NYC, Terrorism, And Inconvenient Truths For The Right

Failed Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, poses a very interesting problem for not just the Obama administration, but the entire country - that includes conservatives, by the way.

While conservatives are forming the narrative that this was an abject failure of Homeland Security, I have to question several aspects of those claims. True, the no-fly list was ineffective on this front, but Federal agents spotted Shazad's name on the passenger manifest and were able to capture him.

It's called a "fall-back provision". When one system doesn't catch something or someone up-front, the secondary provisions are there to correct the incident. And while this paints the picture for conservatives that the Feds were nothing more than bumbling keystone cops. The reality is that law enforcement did great job in gathering information that lead to Shazad's arrest. The only caveat to that was how he was able to make it onto the plane.

The reality of using tracking systems like the no-fly list is that the reliability of them are largely predicated on one person making the proper call at the right time. Considering the timeline of actions between Shazad's poorly constructed "bomb" and police discovering his identity, I'm not too surprised ( but still troubled ) that a TSA screener missed the opportunity to catch him up front.

------------------------------------

Conservatives are foaming at the mouth with this one. They are doing their level best to play all the angles that they refused to look at when Bush was in office and even are creating the narrative that the "mainstream media" are about to blame Bush for this incident. Predictable and quite frustrating to deal with as well.

Malkin seems to be taking the "Arizona" approach by hinting that we should prevent immigrants from the middle east from marrying. This is already an issue of sorts in various portions of America, as immigrants will attempt to marry a natural born citizen to gain their own citizenship. This has not been shown to be the case with Shahzad, though Malkin is cultivating that theme. And while her piece takes to task how at various points in the past 20 years some "terrorists" have been shown to use the marriage angle to gain entrance into America, I'm wondering where all the abject rage and purse-lipped anger was in regards to the Bush administration. After all, this is surely a touchy subject for an anchor baby.

There were many instances like this that occurred on Bush's watch - Richard Reid, The Ft. Dix Plot, and the JFK airport plot.

Conservatives weren't even a fraction as critical towards the Bush administration and how the investigations were handled. These were all "terrorists" that were equally as amateurish as - if not more so - Shahzad.

The intel and resources used to capture Shahzad worked, even with the lapse in communication. There's even a report out that an army surveillance plane was the key in finding out where Shahzad was headed - they traced his call while he was reserving his ticket. However, this story is slowly being walked-back, likely due to the fact that this was more than likely not to be reported.

And while conservatives and their media masters are going to spin this incident to their own ideological advantage, the reality is that Shahzad was captured in less than 54 hours from when the make-believe bomb was intended to go off.

I'm not going to claim that this was a perfect situation and it was handled with 100% accuracy - that's never going to happen. Anyone claiming the contrary is so divorced from reality that they honestly shouldn't be commenting on issues like this to begin with. There will likely be steps taken to improve communication and intelligence gathering, and that's already starting to happen, and with the information garnered from Shahzad during interrogation ( which is ongoing as of yesterday ) we will learn more about any possible connections he may have had.

Despite what conservatives claim, the Obama administration has a far better record than the Bush administration regarding specific aspects of combating terrorism. And while "close calls" such as this shouldn't be minimized, it's just as bad - if not worse - to over-inflate and issue. Neither approach will benefit this country in any fashion.

Conservativism In Action?

Not only is a conservative behind the lack of leadership within the TSA, but it has come to light that the Bush administration released Muhamad Attik al-Harbi and Said Ali Shari, two Guantanamo detainees, in November of 2007. And while this clearly falls into the laps of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, you can't mention that at all - well, to conservatives anyway.

Recidivism amongst released prisoners by the Bush administration appears to be quite the problem. It's been reported by conservative media outlets and been a major talking point against the release of any more prisoners by the Obama administration to even moving remaining detainees to Illinois in the near future.

There's plenty of blame to go around for what happened Christmas day, but when one takes a look at it, some of the ones that have some serious explaining to do are conservatives. As much as I don't agree with his point of view, Allahpundit over at HotAir makes a rather valid point:

This reads like the plot of one of those over-the-top David Zucker attack ads against the left — except it wasn’t the left that presided over this one. The next interview with Dick or Liz Cheney should be pretty interesting, huh?

But what of the other prisoners that Robert Gates is wanting to return - some of them to Yemen, the place that's now being portrayed as the new Afghanistan? It's safe to say that no one really knows just yet, and that's why commenting on it would be beyond foolish. However, have the Uighurs that were released early this year had US eyes on them? There was a massive uproar from conservative media outlets initially, but now the Uighur story is all but gone. Did the Obama administration take special actions to insure that recidivism wouldn't happen?

