So what do you think of this letter to Eric Holder, Attorney General of the US?

By email (to the Counterterrorism Division) and by regular mail:

The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.

Attorney General of the United States

United States Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20530-0001

Dear Attorney General Holder:

This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases. An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading.

The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.

Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government.

Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities. This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case. Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay…. President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]” (Emphasis added.)

Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself.

For what it may be worth, I will say this much. For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated. Essentially, there have been two camps. One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s. The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission. Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people.

There are differences in these various proposals. But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing: Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war en


In brief, this letter points out the hypocracy of the Barry administration and the potentially unconstitutionality of many of the policies of this administration. I noticed the letter was slightly cut off so here is the full link to the site:

Notice the author.

Update 2:

dopray777, first, thank you and your son for your sacrifice. I am truely humbled when those who have sacrificed so much agree with my point of view. As for the rest of your response, I could not agree with you more. Barry and his administration are absolutely corrupt and unconstitutional and should all be shot for treason.

11 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    "If I had more time, I would write a shorter letter" - Abe Lincoln

    Higher ups will only read concise briefs. This part says it all:

    Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted.

    My son is one of many of our brave military fighting with their blood, sweat and tears. Seeing their brothers in arms being killed, all the while knowing that their Commander in Chief is sending in more Taliban Terrorists. WTF? Who does Obama work for, really? Obama and all who support him have blood on their hands and a curse on their heads.

  • 4 years ago

    Absolutely! Eric Holder is a traitor to this nation in the first place by coddling terrorist instead of holding them accountable. By his actions one has to wonder what side he is really on, the government has been throwing our tax dollars at La Raza too, and the people have no clue. This was their way of giving the drug cartels the weapons to over throw the Mexican government. Not only is this administration helping the Muslim Brotherhood out in the middle east handing them Egypt and Libya, yet also helping the drug cartels in Mexico the weaponry they need to move into the southwest.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think it is a FANTASTIC letter. We need more people who stand on principle and are unafraid to stand against the adminastrations "wrath" by turning their main stream press lap dogs upon him. When more are unafraid of the "racism" label applied to any who do not agree with the "great leader" we will start to see opinion start to change to stop the deconstruction of our great country.

  • 1 decade ago

    Too polite.

    He should call the Kenyan usurper the traitor that he is, straight out. Of course, the Kenyan usurper is not really a traitor, because he is not an American in the first place.

    But, it is still too polite to the evil b*****ds who are determined to destroy the United States.

    Revolution? "Yes, we can !!"

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago


    ha h ah hahahahah

    link for holder

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Personally, I think you are crazy. You do like words, now don't you?

    I think this letter should do just fine to get a really active FBI file started on you. Expect to start seeing plain unmarked cars being parked right outside your house all the time.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    What do I think of it, it's a bunch of crap. In fact most to the Jag lawyers that work on this cases for years has quit and is helping these detainees.

  • 1 decade ago

    I tried to read it, but I get off at 5

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It proves--holder and osama are not good men or good citizens..and we all know that obama likes militants and anti-american sentiments from anyone--he loves us to fight and be in civil war--we have alsoer for pres and his staff are a bunch of &^&^&*a--ho's who are not very intelligent--but they are evil...I'll give them that.

  • 1 decade ago

    Sounds like someone is trying to weenie out and go on the lam.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.