DOJ: Department Of Jihad
Investors.com says the Justice Department employs nine lawyers previously involved in the defense of terrorist detainees. This is a colossal conflict of interest. Just whose side are they on?
From the dropping of a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party to the decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Muhammed in a civilian court within blocks of where the World Trade Center once stood, the actions and attitudes of the Justice Department and Attorney General Eric Holder toward the thugs and terrorists who threaten us has grown curiouser and curiouser.
We may now have a clue as to why. Last November, Sen. Charles Grassley, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked the Justice Department how many of its lawyers had defended terrorist detainees over whom the department holds sway.
Grassley knew from earlier press reports of two such lawyers who worked on behalf of detainees at the liberal organization Human Rights Watch. He wanted to know how many more there were. Last Friday, Holder answered nine.
"To the best of our knowledge, during their employment prior to joining the government, only five of the lawyers who serve as political appointees in those components represented detainees," Holder said in a letter dated Feb. 18. "Four others contributed to amicus briefs in detainee-related cases involved in advocacy on behalf of detainees."
So the decision to Mirandize the Crotch Bomber, Umar Abdulmutallab, and to quickly get him lawyered up was made by a department populated by leftist lawyers who believe terror is a law enforcement matter and who have tried to get off those actively trying to kill us.
We still have no official answer to what the Justice Department would do if Osama bin Laden were captured.
"It's like they're bringing al-Qaida lawyers inside the Department of Justice," said Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of the plane driven by terrorists into the Pentagon, following KSM's plan.
We still have not been told all the lawyers' names. Like the detainees they represented, presumably they have the right to remain silent. So much for transparency.
Lawyers in private practice are free to choose their clients and their reasons for defending them. But these lawyers are in the employ of the American people and have the task of prosecuting those who try to kill them. Some chose to defend enemies who are making war on America. We have a right to know who they are, who their clients were and why they defended them.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
"CAPTURE" OF MULLAH BARADAR
IN AN EFFORT TO CLAIM SUCCESS ON THE WORLD STAGE, THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TAKES DOWN AN EASY, LONG TIME AVAILABLE, IN-PLAIN-SIGHT, COOPERATIVE TARGET AND HAS SABOTAGED ANY CHANCE OF TALIBAN NEGOTIATION AND TRUST.
The Strange Case of Mullah Baradar [Dana M. Perino and Bill Burck]
Yesterday, the New York Times broke the story that one of the Taliban’s top military commanders, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, had been captured in Karachi during a joint raid by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the CIA. Baradar is reportedly second only to Mullah Omar in the Taliban’s loose hierarchy. The Times reported this as a huge victory, and the Obama administration took a few well-deserved bows.
At first blush, and based solely on the Times’s reporting and the administration’s reaction, this did indeed appear to be a major achievement. We noticed something odd with the triumphant tone, however. The article published yesterday noted that Baradar had been one of the Taliban’s “most approachable leaders” and one of the few Taliban commanders willing to negotiate with President Karzai's government.
This struck us as discordant with the dramatic raid, capture, and interrogation of Baradar initially described by the Times. Baradar was not captured in a spider hole, like Saddam Hussein was, or hiding out in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was. Instead, it appeared that his location was not much of a secret at all.
At first we wrote this off as more evidence of the on-again/off-again “cooperation” we receive from the Pakistani intelligence service, and Baradar’s capture was a good sign it was on again. But, according to new reporting by the Times today, the reality is far more complicated.
Today, the Times is reporting that the real story behind Baradar’s capture is that Pakistan wanted to gain a place at the table in negotiations between the U.S. and Karzai and the Taliban.
Specifically, Baradar, it turns out, was one of Karzai’s main contacts with the Taliban for years, and he was at the center of efforts to negotiate a peace with the Taliban. Pakistan was frustrated at being excluded from the talks, so it snatched up Baradar to gain an advantage.
The Times quotes an unnamed American intelligence official: “I know that our people had been in touch with people around [Baradar] and were negotiating with him. So it doesn’t make sense why we bite the hand that is feeding us. And now the Taliban will have no reason to negotiate with us; they will not believe anything we will offer or say.” If this is true, then the capture of Baradar is not exactly what it first appeared. And if Baradar was as central to Karzai’s and America’s efforts to negotiate with the Taliban as the article suggests, then there appears to be significant costs to the capture. Perhaps it was even unhelpful to Karzai and the U.S.
