Midknight Review -- new and revised: The Obama Terrorist Policy: Killing them is better than waterboarding them. Huh ??!!

In a recent Washington Post story, the following concerns were given commentary:

1) The Obama Administration"s "proclivity" to kill terrorists rather than capture and interrogate them.

2) The continuing confusion as to where to keep terrorist captured on foreign soil. With the announced closing of GITMO (and it has only been "announced"), Obama has no place to keep these idiots.

Sunday, Joe Biden rattled of some "facts" supporting the Obama terrorist policy, to wit: we have "killed 12 of the top 20 Al Qaeda leaders and killed 100 of Al Qaeda's troops."

Two things: first, we doubt that Biden can give us proof of the 12 kills -- only two have been reported in the media -- and the killing of "100 . . . Al Qaeda troops" !!! ??? Wow, and he thinks Al Qaeda is not growing at ten times this attrition rate ?

Understand that on August 26 of 2009, Obama announced the end of the Bush interrogation tactic and the beginning of the FBI's HIG or High-value Interrogation Group. The reason why the "underwear bomber" was given a lawyer after 50 minutes of "interrogation" while he was under heavy medication for severe burns to his crotch and upper legs is that no such High Valued Interrogation Group exists -- five months after they were "set up" by decree of Obama.

Where are we on this business of fighting the terrorists AND protecting the people of this country? For starters, with the announced closing of GITMO, Obama has no place to keep the battlefield captives, no interrogation units in place to question them, and no clue as to how to monitor the terrorists for information. After you kill them, it is unlikely that you will be able to question them. And if you Mirandize them, you might as well kill them for all the information you will get from them.

In criminalizing the terrorist wars, Obama is saying that the terrorists are simply on a crime spree, kind of like the gangster/terrorists in the inner cities of our country. And everyone knows how well we are doing in defeating the gangs of the inner city, right?

Our question is this: why is killing them a better idea than waterboarding them? Anybody have a clue? -- jds.

.

The Stated Nonsense from the Left now includes these Progressive goals:

July 2, 2008, Obama had this to say: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

MICHELLE OBAMA: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

“ . . . . . . they have become a generation of activists possessed with that most American of ideas – that people who love their country can change it.” -- Obama the Radical

On September 30, Van Jones told MSNBC "I think everybody should hold onto your seats. October is going to be the turning point when it comes to the progressive fight back."

Midknight Review -- new and revised

The Obama Terrorist Policy: Killing them is better than waterboarding them. Huh ??!!

No comments:

Post a Comment

copyright policy of the original Midknight Review