Liberal Tolerance: An Oxymoron

26 Nov

We’ve all heard it; conservatives need to be more tolerant. Of course, we are always being told that by the ever so tolerant liberals aren’t we? I looked up the definition of tolerance before starting this and here it is: 

 “A fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one’s own; freedom from bigotry.”

Sounds just like all your liberal friends, doesn’t it? I’ve experienced some liberal tolerance firsthand this past week.  Here are some examples:

“She should have been a do-over, aka abortion”

“If you were to be treated in an emergency room, due to a grave accident and in need of large amounts of blood transfusions of your type of blood, let’s say, AB Negative… I guess it would NOT bother you or your father at all if they did not fact check what type of blood you needed. Oh well who are you to most of Americans?!! We don’t need to do any fact checking for you! So I guess all conservatives really don’t care if you die Jackie.”

Ah! Yes, it appears to me tolerance means getting rid of people who’s opinion are different that yours.  Don’t get me wrong, these people have every right to say these things.  That’s the beauty of the first amendment and living in America.  But don’t you dare accuse me or anyone, whether they be on television or radio of not being tolerant when you yourself are anything but the poster child for tolerance.

It all boils down to hypocrisy.  Liberals preach about how they are such tolerant, accepting people but then someone has a different view of them and all of a sudden liberals go on a tirade.  Liberals like to call anyone who disagrees with them a bigot, racist, hatemonger, or in some cases (not all) they even go to the extreme to wish death upon a person.  

But, hey tolerance has gotten us SO far in America.  I mean we have to be tolerant of terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans so let’s give him a fair trial.  Because, that’s what the families of those victims would want.  Right? WRONG.  I can assure you an overwhelming majority, if not all of the families of the victims feel this to be a slap in the face.  And if Mr. Holder is so sure KSM will be convicted, why not save NYC the circus, save us the time, save us the money and just get rid of the guy.  At the very least send him to a military tribunal and have them take care of it, which would be the correct thing to do.

Kids are being told they cannot bring a Bible into school or even simply pray in school.  Now let’s imagine it this way.  Say a kid comes to school holding a handful of books on homosexuality, maybe some pamphlets from NAMBLA.  Do you think if a parent who is against gay marriage were to go to the school and ask that the child be told not to bring those in the school would grant that request?  I think not.   That parent would probably be called a homophobe.  And we cannot forget to mention that if you are against same sex marriage you are a homophobe.  It’s amazing that in this country we had to pass a Hate Crimes Bill.  Someone explain to me how we are supposed to be able to tell if someone beat someone up because they hated them for their sexual orientation.  Tell me this also, will gay people be charged if they beat up a Christian?  Who are we to judge and say a person beat up someone because they hate the other persons lifestyle?

For some reason there is a growing movement in America to remove God from everything not just schools.  We are being told that we have to be tolerant of other people’s beliefs at the expense of having to hide our own.  Why can’t others be tolerant of our beliefs?  It’s an incredibly sad thing when this Nation is trying to remove God, or others opinions.  People come to America to express their beliefs, speak their mind and worship as they please.

Merry Christmas has become Happy Holidays, Happy Thanksgiving is Happy Turkey Day and Christmas carols are being banned in schools.  Oh, but the children can sing about their fearless Commander-in-Chief.

And we cannot forget the shooting at Fort Hood.  I’d call him a terrorist but I don’t want to jump to any conclusions……………mm yep he was and is a terrorist.  We couldn’t “jump to conclusions” about a terrorist attack but the President was awfully quick to point out how a white cop acted “stupidly” in arresting a black professor.
You see, the simple fact is that tolerance is preached widely among liberals yet rejected by those very same people.  I firmly believe the whole idea of tolerance and political correctness will do more to harm this country than anything.

Check out this story about a Best Buy Ad. America meet political correctness.

Or check out Keith Olbermann’s Countdown to see just how tolerant our left-wing friends are.

*Update: I realize not all liberals are like the ones I’ve portrayed but I think we can all agree there is an overwhelming amount of li berals who preach “Do as I say, Not as I do.” Take Al Gore for example, Mr.Enviornment, yet he refuses to stop eating meat (which according to PETA is the #1 cause of global warming), he flies around on private jets, and his 20 room mansion is fueld by natural gas and his home uses 20x the normal amount of energy, and his electricity bill for one month is $2,400.  We can also chat about Mr. Michael Moore, the man who despises capitalism yet if it weren’t for capitalism he would not be as successful as he is.