Does capturing Baradar really further U.S. strategy? (Perhaps the administration did not view him as a valuable contact and thought he would be more useful in custody and subject to interrogation.) Or does it actually harm U.S. strategy? Was it forced on the Obama administration by the Pakistanis? If so, does the administration’s triumphant tone reflect its true feelings about the importance of capturing Baradar, or is it a smokescreen?
The fact that the New York Times, not known for its strength of objectivity in covering the Obama administration, is reporting this suggests to us that there’s a better-than-even chance that the administration is trying to turn a lemon into lemonade.
Its public messaging is that the capture of Baradar is a huge win in the ongoing war with the Taliban. But is the administration concealing the downsides of the capture? We hope not. And we certainly hope the administration is not crowing about capturing Baradar in Pakistan in order to distract from the difficulties it has had on the home front with the KSM trial and Mirandizing the Christmas bomber. But if the Times story is accurate, the evidence is beginning to tilt in the wrong direction.
— Dana M. Perino is former press secretary to Pres. George W. Bush. Bill Burck is a former federal prosecutor and deputy counsel to President Bush.
What a bunch of narcissistic, showoff-only, acting-"Present" MORONS!
The Strange Case of Mullah Baradar [Dana M. Perino and Bill Burck]
Yesterday, the New York Times broke the story that one of the Taliban’s top military commanders, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, had been captured in Karachi during a joint raid by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the CIA. Baradar is reportedly second only to Mullah Omar in the Taliban’s loose hierarchy. The Times reported this as a huge victory, and the Obama administration took a few well-deserved bows.
At first blush, and based solely on the Times’s reporting and the administration’s reaction, this did indeed appear to be a major achievement. We noticed something odd with the triumphant tone, however. The article published yesterday noted that Baradar had been one of the Taliban’s “most approachable leaders” and one of the few Taliban commanders willing to negotiate with President Karzai's government.
This struck us as discordant with the dramatic raid, capture, and interrogation of Baradar initially described by the Times. Baradar was not captured in a spider hole, like Saddam Hussein was, or hiding out in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was. Instead, it appeared that his location was not much of a secret at all.
At first we wrote this off as more evidence of the on-again/off-again “cooperation” we receive from the Pakistani intelligence service, and Baradar’s capture was a good sign it was on again. But, according to new reporting by the Times today, the reality is far more complicated.
Today, the Times is reporting that the real story behind Baradar’s capture is that Pakistan wanted to gain a place at the table in negotiations between the U.S. and Karzai and the Taliban.
Specifically, Baradar, it turns out, was one of Karzai’s main contacts with the Taliban for years, and he was at the center of efforts to negotiate a peace with the Taliban. Pakistan was frustrated at being excluded from the talks, so it snatched up Baradar to gain an advantage.
The Times quotes an unnamed American intelligence official: “I know that our people had been in touch with people around [Baradar] and were negotiating with him. So it doesn’t make sense why we bite the hand that is feeding us. And now the Taliban will have no reason to negotiate with us; they will not believe anything we will offer or say.” If this is true, then the capture of Baradar is not exactly what it first appeared. And if Baradar was as central to Karzai’s and America’s efforts to negotiate with the Taliban as the article suggests, then there appears to be significant costs to the capture. Perhaps it was even unhelpful to Karzai and the U.S.
Does capturing Baradar really further U.S. strategy? (Perhaps the administration did not view him as a valuable contact and thought he would be more useful in custody and subject to interrogation.) Or does it actually harm U.S. strategy? Was it forced on the Obama administration by the Pakistanis? If so, does the administration’s triumphant tone reflect its true feelings about the importance of capturing Baradar, or is it a smokescreen?
The fact that the New York Times, not known for its strength of objectivity in covering the Obama administration, is reporting this suggests to us that there’s a better-than-even chance that the administration is trying to turn a lemon into lemonade.
Its public messaging is that the capture of Baradar is a huge win in the ongoing war with the Taliban. But is the administration concealing the downsides of the capture? We hope not. And we certainly hope the administration is not crowing about capturing Baradar in Pakistan in order to distract from the difficulties it has had on the home front with the KSM trial and Mirandizing the Christmas bomber. But if the Times story is accurate, the evidence is beginning to tilt in the wrong direction.
