Posted by
JDComments on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 9:24:42 AM
This
article reports on a group of ex-justice department officials , led by Janet Reno, who are contesting the procedures being used to try terrorist suspects, who they believe instead should be processed through the American criminal legal system with all the attendant rights that implies. At present their concerns pertain to Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, a suspected sleeper cell agent of Al Quaida and the only detainee in the US. They find it reprehensible that he can be held indefinitely without being tried by a system which is designed to be biased for the defendant [embodied in "guilty until proven innocent"], and which, due to the decisions of Liberal judges over the years, has coddled and liberated many obviously guilty people in the name of protecting their "rights" by formulating legal concepts like Miranda, the exclusionary rule, and just cause, all there to protect and err on the side of the accused. As a result , even someone who most people are sure killed two innocent people, O.J. Simpson, can walk away a free man under our legal system. The difference between proof and sufficient proof under a criminal trial is obvious to anyone who has watched "Law and Order", and the idea that somebody who is contemplating using a WMD to kill thousands or millions of people could be released because a search warrant was not in order is both frightening and instructive, for it illustrates the difference between the War on Terror and a law enforcement problem. In the latter we are willing to let a guilty man go free to protect those who might be innocent; in the former we can never take the chance of releasing someone who is planning to kill innocent Americans by the hundreds or thousands or millions. Reno and her Liberal friends do not understand this and if they succeed in their crusade, we may all pay a horrible price .