As Terror Looms, Obama Defends Gitmo Closing

Four people were arrested today for attempting to reign terror in New York. The media described them as a home grown terrorist group but, in reality, the group of men were Muslim converts who wanted to bomb Jewish synagogues and shoot at military aircraft. They might have been here but their terror was not home grown. It was grown from the seeds of hatred sewn in the Middle East.

While this news was fresh, Obama was giving a speech defending his decision to close Gitmo. In that speech he did not rule out bringing some of the terrorists at Gitmo to the United States. The Won stated that he would not bring those who were a danger to us into the country which tells me he means those who would not be in jail. How could the ones in jail be a danger?

Obama said that some of them would be brought here and placed in Super Max prisons while they awaited trial. That might work out well if they are convicted of crimes but what happens if they are found not guilty? Other countries are not willing to take them and we will not be able to put them back in jail so what will we do with them? Just because they are found not guilty does not mean they are not a threat.

If we are forced to let these people loose in America then they should be placed in the neighborhoods of the Democrats who want them released. Obama should be required to take a few of them in at the White House and let them around his daughters with no Secret Service protection. That is what he is proposing happen to the rest of us because if they are released they will certainly be living near our children and we don’t have law enforcement guarding us.

Obama has no plan. He did not think through this process and he figured that all he had to do was smile and say “hope and change” and other countries would take these people. He, as stated by his Press Secretary, made a hasty decision and now he is trying to figure out how to make it happen. He is finding out that it is not very easy to get rid of the people at Gitmo or Bush would have done so.

It was interesting listening to him because he blamed everything on George Bush and then said that Gitmo was used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists and that we are less safe because of the place.

Right, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11 is proof that we are less safe.

The terrorists captured today by the FBI claim they were motivated by our actions in Afghanistan. Obama has increased the number of troops in that country so it is safe to say his actions made them want to wage jihad.

Is it safe to say that Obama is a recruiting tool for the terrorists?

America became less safe when Obama took office. The events in New York show that the threat is still out there and we will be attacked again. It is only a matter of time.

Keep this in mind folks because when it happens Obama will not be able to claim it was Bush’s fault though I have no doubt he will try.

The best news of the day is that Dick Cheney gave a speech at the same time Obama did (Obama evidently changed his to coincide with Cheney’s – probably and effort to take the spotlight from Cheney) and Cheney laid it all on the line and schooled the youngster.

Sources:
WCBSTV
New York Daily News
NBC New York
Daily Mail UK
Al-Reuters

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

31 Responses to “As Terror Looms, Obama Defends Gitmo Closing”

  1. Blake says:

    What I thought was interesting was his rank hypocrisy- a trademark Skinny B- ism.
    He repeatedly said he wasn’t pointing fingers, yet he points fingers at the Bush administration 28 times in that speech- what a lying hypocrite he is.

    • Darrel says:

      BLK: “He repeatedly said he wasn’t pointing fingers,”

      DAR
      A search of the transcript shows the word “finger” only occurred once in the speech:

      “I understand that it is no secret that there is a tendency in Washington to spend our time pointing fingers at one another.”

      Try again.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/21/obama-national-archives-s_n_206189.html

      D.

      • Blake says:

        I see also that Clinton isn’t the only one who parses words by the letter- counting fingers, huh? If that’s the best defense you have for Barama, there’s a finger I could point.
        Huffington Post indeed- communist expat still learning english- perhaps Clinton will teach her. I understand Bill and Hil like to keep at least a continent between them these days.

      • In on it not says:

        “He point one finger at Bush and three pointed back to himself.”

        What a hate-filled person you are, DAR.

  2. Darrel says:

    BLK: In that speech he did not rule out bringing some of the terrorists at Gitmo to the United States.>>

    DAR: Not “rule out?” He specifically said they are coming. Better hide.

    BLK: How could the ones in jail be a danger?>>

    DAR
    He was speaking of the current attempt of guys like you trying to scare people by pretending these people will be a danger when they escape super max prisons.

