Attorney General Eric Holder at War (but on whose side?)

Ready or not, trained terrorists are coming to America on your and my dime, courtesy of Attorney General Eric Holder. How else can he smooth the political way for President Barack Obama to convince other nations to take the rest of al Qaeda’s killers off America’s image-stained hands? To be fair, Obama will only import 17 Uighurs, who are associated only with the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), who only went to Afghanistan to join the violent jihad, and who only fought alongside the Taliban and al Qaeda or were only training in ETIM terrorist camps when we invaded. (News reports last week said Obama may also import one, two, or three other terrorists who are not Uighurs.) Fair being fair, Obama will spread them around to sponsors in northern Virginia, California, Florida, and a half-dozen other states.

What harm could maybe a mere 19 or so trained terrorists running around loose in America possibly do?

The National Review’s Andrew C. McCarthy writes this morning:

The new attorney general would understand that “we are at war,” as he put it during his confirmation testimony. “To be honest,” Holder explained, he believed that “our nation didn’t realize that we were at war when, in fact, we were.” On reflection, when he “look[ed] back” at his tenure helping run the Clinton Justice Department — when he considered “the embassy bombings, the bombing of the Cole” — Holder had to admit that “we as a nation should have realized that, at that point, we were at war. We should not have waited until September the 11th of 2001 to make that determination.” Things are different now, though. Holder had come to appreciate that there are dangerous terrorists out there who mean real harm to Americans. He grasped, he said, that those terrorists have to be stopped and captured — even if it means detaining them without trial.

It was an effective performance — emphasis on performance.

Holder got the job, and that turned out to be a good day for Binyam Mohammed. He was the would-be accomplice of would-be “dirty bomber” (and now convicted terrorist) José Padilla. Mohammed planned to carry out mass-murder attacks in American cities. A succession of three Bush-era attorneys general kept him locked up in accordance with the laws of war, a practice the Supreme Court reaffirmed in its 2004 Hamdi decision. Moreover, military prosecutors believed they had a strong war-crimes case. But Mohammed will not be tried by the military, or by Holder’s department. Of course, declining to try him would not be a big deal as long as Mohammed remained incarcerated. After all, as Holder solemnly declared to the Senate.

If we have a basis to determine that a person is dangerous, and we have evidence that would demonstrate that that person is dangerous, I don’t think that, given the Supreme Court decision in Hamdi, and the responsibility that I have as attorney [general] of the United States, should I be confirmed, for the safety of this nation, that that is a person who we can release.

Right. We have plenty of basis and evidence that Mohammed is dangerous. But Holder’s sense of “responsibility … as attorney general … for the safety of this nation” did not stop him from agreeing to Mohammed’s release and transfer to England — where he now plots freely while on the British dole.

Naturally, having discerned that all the tough talk was just that, talk, British authorities are back on the administration’s doorstep, demanding the release of Shaker Aamer. He’s a bin Laden confidant who trained aspiring terrorists at al-Qaeda camps, met with shoe-bomber Richard Reid, and traveled widely in the United States — meeting with embedded terrorists and sharing an apartment with Zacarias Moussaoui (convicted in 2006 for his complicity in the 9/11 plot). Anyone want to bet how that gets resolved?

Meantime, at a press briefing two weeks ago, Holder said he’d been pondering the shuttering of Guantanamo Bay — which is to say, the emerging plan to honor the closure commitment Obama made to the Left simply by springing most of the remaining 240 or so detainees, several of whom are suing the United States courtesy of the free legal help they’ve gotten over the last several years from Holder’s former law firm. Some of these captives, Holder observed, would need to be released in the United States, the better to encourage other nations to join Adopt-a-Binyam.

The detainees, it bears remembering, are aliens affiliated with the global jihad. In the main, they are associated with terrorist organizations and have received paramilitary training. Under federal law, both terror-group membership and terrorist training are grounds for excluding aliens from the United States. That law was enacted in 2005 because of the war Holder says he now realizes we’ve been in for over a decade. It was enacted because paramilitary courses factored into all those terrorist attacks from the 1990s that “we as a nation” missed the significance of. Holder hasn’t explained how turning trained jihadists loose on the infidels that they were training to kill is consistent with his new war mentality (a war in which, at his direction, we no longer call enemy combatants “enemy combatants”). Nor is it clear how this comports with his “responsibility … for the safety of this nation” and his obligation to enforce U.S. statutes.

Read the rest.

  1 comment for “Attorney General Eric Holder at War (but on whose side?)

  1. twins3499
    April 4, 2009 at 5:40 pm

    So we now return to 1993 and the Reno Justice Department policy of treating terrorist attacks as a crime no different than say DUI despite assurances otherwise in Holder’s testimony.

    There is one difference from say DUI though. In a DUI you have a chain of evidence police car video,field sobriety test, breathalyzer results,maybe even blood tests. They will have to release these scum because when captured on the battle field the primary responsibility of the soldier is not to preserve evidence but to neutralize the threat faced at the moment. Holder is well aware of this and is also aware that chances are great that any judge will throw the cases out for a variety of reasons including them not having received a speedy trial,tainted or evidence lacking the substance to gain and uphold a conviction. So rather than be embarassed by bringing to trial that which cannot secure a conviction and withstand an appeal just let them go. After all I’m sure they secured the promise that they would be good little boys from now on and we know they never lie to the infidel to ensure they obtain their own means as the Koran instructs them to do.

    And how could we possibly ask others to take in some of the remaining 240 scum if we do not do so ourselves?

    What a wonderful idea placing them in NY and Northern Virginia it’s not as if those areas haven’t been the targets of these jihadists previously. Well unless you count the shootings at CIA headquarters, WTC 1993, the bridges and tunnels plot in NYC and the subway plot in NYC both in the 1990’s during the Clinton administration, the Pentagon and WTC 2001 to name a few.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *