The Kool-Aid Drinkers

As I was reading The Star Democrat I happen to come across the following comment which I just do not understand. In that article the writer is putting Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, when they called for a war crimes trial, in the same category as Stalin, Hitler, and many other war criminals. What nonsense. Have they forgotten 911 and the death total on that day? Have they forgotten the attack on the Marine Barrack in Lebanon? Have they forgotten the attack on the USS Cole and the loss of life there? I could go on and on but I think that I have made my point. Here is an insert of that article from the paper

("Bringing Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, and the rest to justice should be an extremely high priority for anyone committed, no matter how minimally, to the rule of law. In addition to their actionable constitutional crimes, they should be brought before a competent tribunal on charges of war crimes, crimes against the peace, and crimes against humanity.")

I have to ask this question: What Actionable Constitutional crimes? Since when is it a crime for the elected officials of this country to do whatever it takes to protect this country against a people that hate us, that would make us slaves, who would cut our heads off because our religion is not like theirs. These people are out to destroy us and you say we must bring our past leaders to justice for trying to protect us. You call it crimes. What crimes? Since when is it a crime to protect our homeland from such violence? No pun intended but what kind of kool aid have you been drinking? I ask you what are the bases for someone to take legal action against these public servants who took the measures to keep you and the rest of America safe. All I see is some great Americans who met the challenge head on and did something about it.

Do you say the same thing for the other great leaders in our past? For just one example was President Truman wrong for using the A-Bomb against Japan? Do you say that he should have also been brought up on actionable constitutional crimes? Remember those two bombs killed hundreds of thousands of people in the blink of an eye. No he was not wrong! He saved hundreds of thousands of American Soldiers lives who would have been killed if we had to invade Japan. The Japanese people at that time were a country that would do anything to help its cause. Remember the death march on Bataan? Remember Pearl Harbor? We must remember that an adequate response to terror is always the best protection against future terror.

The American people must never again take weak measures such as blowing up aspiring factories, or making air strikes in places of no importance. We cannot give every terrorist that tries to destroy us their Miranda Warnings. There is a difference between an act of war by a terrorist society and an American Citizen breaking the law. I can see now the American soldiers on D-Day giving all the German soldiers their Miranda warnings before firing on them. I must say that the remarks made by Dick Cheney below are my thoughts exactly and the thoughts of most Americans.

"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an al-Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are committed...to kill Americans, then I worry. Protecting the United States from terrorist attacks sometimes...requires us to take actions that generate controversy. I'm not at all sure that's what the Obama administration believes." - Former Vice President Dick Cheney, as quoted in Politico

What better way of saying what most Americans believe. I'm glad that the majority of the American people have not drunk any of this kool-aid.

Bill Patchett

February 16,2009