Dead or Alive?
Yesterday Steve Schippert discussed Attorney General Eric Holder's public revelation that terrorists like Osama bin Laden should be given the same rights as Charles Manson. Holder also claimed that Osama bin Laden "would be killed rather than captured alive, that Miranda rights would be read to the corpse of bin Laden."
Beyond the other problematic inconsistencies highlighted by Steve's post, we once again are witnessing a difference of opinion (schism?) between the Administration point of view in Washington DC and the statements of the Commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said Wednesday that the military would "certainly" try to capture Osama bin Laden alive and "bring him to justice" -- contradicting remarks by a top Obama administration official.
OK. Maybe it can be argued that the "reality" (as Holder put it) is that bin Laden will be killed before he is ever in custody. Even if that is true, somehow equating bin Laden's rights with those of Charles Manson simply, also bends reality. Thirty-six years ago Sam Peckinpah made a movie about bounty hunting titled "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" (admittedly a pretty bad movie). Maybe it's not that important if bin Laden is taken alive or if he is killed in the process of his capture. But proof of his death is what is needed.
Holder denies that there is a split between Administration policy and the attitude of the American people when it comes to the treatment of terrorists. It is interesting that some of the same people who are concerned about the post-September 11th security measures abridging their Constitutional rights are the same ones willing to extend Constitutional rights to the terrorists who started this whole mess in the first place. The disconnect is so obvious that is hard to see how Eric Holder doesn't see it.