    BLK: what happens if they are found not guilty?>>

    DAR
    What do you think should happen to people who are found not guilty? Shot them in the knees?

    BLK: He is finding out that it is not very easy to get rid of the people at Gitmo or Bush would have done so.>>

    DAR
    “The effort to shut down the facility, however, began during Bush’s second term, promoted by Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.”

    “One of the things that would help a lot is, in the discussions that we have with the states of which they (detainees) are nationals, if we could get some of those countries to take them back,” Rice said in a Dec. 12, 2007 , interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. “So we need help in closing Guantanamo.”
    –http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090521/pl_mcclatchy/3237981

    BLK: It was interesting listening to him because he blamed everything on George Bush..>>

    DAR
    Well if he did (he didn’t) he would have gotten that part right.

    BLK: and then said that Gitmo was used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists and that we are less safe because of the place.>>

    DAR
    Obviously true and confirmed over and over. See below.

    BLK: Right, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11 is proof that we are less safe.>>

    DAR
    No, it proves they like to take a break between attacks while they plan. That we were attacked on 9/11 proves Bush/Cheney were asleep on the job. Cheney was the chairman of a anti-terrorist “task force.” He didn’t chair a single meeting.

    BLK: The best news of the day is that Dick Cheney gave a speech at the same time…>>

    DAR
    And the claims Cheney made were immediately ripped to shreds. Lie after lie is exposed and this time they are so blatant, so patently false, so absurd, even mainstream news sources are not hesitating go after his claims for what they are. Lies. It’s actually refreshing to see the news actually calling a spade a spade for a change. See it all here:

    “Cheney’s speech contained omissions, misstatements”

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090521/pl_mcclatchy/3237981

    They take nine specific claims from Cheney, and they debunk them, substantively, factually. It’s a beautiful thing to behold.

    D.

    • Blake says:

      You also claim that because we were attacked on 9/11, that Bush/ Cheney were asleep on the job- Like Clinton was for every freaking attack on his watch- Khobar Towers, Kenya, U.S.S. Cole, and the first attack on the World Trade Center? Not to mention it was Slick Willy that put the vaunted “firewalls” in place so our intel services could not talk with each other.
      Asleep on the job like THAT?

    • Blake says:

      They like to take a break while they plan? What the heck do you think they do? Play foosball while discussing jihad? Kick back in some cave, and share brewskis? You make it sound so innocent and fun I almost want to join, D- certainly you must have had your tongue so deep in your cheek you had to have choked.
      I can just see bin Laden and his dialysis machine doing laps around a pool while al Zarkawi tans that birthmark on his face. What a sight. I hope a drone can catch that, and I hope the drone is armed.

    • Big Dog says:

      I would never shoot someone in the knee. If you shoot someone do it with a kill shot. My preference is the head and the heart.

      I certainly would not release them in the US unless my conditions were met. Obama and Pelosi have to live with them.

      They did not debunk Cheney. They claimed he had omissions and misstatements. However, it is clear that he was on target. But then again, that all depends on your point of view. Did you read all of Obama and Biden’s lies from similar sites before you voted?

      • Darrel says:

        BIGD: They did not debunk Cheney.>>

        DAR
        Yes they did. Nine specific comments, responded to directly, point by point.
        In another thread, Blake said Obama prevaricated in his speech. I asked him for an example. He then made something up that Obama didn’t even say in the speech (he did that twice actually).

        BIGD: They claimed he [Cheney] had omissions and misstatements.>>

        DAR
        And they showed it. He lied by ommission and “misstatements” is polite talk for lie. Cheney can’t be *that* misinformed.

        I would really like to be more conservative on some issues. I am a swing voter. But I have a real problem with the blatant dishonesty in your party right now. You can read those 9 examples and not have a problem with that? If Obama had one of those in his speech I would squirm. If he had a couple it would be a real problem. But nine?!

        One example:

        ***
        Cheney accused Obama of “the selective release” of documents on Bush administration detainee policies, charging that Obama withheld records that Cheney claimed prove that information gained from the harsh interrogation methods prevented terrorist attacks.

