Was Adolf Eichmann a Terrorist?
By Larry Johnson on November 14, 2009 at 12:45 AM in Current Affairs
(Bumped up from Friday evening.)
Does it matter what we call someone? Is terminology essential for taking action against someone responsible for a monstrous crime? I confess I’m amused by the furor over whether to label Major Nidal Hasan a “terrorist.” But so what? If call him a terrorist does that fast track him to a court martial? The answer is no. If you call him a “terrorist” does that ensure he is executed for his crimes? No.
The key issue with respect to Hasan was whether or not he was acting on behalf of someone else per their instructions. While Hasan certainly tried to reach out to folks that have links back to Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda sympathizers, there is no evidence that he was a mole and carried out a secret plot. We also have strong circumstantial evidence that he was unfit for duty as a U.S. military officer and instead of being disciplined was passed along and allowed to become a threat.
News today that the Obama Administration is going to try the 9-11 plotters and other Al Qaeda operatives in a civilian trial in New York City has again awakened the red herring about “fighting terrorism as a war.” Which then leads to my original question, was Adolf Eichmann a terrorist?
Eichmann, for the culturally ignorant, was the mastermind of the Final Solution that helped exterminate 6 million Jews:
Reinhard Heydrich disclosed to Eichmann in autumn 1941 that all the Jews in German-controlled Europe were to be exterminated.[13] In 1942, Heydrich ordered Eichmann to attend the Wannsee Conference as recording secretary, where Germany’s anti-Semitic measures were set down into an official policy of genocide. Eichmann was given the position of Transportation Administrator of the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question”, which put him in charge of all the trains which would carry Jews to the death camps in the territory of occupied Poland.
In 1944, he was sent to Hungary after Germany had occupied that country in fear of a Soviet invasion. Eichmann at once went to work deporting Jews, sending 430,000 Hungarians to their deaths in the gas chambers.
By 1945, Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler had ordered Jewish extermination to be halted and evidence of the Final Solution to be destroyed. Eichmann was appalled by Himmler’s turnabout, and continued his work in Hungary against official orders. Eichmann was also working to avoid being called up in the last ditch German military effort, since a year before he had been commissioned as a Reserve Untersturmführer in the Waffen-SS and was now being ordered to active combat duty.
Eichmann fled Hungary in 1945 as the Soviets entered, and he returned to Austria, where he met up with his old friend Ernst Kaltenbrunner. Kaltenbrunner, however, refused to associate with Eichmann since Eichmann’s duties as an extermination administrator had left him a marked man by the Allies.
While Eichmann certainly inflicted terror on his victims, both directly and indirectly, he was not a terrorist. He was military officer and was fighting in a war. However, when it came time to bring him to justice it was not through a “war or terror.” Israel (correctly so in my view) took matters into its own hands and snatched him from Argentina and took him to Israel for trial:
In 1959, Mossad was informed that Eichmann was in Buenos Aires under the name Ricardo Klement (Clement) and began an effort to locate his exact whereabouts.[21] Through relentless surveillance, it was concluded that Ricardo Klement was, in fact, Adolf Eichmann. The Israeli government then approved an operation to capture Eichmann and bring him to Jerusalem for trial as a war criminal. The Mossad agents continued their surveillance of Eichmann through the first months of 1960 until it was judged safe to take him down, even watching as he delivered flowers to his wife on their 25th wedding anniversary on March 21.
Eichmann was captured by a team of Mossad and Shabak agents in a suburb of Buenos Aires on May 11, 1960, as part of a covert operation.[22] The Mossad agents had arrived in Buenos Aires in April 1960 after Eichmann’s identity was confirmed. After observing Eichmann for an extensive period of time, a team of Mossad agents waited for him as he arrived home from his work as foreman at a Mercedes Benz factory. One kept lookout waiting for his bus to arrive, while two agents pretended to be fixing a broken down car. An unconfirmed fourth would ride on the bus to make sure he would leave. Once Eichmann alighted and began walking the short distance to his home, he was asked by the agent at the car, Zvi Aharoni, for a cigarette. When Eichmann reached in his pocket he was set upon by the two by the car. Eichmann fought but team member Peter Malkin, a Polish Jew and a black belt in karate, knocked Eichmann unconscious with a strike to the back of his neck and bundled him into the car and took him to the safe house.