See http://thehandwritingonthewall.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/global-warming-finally-disproven-the-revival-of-copenhagen/ for some facts about Mr. Gore and Global Warming.

Advertisements

35 Responses to “Liberal Tolerance: An Oxymoron”

  1. Cole November 26, 2009 at 12:52 am #

    You rock Jackie!

    Just wait for the lib hate comments to role in, which is pretty ironic in itself, considering the post.

    Keep it up!!

  2. Ian November 26, 2009 at 12:56 am #

    Some good points.

    On the gay stuff, recently it became an arrestable offense to speak out against gays, a group of people that are Sinners in the eyes of almost half of Americans today. The gay rights bit was an amendment to the civil rights act passed by MLK Jr… No that is wrong… sorry… REVEREND MLK Jr. The act of adding gay legislation… hmm dual meaning to my words?… To the civil rights act that was MLK Jr.’s life work shows COMPLETE disrespect for the man. MLK Jr. and countless other black men, and whites as well, fought with words and died for their freedoms. By last count one gay guy has ever died from hate… and I think the jury is still out on that one, just a little…

    Good job Jackie. Now to watch that Best Buy ad…

  3. TNJim November 26, 2009 at 6:31 am #

    Spot on, Jackie! I had a hunch you’ld write a diary like this after reading some of the despicable comments on your Palin/MSDNC post. Yeah, they’re tolerant until they are challenged. Keep up the good work, kiddo!

  4. John Hitchcock November 26, 2009 at 8:02 am #

    Heh, if you want more examples of Liberal tolerance, check out my Liberals Are Racists. Since I didn’t add hyperlinks, it’ll take a modicum of work to find the site and article I referenced, but there is plenty of information to use. The site I referenced was “Sadly, No!” a hyper-liberal site. But “liberals are racist” in my own search box provides even more articles for the fun of laughing at those “tolerant” liberals.

    So, yeah, before you start attacking a kiddo, libs, check out what I’ve already documented about your type. You don’t want to enter a fight half-baked when you could go in fully baked, now, do you?

  5. Rosemary November 26, 2009 at 8:55 am #

    Very well stated. Liberals tend to think that the rules don’t apply to them.

    As for “gay” to me it will always mean bright and happy as in “gay yellow flowers” or carefree as in “gaily playing.” As Humpty Dumpty said in Alice in Wonderland, you have to let the words know who’s boss.

    As for hate speech, what about “tough love” instead?

    • John Hitchcock November 26, 2009 at 9:12 am #

      I agree re: gay

      The left, and especially the homosexual crowd, has co-opted many words and redefined them to the left’s benefit. Gay means happy, joyous, etc. Queer means strange, unusual, etc. Neither term has anything to do with Sodom and Gomorrah. But the left long ago co-opted those terms (read lied to get them redefined). As such, I refuse to use those terms to refer to those people. Just sayin’.

  6. Matt November 26, 2009 at 1:13 pm #

    Couple points:
    1) Things like this “us vs. them” mindset are the problem with the political system in the US and the reason why nothing gets done in Congress. There is always room for compromise, and keep in mind, we’re all Americans.

    2) The “us vs. them” mindset is just the media playing the American public for ad revenue. The more extreme the media can portray an issue, the more entertaining it will seem, and hence, will increase viewership. In reality, many Senators on opposite sides of the aisle are good friends, and agree on many issues, but the media will never mention this because its more profitable to portray politics as a zero-sum game. But even if D or R win in this zero-sum game, the American people always lose.

    3) The quotes you listed above are horrible, and should not be condoned coming from anybody, liberal or conservative. But keep in mind, a few bad apples dont spoil the whole pile. Most liberals are good people, just as conservatives are.

  7. makeupyourownmind November 26, 2009 at 4:39 pm #

    For once I think we see eye to eye on this issue. But it’s not ALL liberals who need to be more tolerant, not is it ALL conservatives who need to be more tolerant. It is those individuals whose only intelligent response to a great point or opinion is “F this, F that, you’re dumb, blah, blah, blah!” The quotes you have provided illustrate such mindless babble. But do not lump ALL liberals in the fashion of those two comments. There are many liberals AND conservatives that are able to look at someone’s opinion and think, “You know what? This is a good point. I may not agree with it, but I understand where he/she is coming from.”