        “I’ve formally asked that (the information) be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained,” Cheney said. “Last week, that request was formally rejected.”

        Response:
        “However, the decision to withhold the documents was announced by the CIA, which said that it was obliged to do so by a 2003 executive order issued by former President George W. Bush prohibiting the release of materials that are the subject of lawsuits.”
        ***

        Read the CIA response here:

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/14/cia-denies-cheney-request_n_203596.html

        BIGD: However, it is clear that he was on target.>>

        DAR
        If you make that many misstatements of fact in one speech, and this is your idea of “on target” I suggest you need to adjust your scope or raise you standards.

        BIGD: Did you read all of Obama and Biden’s lies from similar sites before you voted?>>

        DAR: “all of” their “lies?”

        Oh please, do share one with me. Hit me with your best shot. Get one that’s right “on target.”

        D.

        • In on it not says:

          His biggest lie, “I have honest American values, and hold the values of America as my highest standards.”

          How about you, what is your big lie?

        • Blake says:

          The CIA could release the memos at the direction of Barama- just like they did with the redacted selected memos-lets go ahead and get them ALL out in the open- I trust Cheneys memory a lot more than Barama’s motives.
          But c’mon big boy, let’s have a celebrity death match, steel cage style- Cheney v. Barama, only weapons, memos. Who will survive? I will bet on Cheney.

        • Darrel says:

          George W. Bush signed a EO “prohibiting the release of materials that are the subject of lawsuits.”

          And Obama should rescind that? Then you would criticism him for releasing materials that are subject to lawsuits.

          Obama’s not a cowboy like Bush (“all hat, no cattle”). He doesn’t go around abusing executive privilege like Bush routinely did (see warrentless wiretapping mess). People like this feature of him. It shows good judgment.

          D.

    • In on it not says:

      Not really. They gave “alterant scenarios,” possible theory, fictious history and a lot of rubbish mealy mouth talk.
      Did your mother not breast feed you long enough? Why are you such a hater?

  3. Blake says:

    first, I did not write that post, D- just a comment- what I did mean to say was that he criticized the pointing of fingers, then he pointed fingers at Bush 28 times. When is he going to grow a pair and be a big boy?
    The terrorists have hated us well before gitmo, so that argument is false.
    Bush had tried to see if ANY other country would take the prisoners, but had no takers- a problem Skinny B seems to have also. Oh, he could have put them back in many of their native countries, and they would have been truly tortured, then killed, and while I don’t care, Bush did, so he did not do that.
    Yes, in an infantile display, he did blame everything on Bush, as you seem to do- as if the terrorists were Bush’s henchmen- what a crock,D- you are better than that.
    Bush did not ask for the fight- this was brought to our shores, and you can blame it on the rag head’s inner child being deprived of whatever tingles their leg, but the fact is that they attacked us first, and what they get in return is not enough in my opinion.

  4. a mother says:

    How about this: reinstate The Rock, put them all there, and let tell them that we’ll get around to their trials as soon as we are done with every case sitting before the Supreme Court. The ones who aren’t actual American citizens aren’t covered by the “speedy trial” part of our Constitution, those who have been given citizenship need to have it revoked, and those who were born here and are natural-born Americans can be the first tried but the judge(s) need to reminded what happens to traitors.

    • In on it not says:

      Yes. We give more fairness and impartiality to criminals that we know tried to kill us then we do to our own unborn children.

      How can we have come so far down the dark path, and not even know that is hwere we are?

      Well, people like Darrel are at the front of the line, and I bet my last buck he is a government worker of social services menion of some sort. At any rate, not a producer, bbut a part of the problem.
      A moocher as Anne Ryand would say.

    • Blake says:

      You see Mother, that’s the crux of the problem here-As a nation, we have gotten so touchy- feeley that we have actually forgotten the true penalty for traitorous activity. That HAS to be true, or we would have at least half of the liberals with their backs against a pock- marked wall.
      As for the terrorists, I say, NO MORE PRISONERS. It’s always a bad thing when you try to import invidious non- native wildlife into the U.S.- look at what the fire ants have done, No, best to kill them in place.

