The Emperor Obama

It is painfully apparent that President Obama ordered the summary execution of Osama Bin Laden. His actions are just another nail in the coffin of American Jurisprudence, following in the tradition of other autocratic Presidents who actions denied constitutional protection to certain individuals.

Article 1, section 8 of The Constitution of the United States provides that Congress shall have the power:

“To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations.”

Amendment 5 of the Constitution of the United States provides that:

“No person…shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

It should be noted that the Framing Fathers did not use the term “citizen” or “resident,” but chose the term “person,” as in human being, as in war criminal, as in illegal immigrant, as in ad infinitum…

To hear no member of Congress, in either house, in either party, decry this act for what it was, cold-blooded murder, is more disheartening that the fact that our agnostic, narcissistic, Marxist President  is following in the footsteps of another president and apparent hero, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, president of the Soviet Politburo, who thought nothing of ordering  the summary execution of thousands of white Russian patriots and monarchists, but started, as they all do, with one.

Prime Minister Hideki Tojo of Japan, responsible for millions of deaths, including hundreds of thousands American citizens and American protectorate citizens, was captured, tried, convicted and executed by force of law, with full benefit of our constitutional protections.

Field Marshal Alfred Jodl, successor to Adolph Hitler, whose butchery and savagery  was responsible for tens of millions of deaths, including my uncle at St Lo, Normandy, France, on 6 June, 1944,  was arrested, tried, convicted and executed in accordance with US Law and constitutional protections.

Had Adolph Hitler been captured, he would have been afforded the full protection of US law and due process prior to his certain execution.

Hasn’t President Obama heard of Nuremberg? Doesn’t he understand, and don’t our Congressmen, and don’t you understand, that this is not Imperial Rome, but The United States of America!

Osama Bin Laden, it is reported, was unarmed and in the company of his family, wives and minor children; and I strongly believe no US Navy Seal would have taken a kill shot without orders allowing the shot to be taken.

The death of 3,000 American citizens on 9/11/2001 was a heinous crime, but no worse than Bataan, or Burma, or the actual invasion and occupation of US territory at Attu and Kiska by the forces of Imperial Japan, beginning in June, 1942.  And I could, but will not name multiple dates from 1941 through 1945 on which more than 3,000 US citizens were killed by Axis powers.

President Obama ordered the execution of Osama Bin Laden to insure that the US would not have to try him in accordance with our Constitution and Laws, precisely because those Laws are now so perverted by the influence of foreign jurisprudence as to make a fair trial, for the prosecution, impossible. The ACLU, the SCOTUS, and liberal euroamericans have created an atmosphere of indulgence and permissiveness which apparently frightens The President and his inept and churlish Attorney General, even as both have worked diligently to create the tort oriented, judicially active jurisprudence we experience today.  What if Bin Laden was freed on a technicality, or worse yet, found not guilty by a jury of His peers, the disadvantaged hyper-liberal denizens of New York? The President and his crony, Eric Holder, could not even be sure that they could convict KSM, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks, in Federal Court  in New York City.

Who in Congress has decried this fact, or acted to introduce legislation to curb the power of Federal Courts in so far as they fail to rightly determine the intent of Congress. No one; in fact, there seemed to be general relief on the part of Congress that the President recanted yet another campaign pledge.

Why do we expect our citizens to respect the law, when our leaders admit its corruption?

The summary execution of Bin Laden follows yet another criminal act, the extra-legal, unconscionable, and un-Constitutional murder of Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi’s son and grandchildren in a Predator UAV attack on a leader of a sovereign nation with which no state of war exists, and in which we had no vested national interest nor fear of invasion or impending criminal act.

Now the President strikes the pose of concern over inflaming radical Muslims should the pictures of Bin Laden be released to the American public? Mr. President, they are already inflamed. They are encouraged by your actions. We, the American public, have seen pictures of the dead in trenches since Shiloh, at Manassas, at Wounded Knee, in the Argonne, at Corregidor, Iwo Jima, Normandy, Inchon, Khe Sanh, the list is endless.

It is my belief that our President will not release the pictures of the man he had murdered out of fear they will someday be used against him in one of the many international tribunals he so favors, and I believe, also out of respect for a man he considers an intellectual hero. What ambivalence he must feel; he is President of The United States of America, and yet he is a man who would see us all under one world law, one world way, one world.

It is time to return to our Founding Father’s wise words:

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”

George Washington,  Farewell Address to Friends and Fellow Citizens, 19 September, 1796

 

This entry was posted in National Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *