I am outraged by the editorial in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune titled, "American justice confirmed".

As Justice Antonin Scalia states, "The nation will live to regret what the court has done today." Five unelected members of the Supreme Court of the United States overnight gave legal status to radical Islamists that have and are trying to kill us. Abraham Lincoln said that the constitution is not a suicide pact. Five members of the Supreme Court made it just that.

According to Justice Scalia,"Today the Court warps our Constitution in a way that goes beyond the narrow issue of the reach of the Suspen­sion [of habeas corpus] Clause, invoking judicially brainstormed separation­-of-powers principles to establish a manipulable 'func­tional' test for the extraterritorial reach of habeas corpus (and, no doubt, for the extraterritorial reach of other constitutional protections as well). It blatantly misde­scribes important precedents, most conspicuously Justice Jackson’s opinion for the Court in Johnson v. Eisentrager. It breaks a chain of precedent as old as the common law that prohibits judicial inquiry into detentions of aliens abroad absent statutory authorization. And, most tragi­cally, it sets our military commanders the impossible task of proving to a civilian court, under whatever standards this Court devises in the future, that evidence supports the confinement of each and every enemy prisoner."

What does this mean in plain language? Ronald Kessler of NewsMax.com explains, "By this reasoning, illegal aliens should be given access to the federal civilian courts to contest their expulsion from the country. Nazi soldiers taken prisoner during World War II and held on American soil should have been allowed to argue their cases in federal court. Instead of shooting terrorists on the battlefield, American soldiers should read them their rights and ship them off to American jails."

"The level of due process they [the federal courts] require," said David B. Rivkin, a lawyer who served in the Justice Department in the Reagan administration, "will be impossible to meet and therefore will result in the release of a substantial number of enemy combatants." Kessler points out, "In fact, under the majority opinion in Boumediene v. Bush, suspected terrorists are given more rights than our own soldiers are afforded when charged with crimes. Their cases are restricted to the military courts."

So where do our two Presidential candidates stand on this critical issue?

According to Boston.com, Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, said in a statement that the ruling validating detainees' rights "ensures that we can protect our nation and bring terrorists to justice, while also protecting our core values."

The Boston Globe points out, "Obama has long advocated ending the justice system specially created for Guantanamo Bay. He said the detainees should be brought to trial in US courts or in military courts-martial, a proposal the Supreme Court ruling does not affect."

"The United States Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country," said Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, at a town hall meeting near McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey.

As PowerLine Blog points out, "[what] the Court's majority overturned was not a decree by the Bush administration, it was a statute that was passed by large majorities in both the House and the Senate in 2006. The Military Commissions Act passed the Senate on a 65-34 vote, with Democratic Senators Carper, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Lieberman, Menendez, Nelson (Neb.), Nelson (Fla.), Pryor, Rockefeller, Salazar and Stabenow voting with the Republicans. Likewise, in the House 34 Democrats joined with 219 Republicans to pass the statute."

As former Senator Fred Thomson said in his article "A Supreme Error", "Upon reading the opinion in Boumediene v Bush, one must conclude that the majority knew where they wanted to go and simply had to figure out how to get there. The trip was not a pretty one. How could it be when the justices seemingly wrote a map based on ideas cherry picked from over 400 years of established law and backfilled with justifications to create a new right for alien combatants that Americans themselves do not enjoy?

They could have saved us all a lot of time if they’d told us what was clearly on their minds.

They don’t trust military tribunals to deal with those accused of being enemy combatants, even if the tribunals are following guidelines established by Congress.

That the government has probably detained some prisoners at Guantanamo for longer than they should have.

And that Guantanamo should just be closed.

Though they are willing to give it lip service, they don’t really believe we are at war … at least not a “real” war.

Therefore, they should create a new right for our nation’s enemies commiserate with the displeasure that they and the rest of the “enlightened” people have with this “war,” Guantanamo and the Bush Administration."

What may be the reality of this decision? If you are a soldier in Iraq, Afghanistan or any of the over 100 countries we have our troops and you capture an enemy combatant what do you do? Do you have the evidence needed to convict this radical Islamist killer in a U.S. Court? Are you as a soldier prepared to be called as a witness in a public trial, like our police officers, and testify that yes this enemy combatant tried to or did kill your fellow soldiers? Can you prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt? What do you do?

Putting our troops in this situation is both repulsive and outrageous. More importantly it is deadly. For you see our enemy understands what the Supreme Court just did and they will take full advantage of it.

"Detainees will be able to call witnesses and demand to see classified information, putting a tremendous strain on the court system and the Justice Department. They will shop for liberal jurisdictions to bring their cases. When capturing terrorists, our own soldiers will be burdened with accumulating the amount of evidence required by law enforcement." according to Kessler.

Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Quds Forces, the Mahdi Army, and the 20 other radical Islamist terror organizations world wide now have a friend in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune and Senator Obama.

They have an enemy in Senator McCain. You decide who is right and who is wrong. While you are our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will be paying the price in blood as they decide "What to do".

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune has a excellent editorial titled, "NATO at a crossroads".

We fully agree with the editorial board when is says that, "NATO should not compromise its commitment to accomplishing the crucial mission in Afghanistan."

Historically, there have been many issues facing the West and by definition NATO, which as pointed out by the editorial board, "has outlasted the Soviet Union, helped quell genocide in southern Europe and successfully expanded beyond the imagination of its creators."

