Releasing The Predictability

Both Ed Morrissey and the woman he and Allahpundit affectionately refer to as The Boss are really reaching for something that really isn't there with their latest attempt at smearing the Obama administration.

Michelle's purse-lipped outrage:

Here is what Team Obama’s “smart” and sensitive form of diplomacy has wrought: A hero’s welcome home to Libya for the murderous Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, who was released last August claiming he had terminal cancer and three months to live. A year later, the jihadist is still alive, senators want an investigation, and The Australian reports that the Obama administration backed “compassionate release.”

And Morrissey's over-reaching narrative:

What the US actually wanted, short of continuing Megrahi’s imprisonment, was a sort of house arrest in Scotland, not Libya. That is what was meant by LeBaron’s suggestion of “compassionate release.” The White House didn’t want Megrahi stepping off of a plane in Tripoli to cheering crowds, the exact scenario that played out in the end. While having Megrahi outside of prison wasn’t the nominal situation, that at least would have kept Megrahi from rubbing his freedom in the noses of the Pan Am 103 victims’ families.

The letter did not give a green light to Megrahi’s parole to Libya. Nevertheless, it shows the kind of ineptitude that has plagued the Obama administration’s diplomacy from the “reset button” with Russia to this day. LeBaron’s note was a clear signal to Scotland that the US had lost most of its interest in Megrahi; recall that the US had insisted originally that any parole must include extradition to the US. The Scottish government must have presumed that we would not strenuously object to their release of Megrahi to the Libyans after LeBaron failed to raise that point and demand Megrahi’s extradition.

Also, it shows that the Obama administration lied about being surprised by Megrahi’s release. They knew it was coming, and while they may have been surprised that he went to Libya, the White House knew Scotland was going to spring Megrahi one way or the other.

But if anyone takes the time to actually read the article in The Australian, they would get a far different picture than what Morrissy and Malkin are painting.

The Obama administration were expressly against the situation that ultimately played out. But if one were to go by Malkin and Morrissey's writings, you would get the picture that the US signed off on the deal to sent Megrahi back to Libya. Michelle and Ed's strategy in framing the story in this fashion is that they are banking on the laziness of conservatives to do any sort of fact checking. Unfortunately, that line of thinking normally works, as conservatives have a desire to believe the worst about anyone from the opposition party. I'm almost certain that if Malkin and Morrissey knew they could get away with it, they would have reported that Obama himself opened the cell door and extended a welcoming hand to Megrahi.

The US government, despite what these two clowns think, doesn't control the Scottish Justice Department, their prison system, or even those that took Megrahi into custody. These two pieces are clearly designed to distort the reality of this situation. And while this could have been handled much differently, what exactly do Malkin and Morrissey think that the Obama administration should have done? Should they have flown to Scotland and barrackaded the prison doors? Maybe send troops there as a show of force? We aren't really meant to understand that, as it's easier to inflate a situation to reflect your agenda rather than report it from an honest perspective.

In All Her Purse Lipped Rage

Michelle Malkin will always find a way to call Obama administration officials "terrorist sympathizers".



I'm reminded of a comment made by Keith Olbermann the other night, about the thousands of DOJ attorneys that haven't represented a "terrorist" from Guantanamo. Malkin, as well as others, would have us believe that EVERYONE at the DOJ has nothing but utter contempt for the safety of the American people.

But here's something that she should realize - the "terrorists" captured and housed at Guantanamo would have representation whether they were to be tired in civilian court or the tribunal system. It's part of the due process system that her and other conservatives claim to champion. Well, they champion it when it serves their own bitter interests.

And All Fox Nutjobs Are The Same

Just watch Steve Doocy prove how much of an idiot he is with this clip



Think Progress goes on to detail how our preconceptions about terrorism and those that use it are rather dangerous.

...the individual in question here, Abdulmutallab, I mean he would not have automatically fit a profile if you were standing next to him in the visa line at Dulles, for example. So it’s the behavior that we’re attempting to profile. And it’s the behavior, these little bits and pieces of information that were in the databases that we didn’t quite stitch together at this point in time. But it wasn’t a question of ethnicity or religion. Those are contributing factors, but it’s what people do that we should be paying attention to.

I'm guessing Doocy also thinks that all black people look alike too.

While some would call Doocy's statements racist, I think they fit more comfortably in the category of patently stupid.

Judith Miller Knows Jailtime b/w Classic AC/DC Track

Judith Miller, a central figure in the Valerie Plame affair, and whom had a film made about her story, claims that the US knows how to house terrorists outside Guantanamo.

Her response was a reply to the dicussion on Fox And Friends about FBI Director Robert Mueller's statements to Congress:

...Mueller was asked what concerns the FBI has about the release of Guantanamo detainees.

"The concerns we have about individuals who may support terrorism being in the United States run from concerns about providing financing, radicalizing others," Mueller said, as well as "the potential for individuals undertaking attacks in the United States."