— Dana M. Perino is former press secretary to Pres. George W. Bush. Bill Burck is a former federal prosecutor and deputy counsel to President Bush.
Monday, February 15, 2010
IMPORTANT DRUG RECALL
Subject: FW: Drug Recall - Very Serious *** Send to friends & family
Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 10:39 PM
Drug Recall - Very Serious *** Send to friends & family
CONFIRMED BY: SNOPES.COM & FDA
All drugs containing PHENYLPROPANOLAMINE are being recalled..
STOP TAKING anything containing this ingredient. It has been linked to increased hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in brain)
among women ages 18-49 in the three days after starting use of medication The FDA recommended that everyone (even children) seek alternative medicine.
The following medications contain Phenylpropanolamine:
Acutrim Diet Gum Appetite Suppressant
Acutrim Plus Dietary Supplements
Acutrim Maximum Strength Appetite Control
Alka-Seltzer Plus Children's Cold Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold medicine (cherry or orange)
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold Medicine Original
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Cough Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Flu Medicine
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Sinus Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Night-Time Cold Medicine
BC Allergy Sinus Cold Powder
BC Sinus Cold Powder
Comtrex Flu Therapy & Fever Relief
Day & Night Contac 12-Hour Cold Capsules
Contac 12 Hour Caplets
Coricidin D Cold, Flu & Sinus
Dexatrim Caffeine Free
Dexatrim Extended Duration
Dexatrim Gelcaps
Dexatrim Vitamin C/Caffeine Free
Dimetapp Cold & Allergy Chewable Tablets
Dimetapp Cold & Cough Liqui-Gels
Dimetapp DM Cold & Cough Elixir
Dimetapp Elixir
Dimetapp 4 Hour Liquid Gels
Dimetapp 4 Hour Tablets
Dimetapp 12 Hour Extendtabs Tablets
Naldecon DX Pediatric Drops
Permathene Mega-16
Robitussin CF
Tavist-D 12 Hour Relief of Sinus & Nasal Congestion
Triaminic DM Cough Relief
Triaminic Expectorant Chest & Head
Triaminic Syrup Cold & Allergy
Triaminic Triaminicol Cold & Cough
I just found out and called the 800# on the container for Triaminic and they informed me that they are voluntarily recalling the following medicines because of a certain ingredient that is causing strokes and seizures in children
Orange3D Cold & Allergy Cherry (Pink)
3D Cold & Cough Berry
3D Cough Relief Yellow 3D Expectorant
They are asking you to call them at 800-548-3708 800-548-3708 with the lot number on the box so they can send you postage for you to send it back to them, and they will also issue you a refund. If you know of anyone else with small children,
PLEASE PASS THIS ON.. THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF!
DO PASS ALONG TO ALL ON YOUR MAILING LIST so people are informed. They can then pass it along to their families.
To confirm these findings please take time to check the following:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/ppa/
PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO YOUR CHILDREN IN CASE THEY GIVE IT TO THEIR CHILDREN OR TO FRIENDS WHO HAVE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN
Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 10:39 PM
Drug Recall - Very Serious *** Send to friends & family
CONFIRMED BY: SNOPES.COM & FDA
All drugs containing PHENYLPROPANOLAMINE are being recalled..
STOP TAKING anything containing this ingredient. It has been linked to increased hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in brain)
among women ages 18-49 in the three days after starting use of medication The FDA recommended that everyone (even children) seek alternative medicine.