Conservatives Own Email-Gate Is Brewing

Well, look what we found - 22 million emails from the Bush administration that were allegedly "lost". And the timeline for these just happens to coincide with the Plame Affair. Perhaps this story will reveal more conservative hypocrisy in regards to revelations of information contained in email correspondence.

The discovery was announced Monday by the National Security Archive and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, which filed lawsuits against the Executive Office of the President, or EOP, over the e-mails in 2007.

The two groups had initially filed a Freedom of Information Act request for e-mails in the wake of a scandal involving the Justice Department, which had fired U.S. attorneys around the country in an apparent political bid to rid the department of prosecutors who didn’t adhere to the White House’s conservative agenda. The missing e-mails were also potentially crucial to the investigation into the Valerie Plame–CIA leak scandal.

These emails will now be cataloged in the National Archives and made part of the public domain. Potentially there is information contained within that will show not only the corrupt nature of the Bush Justice Department but also that Plame's outing by Dick Cheney and his staff was illegal. Could formal charges finally be brought against Cheney? Could "Scooter" Libby face more charges or would that fall under the "no double jeopardy" rule?

This story has the potential to spell big trouble for former Bush administration officials, and the spin from conservatives will likely be quite dizzying.

In What Respect Charlie?

I'm sure we all remember this:



Sarah Palin's first big screw-up on the national scene and conservatives lept to her defense by claiming that there isn't and wasn't a clearly defined "doctrine" of George W. Bush like the "Monroe Doctrne" was. It appears that some conservatives are now changing their tune.

From Bloomberg

The Sept. 11 terrorist strikes prompted Bush to alter U.S. policy by stressing the option of preemptive military action against groups or countries that threaten the U.S. Critics said that breached international norms and set a dangerous precedent for other nations to adopt a similar policy.

The doctrine is being reassessed as part of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review of strategy, force structure and weapons programs. Hicks is overseeing the review.

Perhaps it's time that conservatives realize that their reactionary stance and naval-gazing in realtion to Sarah Palin has caused them to be the mockery that they are today. There is, was, and has been a Bush Doctrine during and since George W. Bush's presidency.

It's this type of mentality within the modern conservative movement that has caused them to consistantly lose ground. From local, state, and national elections, the Republican party has been a net loser since 2006. They may pose only a handful of gains in the mid-term next year - not out of the American people seeing them as better leaders, but from a historical context.

The doctrine of the conservative movement, however, is widely known and accepted - oppose at all costs, fabricate, scare, and molest reality into the visage of your chosing.

Deregulation: Another Love Story

Raw Story has just released an article that shows that the Bush Administration blocked attempts at preventing predatory lending.

In 2004, the Office of the Currency Comptroller, an obscure regulatory agency tasked with ensuring the fiscal soundness of America's banks, invoked an 1863 law to give itself the power to override state laws against predatory lending. The OCC told states they could not enforce predatory-lending laws, and all banks would be subject only to less-strict federal laws.

And while conservatives aren't willing to accept that massive deregulation on the part of the Bush administration had anything to do with the financial collapse, they are still sticking to the talking-point that it all happened because people were taking loans that they couldn't afford.

This was a topic of discussion on last night's Hannity program where Micheal Moore presented some interesting information to counter Sean's finger-pointing.



I have often wondered why Sean Hannity favors blaming the American people the ills that the economy faces from time to time. Certainly, responsibility is a major factor, but when have you ever seen him take on big pharmaceutical companies, banks that practice in predatory lending, or companies that discriminate on the basis of race, gender, or religion. You don't, because Hannity sees himself and his ideology as vastly superior to everyone else.

And as an exit question, I wonder what "stuff" is being made in America by "ethical" people that Hannity is speaking about at the end of the clip. His entire end of the argument is predicated on glittering generalities - no facts to back up his assertions. The vaugueness with which conservative approach debate in this country leaves one wondering far too often who or what they are really talking about.

Fox Giving O'Reilly Undue Credit

Seems that prosecutors in Spain have decided against going after 6 Bush administration officials.

Guess who's getting credit for this one?

Yep, Bill O'Reilly. Courtesy of the newly dug-out corner of the internet known as the "Fox Nation".

MADRID — Spanish prosecutors will recommend against opening an investigation into whether six Bush administration officials sanctioned torture against terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, the country's attorney general said Thursday.

Candido Conde-Pumpido said the case against the high-ranking U.S. officials — including former U.S. Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales — was without merit because the men were not present when the torture took place.

"If one is dealing with a crime of mistreatment of prisoners of war, the complaint should go against those who physically carried it out," Conde-Pumpido said in a breakfast meeting with journalists. He said a trial of the men would turn Spain's National Court "into a plaything."

