I Brake For Brainwashed Libs.

Hi yall, I believe everything that my Liberal Masters tell me!!!

Bill Ayers is a known, unrepentant terrorist who admits to bombing the Pentagon, the Capitol Building and police precincts. His terrorist group, the Weather Underground, is responsible for the murder of police officers. But instead of cooling his heels in a prison cell, he's a college professor in Illinois who has recently stated that he doesn't think his gang did enough damage to the US.

So why isn't he in jail? Simple, his rights were violated by law enforcement. The FBI was engaged in illegal practices (most notably, breaking and entering without a warrant or probable cause) leading up to his arrest. Because of these violations, all charges against Ayers were dropped.

Fast forward to today. President Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, has decided that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the guy who planned the 9-11 attacks that took the lives of 3,000 innocent Americans, should go on trial in civil court.
It makes me sick just thinking about it. Of all the things Obama has pulled since his swearing in, from trying to break our economy to the apology tour, this is the worst.
KSM was not read his Miranda Rights when he was captured, was held for years without trial or legal council and was water boarded while in custody. Are these not grounds to throw out all charges against him, as the court did with Ayers' charges? Isn't that exactly what we risk by going forward with this idiotic plot?

But Holder and Obama have both assured us that he will be found guilty. Really? How can they say that if KSM is to be tried in a court that requires he be presumed innocent until proven guilty? By stating that there is no doubt that he will be found guilty, they admit that the trial is rigged which defeats their stated purpose for sending him to trial. KSM is still being denied a fair trial if what Obama and Holder tell us is true. Isn't that also a violation of the very rights they are trying to afford him?

And if his charges aren't thrown out and he is found guilty, what does it say about our legal system when a criminal can be arrested, not read his rights, held indefinitely, without legal council, and water boarded and still be convicted of his crimes? What kind of precedent does that set? Can we do that to bank robbers and embezzlers now? Is there not equal protection under the law?

Obviously this stunt is not meant to protect the rights of KSM or he would be presumed innocent. So why do it? Why put our legal system in such a lose-lose situation? On the one hand, we risk setting free a mass-murderer with the blood of 3,000 innocent Americans on his hands. On the other, we risk the integrity of our legal system by rigging a trial against a guy whose "rights" have been violated.

Why the risk? Hard to say. It may be that they really are too freaking stupid to know the difference between a common criminal and an enemy combatant and their warped world view has blurred the lines between a crime and an act of war. Or it may be that, to Obama and Holder, a "gotcha" moment against the CIA and the Bush Administration is far more important than the integrity of our legal system and the American lives lost on 9-11.