Wednesday, May 03, 2006

"America, you lost, I won"

I'm more than peeved right now. The only reason we lost is because these 12 Americans decided for the rest of us that we'd all lose together. It feels like I went to sleep last night and woke up in France.

A jury today spared Zacarias Moussaoui from the death penalty, deciding he should instead instead serve life in prison. ABC News suggested "Defeat for U.S. Government?" but didn't report what Moussaoui said upon leaving the courtroom. However, CNN did, and Moussaoui's own words tell us who really lost: "America, you lost." See that? America. We all lost here because of a jury too cowardly to do the right thing.

Look at this moron who gave a soundbite to ABC News: "he's not the real problem. The real problem are the terrorists who do want to kill us, like Osama bin Laden who's still not captured." Number one, it's pointless to focus on capturing Osama, not because he can't be captured, but because he's so neutralized and not worth much bother. We don't need a tourniquet, only a little pressure, and that frees up our military and intelligence personnel for other things. Number two, what reality does she live in, that she thinks Moussaoui never wanted to kill Americans? What was he doing with al Qaeda, serving as goodwill ambassador? Number three, she actually thinks he'll reflect upon his crimes while serving a life sentence? That's just liberal garbage about "rehabilitation."

The next moron says we've proven that "we're not gonna stand for terrorists to come to our country and to be let loose. He will be in confinement, he will not be released...we will treat [terrorists] with respect no matter how much they disrespect us." Good lord! I don't want to treat criminals with respect. I want to treat them with justice. Moussaoui is one of the last people on this planet who deserves respect of any kind, evidenced by everything he said to the court.

And how will we demonstrate "we're not gonna stand for terrorists," by deciding we're going to feed, clothe and house Moussaoui for the rest of his life? The least he deserves is a daily spraying with pig blood, or better yet, a weekly drop-off at an NYPD precinct -- they'll know what to do with him in the basement.

Little Green Footballs notes that, no doubt, Moussaoui will be given every comfort he demands:
Note: in radical Islamic ideology, being captured by infidels and executed does not equal martyrdom. It equals humiliation. The ‘72 virgins/raisins’ fantasy is reserved for those who die ‘gloriously’ in battle.

And Zacarias Moussaoui will game the system to the best of his abilities. Don’t be surprised to see him get his own Koran, halal food, a prayer rug, and an arrow pointing toward Mecca.
I'd already said that toward the end of April:
Besides, I find there's a peculiar characteristic to Islamofascists' martyrdom versus that of other faiths. For example, Christian martyrs for two millenia have accepted their deaths -- any deaths -- as God's will. Islamofascists, however, don't just seek any death, but suicides on their own terms. If Moussaoui is executed, it would be at the hand of "infidels," not his own, nor would he have killed anyone else with his death. It would be futile, and perhaps even ignominious that he was caught so stupidly.
How long until there's a hijacking or kidnapping, with the price of the victims' freedom being Moussaoui's release (and a hero's welcome in Gaza)?

How many American children will die because they couldn't get a life-saving operation, or suffer dental problems because their parents lacked the money, while Moussaoui gets free health care for the rest of his life? How many American families won't be able to buy the food they'd have liked to have, because their taxes went to pay for whatever food Moussaoui wants?

It's said that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. I suppose today demonstrates that a country is only as intelligent as its stupidest citizen. At least an economy's strength isn't dependent on its lowest producer.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

So we should execute him because he does not like "America"?
The man was in jail on Sept 11.
We prosecuted this man for something he played no part in. This wasn't about justice. It was about scapegoating someone so that it would look like the Justice Dept was doing something and to make a few people feel like their friends and relatives that died on that day feel like they are getting some justice. "At least SOMEONE'S going to jail for Sept 11." What a joke.
Look at the DOJ's record since 2001 regarding "terrorists"--
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/comments.php?id=P2725_0_1_15

This has been all about taking revenge on someone that looks like a terrorist. He was convicted for knowing about the attack and for wanting to participate. Heck, why didn't they throw in a charge for committing a hate crime, too?
You really should sit down and watch MINORITY REPORT and take note of the theme.