  5. Big Dog says:

    How about we declare them prisoners of war and we don’t have to release them until the war is over and we can keep them at the Gitmo POW camp.

    Darrel, the request by Cheney was denied. Yes, they are held by EO signed by Bush. I know you are trying to fool people but it will not happen.

    Obama has already rescinded some Bush Executive Orders and he could do so in this case.

    Let’s not parse words, his request was denied and while the excuse of the EO was given, the reality is they could have done it if Obama had removed the EO. He can do that and he HAS done that with other issues.

    The EO excuse is the way Obama is getting around releasing items that might hurt the cause. You can bet if the memos had admissions by Carl Rove, George Bush and Dick Cheney that they knew it was illegal but did it anyway Obama would remove the EO quickly and say he was being transparent.

    So quit playing the games.

    Cheney was on target. Those fellows were the ones who don’t know all the facts.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Darrel:
    These misstatements by Obama are but one example

    Or these

    Or here

    Or this

    Or these by Biden

    And let us not forget that Biden said he got his info from the people at a local diner. Problem is, the diner closed nearly 20 years prior. He picked a name he remembered and used it to deceive people.

    You will note that some of the links I provided contain McCain’s misstatements as well. Obviously all of them say things that are not true or they say them in a way to make their argument look better.

    So one asks why your source picked at what Cheney said but failed to do the same for Obama’s speech.

    Obama misled people in that speech. You and others believe we are afraid of these people who are coming here. I am a Second Amendment guy and my family is as well so we have no fear of these kinds of folks.

    You all say that they will be in jail and blah blah. Once they come here the ACLU, Obama, and people like you will argue they are due rights under the Constitution (they are not because they are not citizens) and the ACLU will argue they have civil rights (they do not because they are not citizens) but they will get them.

    Then some slimy lawyer will say that they were not Mirandized or some other BS and they will be released into our society. That is why we kept them out of here, liberals bastardize the laws and the Constitution and hurt us.

    • Blake says:

      This is why we NEED people in the Supreme Court who interpret the Constitution, not turn it into the handi wipe of the left.

    • Darrel says:

      BIGD: “Obama misled people in that speech.”>>

      DAR
      Still waiting for one example. Blake made a few attempts but as I showed he had to resort to completely making them up.

      Quote Obama “in that speech,” show how/where he “misled people.” Make your case. Let’s see what you’ve got.

      You’ve brought a squirt gun to a gun fight, but did you bring any water?

      D.

  7. Big Dog says:

    So Dar, cowboys are all hat and no cattle? I know a few who would show you that not to be true.

    If it were a real gun fight, you would be lying in a pool of blood with a chalk outline surrounding you.

    How many EOs has Obama used so far and how many has he rescinded?

    And no, I would not criticize him. I would want him to release them to give the argument balance. The EITs are subject to litigation but he released them.

    I was against releasing any but now that he has done that he needs to release them all.

    How transparent of him. Like I said, if they were damaging to Bush/Cheney he would release them.

    • Darrel says:

      No, *Bush* is a “cowboy” who is “all hat and no cattle.”

      I grew up on a 180 acre dairy farm and helped milk 40 head, twice a day. We had lots of cattle. I know the difference.

      Regarding guns, I have lots of them and am a bit of a marksman. So again, you don’t know what you are talking about.

      D.
      —————–
      “You know I could run for governor but I’m basically a media creation. I’ve never done anything. I’ve worked for my dad. I worked in the oil business. But that’s not the kind of profile you have to have to get elected to public office.” -George W. Bush, 1989

      • Big Dog says:

        That is not what you wrote. You wrote that cowboys are all hat and no cattle.

        As for being a bit of a marksman, that is all well and good. It is not that I don’t know what I am talking about, I am just that much better than you.