Prosecutors at Spain's National Court have not formally announced their decision in the case, but Conde-Pumpido is the country's top law-enforcement official in the country and has the ultimate say.

A Spanish investigative judge is not bound to accept the prosecutor's ruling, but it is highly unusual for a case to proceed without the support of prosecutors.

Strange, I didn't see O'Reilly's name mentioned in the article.

Righteous Indignation

Bill O'Reilly is all in a lather over a Spanish lawyer wanting to bring charges against Bush administration officials.



From Media Matters

How dare someone in Spain have their own opinions!

All this reminds me of Bill failed boycott of France.

I think the most laughable part of this whole prattling nonsense that is Bill equates insulting America with being against George Bush.

It's ill-informed voices like Bill O'Reilly's that have caused other countries to have such a poor opinion of America. I'm sure that Spain will be simply crestfallen, now O'Reilly has threatened to never travel there.

Kind of invalidates his "just one of the folks" label he likes to afix to himself. How many people do you know that have travelled to Spain or can even afford to?

More Important Than "That One"

This isn't just sad, this is childish:

In December, President-elect Obama asked the White House if he and his family could move into Blair House — the White House’s guest house — a week early, so that his daughters Malia and Sasha could start school. The White House rebuffed them, saying the house was already booked for another guest. A White House source added that “Blair House was appalled” by the request.

After weeks of speculation, the mystery guest that trumps the President-elect and his family has finally been revealed. The White House offered the house to John Howard, the former Prime Minister of Australia who is set to receive a Medal of Freedom. Instead of arranging other accommodations for Howard’s one-night stay, the Bush administration told the Obama family to stay in a hotel for two weeks. (Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, who are also receiving the Medal of Freedom, opted to find other accommodations.)

Via Think Progress

Good on Blair and Uribe.

Margaret Carlson, a Bloomberg Journalist, visited Countdown on MSNBC to shed some further light on this pathetic stunt:



Much like listening to someone speak or reading a passage of text, people more often remember the first and last thing said or done. In this case, the Blair House pettiness will surely last.

Is The Bush Administration Advocating "Sex Ed For Kindergartners"?

Yes, They are.

( ht to ChiGuy @ DailyKos for this one )


In a previous blog, I talked about how Michelle Malkin and Byron York had their knickers in a twist over legislation - supported by Barack Obama - that advocated teaching comprehensive, age appropriate, sex education to children in grades K - 12.

Well, it appears that this is not a new concept.

The "sex ed for kindergartners" policy for which McCain has been bashing Obama is in fact a policy currently funded by the Bush administration and is a policy that has been recommended by state boards of education in conservative states such as Tennessee and Wyoming.

If you take a look at the CDCs funding of The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE), you'll find this:

Providing HIV-related information and guidance to state boards of
education and other education stakeholders on policies that promote
effective HIV prevention for kindergarten through 12th grade students in
schools across the nation.

This is also not a new practice. It's been going on since 2003 in Tennessee.

A press release, dated February of this year reads in part:

The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) has
made grants to three state boards of education to promote more
effective instruction to K-12 students about HIV prevention. The
$13,000 grants are being made to the North Carolina, Oregon, and
Tennessee State Boards of Education.

...

The grants are part of NASBE's HIV Prevention Policy and Program
Improvement Initiative, a facet of the Center for Safe and Healthy
Schools, which is supported by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's Division of Adolescent and School Health (CDC-DASH).

Even Wyoming has had this policy in place - for 10 years.

Be sure and read ChiGuys diary for the rest of the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

If there was any remaining question in the minds of voters ( likely or not ) as to whether McCain and his campaign have been honest with the American public, you've got your answer now.

Apparently, Mitt Romney was continuing this lie and did so on morning Joe today:

Movies That Make You Think : v1.2 Loose Change

I'm not really into the whole "the government was behind 9/11" conspiracy theory.

But, let me preface this blog with this - there are several events of that day which ( hindsight being the perpetually clear-eyed bastard that it is ) tells me that something still isn't right. Something is still missing. I often feel like I have been lied to.

There are several moments in the film that suggest a sinister plot within the Bush administration. I find that highly unlikely, as they are ill-equiped to handle something on such a scale as the events of Sept. 11 2001.

However, there are several topics within the film that require further investigation.

But, who knows if Americans will ever know why so many people died, why so much covered-up from the start, why two planes were literally vaporized, why the Bush administration denied requested for an independant investigation. And more questions than most American may care to ask.

It's not wrong to question these things. The true sin would be to ignore them.