"All of those are relevant concerns," Mueller said.

More from Raw Story and Think Progress.

The "radicalization" arguement seems to be a bit far reaching. What of gang members that recruit other gang members during their time in jail?

And now, a little musical interlude that seems to fit the reactionary Right's "fears" of terrorists being housed in Supermax prisons.

Ignorance As A Weapon Of Domestic Terrorism?

Sure, it's a stronge statement, but let's take a look at what we are talking about here.

The reason that "terrorism" works is because the attacker(s) only hav to succeed once. That's it. Once they have, all they have to do is sit back and watch their victim(s) - it's the U.S. in this case - start destroying themselves from the inside.

Conservative misinformation is a perfect weapon to continue to, in essense, aid terrorism in America.

Here's some examples.



Quinn seems to be forgetting that US tax dollars have been footing the bill for Guantanamo since its opening. The issue with prisons in the US has little to do with "shoring up security" as one of the primary problems are overcrowding, lack of basic maintenance on the buildings, and lack of qualified personel to run the prison system.

Also, known terrorists are already housed in US Supermax prisons.

Detained in the supermax facility in Colorado are Ramzi Yousef, who headed the group that carried out the first bombing of the World Trade Center in February 1993; Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted of conspiring in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001; Ahmed Ressam, of the Dec. 31, 1999, Los Angeles airport millennium attack plots; Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, conspirator in several plots, including one to assassinate President George W. Bush; and Wadih el-Hage, convicted of the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya.

I haven't heard anyone complaining that they are afriad that these men are being detained in the US.



Buchanan seems to accept the line of thinking that suspected terrorist detainees are going to enjoy luxuries when/if they are transfered to Supermax prisons in the US. Again, taxpayer money has has always funded prisons in the US. This talk of "bail" and "when they get out" is rabid hyperbole that lacks any pretense of intelligent discourse. It's fair to say that Pat just might agree with Newt Gingrich's wild assumption that when/if these detainees are released, that they will receive welfare.



Then why hasn't this happened to those terrorists that we already have housed in the US?

Bob Cesca has an interesting take on this clip:

Yeah, what if we put a terrorist in a prison (sort of like the dozens of terrorists currently in our domestic prison system) and then the ghost of Saddam Hussein appears as a gigantic marshamallow man and bashes a hole in the prison wall, releasing a mutated 100-foot-tall "Mr. Jingles" mouse into nearby neighborhoods where it devours YOUR CHILDREN.

Despite the very real fact that no one has ever escaped from a Supermax facility, Halperin seems to be having visions of a mash-up between Con-Air and escape from New York.



And, as always, the Conservative media mouthpiece that is Fox"News" perpetuates this faulty line of thinking.

....the administration has consistently maintained that terrorists will not be released into the United States. At a January 27 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, Gates responded to a comment by Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) about the administration's detainee policy by saying, "I can't imagine a situation in which detainees at Guantanamo who were considered a danger to the people of the United States would simply be released here."

Similarly, during a May 7 hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) asked Attorney General Eric Holder: "Do you have the authority under the law to do this, to bring terrorists into this country and bring them into the community?" Holder responded, "[W]ith regard to those who you would describe as terrorists, we would not bring them into this country and release them, anybody who we consider to be a terrorist, as I think you're using the word."

Nevertheless, Fox News hosts and contributors have repeatedly advanced the baseless Republican charge that the administration intends to release terrorists held at Guantánamo Bay into the United States...

Sean Hannity, one of the loudest voices in the lunatic-fringe conservative movement, seems to take great joy in his misinformation.

The Director of National Intelligence, as Hannity stated at the start of the clip, was referring only to the 17 Chinese Uighur. What is more interesting about this point is that George W. Bush's administration was fine with releasing them.

...Blair was answering a specific question about detainees belonging to the Uighur ethnic group from western China. As Media Matters for America has noted, the Bush administration told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in September 2008 that the 17 Uighur detainees "will be treated as if they are no longer enemy combatants."

The level of misinformation and blatant lies that have become so ingrained in the national dialogue is staggering.

One of the basic definitions of "terrorism" is this:

The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized.

By it's very nature, the conservative movement, their media arm, as well as the pundits, writers, and radio personalities that abide by their doctrine of fear and misinformation are perpetuating a level of terrorism in this country that is growing to such a state that it is becoming such an ingrained portion of common conversation that many people aren't able to discern between the lies and the truth.

That Was His Screw-Up ( or ) Set Them Free?

There seems to be quite the rabble-rabble about a prisoner that was housed at Guantanamo being released and then rejoining Al Queada. But, guess who was responsible for this person's release:

The Bush administration released this man in 2007, without trial -a decision made by political appointees, not judicial review - and handed him over to the Saudis who let him walk.

Has the Obama administration said anything about letting these people just walk?

Has Obama himself said anything about letting these people just go free without trial, without finding out what they have done, without dispensing punishment thatis due?

NO.

More here