For those that don't know, Mr. Fenstermaker is one of the lawyers for the 9/11 terrorists. He says that he will not be in the courtroom for the "trial of the century", (my emphasis) but he has some part to play in this charade. Today I sent Mr. Fenstermaker an e-mail asking him to define his role for me. Since it was sent only today I have yet to receive a reply. If and when I do I will gladly post it here once I have informed Mr. Fenstermaker. By the way, he encourages people to e-mail him at scott@fenstermakerlaw.com.
Then why am I already labeling him a pinhead, you ask? I would think that it's pretty clear, but let me give you my thoughts anyway. For starters these terrorist scumbags need to be tried by a military tribunal before their executions not by a civilian court in NYC. Scott- can I call him that, it's so much easier to type, I can, thanks- says that there will be propaganda expressed by the "defendants" during the trial, but he won't elaborate on what type. Well, we already know what type will be spouted by the terrorist and Scott just doesn't seem to care. Or maybe he's just giving the typical lawyer answer by saying he doesn't know. So it appears that Scott is in favor of a show trial, because after all that's all this is.
But the kicker for me and what made me make Scott the subject of today's entry is the article I read by Ed Morrissey on Hot Air.com. The article is a series of e-mails shared by Scott and Ed. At the end of one of the epistles is this comment by Scott, "By the way please tell your subscribers that I still don't know who attacked the World Trade Center and, yes, I still don't care. From the perspective of those who died, it makes very little difference who killed them. From the perspective of everyone else, it's frankly none of their business, unless they sit on the jury of course. Print that loud, wide and clear." Holy s*&*, did I read that correctly?
Is Scott a real life physic? How the hell does he know what the dead think? I doubt that he spoke to any of them just before they were killed. Are we beginning to see why I think of Scott Fenstermaker, Esquire as a pinhead?
Then of course is the part of how for the rest of us it's none of our collective business who killed these people. What? For the families of the victims, I believe that it most certainly is their business. As for the rest of us, you had better believe that it's our business. Our country was attacked by terrorists that slaughtered almost 3,000 innocent men, women and children for nothing more than an ideology. We have since been at war with that ideology, thousands more have died.
I also saw an interview Scott did recently on the O'Reilly Factor. In that interview Scott said that he didn't care if people hated him. He actually said that he was "honored" that people would hate him. He thinks that the people who hate him also hate the rule of law.
All this coming from a graduate of the Air Force Academy. I find it hard to believe that a person who has worn the uniform of one of our branches of the military could say these things.
I don't hate Scott. He isn't deserving of my hate. It would take too much energy and I won't waste it on him. I feel sorry for him. He is so wrapped up in being a lawyer for these lowlifes that he seems to have forgotten that these atrocities were committed against his fellow Americans. He just doesn't seem to get it. Besides, I read some of the comments made about Morrissey's article and many other folks are pouring their hatred his way.
To me he's just another liberal lawyer trying to get his 15 minutes.
Or in other words, a pinhead.
And a major league one at that.
Webster's defines pinhead:
1. the head of a pin
2. something very small or insignificant
3. a very dull or stupid person
No comments:
Post a Comment