6/20/2010

24 Responses to “Decision on 9/11 Trials may be Postponed”

1. So Obama wants to do the right thing, except when it will be shot down by the electorate.

   Arizona Bob (e8af2b) — 6/20/2010 @ 9:56 pm

   
   

2. So much for the decisive decision-making of the Empty Suit(tm).

   Can’t make a decision for fear it will be held against Democrats in November.

   Courage of his convictions? That would be zero.

   SPQR (26be8b) — 6/20/2010 @ 9:56 pm

   
   

3. I don’t think it will be a problem after November.

   Mike K (82f374) — 6/20/2010 @ 10:07 pm

   
   

4. Class, character, and integrity are certainly distinguishable between the two administrations.

   Unfortunately.

   Machinist (497786) — 6/20/2010 @ 10:15 pm

   
   

5. I suspect that similar vacillation will be displayed regarding the sueing of AZ in the matter of SB 1070. This admin is all about the sound-bite, the immediate polls and nothing to do with actual governing, or decision making or problem resolution. Most everyone on this site know that, with the usual notable exceptions. You know who you are…

   Gazzer (d79016) — 6/20/2010 @ 10:35 pm

   
   

6. Meanwhile, while I’m not sure of the accuracy of all portions of the following assessment — or the main person who’s being quoted — the phrase “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” does cross my mind…

   http://www.americanthinker.com, Pamela Geller, June 16, 2010:

   “The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim.”

   That was the claim of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, as reported in the May 2010 issue of Israel Today.

   According to journalist Avi Lipkin, Gheit appeared on Nile TV’s “Round Table Show” in January, on which he said that “he had had a one-on-one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda.”

   Obama allegedly said this in the context of reassuring Gheit that he would soon deal with Israel….

   Could this be true? Even if Gheit’s claim isn’t true, or was misreported, every country in the free world must be cognizant of the catastrophic sea change that has taken place in the leadership of the free world — as witnessed by events over the past year.

   …The alleged exchange between Obama and Gheit would almost certainly have happened in early January 2010, when Gheit was in Washington, D.C. regarding “Mideast peace talks.”

   …This is a devastating claim, and yet no media outlet is covering it. Remember, during Obama’s campaign, I and others were excoriated for using his middle name. We were accused of implying he was a crypto-Muslim. We could not discuss his background, his Islamic schooling, his ties to Islam.

   …It became all too clear after his election how proud Obama was of his Muslim name, background, and family. He made this plain when he gave his very first interview to Muslim media and boasted of these things. He suddenly became proud of the very things that were verboten to speak of during the campaign.

   If Gheit’s reported claim is true, then Obama is a baldfaced liar. But why? Why lie if you have nothing to hide?

   …In Israel Today, political analyst Aviel Schneider exposes some of the further implications of Gheit’s claim:

   That could explain why Obama has instructed that the term “Islamic extremism” no longer be used in official government documents and statements. Furthermore, the US is now accusing Israel of harming American interests in the Middle East.

   …Even the US Congress considers Obama’s behavior toward Netanyahu humiliating. Three-quarters of the House of Representatives, 337 of 435 members, signed a bipartisan letter to Clinton expressing “deep concern over recent tension” between the two countries, and demanding that it be smoothed over quickly and in private.

   …Is it any wonder that Obama’s counterterror adviser speaks Arabic, calls Jerusalem “Al-Quds,” and calls jihad a “legitimate tenet of Islam”?

   We know that Gheit met with Obama in April 2010 in D.C. — check out White House.gov, which lists Gheit as one of the attendees of a “Nuclear Security Summit” at that time. And they met more than once. Gheit had a private meeting with Obama in May 2009.

   Worse yet, Gheit just last month called Israel “the enemy.” This after Israel gave them the Sinai (which Israel had won in a defensive war and defended through another one) with all its oil in return for “peace.”

   How plausible is Gheit’s reported claim about Obama? Let’s review Obama’s track record:

   * March 2009: Obama declares the “war on terror” is over, despite a dramatic increase in jihad war ops.

   * March 2009: he floats the idea that he will talk to violent, genocidal Hamas.

   * March 2009: he demands that more Muslim Americans work in the Obama administration and insists that they be recruited.

   * April 2009: Obama tells Europe to admit Islamic Turkey into the EU, much to the consternation of the Europeans.

   * April 2009: Obama demands that non-Muslims respect Islam (despite our differences) in a speech in Turkey.

   * April 2009: Obama says in a speech from Turkey, “We are not a Christian nation.”

   * April 2009: Dalia Mogahed, the first hijab-clad senior adviser to Obama on Muslim affairs, says in an interview with terrorist- and jihad-supporting Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi’s website, “Many have claimed that terrorists have ‘hijacked Islam.’ I disagree. I think Islam is safe and thriving in the lives of Muslims around the world. What the terrorists have been allowed to take over are Muslim grievances.”

   * April 2009: Obama lays groundwork for a partnership with Hamas.

   * May 2009: Obama promises to offer his “personal commitment” to Muslims.

   * May 2009: Obama calls America “one of the largest Muslim countries on the planet.”

   * June 2009: Obama invites the Muslim Brotherhood, a violent global jihadist group whose sole objective is a universal caliphate, to his speech to the ummah (Muslim community) in Cairo.

   * July 2009: Obama creates a new office at the State Department, Outreach to the Worldwide Muslim community, reporting directly to Hillary Clinton.

   * July 2009: The State Department Welcomes Hamas mouthpiece Al-Quds TV to D.C. to filmpPropaganda.