The following medications contain Phenylpropanolamine:
Acutrim Diet Gum Appetite Suppressant
Acutrim Plus Dietary Supplements
Acutrim Maximum Strength Appetite Control
Alka-Seltzer Plus Children's Cold Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold medicine (cherry or orange)
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold Medicine Original
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Cough Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Flu Medicine
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Sinus Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Night-Time Cold Medicine
BC Allergy Sinus Cold Powder
BC Sinus Cold Powder
Comtrex Flu Therapy & Fever Relief
Day & Night Contac 12-Hour Cold Capsules
Contac 12 Hour Caplets
Coricidin D Cold, Flu & Sinus
Dexatrim Caffeine Free
Dexatrim Extended Duration
Dexatrim Gelcaps
Dexatrim Vitamin C/Caffeine Free
Dimetapp Cold & Allergy Chewable Tablets
Dimetapp Cold & Cough Liqui-Gels
Dimetapp DM Cold & Cough Elixir
Dimetapp Elixir
Dimetapp 4 Hour Liquid Gels
Dimetapp 4 Hour Tablets
Dimetapp 12 Hour Extendtabs Tablets
Naldecon DX Pediatric Drops
Permathene Mega-16
Robitussin CF
Tavist-D 12 Hour Relief of Sinus & Nasal Congestion
Triaminic DM Cough Relief
Triaminic Expectorant Chest & Head
Triaminic Syrup Cold & Allergy
Triaminic Triaminicol Cold & Cough
I just found out and called the 800# on the container for Triaminic and they informed me that they are voluntarily recalling the following medicines because of a certain ingredient that is causing strokes and seizures in children
Orange3D Cold & Allergy Cherry (Pink)
3D Cold & Cough Berry
3D Cough Relief Yellow 3D Expectorant
They are asking you to call them at 800-548-3708 800-548-3708 with the lot number on the box so they can send you postage for you to send it back to them, and they will also issue you a refund. If you know of anyone else with small children,
PLEASE PASS THIS ON.. THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF!
DO PASS ALONG TO ALL ON YOUR MAILING LIST so people are informed. They can then pass it along to their families.
To confirm these findings please take time to check the following:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/ppa/
PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO YOUR CHILDREN IN CASE THEY GIVE IT TO THEIR CHILDREN OR TO FRIENDS WHO HAVE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN
Sunday, February 14, 2010
AMERICAN ADMIRAL WORRIES ABOUT ATTACKING IRAN
The chairman of the US military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said on Sunday he was concerned about the consequences of any attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
"The outbreak of a conflict will be a big, big, big problem for all of us, and I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences of a strike," Admiral Mullen said.
This is enough of the actual story from Yahho News, what IS important are some of the pertinent comments on FreeRepublic on the matter:
Go to:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2451351/posts
"The outbreak of a conflict will be a big, big, big problem for all of us, and I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences of a strike," Admiral Mullen said.
This is enough of the actual story from Yahho News, what IS important are some of the pertinent comments on FreeRepublic on the matter:
Go to:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2451351/posts
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
ENERGY DEPARTMENT FOUNDED UNDER CARTER - FOR WHAT?
Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment Of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration?
Anybody?
Anything?
No?
Didn't think so!
Bottom line ...
We've spent several hundred billion dollars
In support of an agency ...the reason
For which not one person who reads
This can remember.
Ready???????
It was very simple ..
And at the time everybody thought
It very appropriate...
The 'Department of Energy' Was instituted on 8-04-1977 TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
Hey, pretty efficient, huh?????
AND NOW IT'S 2009, 32 YEARS LATER ... and we are no less dependent are we?
AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR
IT HAS 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES
AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!
THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'
Ah, yes, good old bureaucracy...
And NOW_ on Obama's moronic urging we are going to turn The Banking System, Health Care & The Auto Industry over to government ALL IN THE NAME OF his CHANGE?
May God Help Us !!!
===============================================================================
Saturday, February 06, 2010
OBA-HUSSEIN TO FUND HAMAS TERRORISTS WITH $40 MILLION
Supporting the enemy is getting longer and longer. Three other recent articles that show us examples of this are
“US Terror Blacklist Whitewashes Hamas, Enables Funding”, http://loganswarning.com/2010/01/24/us-terror-blacklist-whitewashes-hamas-enables-funding/
“Obama Welcomes Islamic Terrorist Into America”,
http://loganswarning.com/2010/01/22/obama-welcomes-islamic-terrorist-into-america/
and
“Obama/Gates: We Recognize the Taliban”. Don’t blame me, I did not vote for him.
http://loganswarning.com/2010/01/22/obamagates-we-recognize-the-taliban/
United States to Donate $40 Million to UNRWA
Feb/05/10
(IsraelNN.com) The United States announced on Thursday that it will donate $40 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Arabs in the Palestinian Authority-assigned areas, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria who fled when Israel was established in 1948. About a quarter of the package is supposed to be designated for food and the creation of jobs. The rest is for maintaining basic services provided by the agency.
The American funding comes despite a report commissioned by the European parliament, which showed that Hamas terrorists have been chosen by the agency’s labor union to oversee its Gaza facilities, which was part of a Canadian decision last month to stop its UNRWA funding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