    You’re VERY right, the more this country tries to push away from God, the more the problems just keep on coming. On my “Quotes To Believe In” page there is a quote by Ronald Reagan which illustrates a major difference between his time and now: “America has begun a spiritual reawakening. Faith and hope are being restored. Americans are turning back to God. Church attendance is up. Audiences for religious books and broadcasts are growing. And I do believe that He has begun to heal our blessed land.”

    Do not let everyone else’ lack of faith pull you down. And ESPECIALLY do not hate homosexuals OR terrorists for the choices they have made, no matter how hard that may be. Our job as Christians is to show EVERYONE the same love and kindness that God shows us each and every day. Do not worry about the judgment they receive on this Earth, their day will soon come.

    Have a wonderful Thanksgiving Jackie,
    Timothy Hawley

  8. Chris November 26, 2009 at 5:03 pm #

    Brilliantly written, Jackie! I’m grateful that I know a few liberals who are tolerant and understanding, but by and large those in the public sphere (i.e. those who speak the loudest) are among the most intolerant bunch around.

    Happy Thanksgiving!

  9. Sean November 26, 2009 at 5:04 pm #

    Why are you scared of fair trials for terrorists? If you’re so convinced of their guilt, what do you have to lose by granting them the justice that they supposedly hate us for in the first place?

    • John Hitchcock November 27, 2009 at 2:59 am #

      Sean, why are you scared of using the 233+ year precedent in dealing with war criminals to the point you want to make up a new precedent out of whole cloth?

  10. Dale November 26, 2009 at 5:14 pm #

    I like how you take specific cases from specific individuals to characterize an entire group of people. That’s really good logic, because we know all people who vote a certain way think the same, it’s just a fact. Timothy McVeigh would be really proud of you for pointing out these things, because he thought the same way you do.

    • John Hitchcock November 27, 2009 at 3:02 am #

      Dale, do you know what “examples” are? Or do you just enjoy being contrarian?

  11. I.T. November 26, 2009 at 5:40 pm #

    Best Buy published Muslim holiday wishes in that ad because the Muslim holiday happened to fall on the day after Thanksgiving this year. Best Buy is not “forgetting” Christmas, as the link you posted suggests. Christmas is simply a whole month away, whereas Eid al-Adha is the day after Thanksgiving. Best Buy is promoting their Thanksgiving holiday specials, and thus it makes sense to note other holidays that occur at the time of those specials.

  12. Matt November 26, 2009 at 10:13 pm #

    The ‘do as I say and not as I do’ is ubiquitous throughout politics. Witness the many Senators on both sides caught in unsavory relationships with mistresses, paiges, etc.

    Regarding Al Gore, just because he doesn’t live the lifestyle he preaches, doesnt make it wrong. Yes, it makes him a hypocrite, but the basis of his arguments are still sound.

    As for PETA claiming meat is the #1 cause of global warming, they have an agenda other than climate change (namely that people stop eating meat), and I would hardly consider PETA climate experts. The fact is, while methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, CO2 is still the primary worry. Why? Essentially, methane is somewhat self limiting. If all methane and CO2 emissions were to stop today, methane levels would reach equilibrium in 5-10 years, while CO2 would take 100-200 years to reach equilibrium. What this means is that any increase in CO2 we do now, we’re stuck with for a very long time. Not so with livestock-produced methane. Of course we could easily reduce cattle-produced methane by changing the feed from grain to grass (and reduce E.Coli outbreaks and increase beef Omega 3 to Omega 6 ratios) but thats another issue 🙂

  13. piros12 November 27, 2009 at 12:16 am #

    “Liberals like to call anyone who disagrees with them a bigot, racist, hatemonger, or in some cases (not all) they even go to the extreme to wish death upon a person.”
    Like using Psalm 109:8 as a prayer for President Obama?

    “I mean we have to be tolerant of terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans so let’s give him a fair trial. Because, that’s what the families of those victims would want.”
    No, we give them a fair trial because we believe in justice and liberty for all.

    “For some reason there is a growing movement in America to remove God from everything not just schools.”
    A lot of that is a backlash to the movement to put God into everything. For example “Under God” in the the Pledge of Allegiance.