   * In July 2009, Obama sanctions the brutal crackdown of those marching for freedom in Iran and sides with the mullahcracy. He stands silent about the Iranian regime’s mass executions, mass rape, and murder.

   * September 2009: Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton on Obama at the U.N.: “This is the most radical anti-Israel speech I can recall any president making…I have to say I was very shaken by this speech.”

   * October 2009: Obama offers millions in Muslim technology fund.

   * November 2009, Fort Hood Jihad Coverup: Obama Urges Congress To Put Off Fort Hood Probe, Warns Against Turning Tragedy Into “Political Theater”

   * November 2009: Obama offers the Taliban control of the Kandahar, Helmand, Oruzgan, Kunar, and Nuristan provinces, in return for a halt to the Taliban missile attacks on U.S. bases.

   * February 2010: Obama names a Hafiz to the Organization of the Islamic Conference. “And as a hafiz of the Koran, [Hussain] is a respected member of the American Muslim community,” Obama said in his message to the Doha meeting, using the Arabic world for someone who has memorized the Islamic holy book.

   * May 2010: Obama’s Counterterrorism Adviser Calls Jihad “Legitimate Tenet of Islam.”

   * May 2010: White House Pro-Terrorism John Brennan Speechifies in Arabic, Equates Terrorists with Shoplifters, Lawmakers Call for his Firing.

   * June 2010: Obama equivocates on the jihad warship convoy (affectionately named a “flotilla” by the media): Obama “Expressed a Deep Regret Over Loss of [Jihadist] Life”

   * June 2010: Obama administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at U.N.

   …Now: will the lapdog media make Obama address Gheit’s claim?

   The American people deserve answers. But whether or not what Gheit reportedly says is true, Obama’s pro-jihad track record is clear.

   Mark (411533) — 6/20/2010 @ 11:02 pm

   
   

7. The Obama Administration first announced KSM and the others would be tried in civilian court in New York last November. It takes them more than a year to study and come up with an alternate plan? Did they have a commission working on it?

   daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 6/20/2010 @ 11:08 pm

   
   

8. can KSM sue for his freedom due to lack of a speedy trial?

   redc1c4 (fb8750) — 6/20/2010 @ 11:15 pm

   
   

9. The article points out that, unless the Obama Administration decides to try the 9/11 detainees in a civilian trial, its position will be “largely indistinguishable” from the Bush Administration’s policy.

   Oh, it’s already distinguishable. Bush made a decision.

   Dusty (109a16) — 6/20/2010 @ 11:22 pm

   
   

10. Big Oh’s voting Present again!

    AD - RtR/OS! (71ba66) — 6/20/2010 @ 11:27 pm

    
    

11. That’s our boy! Always making decisions based on the political ramifications first, and doing the right thing . . . well, not at all.

    Icy Texan (30a2d8) — 6/21/2010 @ 2:37 am

    
    

12. Remember when this administration was supposed to de-politicize the DOJ? Instead Obama and Holder set aside time each day to spoon each other and make sure their ties don’t clash with the other’s.

    The DOJ should just move their HQa to the WH and make it official.

    MU789 (959170) — 6/21/2010 @ 5:24 am

    
    

13. It takes them more than a year to study and come up with an alternate plan?

    Absolutely, since our AG’s still unable to determine that Islam or Muslim origin has any real connection to terrorism.

    Dmac (e47b06) — 6/21/2010 @ 6:38 am

    
    

14. I reckon a whole host of bad things will happen in November.

    JD (d55760) — 6/21/2010 @ 6:41 am

    
    

15. Seeing as one of the DOJ’s new hires, Dystal from HRW, is on record as not believing KSM’s confession,
    oh, we’re in capable hands

    ian cormac (38cac7) — 6/21/2010 @ 7:16 am

    
    

16. This whole thing about the terrorist trials was a smoke screen for healthcare, and many fell for it. Go back and look at the timing of the announcement and its utter absurdity. This was never going to happen, it was purely to draw attention away from jamming Obamacare down Americans throats.

    Frederick (4f7681) — 6/21/2010 @ 7:58 am

    
    

17. Meanwhile, 3 Supreme Court justices think giving support to terrorists is protected by the 1st Amendment.

    Kevin Murphyr (5ae73e) — 6/21/2010 @ 8:45 am

    
    

18. > For a candidate that ran on Hope and Change, “largely indistinguishable” would be quite a comedown.

    Not that the media will EVER mention those two bolded words in any discussions of the matter.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (79d71d) — 6/21/2010 @ 9:29 am

    
    

19. “Meanwhile, 3 Supreme Court justices think…”

    I doubt it.

    Dave Surls (c47b0f) — 6/21/2010 @ 9:46 am

    
    

20. The Great Thinkers:
    Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor!

    AD - RtR/OS! (a2aeeb) — 6/21/2010 @ 11:12 am

    
    

21. We are so screwed.

    Vivian Louise (643333) — 6/21/2010 @ 11:14 am

    
    

22. Justice isn’t wearing a blindfold at Erik Holder’s Justice Department, his eyes are sharply focused on weighing political considerations against the law.

    ropelight (a7be0b) — 6/21/2010 @ 1:24 pm

    
    

23. I think we should have a contest for Obama’s next campaign slogan. We’re off to a good start with “largely indistinguishable.” How about “More Hope. More Change. More of the Same.”? Or how about “We golf so you don’t have to”? Or “Petroleum? We don’t need no stinkin’ petroleum.”

    rochf (ae9c58) — 6/21/2010 @ 3:46 pm

    
    

24. haiku waiting for
    November 2 twenty ten
    change can believe in

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc) — 6/21/2010 @ 4:04 pm