There a preliminary interrogation was conducted and it was proved that Klement (Clement) was undoubtedly the Nazi Eichmann.[21] The agents kept him in a safe house until they judged that he could be taken to Israel without being detected by Argentine authorities; then smuggled him out of Argentina on board an El Al Bristol Britannia flight from Argentina to Dakar and then to Israel on May 21, 1960, heavily sedated and disguised, like the agents, in the uniform of the El Al crew.[23]
Israel demonstrated that a genuine monster could be brought to justice using the law rather than force. I consider this one of Israel’s finest moments. David Ben Gurion and his Government demonstrated that they could defeat a monster without having to become monsters.
The Bush Administration brought us the nonsense that we must fight terrorism as a war. This still makes no sense because terrorism is a tactic, it is not a strategic organization. This does not mean therefore that we use only “law enforcement” means against people who engage in terrorism. Hell, no. If we can located a terrorist cell and kill them I think that is swell. But I know firsthand from working with the military force that has the capture/kill mission for terrorists that they rarely get the opportunity. The folks who engage in terrorism tend to hang out in groups and small cells that are not easily attacked with military force. More often than not we can get these people thru intelligence or law enforcement operations.
So what do we do about Khalid Sheik Muhammed and the others coming out of Gitmo? I agree with Rudy Guiliani. These individuals are defacto combatants and should be tried in a military tribunal. They are not common criminals and should not be tried in a civilian court.
UPDATE: Here’s Rudy’s comments today:
Unfortunately, as with so many other aspects of the Obama administration, this is a plan not fully thought through.
These are some initial thoughts. Chew away.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Where are the civil courts going to get “a jury of peers” to sit on the KSM trial?
The borders are open. I’m sure NY will be flooded even more with his “peers”!
When the first attack in NY happens, Obama will not only be a “traitor” he will also be a “murderer”!
IMPREACH the POS NOW!
CAROL HAKA
And when it goes down and he tries to preside over a ceremony for the victims, @$%^&()(*&^%$#@!@#$%^&*)(&*^%$&^#&%$#@#@*+_)__*(&_)^^$&#^@^@@^#%$(&^)&_)*+_)(_(+)(&(*&%*%$^%@!@%%*(_((*^(&$%$#$#$^&**(&$%$*^)&_*_)_+_++_+&%^#@@#$%&*()(*&^%$#$%^&*(*&^%$#@#$%^*&(&^%$^&*^%$*%$^%%$#%$#*%^)&_$^&(*Y%###&__((*^^%$@#^%%^(_+(_+)(&$$!#@#^%&)((*&^(&$^%*)((&)%$#^%^*(_)(*_*(&%^%*#&%(*&_(%$*^#%#*^&*)_+_))*(^&*%^#%$#%%(*)_(_)*(&)*&%*^%$#^%$#*^)(___+^&%^%#@#&*$%^&*&^%$%&*(^&%^$$^&^*%^$%*&&%^#%$&(*&__^%&%##^%^)&__)^^$$^$^)&&^%^%#%$@(*__&&*^$%#@##@(%_&!@$^&*(*%^&*()_(*&%^$^&*(*&^%$%^&*&^%^&*(&$*&%(*&(*^%%$^&*&%$#%^&*(&^%$^&*^%$*&^&^%$%^#$@%^*(&(*&$%$#%%*&)*^*^$^%%$#%%(^*&)^*^%$%^$#$&^&)*_&^%*%$##$*())__)^*^$%^$%^(*&&_*^%%$$@#@%$^&*()(*&%$#%*&()_(*&^%$%^&*^%&^%$^&%$#@%*(&(&^%^*%$&$%#^&*&^%$%#$*&^(^%#%^^*&^$&^%*&#$*&*(#%^&*(&^%$#$%^*&(
And besides all of that “FUCK HIM”!
CAROL HAKA
My thoughts and feelings exactly.
What political genius thought this would be a good idea with 2010 election coming?
If Republicans thought that healthcare was going to be Obama’s Waterloo well they just got handed gift that will unfortunately keep on giving.
For Stevie Israel, Tony Weiner, and Jerry Nadler as well as Mayor Bloomers to immediately come out in support of this pathetically stupid idea must have consequences. Unfortunately for NYC this came after Bloomers got re-elected, but with this statement his pockets are not deep enough for him to get elected to any office in NYS in the future.
As far as those congressmen, the GOP must come up with compelling candidates and their decision on this trial must be the mantra of the campaign to unseat all of them.
