Congress

9/11 families back military trials in letter to President Obama

Eight year ago today, on November 13, 2001, my family laid to rest a 9/11 hero on what would have been his 46th birthday. Outside the church, along with hundreds of friends and neighbors and 1,200 firefighters tearfully saluting their fallen brother, we felt our nation standing as one. Today, we ask that you stand once more, for your families and with ours, to support our troops, and in the common defense.

We have appealed directly to the President. Below is that letter. If you wish to add your name to it, PLEASE CLICK HERE. (Note: 911FamiliesForAmerica.org is partners with theBravest.com and KeepAmericaSafe.com in this effort.) … Update: November 15, 2009: Due to the tremendous response, we are creating a displayable list of the 100,000 people who decided to co-sign our letter to President Obama. In addition, we have issued a call to action for this Wednesday in Washington D.C.

Transferring terrorist prisoners to the U.S. means setting them free here, too: Andrew McCarthy

“If Guantanamo Bay is closed, scores of trained jihadists, committed to killing Americans, will be released to dwell among us: It is that simple.” — Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online, October 23, 2009

McCarthy was not fear mongering; if President Barack Obama brings Guantanamo detainees into the United States, federal judges will order trained terrorists released free onto America’s streets. McCarthy explains:

Criminal trials also proceed in accordance with a pair of centuries-old legal principles. First, pieces of evidence are viewed not in isolation but in conjunction; second, jurors do not check their common sense at the door when they enter the courtroom. This is why the vast majority of defendants who go to trial get convicted. Even a not-so-clever defense lawyer can always come up with a reason to degrade this or that aspect of the prosecution’s case: Maybe the teller didn’t get a good look at the bank robber; the defendant’s fingerprint could have been left in the getaway car weeks before the robbery; the robbery money might be in his house because he unknowingly borrowed it from the real robber; and the accomplice may have falsely fingered him in hopes of saving his own skin. But if the prosecution shows an identification by the teller, a fingerprint in the getaway car, possession of the robbery proceeds, and a co-conspirator saying the defendant was in on it, that’s not a shaky case. Taken together, those facts spell slam dunk to a rational, objective fact-finder.

But Gitmo terrorists don’t have to deal with jurors vetted to ensure their objectivity. They get highly opinionated judges. Those judges first make up the rules, procedures, and presumptions, and then purport to apply this “law” to the facts — in many cases, just as a defense lawyer would do. As Joscelyn demonstrates, Kollar-Kotelly simply ignored some of the facts (like the Kuwaiti intelligence that Mutairi was an al-Qaeda operative) and speciously minimized or explained away others, studiously averting her gaze from the mosaic composed by the proof.

Will we literally risk life and limb by leaving it to unelected, lifelong federal judges to decide — without Constitutional authority in matters of war and contrary to the Real ID Act — whether to set terrorists free on our streets?

Our Constitution says it is the Executive alone, the President who conducts war, national security, and foreign policy with Congress regulating the President’s authority through the power of the purse and ratification of treaties. It also says Congress can limit the Judiciary branch; it could deny the courts any authority concerning detainees. Yet that would require both a majority in Congress and this President to care more about the lives of Americans than the “rights” of terrorists. Barring that, judges will decide, common sense and the common defense be damned.

Senate Dems block vote, avoid talking ‘about Obama’s Gitmo jihadi dump’

Senate Democrats took the coward’s way out last night; they blocked a vote that would have prevented the transfer of Guantanamo detainees into America’s prisons. Michelle Malkin has them pegged, “Bok, bok, bok. Another chicken run from Democrats who desperately do not want to talk about Obama’s Gitmo jihadi dump.”

Sen. Jim Inhofe’s office responded to our inquiry by email after the vote:

Senate Democrats today blocked the effort of U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) to consider his amendment that would permanently keep the military-run detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (GITMO) open while preventing terrorist detainees from being transferred to the United States.

“President Obama and the Democrats’ obsession with closing GITMO is confounding,” Inhofe said. “I attempted to get the Senate to consider my very clear and straightforward amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that would have ensured that GITMO remained open and denied the transfer of terrorist detainees to the United States. Polls have shown that most Americans do not want to close GITMO, and certainly do not want these terrorist detainees to be transferred to the United States. A few days ago, my office announced a petition drive to get Oklahomans and Americans to support my effort to keep GITMO open. In that short amount of time, my office was inundated with tens of thousands of signatures to the petition. The fact that the Democrats have blocked my amendment defies the outspoken desire of these Americans.”

Inhofe continued, “The amendment I tried to offer is very similar to S.370, a stand-alone bill I offered to keep GITMO open. I will continue to pursue every available opportunity to achieve legislation that permanently keeps the facility open and closes the door to terrorist transfers.”

To learn more about the Inhofe petition to keep GITMO open, visit here.

As 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America reported yesterday, since June 30, President Barack Obama has cleared two dozen beds at Supermax for Gitmo detainees.