    “People come to America to express their beliefs, speak their mind and worship as they please.”
    And yet Conservatives overwhelmingly do not support gay marriage. Opposition to gay marriage is based solely on ones religious beliefs. Conservatives talk about their religious freedom being infringed and they infringe on people who want to practice their religious freedom, freedom of expression, etc. through gay marriage.

    “We couldn’t “jump to conclusions” about a terrorist attack but the President was awfully quick to point out how a white cop acted “stupidly” in arresting a black professor.”
    The president received a lot of criticism from Liberals for that remark.

  14. John Hitchcock November 27, 2009 at 3:10 am #

    Matt, as the CRU dump points out, those AGW “scientists” were falsifying evidence, refusing to release their bad data in violation of FOIA in two different countries and in violation of scientific standards, bullying scientific periodicals into refusing material submitted by skeptics, wholly destroying the peer review process, etc, etc. AGW is false.

    And CO2? That’s the lifeblood of every photosynthesis-type plant on the earth. It is not a pollutant.

    I am old enough to remember the “coming ice age” scare in the 1970s, with NYT leading the way. We lost the use of the highly efficient Freon due to it. And the “ozone hole” scam vanished just as quickly.

    In fact, NYT in the 20th century has done much reporting on two different global warming hoaxes and two different coming ice age hoaxes, considering all four to be gospel truth. Might want to get a look at history.

    • Matt November 27, 2009 at 8:37 am #

      John,

      Couple points:
      FOIA only applies to US Government Agencies, therefore would have no jurisdiction in ‘two different countries.’

      I’m not sure what the CRU dump is, but even IF some scientists are using bad data, this doesn’t invalidate the whole of the AGW theory. Thats quite a logical leap to make.

      Yes, CO2 is used by plants in photosynthesis. However, CO2 levels are way above the equilibrium where CO2 sources = CO2 sinks. At the same time, millions of acres of rainforest are being chopped down in South America, futher imbalancing this relationship.

      The Ozone Hole problem vanished as quickly because its well on its way to recovery due to prompt worldwide action banning the use of Freon, and other CFCs.

      As far as the ice age scare goes – thats just another example of the media jumping on a minor scientific study, and blowing it all out of proportion. The majority of climate scientists at the time did not believe there was any impending ice age, as the evidence was fairly weak. Bottom line: dont expect good science from the media or politicians.

      • John Hitchcock November 27, 2009 at 2:03 pm #

        Matt, Great Britain also has FOIA, so there’s that other country. And do learn about the CRU dump. You might want to check here for starters.

        Bottom line: The major players in AGW theory were caught cooking the books and bullying the scientific community.

      • Ian November 27, 2009 at 5:03 pm #

        “As far as the ice age scare goes – thats just another example of the media jumping on a minor scientific study, and blowing it all out of proportion. The majority of climate scientists at the time did not believe there was any impending ice age, as the evidence was fairly weak. Bottom line: dont expect good science from the media or politicians.”

        Matt-

        As far as the gloabal warming scare goes – thats just another example of the media jumping on a minor scientific study, and blowing it all out of proportion. The majority of climate scientists of Our time do not believe there was any impending melt downs, as the evidence is fairly weak. Bottom line: dont expect good science from the media or politicians.

        hehe, see what I did? The same argument you make against an ice age is the same argument I use against global warming… Hmmm, maybe they are both lies?

        As for the CO2 thing, an imbalance? Are you aware that there have been more algae blooms, and larger ones, in the last forty years, than ever before? Algae needs CO2, the algae trends lay out perfectly on the REAL CO2 increase trends, which is not all that large of an increase. I find it insulting… well not really but if I was nature, or God, I would… that people do not believe Earth is equipped for this. Earth is maybe the most amazing item in this solar system. You are aware that Earth was once a giant ball of ice, as science shows. And yet today we have a wide variation in temperatures. Earth shall always keep itself steady, it is FAR bigger than you, me, or Al Gore’s ego.

      • John Hitchcock November 28, 2009 at 4:55 pm #

        Many scientists have found a correlation between CO2 and rising temperatures. That is a given. While the “movers and shakers” in the AGW industry (those scientists who have refused to divulge their data and modeling mechanisms – and cannot explain their broken models – despite FOIA in two different nations, and in contravention of scientific standards) claim that correlation is causational, i.e. CO2 causes warming, other scientists have found that, historically, CO2 increases follow temperature increases.

