2009 Plane Terrorist Was Released By Bushies & Saudis

The irony of some stories can be too striking to not note.  The Dec 25 terror plot to blow up Northwest Flight 253 is such a story.  In the time period since President Obama has stated that the Guantanamo prison in Cuba needs to be closed and the current detainees moved to U.S. prisons, the Cons have spewed vile attacks against the Commander-in-Chief and his plans.

Among their attacks, they claim that letting terrorists free (a potential result of trials) would endanger America.  It turns out they know the best about this – one of the planners for the Flight 253 attack was released from Guantanamo … by the Bush “administration”.  He was sent to Saudi Arabia for “art therapy rehabilitation” and released into the public.

What the Bushies didn’t do was hold a public trial for him.  The military and the “administration” made the opaque decision to send the man onto Saudi Arabia, the same country where 19 of the 20 9/11 terrorists were born.  Saudi Arabia in turn set the men free.  Yet, there is no word from peeing-in-their-pants Cons about the Saudis releasing this monster back into the public.  Why aren’t John McCain and Joe Lieberman calling for bombing the Saudis?  Because the Saudis enjoy high-level protection from their American lap-dogs.

No, in the Cons’ sick and twisted world-view, those who were directly responsible for endangering Americans (who were the same people who didn’t keep America safe prior to 9/11, btw), continue to shoulder zero blame.  Instead, the half-black Commander-in-Chief gets skewered.  Moreover, keep in mind that these same screw-ups were the ones saying in the Bush years that disagreeing with the President was unpatriotic and traitorous.  They forgot to specify that only applied when the President was a Con and a rich white man.

Among other things, this terror plot, failed or not, points to yet another failure of the Bushies – it is obvious that despite wasting billions of our tax dollars, the Bush “administration” didn’t ensure our intelligence agencies were communicating properly or working together effectively.  An eerily similar trail of clues leading up to this terror plot are quickly becoming apparent.  Further, first responders are in most cases not any closer to possessing the equipment they’ve cited as necessary to respond to attacks on U.S. soil than they were on 9/10/2001.  Guess what, Cons – your man in charge didn’t do enough about that for 7 long years.  Yet today, you’re blaming President Obama.  Why, oh why do Cons hate America so much?

Cheney’s Daughter Is A Serious Foreign Policy Expert?

The Cons live in a very strange world.  It’s a world in which the “free-market” supposedly fixes everything by itself and so is pursued with religious vigor that would make Orthodox followers scratch their heads.  It’s a world in which every dark-skinned person in a viable, current threat to the safety and security of the Cons’ gated communities, except for the ones that are rich (see: Saudi Arabian royalty, etc).  It’s a world in which the term climate-change is a far-left conspiracy theory that has somehow grabbed power in nearly every country’s government, that nearly every scientist is somehow a part of and that nearly every media outlet is somehow a part of to boot.  It doesn’t have to make sense to the rest of us – the Cons excel at cognitive dissonance.

In this fantasy land, the daughter of the last Vice-President Puppet-Master is somehow considered to be a leader in developing Con opposition to President Obama’s foreign policy initiatives.  Never mind that saying the President’s foreign policies weren’t in America’s interests got you labeled “traitor” and “terrist-lover” by the same Cons just one short year ago.  The difference was the “President” was a Con, so his directives comes down from up-high, don’tcha know?  Now that the President is a half-black man, all that is out the window.  Nothing President Obama can or will do will ever be good enough for these rigid ideologues.

Supreme Court’s Guantanamo Ruling

There has been a number of pieces, both in the news and in the blogosphere, regarding Guantanamo Bay detainees’ rights to U.S. court hearings. I applaud the Court’s decision. It has been reprehensible that any person was held without charge and without access to a court system. The Bush administration’s intentions to undo recognized law since the Magna Carta was simply breathtaking. The following neatly sums up my thoughts on the matter:

Every member of the Congress that approved the Military Commissions Act and the Detainee Treatment Act, now correctly reversed by the Court, will have the moral stain of having been a party to it besmirching their careers and their legacies forever. History will be only slightly less unforgiving to the Congress which allowed the grave abuses of the Constitution by the Bush administration than it will be to Bush himself. So no member of the Senate should be quick to follow Graham further down that path to complete ignominy. [Read the remainder of the post to understand the Graham reference - WD.]

One of the offenders is Colorado’s Ken Salazar. He voted for the legislation and then admitted he did so despite thinking it was unconstitutional. What exactly does taking an oath to defend the Constitution mean to Sen. Salazar and his colleagues that passed these awful Acts? Apparently little to nothing.

As such, I repeat my intention to support a challenger to Sen. Salazar. This vote is far from the only one he has made since 2004 that did not meet my small-d democratic values and ideals, but it is likely one of the more important ones.