Yesterday, Ed Morrissey looked at<\/a> this piece by Peter Beinart<\/a>:<\/p>\n Peter Beinart makes an interesting, if somewhat contradictory, argument at the Daily Beast regarding Dick Cheney\u2019s argument that the Obama administration doesn\u2019t really think it\u2019s fighting a war against terrorists. On one hand, Beinart argues that the Obama administration successfully rebuked Cheney through its reference to its own rhetoric, in which they used the term \u201cwar\u201d as recently as the inauguration almost a year ago. Beinart then argues that Cheney was right after all, and that Barack Obama should embrace the idea that he isn\u2019t fighting a war against radical jihadist terrorism:<\/p>\n But they missed the larger point, which is that while America is obviously at war in Afghanistan and Iraq, it isn\u2019t actually at war with jihadist terrorism. Rather than proving Cheney wrong, the White House should have done something more audacious: Prove him right. \u2026<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n Read both pieces;<\/strong> unsurprisingly I think Morrissey gets the better of Beinart in this debate. Then consider this new headline, which is currently being featured at Hot Air<\/a>: Va. suspects in Pakistan say mission was jihad not terrorism<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n \nFive Northern Virginia men arrested in Pakistan indicated Monday that they plan to fight terrorism charges that Pakistani police are recommending by using a strategy seen in U.S. courtrooms: that they were preparing for jihad but not planning any terror attacks. [\u2026] The men told a Pakistani court that they had neither sought nor established contact with extremist groups and traveled to the region only \u201cto help the helpless Muslims,\u201d according to their Pakistani attorney. As they entered the courtroom, one of the men, Ramy Zamzam, told reporters: \u201cWe are not terrorists. We are jihadists, and jihad is not terrorism.\u201d \u201cJihad can take all types of forms, and it\u2019s a great disservice when government officials use jihad and terror interchangeably,\u201d said John K. Zwerling, whose client, Seifullah Chapman, was one of 11 Muslim men convicted after Sept. 11 in federal court in Alexandria of being part of a Virginia jihad network in the so-called paint-ballers case. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n After 9\/11, could we even imagine that the decades-old<\/strong> (and cowardly) terrorist action of Islamic Fundamentalists against the West would be reduced to tactics of semantics, on all sides?<\/p>\n Sort of how I\u2019d imagine a war fought by litigation might be: we\u2019ll defeat terrorism by ascertaining what the meanign of \u201cis\u201d is.<\/p>\n With the upcoming show-trial of Kalid Sheik Mohammed<\/strong>, we\u2019ll get to see war prosecuted in the courts<\/a>, soon enough. What a disaster that\u2019s going to be! Let\u2019s imagine:<\/p>\n \u201cObjection your Honor! As the term \u201cjihad\u201d is currently under debate in another court, its use in this trial may be considered prejudicial to my client. We move that the terms, \u201cjihad,\u201d and \u201cjihadi\u201d be thus disallowed at trial. We further object to the use of the words \u201cterrorists,\u201d \u201cextremists,\u201d and \u201cwar,\u201d as each of these terms, thanks to history, have become amorphous and may be interpreted in ways misleading to a jury or prejudicial to my clients, who are entitled to due process.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Oh, speaking of war-by-litigation, Moussaoui\u2019s conviction has been upheld<\/a>! Mostly because, um\u2026of his own confession<\/a>.<\/p>\n I sure am glad that all the morons are out of power and the smart lawyers are back in control, aren\u2019t you? KSM\u2019s show trial is going to be a showcase ending in lunacy and sorrow.<\/p>\n Washington Examiner:<\/strong> Treating Terrorism as Ordinary Crime<\/a> Yesterday, Ed Morrissey looked at this piece by Peter Beinart: Peter Beinart makes an interesting, if somewhat contradictory, argument at the Daily Beast regarding Dick Cheney\u2019s argument that the Obama administration doesn\u2019t really think it\u2019s fighting a war against terrorists. On one hand, Beinart argues that the Obama administration successfully rebuked Cheney through its reference […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":112,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,179,188,190,215,232,251,271,272,273],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15283","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-remaking-america","category-nanny-statism","category-obama-bad","category-obama-white-house","category-quoting-the-news","category-send-in-the-clowns","category-the-fourth-estate","category-war-by-litigation","category-war-on-terror","category-war-what-it-good-for"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n[\u2026]
\nPakistani police say the men were in contact with a Taliban recruiter, were seeking to join al-Qaeda and went to Pakistan to carry out terrorist acts. The FBI is also investigating the men, and officials have said the Justice Department is likely to consider charges in the United States.
\n[\u2026]
\nThe emerging legal strategy reflects a view among some lawyers that prosecutors have misused the word jihad, especially since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and that it is a peaceful term that can mean studying Islam and caring for the sick.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cA stupid and dangerous game\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"