The 9/11 defendant’s response to the government’s accusations
Pamela Geller writing at Atlas Shrugs expresses the white hot anger every American should feel about the decision by Obama and Holder to try the 9/11 terrorists in a U.S. courtroom:
Skin crawling moment. Obama’s war on America blasts off our bloodied backs. Here is the preview, the overture, if you will, to the Islamic public spectacle of the NYC terror trial. Christians meet lions.“Obama’s war on America” is exactly right. A president who would do this cruel and monstrous thing to his own country is an enemy of that country.
I’ve only glanced at the document, “The Islamic Response to the Government’s Nine Accusations,” and it looks like a full blown jihadist justification for the 9/11 attack. The evil insanity of trying enemies of the United States in a civilian U.S. courtroom is seen more clearly than ever.
Now a possible positive side of this mess is that the statement fully avows the jihadist nature of Islam, making it harder for the fantasists among us to keep talking about moderate Islam. But will it? In reality, the libs and neocons will say that the defendants don’t speak for Islam, they hijacked a noble religion.
And let’s remember, the neocons began worshipping at Obama’s feet over his Nobel Peace Prize speech in which he said that war is sometimes necessary. They’ve been bought off. They will not have the Geller-like white-hot anger that one ought to have. But, come to think of it, those de-natured ideologues are not capable of having white-hot anger about anything.