Carol,
Obama already IS a traitor with Afghanistan. However, I agree with you. Obama Has to GO. He endangers our country it seems on a weekly basis. Protecting the USA is one of the very few constitutional duties he actually has.
Like someone said the other day, this trial of these terrorists should be handled by two guys from Newark, NJ and a Buick and it will be over in 2 days time….
Larry, I never saw Guiliani more angry and agitated than that interview about the KSM trial in New York.
I agree that to have ever called this a “war on terror” was dumb and wrong. This is a war against radical Islam groups who use terror as a tactic.
I also agree with you and with Rudy that KSM is an enemy combatant - a prisoner of war - and a war criminal who has committed crimes against humanity. He must be tried by a military tribunal.
To allow this monster the public platform of the New York media in our criminal justice system (especially in New York) is outrageous and indicative of the contempt Obama has for this country and its principles.
I signed and others should sign the letter being sent by the 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America and theBravest.com urging Obama to not bring the terrorist detainees to the U.S. to stand trial in civilian courts:
https://keepamericasafe.wufoo.com/forms/z7×4z5/
Hokma,
Thanks to the link to the 9/11 families letter.
Signed and sent.
The DC shooter who was just executed (hooray!) was blackmailing the US government for two million dollars to end his murder spree. He planned to use the money to establish a terrorist training camp in Canada, and he dreamed that hundreds of his graduates would filter back down into the US and terrorize on a broad scale. Was he acting almost alone, and was he still a terrorist? Yes, and yes.
Onofre,
As Larry astutely points out it really does not matter whether we label him a murderer or a terrorist.
Myself, I am very comfortable that he will be tried in a Military Court for the following reasons:
1. He will be kept in a Brig with other Military people, and I doubt if they will be exchanging cheery ‘Hellos” with him. His visitors will be closely screened.
2. The guards will be Military, and they will follow Military protocols, and will not worry too much about Political Correctness.
3. Hassan will be less likely to corrupt others in a Military prison. Keep in mind that most Islamic “converts” in this country come from within out own prison system.
4. Larry Can Correct me if I am in error. But from what I have read, evidentiary rules are more stringent and regulated in Military procedures, thus eliminating much of the psycho babble, discrimination and extraneous paths and arguments allowed in a civilian court. The number of appeals are more limited than in our civilian system.
We do not have to be concerned with CAIR, Muslim Brotherhood, Black Panthers or any of the other Islamic groups Obama is, or has been, affiliated being involved in the adjudication or decisions. All will be done by MILITARY people.
5. Even in a Military Court it will be a lengthy procedure and not resolved within a week. Hassan’s family (tribe?) has already indicated they are willing to go to any lengths to defend him.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6710592.html
If we go the Civilian court route the appeals, exceptions, and arguments can go on and on past most of our remaining lifetimes. If Hassan’s family hires someone like Alan Dershowitz, it can be an ongoing circus like the OJ Simpson trial in California.
6. It costs about $50,000+ a year to keep someone like Hassan in a regular prison. Surely all those high priced lawyers his family hires will demand and sue that Hassan’s $90,000/year salary remain active. In Military proceedings Hassan’s salary will most like be suspended or put on hold. All those involved in the adjudication and decisions are already paid by the military, thus saving the American taxpayer millions of dollars at least.
7. A trial by the Military would have less influence from POTUS. Also, POTUS knows he would risk his presidency if he pardons or commutes the decision of a Military court, no matter how many of his WACKO friends or Islamic groups pressure him to do so.
8. Perhaps most importantly, our troops need to see that the Military and its justice CAN and WILL protect them. Right now morale among the troops is at an all time low. We as civilians can help by letting the Military do its job.
We can also let the troops know that “WE THE PEOPLE”, despite POTUS, wholeheartedly support them and their sacrifices in keeping us all safe. Xerox has developed cards where you get to pick which one you like and write a message to the troops. You do not designate who will get the card. Xerox is most likely sending them to those who need them most. Here is the link and its FREE:
http://www.letssaythanks.com/Home.html
That’s all very interesting Nellie, but it is not germain to the point I was making. The distinction between a whether someone is a murderer or a terrorist is important for more than semantic reasons. The motive of a killer plays an important role when deciding punishment. A coldly calculated murder is somewhat different and treated more harshly than an instantaneous one, even though the results may be the same. And it is important to understand if Hasan’s goal was to kill and terrorize as part of a greater movement, regardless of his absense of orders from someone else, and not just to settle a personal score, as in revenge.