Moussoui seems like a bad person to me. Al Qaeda is usually up to no good. But then again, neither were the Sons of Liberty.

Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger Perry Eidelbus said...

Moussaoui was part of the terrorists, not just a wannabe. He has admitted so. He knew of the terrorist attacks, so with just a word, he could have prevented it. He was therefore complicit in first-degree murder, so how can you say he only looks like a terrorist?

Scapegoat nothing. I don't just want to execute him -- I want to execute the whole lot of 'em.

Now Moussaoui taunts us, telling us that we lost. And you know what, he's right. Until we return to the mindset that criminals should be punished as brutally as the crimes they committed, the Islamofascists will continue to laugh at our weakness. Right now even the most pro-American Saudis must be chuckling, "Those American fools have no spine! Here, few people dare even steal because of our punishments!"

What would you like to bet that the ACLU will (maybe they immediately started) start filing motions on his behalf, because his punishment is supposedly too severe? Even the French have started, but why is that necessary when we undermine ourselves?

Next time, try bringing up an argument of more substance than mentioning an irrelevant movie. If you had taken a look around, you'd have seen I'm the FIRST person to oppose thought crime. However, deliberately withholding information about planned mass murder is not thought crime. It is REAL crime. Also, plug something with more credibility than a rabidly liberal website (whose acolytes wouldn't know a just war even with mushroom clouds over our cities).

You concluded: "Al Qaeda is usually up to no good. But then again, neither were the Sons of Liberty." Since when is al Qaeda ever up to any good? Or do you really believe the "Zionist occupation" bullshit, that it's ok for Muslims to blow up civilians?

By contrast, the Sons of Liberty never attacked innocent civilians. The type of freedom for which they fought was individual freedom, not the pseudo-freedom to have a mullah's foot on your neck.

Thursday, May 04, 2006 1:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moussaoui has claimed a lot of things over the past 5 years. It's funny that you only choose to believe the one's that fit your prejudice. He didn't necessarily withold info. They, the FBI, had a lot of info that they chose to ignore until long after 911. What he did was essentially keep quiet. As far I know, the 5th amendment has not been repealed.
(Minority Report was not about thought crime. It was about arresting people before they commit a crime.)

Whether or not Antiwar.com is a good site has no bearing on the point that was made in the link I offered. The DOJ has utterly failed at doing anything since 911.
Gitmo is a joke--and this is finally coming to light for those that are skeptical of my claim.

Al Qaeda--should you choose to believe that it is an actual organization--serves it's own goals. The Taliban serves the goal's of it's members. The Son's of Liberty served their own goals, too. None of these organizations represent/ed all of the people in their community. Some outright oppose/ed these orgs. Some believe/ed that they were doing the right thing.
I'm sure some in Iraq and Afghanistan right now see the US as an evil entity. We are attacking innocent people and occupying their homeland. Iraq? We have no justification for being there. Even those offered before the invasion were a joke. In their minds, we are no different than Al Qaeda. Perspective makes a huge difference and Americans in general seem to be lacking this. We are not the rulers of the world.

You just keep on saying to yourself, "she's my mom, drunk or sober." If that's what gets you through the day, you'll never see the point I'm trying to make.

For someone that pretends to be an intellectual, you sure have a lot of growing up to do. You don't just discard opposing arguements because they don't fit in with your worldview.
Some day you just might see that you lack objectivity.

Keep working through these things, though. You usually do a great job here. I just thought you were a off on this one.

Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:06:00 PM  
Blogger Perry Eidelbus said...

The reason Moussaoui is credible regarding his 9/11 role is because the evidence corroborates it. His movements here and there, his funding, his flight training, etc., all fits his admission. It's really that simple. His own deliberate, calculated actions dictate what you call my "prejudice" -- not the other way around.

The Fifth Amendment does not include protection from the consequences of withholding certain information. If you have knowledge that a crime will be committed, you are still culpable (the extent depending on your involvement) no matter how many times you invoke your right against self-incrimination.