        Obama:
        “he would resist any overtures to run for president or vice president before the end of his six-year term as a U.S. senator,” the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

        Said Obama: “I was elected yesterday. I have never set foot in the U.S. Senate. I’ve never worked in Washington. And the notion that somehow I’m immediately going to start running for higher office just doesn’t make sense.”

        He then went on to say he was too inexperienced and would have to start running right away.

        Obama never had a real job. Never.

        And Bush was being humble.

        • Darrel says:

          Sorry if you misunderstood my sentence.

          I said:

          Obama’s not a cowboy like Bush (”all hat, no cattle”).

          Meaning, Bush is a “cowboy” in name only. “All hat, no cattle.” It’s a term used to describe phony city boys who pretend to be cowboys.

          BIGD: “I am just that much better than you.”

          DAR
          I’m sure you think you are. Talk is cheap. I’ll let the record of your performance here stand for itself.

          Obama: “he would resist any overtures to run for president…”

          He changed his mind. Obviously he made the right decision and the country is very glad he did.

          D.
          ——————
          “Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
          —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

  8. Big Dog says:

    Obama Said:

    From Europe to the Pacific, we’ve been the nation that has shut down torture chambers and replaced tyranny with the rule of law.

    This is misleading. A few examples:

    That’s a hard claim to sell in Iran, after the United States overthrew the democratically elected government of Mossadegh in 1953 and brought in the Shah and his secret police, Savak, and their reign of torture.

    That’s a hard claim to sell in Guatemala, when in 1954, the United States overthrew the democratically elected Arbenz government and ushered in four decades of torture and near genocide.

    That’s a hard claim to sell in Indonesia, when in 1965 the United States helped overthrow the government of Sukarno and install Suharto, whose regime killed upwards of 500,000 people in Indonesia, with the CIA furnishing the generals with names of people to assassinate.

    From Progressive.org

    There are more examples there.

    By whitewashing our history Obama misleads people into believing that we were as pure as the driven snow until Bush/Cheney.

    We have been anything but pure in history. Our motives might have been pure but Obama misled when he claimed what we have done.

    • Darrel says:

      Blame America First eh?

      Sneaky bugger! You’re trying to be sensible and throw me off my game. Of course America’s history is a mixed bag. You could give an hour lecture on the good stuff and one at least as long on the bad stuff.

      Unfortunately, most Americans don’t know about the three examples you give above and if they bring them up, they are accused of being anti-American and “blaming America first.”

      Should have Obama worded his sentence this way?

      “From Europe to the Pacific, we’ve been the nation that has shut down torture chambers and replaced tyranny with the rule of law, well except for Iran, Guatemala and Indonesia, and a few others where we screwed the pooch.”

      Really, is that the time to get into that sort of detail? Of course not. That would be viewed as insane.

      For once the GOP would have something substantive to get him on!

      Is Obama’s comment true? Can we find many instances where “from Europe to the Pacific” the US has “shut down torture chambers and replaced tyranny with the rule of law.” In fact, has there been a country that has done it more effectively?

      You have found some instances that turned out very poorly (I’ve used that list before on right-wing nutbars who think the US has done no wrong) but you haven’t shown Obama’s claim to be false and in fact, it’s manifestly true. That sentence doesn’t mean the US is “as pure as the driven snow” it just means what it says, that is, the US has been the nation at the fore front of “shut[ing] down torture chambers and replac[ing] tyranny with the rule of law.”

      WWII alone would make the case. South Korea and pushing the Soviets over the edge do too.

      I do appreciate the attempt though.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        There are plenty of nuances in his speech. I selected this because he wanted to appear as if we never did this until Bush came along.

        He could have left it out. He could have said that there is a sordid history with regard to the use of waterboarding and that he is not going to debate the issue, he is going to stop it period.

        Not true about the anti American crowd. I want people to recognize history, not rewrite it. The left continues to rewrite it.

        It is not anti American to point out the truth of the past. It is anti American to blame us for all the ills of the world while ignoring the deeds of others. It is also anti American to defame our troops.