Onofre,
Sorry it took so long to get back to you.
I do understand your needing and wanting to make a distinction. It is my understanding that the Military charged him with “Premeditated Mass Murders”,, which is about as close as they can come to the definition of a terrorist and still maintain jurisdiction.
There is no way Hassan will be given a GITMO style tribunal, so we are left with either a Military Court or the much riskier Civilian court.
To me the cut and dried procedural process provides of Military providers a firewall for quicker cleaner REAL justice, with limited involvement/decisions by the Obama WH and their Wacky affiliations and perverted ideas.
Do you remember the Charles Manson murders? He was a terrorist, but a”hero” to Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. That happened back in the late 60’s. Taxpayers are STILL providing free medical, dental, wages, recreation, clothing, housing and 3 squares a day, as this monster just simply refuses to DIE. He also get periodic parole hearings. Why on earth should taxpayers being paying for all this to the tune of $50,000+ a year??
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070524114642AApPXEt
While I want Hassan to suffer some, which I am sure he will in a military brig, I also want to have him executed as quickly as possible. For me it is criminal insanity to have taxpayers supporting these monsters with any kind of long term human comforts.
I believe you and I want to end up in the same place. I am willing to lighten up on the label, as I just want to ensure that there is no chance of Hassan escaping the justice due him.
OK. I follow that. Is Nidal Hasan a defacto combatant that should be tried in a military tribunal or is he a common criminal who should be tried in a civilian court?
BTW. I, too, agree with Guiliani on Khalid Sheik Muhammed and the others in Gitmo known to have acted on behalf of their organizations.
Hasan? Maybe trial by four horses turned N, E, S and W. His innocent parts will follow the white horse to the East.
Nidal Hasan is a major in the US Army. He will be tried by courts-martial, not a civil trial. Not only is he in the Army, the crimes occurred on a military installation, ie. Ft. Hood. There is no question that the military has jurisdiction in his case.
In describing someone as a “terrorist,” I don’t think it is necessary to have this restriction: “The key issue with respect to Hasan was whether or not he was acting on behalf of someone else per their instructions.”
After all, Timothy McVeigh, the guy who blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City killing 168 people, was labeled a terrorist (albeit a domestic terrorist) and I don’t think there was ever any suggestion that he was acting on anyone else’s orders.
Lightacandle,
Timothy McVeigh was tried in civilian courts. His label was meaningless. But think how many appeals and how many years we paid for him to be held alive and in custody.
Wouldn’t you rather have a much quicker, and cleaner final resolution?
Chomp on this:
OT, kinda, but since you mentioned this Larry, two points I thought of when I heard about this earlier today and a third bonus:
1.) Who is the brainchild who thought of having the trial in NYC? Clearly, the defense will seek and be granted a change of venue due to the impossibility of getting a fair trial so close to the twin towers and the scene of the crime. Picking NYC may seem like a PR/symbolic gesture but it will end up needlessly delaying justice and costing the taxpayers additional expense. Have people become so obsessed with PR and spin that they’ve forgotten how to think?
I recall hearing the AG being quoted today as saying our court system has worked fine for over 200 years and that the alleged terrorists will get a fair trial. The NYC venue decision in my opinion goes against the AG’s stated goal of a fair trial and defense of using the civilian court to try these terrorists.
2.) A frequent criticism by many from the left is that the right tends to embrace fetuses (pro-life) yet is pro-capital punishment (pro-death?). Where is all the outrage from the left about Obama’s DOJ seeking to execute people? I doubt you will hear much criticism about this decision since that would involve actual criticism of their pseudo-Messiah. And please spare me the “the AG is independent” retort. Clearly, Obama wants these men executed.
3.) Obama Administration = oxymoron.
Politically this is the D-U-M-B-E-S-T thing Obama has done to date.
This will become a three ring circus of media and present a stage for KSM and others to make this country look like weak idiots.
2010 is an election year and 2012 is when Obama is supposed to run for re-election.
This circus will overshadow all other political events (including healthcare and the economy) to become the albatross around the neck of all Democrats and expecially Obama.
Could be. But I’m beginning to wonder if he can’t get away with practically anything and have his adoring media and rug-burned-knees followers think everything is just hunky-dory? Hopefully I am just being paranoid so to speak, and this colossal blunder will in fact aid in his downfall as president.