      • Matt December 1, 2009 at 10:50 am #

        John,

        Ah, I’d heard about that CRU scandal. Crazy stuff – however, I’ve yet to see anything from them that could be considered ‘bullying scientific periodicals,’ or ‘destroying the peer review process.’ Considering that they’re relatively minor in the whole climate research area (there are 3 institutions in the US more influential than them, not including the many universities that have groups focusing on climate science), I’d consider the whole CRU thing to be a distraction and a bit of a strawman.

        Also, the vast majority of models and data are available freely from the many institution websites. NASA GISS’ GCMs are available here http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools, NCAR data and models are here http://www.ncar.ucar.edu/tools/, huge database of satellite data is here http://www.class.ncdc.noaa.gov/saa/products/welcome.

        Short story – the data is all out there and available if you look for it. One of the good things about government funded science in the US is that all grants come with the caveat that all data and results are publicly available.

      • Matt December 1, 2009 at 11:06 am #

        Ian –

        Yes, its possible that the media is blowing this out of proportion. However, if you look at the body of evidence (in scientific journals or otherwise) available supporting climate change, you’ll see this dwarfs the meager evidence given in the study attributing an impending ice age. IIRC, the author of the study itself wasn’t confident in the conclusion, but the media jumped on it anyway.

        And you’re right, there is some automatic balancing built into the Earth’s system. But its not unlimited. Its like a swing on a swing-set. Under normal conditions, you’re pretty safe – just swinging back and forth. But given a big enough push, you might be in for a hell of a ride.

        I think humans have reached the point where our influence can be larger than nature’s. We can level mountains, carve canyons, change the course of rivers, create artificial islands, drain lakes and produce rain. Why is it so hard to believe that we can have an effect on climate as well?

        Anyway, it comes down to this. If we assume the climate is changing, then 10, 20, 50, 100, whatever years down the road, we’ll probably be dealing with altered conditions for farming, raising livestock, etc. Moving these facilities to the new ‘temperature’ zone is not going to be cheap. Nor is dealing with loss of oceanfront properties. So what it boils down to is a free-market approach to an unknown future. Do we spend money now, and mitigate the future effects, or do we deal with the full cost in X number of years?

      • John Hitchcock December 3, 2009 at 5:35 am #

        Matt, I suggest you read this article written by a journalist commentator over at Patterico’s Pontifications. You will find proof of all the assertions I made. You will also find proof of much, much more. And you definitely need to re-check your information RE the importance, or lack thereof, of CRU. Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the CRU bigshots are key players in IPCC.

        Again, in the 20th century, there were 2 ice age scares and 2 global warming scares. And all 4 were blamed on humans.

      • John Hitchcock December 3, 2009 at 6:11 am #

        You can get even more information at this site that the global warming alarmists are full of hot air. Don’t get me wrong. Global Warming exists. AGW does not. We are still warming from the little ice age. Prior to the little ice age, farms existed on Greenland. Now, not so much.

        And the global warming since the little ice age? You can make a linear pattern and wholly disregard the industrial age. Because the industrial age has had zero affect on the linear graphing.

      • Matt December 3, 2009 at 10:06 am #

        John,

        Thanks for the NCTimes link – that was an interesting read – but to me it seemed to focus on the character of Jones, but not so much the underlying science. Remember the theory of AGW is not based on just one single study, graph, institution, etc. Rather, there is a whole host of evidence that supports this theory.

        Here’s a good article summarizing alot of the evidence supporting the AGW theory http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=seven-answers-to-climate-contrarian-nonsense Unfortunately its written in a bit of a confrontational tone – but the facts behind that are good.

      • John Hitchcock December 3, 2009 at 10:49 am #

        Matt, you missed my 6:11am post, which has a link to loads of information, including a 90-min (or 9 10-min, pick your take) video. And that is full of debunkage. It’s also full of showing you the fraud in the science.

        You also ignored the “CRU is the major player in IPCC” statement, which Bradley Fikes and others clearly stated.

      • John Hitchcock December 3, 2009 at 10:52 am #

        And, if you follow the Patterico link, you’ll find Bradley used to make fun of skeptics, but no more. Because he saw enough evidence to prove to him all this AGW hoo-ha is based on fraud, strong-arming, data-destruction, deceit.