"Didn't necessarily withhold info"? I suppose you think his purpose of attending the Brixton mosque was to learn to tie knots? Going to the terrorist training camps was for charitable work? Coming to the U.S. to learn how to fly planes was for...therapeutic reasons? Maybe you think he was misinformed about the waters. In fact, he knew enough that mere hints could have placed us on high alert, prompting us to place air marshals on each flight, and screen passengers carefully for any bladed implements.

People say our pre-9/11 intelligence failed, but it actually failed no more than our human capacity for mistakes. Did they fail to uncover the plot? Of course. Could they have, were it not for the mistakes? I really doubt it. Terrorists flying airplanes into skyscrapers was a recognized possibility, but still so extraordinary that nobody thought the terrorists would actually do it.

You want to talk about scapegoats, well, the REAL scapegoating was during the 9/11 commission: who could be blamed and sued for negligence? Instead we should have come to terms with the fact that it happened, nobody thought terrorists would or could do such an extreme, and the only blame lies with the terrorists who did it.

"Minority Report" IS about "thought crime" not in the Orwellian sense, but because people were being arrested for thinking about a crime though not having yet committed it. Now if you reference it strictly regarding arresting people beforehand...what the hell is your point? You're being even more irrelevant than I thought.

I won't bother to check antiwar.com for the same reason Kos and Eschaton are a waste of bandwidth. If they're right, it's only in the same way a broken clock is. There are two things we agree on, though. The DOJ definitely can't do a thing after 9/11, and Guantanamo Bay is a farce, but not for the reasons you think. If we didn't have such idiot judges and idiot juries, and if we didn't molly-coddle the prisoners, maybe someday the terrorists would actually be afraid of us. As it stands, they know we might as well play catch-and-release. We need to start putting pigs like Moussaoui to death, and prisoner detention at Gitmo needs to be run like a real prison. None of this five-times-daily prayer crap, none of this catering (literally) to their dietary preferences. Torture? Boo-freakin'-hoo. They're lucky we even took them alive in the first place, which is a hell of a lot better than they do to us. I don't see Amnesty International or the ACLU crying as much over Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg or Fabrizio Quattrocchi.

Al Qaeda--should you choose to believe that it is an actual organization--serves it's own goals. The Taliban serves the goal's of it's members. The Son's of Liberty served their own goals, too. None of these organizations represent/ed all of the people in their community. Some outright oppose/ed these orgs. Some believe/ed that they were doing the right thing.

Did you have a point here? You're demonstrating mastery of stating the obvious.

I'm sure some in Iraq and Afghanistan right now see the US as an evil entity. We are attacking innocent people and occupying their homeland. Iraq? We have no justification for being there. Even those offered before the invasion were a joke. In their minds, we are no different than Al Qaeda. Perspective makes a huge difference and Americans in general seem to be lacking this. We are not the rulers of the world.

Again, stating the obvious. Relevance?

You just keep on saying to yourself, "she's my mom, drunk or sober." If that's what gets you through the day, you'll never see the point I'm trying to make.

You know you just made a complete strawman here, right? If you're really familiar with my blog, you know that either you're deluding yourself here or you're flat-out lying about me. But I'll excuse you if you erroneously think I'm a knee-jerk Republican.

I support George W. Bush in the War on Terror, though I oppose the Patriot Act. But I firmly believe going into Afghanistan was the right thing. I firmly believe we should have finished off Saddam 14 years ago (at the very minimum, send in the CIA to assassinate him), but better late than never. For this I make no apologies. The price of blood we have paid is less costly than what we would have.

For someone that pretends to be an intellectual, you sure have a lot of growing up to do. You don't just discard opposing arguements because they don't fit in with your worldview.
Some day you just might see that you lack objectivity.


My blog speaks for itself, and since when did I ever claim objectivity? My agenda is right at the top. It's not my fault that I choose to defend MY LIFE far more effectively than your false concept of liberty.

Now, you, for someone who implies he has intelligence, engage in an awful lot of ad hominems, half-truths, strawmen, and perhaps outright lies. Why don't you reveal yourself and your own blog if you have one, so that I can make fun of you there?

Keep working through these things, though. You usually do a great job here. I just thought you were a off on this one.

Whatever, jerk. Go clean off your prayer rug and dust off your turban. We know enough now of who you are.

Friday, May 05, 2006 12:52:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home