Filed under: S. Goodspeed
I’m glad we have such wise lawmakers to cut through the noise and connect complex issues in such simple, clear, and concrete terms.
Rep Peter King (R-NY), ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, educated the public (well at least the public that watches Fox News) on Attorney General Eric Holder’s true reasoning behind his support of trying terror suspects in criminal courts. King:
House Homeland Security Committee ranking Republican Pete King (N.Y.) said that Holder’s refusal to say that radical Islam motivated the alleged attacker, Faisal Shahzad, makes him an incapable attorney general.
“An attorney general who eight and a half years after Sept. 11 does not realize our enemy is radical Islam is either so politically correct or so out of touch that he doesn’t deserve to be attorney general,” King said on Fox News. “I mean, this is why he wants to have the terror trials of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in Lower Manhattan — he just doesn’t get it.”
Nevermind the highly disputable legal and policy questions undergirding the debate on capturing, detaining, and trying terror suspects going on in legal circles and in the think tank world. Indeed, simplistic partisan attacks are more fun than reviewing questions on evidence, fact, nuanced bipartisan debate, academic studies, and general rational, reasoned debate.
1 Comment so far
Leave a comment