This one he will not get away with.
This will be a multi-year media circus and the Al Qaeda convicts will use every minute of it to their advantage.
If healthcare and the economy were not going to be Obama Waterloo then this will cement his demise.
Bye Bye POS and his militant bride!
CAROL HAKA
I agree this is a horrific thing in bringing these individuals to NY for a Civilian Trial. They should never be allowed in the U.S., but should be tried by the Military in a foreign land, and it should have been done right were they are.
This is another of Obama’s idiotic ideas, and will again endanger the American People. What is this “Muslim” trying to do to us? How did we let ourselves get in this position? There are laws that should prevail, but he’s not letting it happen, and those in Washington to protect us, are cowering to his beck and call, with their only concern being to please the sick man in the Whitehouse, not the people. How will he be tried? Will it be in a civil court for taking office as President of the U.S., when he is not only not qualified, he’s not eligible to hold this office. If I’m wrong, why won’t our courts force him to prove he’s eligible? Are they too bowing to him and his every command? He knows he can’t prove he’s eligible, that’s why it’s not being heard in court.
I don’t have a Harvard degree, but feel I’ve got more experience and common sense than he has, but granted, I may not be the liar he is either. God Bless the U.S.A.
It’s sad, as a mother, grandmother, and great grandmother, I never dreamed I would live to see our country in the position it’s in today, and pray I will live to see it survive the damage this man and other politicians have done to it.
3) Or just plain moron.
Good luck getting a fair and unbiased jury for the 9/11 conspirators in NYC. They will need it … or a miracle.
Good luck is right. There will never be a trial in NYC. If so, it would be grounds for an appeal. The McVeigh trial was moved from Oklahoma to Denver, at the request of his attorney - and that request was granted.
I believe the defendant has the right to request a bench trial.
Could be - but I would think they would still go with the jury trial so they can get the trial moved.
or…….”idiot savant” only without the savant part.
The Obama Administration won’t be trying anybody.
@ Ziggy.
Eric Holder is part of the Obama administration.
Get a clue.
I don’t believe Eric Holder will be conducting the trial, either.
Eric Holder has been one of the decision makers to put this trial in NY. Therefore Eric Holder has a say and a hand in how things go. Please, don’t be so naive on this.
Precsely!
And do not for a moment think that Obama and his WAKSO will not have their sticky fingers all over this.
Excecution?? That is a long shot given that they were tortured. More likely a mis-trial because their so called rights were violated.
I’m not clear on the full legal implications of civil courts vs. military courts, or of making the distinction between a terrorist and a mass murderer.
Consider this Wikipedia entry about The Patriot Act, for example:
“New penalties were created to convict those who attack mass transportation systems. If the offender committed such an attack while no passenger was on board, they are fined and imprisoned for a maximum of 20 years. However, if the activity was undertaken while the mass transportation vehicle or ferry was carrying a passenger at the time of the offense, or the offense resulted in the death of any person, then the punishment is a fine and life imprisonment.” (Emphasis my own.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act#Title_VIII:_Terrorism_criminal_law
Huh? New York civil court has a death penalty for murder. So maybe New York court is the proper place, even though the conviction wouldn’t be specifically for terrorism.
I don’t know if “a jury of peers” represents a problem. What will be really hard is finding jurors who aren’t already strongly opinionated about his guilt.
Since he will now come under the US justice system then there is nothing to stop them from charging him with their brand spanking new “hate crime law”.
Federal Court, Ziggy, not state. State law does not apply unless they are tried in civil court by the victims.
This is the begining of the end, as any result will end up in the Serpent Court. It all depends on Pelican Brief.
In my opinion this serves only one purpose and that is to keep Bush and the CIA in the spotlight. Notice that the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing is getting a military tribunal.
This bunch at the WH have no sense of honor or loyalty and will use and destroy anything that does not fit into their Marxist agenda.
I agree. The plan is to get a two for one with this trial. It makes good on putting a former administration on trial - in essence - which will make the looney lefties happy. It’s all about politics and nothing about the country itself.
However, this has already been labeled the biggest political blunder by a president in history by some.
I guess it’s the Obama administration’s goal to gloriously go down in political flames.
Can we impeach him now?