NATO has morphed from an initially regional self-defense alliance into a proactive Western military force involved in a global war against radical Islamists.

As we have said many times, the West is not fighting a War on Terror. Terror is a military tactic. Nations do not fight wars against military tactics. Nations fight wars over ideologies.

What we are fighting is a global War against radical Islamists. Radical Islam includes nations such as Iran and Syria. Radical Islam includes groups like the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda. Diverse entities tied together by a single ideology.

The Global War against Radical Islamists is like all other wars. There are hot fronts and cold fronts in the war. The hot fronts are currently in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The cold fronts are in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, Australia, and North America.

The hot fronts are characterized primarly by the engagement of military forces in direct contact with the radical Islamists, supplemented by economic, political, and diplomatic initiatives.

The cold fronts are characterized by aggressive intelligence/counter intelligence operations, economic, diplomatic, political and law enforcement actions to prevent the infiltration of radical Islamists who would do harm to the national security or launch attacks against sovereign nations and their people.

We disagree with the report by the Atlantic Council of the United States. The West and NATO can only lose the Afghanistan front if the United States and Europe lose the will to win.

None of the major radical Islamist military and para-military organizations, taken together, can defeat the West and NATO. We can only defeat ourselves by either pulling back from the fight or abandoning the battlefield altogether.

There are many working toward just such a scenario including radical Islamists, anti-war activists and some in both liberal and conservative parties in Europe and North America.

We must maintain our resolve and win on all fronts and thereby win the global War Against Radical Islamists.

We hope our Presidential candidates and the West in general enter into an open discussion of this threat and work together with Muslims around the world to help them solve their problem of radicals who have taken over Islam and preach violence and death.

We attended a series of National Security panel discussions and briefings, culminating in a showing of the award winning documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West in Naples, Florida this weekend.

We met many men and women representing a cross section of America who came together to learn about the threat posed by radical Islam to the world. Around three hundred concerned citizens came to the presentations, showing of the documentary Obsession and the panel discussion.

The event was conducted by the Florida Security Council's founders Tom Trento, Mike Tranchina and Elaine Roy. The Florida Security Council has put on similar briefings for the Florida legislature, hosted by House majority leader Representative Adam Hasner, civic groups, law enforcement, business leaders, religious groups, and concerned citizens.

The Naples expert presenters were noted Naples community leader and event host Jack Tymann, former President of Westinghouse International, Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, physician, former U.S. Navy Commander and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and Sam Kharoba, noted law enforcement trainer, software consultant and founder of the Counter Terrorism Operations Center.

What I learned at the National Security Briefing was the following:

1. We are not fighting a War on Terror. Terror is simply a tactic used by our enemies.

2. We are in fact fighting a global war against Radical Islam or Islamism. The fundamental difference between Islamism and democracy is the relationship between government and religion. The Koran for Islamists is not a guide for laws but rather the guide for laws.

3. We need to know and understand the enemy. We need to recognize that they are fighting a total war against the West. The unconditional surrender of the West is their goal. They look at Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other hot beds of radical Islamic activity as battles in the great war against the West.

4. We need to understand ourselves. We must be prepared to fight a long total war against radical Islam. We must commit to bringing to bear all our social, economic, political and military power against this enemy. We must win regardless of the cost.

5. We must unite as Americans and stand strong together. We must understand that we are fighting for our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. How we fight Isalmism today will determine the political, religious and social world our grand children inherit.

6. We are in a critical clash between American ideas and Islamist ideas. However, we have not engaged in a real discussion of these ideas. Our media, universities, businesses leaders, religious leaders and politicians have all abdicated their responsibility to confront radical Islam because of political correctness and a fear of offending Muslims.

7. Only a grass roots effort by concerned citizens will turn the tide.

After the briefings many asked what can we do. The answer is clear.

First we must all be personally engaged in learning about radical Islam. Next, and this is critical, we must each do whatever we can to get the word out. The most important asset we bring to the table is what we used to call our "Rolodex" file, now we call it our e-mail list. This is the list of all contacts we have made over the years. People who know us and we know them. Most importantly we listen to and trust one another. Finally, we want our friends to join with us and take action to confront radical Islam.

Last, what do we want as an outcome. Here are some thoughts on that. Perhaps you can add to this list.

1. Our Presidential candidates must discuss the War against radical Islam in detail. We all need to know what is their action plan for defeating radical Islam. No plan is not an answer.

2. Our media, universities, businesses, churches, synagogues, and mosques must engage in a meaningful public debate on radical Islamic ideas versus democratic ideas.

3. We want a "surge" of action that will lead to an "awakening" in America as it has in Iraq's Anbar province.

4. Just as in Iraq we need groups like the Sons of Iraq, the alliance of Sheiks and neighborhood groups like Concerned Local Citizens in the global Muslim community to denounce and if needed to fight terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

5. We need a anti-jihad jihad. We need Imams to declare publicly a jihad against radical Islam.

6. We need Muslims to embrace the idea of the separation of church and state. That there is a difference between one nation under God and a nation ruled by Allah.

7. We need to embrace the ideals, values and religious beliefs passed down to us by our fore fathers. We must not forget that we are Americans first and foremost. All other ethnic, religious and race differences are secondary to being an American.

8. Finally, we cannot become complacent. We cannot say it is somebody else's problem. It is too far away to worry about.

We have taken the first step and joined the Florida Security Council. We encourage you to get involved. If you want to know how just e-mail me at rswier@comcast.net.