Imprison Here, Release Here

Transferring terrorist prisoners to the U.S. means setting them free here, too.

by Andrew C. McCarthy - October 23rd, 2009 - National Review Online

If Guantanamo Bay is closed, scores of trained jihadists, committed to killing Americans, will be released to dwell among us: It is that simple.

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder contend that America’s civilian federal prisons are secure. Our “supermaxes,” they insist, are up to the task of confining the most lethal terrorists. Even if that were true (and history shows it is not), the argument is the most hollow of strawmen. These terrorists are not going to escape — they are going to walk right out the prison gates. They are going to be freed by a perverse new legal system, an ad hoc creation of progressive federal judges, assisted mightily by an Obama Justice Department rife with lawyers whose former firms and institutions spent the last eight years representing America’s enemies.

I am so distressed at this article that all I can do is post it. My thoughts about this are unfortunately so filled with rage that I do not wish to write them for public consumption while the rage still fills my soul. I will update this later this weekend after I have had time to cool down. However I will say one thing now. Blood in the streets is coming. Lots of blood. America will not go down without a fight.

After further thought, I am not sure I will ever be calm enough to respond to the insanity in this article. I will leave my original thoughts as I expressed them. This is outrageous. Enough said.

Who says they’re your kids?

Not in Montana

by Frank Miele - October 11th, 2009 - Daily Inter Lake

The one bright spot in the ruling came not from the benighted majority, but from the lone dissenter, Justice Jim Rice, who spoke eloquently for parents and for sanity.

"The Court's decision," Rice noted, "will open a Pandora's Box of potential attacks upon the right of fit and capable parents to raise their own children."

After establishing that the Montana Supreme Court has previously held fast to the rule that "a finding of abuse, neglect or dependency is the jurisdictional prerequisite for any court-ordered transfer of custody from a natural parent to a third party," Rice demonstrates conclusively that his fellow justices in this ruling have ruled in favor of Kulstad "for the apparent purpose of diminishing the reach of the constitutional rights previously declared for parents."

Once again the activist judges in our corrupt court system have ignored all law and precedent and ruled the way they want.. just because they can. Anyone who continues to consider our courts and our judges to be worthy of respect is just as corrupt as the rulings they pull out of their bodily orifices.

This is the epitome of the rule of judges destroying the rule of law.