Great essay, Larry! Yeah, I didn’t like being calld a racist because I liked Hillary and though Obama was hardly ready for the job.
Inoculating this thread: Larry you anti-Semite! /snark
Since “the crime” happened in NYC do they not have original jurisdiction?
I`m sure they will bring in Rev Wright and Bill Ayers for character references.
I agree with Rudy Guiliani for just about all of the reasons he states in his video.
I wonder, if KSM is somehow acquitted, what WILL The Obama do? I almost want it to happen just to see.
This entire proceeding is a sham, because there is no way that the administration would be able to let KSM walk away if that were the verdict.
So, another amazingly stupid move from the smartest administration evah. I cannot believe anyone would view this as anything beyond a “bread and circus” routine. And I am embarassed that it works.
This is Eric Holder’s opportunity to conduct his trial of the CIA. The defense will doubtless go after allegations of torture. My issue is to put the families of those killed on 9-11 through the day of infamy all over again is in itself criminal. Mr. Holder, in your short stay on this planet, you’ve secured the pardon of the FALN bombers, secured the pardon of Marc Rich, and now, this. I trust you’re proud of yourself, Mr. Holder. We will hold you personally responsible for what transpires.
I agree that this has political motivations beyond KSM and the other 9/11 conspirators.
It shows that Obama has nothing but contempt for the victims, thier families, and the first responders to all the 9/11 attacks.
He is using this to put the CIA and the Bush Administration on trial - more Bush bashing. But at the expense of the suffering by 9/11 victims, their memories, and the honor of this country.
Doc 99 and hokma — what you said:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/the_purpose_of_the_ksm_trial_i.html
What I think is even worse: by throwing this into the civilian court system, Holder, Obama, and “the Administration” will not be the ones putting Bush and the CIA on trial — they’re trying to throw this little job to the court system, so their hands are ‘clean” and no one can accuse the Obama Administration of taking a post facto pound of flesh from the Bush Administration to satisfy its leftie base. Holder & Obama will be able to claim it was the judges and the legal teams, acting according to the rule of law, that dished up the dirt. Disgusting political motivations, the same ones driving Obama’s “I can’t make up my mind” strategy on Afghanistan, are what’s behind this whole thing.
Larry, one more thing.
in August 1996, Osama bin Laden published a letter in a London newspaper directed specifically at the West. Printed in a pro-Palestinian paper called Al Quds Al Arabi, the message was titled “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places.”
http://www.americanheritage.com/events/articles/web/20060823-osama-bin-laden-september-11-uss-cole-al-qaeda-terrorism.shtml
Seems to me, the US was only returning the favor.
Larry, people obsess over the language because language is powerful and it shapes attitudes. I remember when fox news was trying to refer to terrorists as “homiciders” not “suicide bombers” or some such nonsense. They felt like calling them suicide bombers implies they were poor victims of depression rather then the murderers of civilians.
Yes, it was silly, but since then I’ve come to respect the power of language. I recently heard that people are “Islamphobes” afraid of the “scary brown people”. Well of course that terminology implies you are a racist. Nevermind that Islam is a religion, not a race or that the majority of Muslims are pretty light skinned. The point and purpose of using “Islamaphobes” and “scary brown people” is to engender sympathy for Muslims as a victim class in need of protection and to shame those who would in any way criticize them.
Being a lefty myself for many years, I now understand the right wing complaint about the language we use to manipulate public opinion.
I remember the White House and supporting media were routinely referring to armed forces opposing the occupation of Iraq as “resistance fighters”. Something finally clicked and they became “insurgents”.
Lately The Democratic Party has become the “democrat party”. Joseph McCarthy popularized that one.
The republicans do that, ziggy. It’s the fastest way to spot a republican, hearing them say “democrat” when it should be “democratic”. I think it’s their way of not saying something “nice” like “democratic” about the party. It makes me want to start calling them “republic”. “There’s a republic senator running for re-election”, etc…
I guess I’ll have to be in the “indepen” party lol
Well you don’t call them the Republicanish, or Republicanic party do you?
Bill Clinton is a Democrat, would you say Bill Clinton is a Democratic?
Grammatically, calling it the Democrat Party seems to make more sense. Using the adjective democratic to describe our method of elections makes sense, and I’m sure most Republicans would agree that it’s a democratic process, but calling the opposing party the Democratic party makes it sound as though the Democrats have sole possession of, or are the exemplars of the concept of democracy. But when the semantic dust settles, is it really such a big deal? I personally have another name for the Democrats, but it is too vile to print on the internet.
