Here is an example of Cheney Fairness:
"We are at war, and when President Obama pretends we aren’t."-- On Obama's Handling of the Underwear Bomber
-Crickets--On Bush's handling of Richard Reid (Shoe Bomber).
Cheney is quick to point out Obama's "Shortcomings" but doesnt hold the same standard for Rethuglicans
Obama isn't exactly caught flat-footed here. Richard Reid was taken into custody in December, 2001. We hadn't established a procedure for dealing with enemy combatants yet or holding them at Gitmo. We hadn't worked out the legal details of the military tribunal.
It took two years to get this guy sentenced, and even after a civilian trial, he was defiant in his claims that he was a "soldier", that he was "at war" with us, that his 'allegiance was to Osama Bin Laden and the religion of Allah'. That, and a whole lot of other crap which proves that even two years down the pike, the guy still fervently believed every scrap of bogus propaganda he'd ever heard.
CNN.com - Reid: 'I am at war with your country' - Jan. 31, 2003
CNN.com - Exchange between Reid, judge follows life sentence - Dec. 6, 2003
Today, he spends his time in prison suing us for his "Constitutional Rights", still defiant. And even after Obama allowed his restrictions to be eased, in his gratitude, Reid refers to Obama as a "hypocrite" who is "no better than Bush".
Burlingame: Shoe Bomber Richard Reid Sues to Resume Jihad from Prison - WSJ.com
Bear in mind that this asshole intended to murder all those innocent bystanders on that plane, just like the Underwear Bomber intended murder to innocents.
Here's the deal with the Underwear Bomber though. This guy has indicated to the FBI that there are more plots in the pipeline. And he was singing like a bird, apparently... right up until we mirandized him and told him he didn't have to.
Now, in order to get information from him, information which may be
necessary to preventing further attacks and the deaths of our citizens, we're going to have to plea bargain with him.
How stupid is that?!
It's not like we haven't already been down this road under Bush and seen that nothing is gained by it. Instead of learning from Bush's experience, Obama REPEATS the same mistake, treating an "act of war" as a criminal matter.
And since no one in the Obama administration can give us a coherent reason WHY a military tribunal would be inappropriate or illegal, we can only assume that Obama isn't taking this war seriously. All we've heard so far is natterings from Obama's underlings about how they want to avoid inciting jihadists. But we have SEEN already that the appeasement of offering civilian proceedings doesn't work. Because we still have terrorists boarding our airplanes!
So... we're not getting the intelligence that we need because we're not questioning this guy. And... we're not getting a deterrent, because even though we have tried offering the best of American jurisprudence, they keep coming.
THIS is why people are pissed off at Obama regarding the Underwear Bomber. Because he's NOT learning. He's obeying the whims of the political left and ignoring the evidence before him on what works and what doesn't based on what we've already SEEN. And endangering us in the process.
The Crotch Bomber was going to kill every person on that plane and as many on the ground as he could reach with an explosion on descent. He is NOT an American citizen with the Constitutional Rights we associate with citizenship. He entered our country illegally because HE LIED to get that visa. This is no different essentially than if he had flown over in his own plane and attacked us from the air as an enemy assault force of one. And if he had, would we arrest him as a common criminal? ...Not likely.
This president needs to pull his head out of his ass and make a ******* decision already. Either we're "at war" and we take it seriously, or we're not. And if we're not, he needs to explain why we've got combat troops on the ground.
Charles Krauthammer had an interesting commentary on the subject this past week:
Excerpt:
This is all quite mad even in Obama’s terms. He sends 30,000 troops to fight terror overseas, yet if any terrorists come to attack us here, they are magically transformed from enemy into defendant.
The logic is perverse. If we find Abdulmutallab in an al-Qaeda training camp in Yemen, where he is merely preparing for a terror attack, we snuff him out with a Predator — no judge, no jury, no qualms. But if we catch him in the United States in the very act of mass murder, he instantly acquires protection not just from execution by drone but even from interrogation.
(more...)
War? What War? by Charles Krauthammer on National Review Online
Krauthammer's right. The fact that this guy managed to cozen the State Department out of a visa and get himself on that plane, doesn't mean that he's somehow less of a foreign enemy combatant than those we deal with militarily on the field.
This approach from the Obama White House is INSANITY.
You're a young person, by your own posts... a newbie to the board. My advice... don't let partisanship blind your judgment. It suits politicians to have our unquestioning allegiance to their parties and their platforms. It's a game of
"the Red Team vs. the Blue Team" that politicians encourage because it keeps us off their necks and supporting them with our votes and our cash. But don't be fooled. When something doesn't make sense to you... you have an unalienable right to SAY SO.
And so does Dick Cheney.
...BTW Cute nick name you guy's have for him! 
