Obama Blunders: The war on terror- Part 2 - GITMO

In my last entry, I noted that the current administration does not seem to be taking the war on terror seriously. In the past few days, I have noticed, to their credit, more of a sense of urgency regarding the situation, the latest statement from the President on the botched Christmas Day attack that it was a "screw-up". However, we have still yet to hear him use the term "War on Terror", with him seeming to view it more as a police operation than a serious threat to our national security, let alone out peace of mind.

I personally believe it would not be as big of a threat as it currently is if the administration had not done the following (though I will state that no measure of security is fail-safe).

The president's pledge to close Guantanamo Bay's terrorist detaining prison shows his loyalty to politcal correctness over the safety of the American people. Since when did terrorists have "rights"? How, on this green earth, does he justify letting these people go?
It was insinuated in congress in May 2009 that these people being detained at this (rather excellent) prison would be released into the general public of the United States of America, and Congressman


Also, we should note that it will actually cost more money to shut GITMO down rather than keep it operating. Does anyone see the flawed logic here? We're already trillions in debt with a huge deficit, and they want to to spend even more?! Once again, we see the liberal attitude of using one's emotions to run government rather than wisdom, prudence and logic?

In a report from May 2009 on this subject from Fox News, we could see the liberal agenda, though masked, has become quite apparent:

"After the failed vote, Tiahrt said that it's now "public record" that Democrats want to "transfer or release detainees on American soil with full knowledge that some will be released on our streets."

Tiahrt also introduced the No Welfare for Terrorists Act of 2009, which prohibits any detainee from Guantanamo Bay who is released into the United States from receiving federal benefits such as food stamps or welfare.

Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair suggested last month that the U.S. would likely give government assistance to detainees released in the U.S. "to start a new life," the Kansas lawmaker noted.

The fact that congress had to vote to keep them from being released on our soil makes it clear that there are people in our government who want to integrated into our society, and even give them funding. Attorney General Eric Holder has stated that none of these people will be released into the American public, but if what happened Christmas Day is any indication, when a man on a no-fly list who was not supposed to have a passport got on an airplane and almost blew up 300 people, then what's to stop the rest of these people from taking similar action?

Similarly, if they made a serious mistake releasing Ali al-Shahiri, from this prison in September 2007, and this individual has gone back to Yemen and risen to second-in-command of al-Qaeda in that area, then what in the heck makes them think that other people within that prison won't go back to al-Qaeda as well? (Don't believe me? Check it out here, on a liberal-news website.)

He Wants you Dead.

Don't believe me? Then wait until they attack again. Because if this administration doesn't get on the ball soon, that's exactly what's going to happen.

Coming next time: the elimination of obtaining information from terrorists.

____________________________________________________________________

I will sign each blog with the following: You know it's true, Mr. President. I am a bold conservative, and I will not stop until out are out of office and I have my freedom once more. -An Angry American