Your examples are nouns, Onofre’s arms. The examples I see in the world are adjectives. In other words, they are using nouns in the place of adjectives.
Oops I just gave you additional arms in your name!
I believe that the noun in republic, and the adjective is republican. No “ish” or “ic” necessary, the “an” does it.
Like Tahiti to Tahaitian
Republican, adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a republic
2. favoring a republic
3. fitting or appropriate for the citizen of a republic
3. (initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Republican party
I’m the last person in the world to turn to in matters of grammar, I admit this. It just seems to me that if one imbecile is a “Democrat”, and many imbeciles are “Democrats”, why shouldn’t the combined mass of imbeciles be called the “Democrat party”?
Onofre’s arm, I think the correct grammatical term for that is “politicians”!
Glad you realized that it is just good natured partisan ribbing. Just imagine Bob Hope or Will Rogers saying it, and that’s the tone intended!
In my view, Eichman wasn’t just a soldier fighting a war. He was a psychopath; he fits the definition of a terrorist, whose ideology drove him to extreme, horrific behavior.
Let’s get our semantics straight here:
Eichman WAS a terrorist, by every definition of the word.
Any questions?!
Does a normal military officer, even in war, “mastermind the Final Solution that helped exterminate 6 million Jews”?
In a word, Larry, NO.
And, in a sane world, there are lots of others who would be defined as Pychopaths and Terrorists too:
Denying Responsibility for the Wars One Cheers On
By Glenn Greenwald
The NYT columnist who has supported 4 wars on Muslims in 6 years decries the Islamic disregard for human life.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23934.htm
===
Can Attacks on a Military Base Constitute “Terrorism”?
By Glenn Greenwald
If attacks on soldiers now qualify, how is it possible to exclude many American actions?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23933.htm
Isn’t it part of “terrorism”, that it’s not one army/country vs. another - it’s (supposedly) non-state-sponsored forces acting against civilians?
It seems like, because of the circumstances, the soldiers at Fort Hood were more like civilians…. they were soldiers, but they weren’t armed, and they weren’t even in the country of “the battle”.
Washington:
http://www.100megspop3.com/bark/Beware.html
How can anyone think that planning an attack that included flying a plane into the Pentagon WASN’T an act of war?
And the more I read about Nisan and what he did at Fort Hood, the more he seems like a terrorist.
-How can anyone think that planning an attack that included flying a plane into the Pentagon WASN’T an act of war? -
Excellent point.
Larry, I agree with you and Giuliani as well as a majority of the American public. Khalid Sheik Muhammed and his Gitmo buddies should not be tried in a civilian court in NYC. A military tribunal for these cowardly monsters seems to the safe and sane thing to do.
I’m trying to give Eric Holder the benefit of the doubt but I’m finding it difficult to believe this man is naive and uninformed about the dangers a trial of this nature would pose to New York City and to our country as a whole. Why are there so many people in Obama’s administration, including Obama himself, making such ill-advised decisions? It boggles my mind!
Indeed. I was surprised to hear Giuliani say that Obama is dangerously incompetent! Pretty strong stuff, but completely on target.
I think Obama and his crew are rushing as fast as they can to get as much damage done to our systems before he and they are fully exposed to the American people for what they are…and that’s something that is very, very bad for this country.
I’ve slung out the ‘impeach’ word a few times over the past several months, but I think it’s entirely possible that in 2010, we might just see acts by Obama which demand that action.
I never saw Guiliani as angry as he was yesterday and on radio even this morning. I have also never been more angry about the actions of any President as I was yesterday when that sanctimonious Holder made this announcement while Obama was conveniently out of town trying to put literal and figurative “distance” between himself and this outrage.
Also, I truly believe that when the GOP takes control of Congress in 2011 that they will immediately investigate and draw articles of impeachment against Obama, because prior to this Obama has literally broken the law more than once and deserves to be thrown out of office.
The timing of this stupid decision strongly suggests that it was a payoff to the far left in the House of Representatives for voting for “the Beast” despite the provision that the Federal Government could not pay for abortions.
Obama sinks to a new low.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-emperor-akihito-japan.html
It’s part of his continued denegration of the United States in the world.
Bowing to world leaders literally and figuratively.
And this civil trial proves that he does not see 9/11 as an act of war but as an isolated criminal action.
