be huddling to discuss their media strategy since it hasn't been released yet. Will they also decide to make it about 'foreign policy'? Could be problematic--their crime occurred in 2000 so the judge could limit their rantings to pre-2000 foreign policy. So it's a loser unless they can find a clever way to blame Bush for the Cole when he was running for president. Maybe something he said on the campaign trail? That might get more coverage from the national media.


And his response is hardly surprising: Holder wants a dog and pony show. He also opined on Obama's bow--
Obama's recent bow before the Japanese Emperor was "fundamentally harmful" to the United States and indicates that Obama "doesn’t fully understand or have the same perception of the US role in the world that most Americans have." Obama's behavior on foreign trips is "very upsetting," Cheney added.
Wonder if Obama will remain speechless?

For the record, I don't think it was the bow more than the depth and prostrated breadth of it. A short respectful head-up nod while shaking hands would have left a little better impression as to the respect WE deserve, based on history if nothing else. OK, conservatives would have still complained but the image left would have been less, well, grotesque. But that version wouldn't have fit in with the apology mosaic so it's no wonder Cheney took the shot.

No comments: