Good Morning…you are safer

Filed in National by on May 21, 2009

5 Months in and it looks like Obama is reading the memo’s that say people want to attack us.

About the Author ()

hiding in the open

Comments (25)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 7:49 am

    Yeah, he’s a regular Vic Mackey.

  2. jason330 says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:11 am

    Pretty bad move on Obama’s part.

    Everyone knows that way you keep the country safe is to let it get attacked. Then start keeping score after the first 3,000 dead are eulogized.

  3. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:14 am

    Seriously the guy totally fucked up the curve for the next president. Now, he/she only has 5 months to keep us safe next go round.

    Before you know it, They are going to expect the President to be in charge on Day ONE!

  4. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:21 am

    oops… “The investigation had been under way for about a year.” Another good Bush policy that Obama is continuing.

    http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/nyc/090520_Arrests_in_Plot_to_Bomb_NYC_Temple

  5. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:30 am

    really? you want to go there huh?

  6. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:30 am

    had the memo said, “guys want to kill americans” that too would have continued the Bush Policy of Ignore and Wait.

    good luck trying though jz. It should be fun.

  7. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:31 am

    Obama once again made a good decision and got out of the way of things that were already going on.

    Now if he had only done that with the Mexico City Policy…

  8. jason330 says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:37 am

    If only Bush had continued the Clinton era policy of reading PDB’s and heading off threats. Then we would never have been attacked on 9/11 and Cheney never would have had the excuse to attack a random country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack.

    *sigh*

    Oh well. the country has spoken. No more Republicans in positions of power.

  9. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:39 am

    except Radio Hosts

  10. Unstable Isotope says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:48 am

    Wait…there are terrorist wannabe supervillians? We can’t put them in regular prisons because of their superpowers.

  11. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 9:39 am

    Are we sure Bush isn’t still running things? Oh boy I hope so. I bet the Western White House is the new Man Behind the Curtain.

    20 May 2009 // Washington, D.C. – Earlier today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) learned that the Obama administration is opposing our request that the Supreme Court reconsider the dismissal of the lawsuit, Wilson v. Libby, et al.

    http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/39738

  12. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 9:51 am

    good point UI. These guys are terrorists and we don’t have good enough prisons in the US to hold these evil people.

  13. Susan Regis Collins says:
    May 21, 2009 at 10:41 am

    What about the 6 or 7 Chinese national Muslims who are the ‘enemy’ of that state because of their brand of Islam? Why are they being held as a threat to the U.S.? There is a community of this sect here who have agreed to take these men into their arms and heart. But NO0ooooo….they musta done something wrong or they wouldn’t have been rounded up and shipped to Gitmo.

  14. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 11:01 am

    Squish, Robert Mueller says that even our max-security prisons are not equipped to safely contain these guys.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_guantanamo_fbi

    Obama has now floated the option of expanding Bush policies in the future:
    “WASHINGTON — President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a ‘preventive detention’ system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried, two participants in the private session said.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.html?_r=1

    1 in 7 released Gitmo detainees have rejoined the fight against Christianity, Judaism, Modernity, Humanity, Clean Water, Indoor Plumbing, Fun, Summer at the Beach, and “the Gays.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21gitmo.html

    Susan, it seems like the Uyghurs are in a legal limbo. I can’t say what the whole story is, because I don’t think it’s out there. Releasing them to China would probably mean death. Releasing them to ethnic communities in America would obviously open a legal door to Deerborn, Michigan becoming a recipient of the rest of the detainees. Heck, who know if these guys should be released at all?

  15. Unstable Isotope says:
    May 21, 2009 at 11:07 am

    The Uighurs are our responsibility now. We’ve been holding them in prison despite ruling several years ago that they are innocent of any wrongdoing.

    Mueller has no credibility. What he said was incredibly stupid. Hasn’t he even heard of solitary confinement? What does he do with the Aryan Nation brotherhood in prison, then?

    It’s simple – if they’re guilty of something, convict them and send them to prison. If not, let them go. That’s how are system is supposed to work.

  16. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 11:17 am

    I don’t think you can have a prisoner in solitary confinement indefinetely. The ACLU, Red Cross, Amnesty International, and PETA would be all over that.

    The Nation of Islam takes care of The Aryan Nation; I don’t know who takes care of the Cherokee Nation or Red Sox Nation.