Harp.
Yet another humiliating moment for the people of this country.
His Bow in the first frame of the video, at the end, to the Empress would have also been correct for the Emperor. The one he did give the Emperor says in clear body language that Obama is a working class Japanese subject who does not deserve the honor of being in the Emperor’s presence.
For someone who supposedly spent 8years at an expensive private school, his manners are appallingly low class, and his knowledge of deportment protocol totally non-exisitent.
Disgusting!!
I keep thinking how dangerous it’s going to be in NYC during the trial. If there was a time for Muslim extremists to make their “point” it will be then. For logistical and safety reasons alone, having trials at Gitmo is such a better idea.
I also think once again Obama shows his contempt for the military. I think it’s implied that the military justice system isn’t trusted to do the job correctly so the civilian courts must handle it. I don’t see why some defendents are to be tried by military tribunal and others aren’t. That leaves me to think this is a purely political move where the Obama Administration thinks they can bask in the glow of public goodwill when they get covictions. Holder has already said he expects them all to be convicted.
I seem to remember an attorney was very confident that the evidence of a glove could convict a well known former football player of murder and we all know what happened there. Don’t count your chickens before they hatch Holder. I think if you do ultimately get convictions, it will not be as easy nor as positive for the Obama Administration as you think!
I agree that this a purely a political move to accomplish two things:
1. Show radical muslims that he regards 9/11 as an isolated criminal act and that we are not at war with them.
2. To have a major bash Bush platform for the 2010 and 2012 election.
He has no regard for the families of 9/11 or their memories. And he has no regard for the national security consequences resulting.
However, this past election is a strong indication that his radical actions are having negative consequences for him and the Dem Party in 2010 and 2012.
– Pentagon-appointed U.S. Defense Science Board on Sept. 23, 2004
— 9/11 Commission Report
Shining a Light on the Root of Terrorism
http://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2009/11/15/shining-a-light-on-the-roots-of-terrorism/
I give you the Commander-in-Chief:
http://radiopatriot.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/i-got-your-salute-right-here/
Larry … Head’s Up. As with Val Kilmer’s Doc Holliday, Obama’s hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Maybe I’ve been working too many hours, but I don’t understand the development of this article. I get the war/vs no war approach, the terrorist/not a terrorist labeling, but the comparative using the Israeli kidnapping of Eichmann in a sovereign nation really doesn’t make sense to me.
Israel grabbing Eichmann in a sovereign nation is a better comparative for the CIA nabbing of Egyptian cleric from a Milan street…the CIA extraordinary rendition case that has recently brought charges against 23 CIA operatives in Italy.
And, no, imo, Eichmann was not a terrorist, he was a war criminal. He would not be the first nor the last underling that failed to obey C&D military orders.
You call Israel’s Irgun members terrorists, but Adolph Eichmann not. Hmm. Maybe you ought to consider your application of the word ‘terrorist’ since the word ‘terrorist’ seems to be an ever-evolving definition.
On the other hand, I absolutely agree with you that trying Khalid Sheik Muhammed and his Gitmo buddies in NYC is not the optimal choice.
But there are those in the law who suggest that there was a method to the justice departments madness: typical Obama administration show. They suggest that the trials will actually never take place in New York - that the attorney’s will ask for a change of venue (they can’t get a fair trial in NY), and most likely the change of venue will be granted.
As to where the trials should be held, or under the jurisdiction of what court or tribunal…. my sources say there really is no precedent since the post WW II trials.
Halli Casser-Jayne
http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com
Author, A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows
KSM confessed–in detail–to a journalist from Al-Jazeera that he personally slit the throat of Daniel Pearl. He confessed–in detail–to being the “mastermind” of the 9/11 bombings.
This all took place before he was tortured.
There isn’t much doubt that he’ll be found guilty. I don’t see much doubt that he’ll get the death penalty. There are laws in place to protect intelligence from being disseminated during public trials.
What’s the problem with having a trial in New York?
A “show trial?” What does that mean, exactly. Every trial is a “show” in the sense that it is an exercise of our justice system, an exhibition of a system of laws, an example of our CONSTITUTION in action. Is there something in that that we should be ashamed of? I don’t think so; it’s a perfect opportunity to remind ourselves that we are actually NOT the same as the terrorists. It is a moment to remember that we are supposed to be a country of LAWS, not men.