      • John Hitchcock December 3, 2009 at 10:54 am #

        Heh, Matt, I just opened up your “7 answers” link. Let me just say my 6:11 link already covered that before you posted it.

  15. ccoffer November 28, 2009 at 4:15 pm #

    “Why are you scared of fair trials for terrorists? “

    Only a low life scumbag would be concerned about the “fairness” afforded a mass murderer, and only a slobbering fool would claim that a military tribunal isn’t a trial.

    Leftists are the scum of the earth.

  16. PaleoSapiens November 29, 2009 at 7:41 pm #

    “Never Underestimate the Power of Human Stupidity”

    Piers Anthony, “Bio of a Space Tyrant”

  17. Rosemary December 1, 2009 at 12:38 pm #

    Matt, I have to disagree with you. I’ll give you a website that has lots of links so you can become well informed on the AGW issue; it’s a scientists site and is in process of setting up a special informative section.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com

    A great deal of information has been kept from the general public – by media and scientists alike. The scientists involved in the CRU email debacle have had significant input into the UN’s — drat, I’ve forgotten their acronym!

    There is ample evidence that every 10,000 years or so we enter an ice age of sorts. Not being a climatologist, I’m not the best person to make the argument, but that is a far more likely scenario than global warming. Especially given that date indicates we have global cooling… data that hasn’t been manipulated, destroyed, or hidden from legitimate peer review.

    I happen not to believe in anthropomorphic global warming or natural global warming. BUT if we were capable of changing the temperature trend, we’d better be quite positive we aren’t contributing to global cooling instead of combating global warming.

    • Matt December 1, 2009 at 1:33 pm #

      Hi Rosemary,

      I actually work in the atmospheric sciences on a project aimed at improving climate models by furthering our understanding of cloud/surface energy balances, so those links I posted are ones I’ve used personally in my day job (i.e. scientist links).

      Anthony Watts is a television meteorologist – he has no scientific degree that I could find evidence of. I’ve seen some of his stuff before, and he tends to misunderstand alot of the science when he draws his conclusions.

      Yes, the earth does enter ice ages at roughly the same period as the Milankovich cycles (every 23,000 and 41,000 years), so we know, roughly speaking, when these occur. But no data at the moment is indicating any large scale global cooling. One must remember that climate science is long-term trend driven – so what happens year to year is not as important as what happens decade to decade, century to century. So if this decade is cooler than the preceding, which was cooler than its predecessor, then we’d have a case for global cooling. But just because this year is cooler than the last has no significance, unless it continues in the years ahead.

      The thing is that among the climate science community, the fact that we are experiencing global climate change is undisputed. The questions of why, when and how are yet to be answered but this is the whole point of science. Its just like gravity. We know it works, we have equations which allow us to predict how it will work, but we have no idea WHY it works. There are theories (gravitons, warped space-time, etc), but none have ever been proven. And yet gravity continues to work, whether or not we fully understand it.

  18. Zach December 6, 2009 at 3:55 pm #

    Hey Jackie,

    The intolerance really cuts both ways, but coming from a side that preaches tolerance it just makes their own hypocracy much more glaring. These are people who simply have been around similar people so much in their lives that coming in contact with those that have differing views evokes a knee jerk response that there must be something very wrong with that other person. Rather than seek to understand these views they take the lazy route of so many other ignorant masses of the past by assigning simplistic labels such as “bigot, racist, etc.” in order for them to justify their own intolerance. Somehow these folks can never really understand how easy it is for two well educated and well meaning people to come to differeing conclusions.

    Just take it in stride when these folks go after you. Their nobody to be overly concerned with and their are plenty of well meaning folks on the other side of the aisle we can have a productive discussion with.

  19. David P Redmond December 6, 2009 at 6:32 pm #

    Please consider linking to

    http://911neverforget.us/

    on your blog

    We need everyone to know how awful a decision this is by AG Eric Holder and to contact their representatives in Congress so we can overrule this.

    – military tribunals are still being held for other detainees
    – Holder himself said KSM and co-conspirators could have been tried in either civilian court or military tribunal
    – even upon an acquittal, defendants will not be released, clearly proving this as a show trial that will be a circus just blocks from Ground Zero

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s