    It is not simple if the evidence is tied to classified or operational information. Even Obama is coming to realize this is not simple and this is not a campaign.

  17. Geezer says:
    May 21, 2009 at 11:46 am

    JZ: I agree — if we put these prisoners in the US prison system, a human rights complaint would be almost guaranteed.

    Sadly, those groups are less vigilant about the 2 million Americans already imprisoned. For example, Delaware, by policy, keeps death-row prisoners in solitary confinement from the date of conviction to the date of execution — in some cases 10 years or more, but in any event, for the rest of their lives.

  18. cassandra_m says:
    May 21, 2009 at 11:54 am

    Here is the thing — if there is a thing the United States knows how to do it is how to imprison people. With one of the biggest prison populations in the world, there is no doubt that keeping these guys behind bars is something we know how to do. Mueller’s concern — if you read that article — is that for the few left who might still be operational, it is harder to stop those contacts in prison. But we already have terrorists in our prisons, so there is something being done to monitor or isolate them.

  19. Jason Z says:
    May 21, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    Geezer, I don’t know how you understand solitary confinement, but Delaware’s policy on its 20 death row inmates doesn’t sound like my idea of lockdown:
    Visitors, personal and legal, are permitted and it seems the only other limit is that they are never socialized with other inmates. They have telephone calls, TV, books, exercise, etc…
    http://doc.delaware.gov/information/deathrow_factsheet.shtml

    I also find it interesting that most(or half?) of them are white, especially considering Delaware’s demograhics and the conventional wisdom about prison populations. I should have known better than to have taken conventional wisdom on its face.

    cassandra, Mueller speaks of how gang leaders are able to run things from behind bars. They have enough trouble at Gitmo with lawyers sharing information with these terrorists’ buddies and remember that guy that made a phone call to al Jazeera? In the US, these issues would be compounded by personal visitors and more access to telephone calls. Gitmo is a secure location where we can keep an eye on these guys.

    Terrorists currently in the US prison system are there because they were arrested on US soil and therefore were afforded Constitutional rights. I’m assuming they are a problem, I wouldn’t be surprised if these guys in NY were converted to radicalized Islam while they were in prison.

    Can anyone find a transcript of Mueller’s testimony? I’ve only been able to hear/read parts of it.

  20. cassandra_m says:
    May 21, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    But the point that terrorists are in prison here and pretty well monitored and surveilled doesn’t help Mueller’s case. It also doesn’t say much for the FBI’s work in identifying the stateside threats, I think, if he would imagine that the FBI wouldn’t monitor pretty closely visitors, conversations, etc. Besides — there is an entire prison on North Dakota that the citizens there want to offer up for this. Getting them all in one place where you could monitor them more closely isn’t a bad idea.

  21. anon says:
    May 21, 2009 at 5:02 pm

    Delaware is 47th in the nation incarcerating people! The Delaware Crime Prevention and Rehabiliation Act would reform the entire system. So why did the Senate Attorney Kadafer state, “putting this into law, would mean we have to change some laws”…duh, thats what the General Assy does and established in code.

    Me thinks the Delaware Prison Industrial Complex is too dependent on the contracts some folks have in this State, therefore we want to keep the status quo. Rather than spend $3400 for Drug Rehab, Delaware would rather spend $34,000 a head to incarcerate. Do the math?

  22. Republican David says:
    May 22, 2009 at 12:40 am

    Of course we are still safe, we still have most of the Bush security apparatus including FBI chief Robert Mueller.

    President Bush didn’t have that luxury. The Clinton era policies which allowed several attacks were still being studied while Bush’s appointees were being blocked by obstructionist Democrats.

    What is sad is the fact that we are unraveling some of the protections day by day. Thankfully, President Obama is starting to see the value of some that he did not as candidate.

    I am hopeful that he will keep coming my way.

  23. Jason Z says:
    May 22, 2009 at 8:56 am

    Anyone else curious why Obama didn’t mention a major terror arrest in his major terror speech?

  24. Donsquishydishimaharishi says:
    May 22, 2009 at 9:01 am

    because the sky isn’t falling and he didn’t run his campaign on horrible brown people with towels on their head want to kill us?

  25. Jason Z says:
    May 22, 2009 at 9:26 am

    Didn’t the FBI, NYPD, and the Joint Antiterrorism Task Force deserve a Presidential pat-on-the-back? No fear mongering necessary?

«
»