The euphemism administration

September 28, 2009

So now the detainees at Guantanamo Bay aren’t jihadis, they’re not terrorists, they’re not Islamists … they’re not even “detainees.”

No, they’re refugees. I’m not kidding.

Then again, what else would you expect from an administration that refers to a war as an “overseas contingency operation?”

What’s a good euphemism for “losers?” Loser


Holder knew. Did Obama?

September 1, 2009

Yet another entry into the Idiot’s Guide to Why Eric Holder Should Be Impeached:

WASHINGTON – Attorney General Eric Holder warned his Scottish counterpart in June that the man convicted of blowing US-bound Pan Am Flight 103 out of the sky could get a hero’s welcome if allowed to return to Libya, according to the head of a group representing the families of victims.

Holder’s warning to Scotland’s justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, came nearly two months before the bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, was released from a Scottish prison and greeted by a cheering crowd on his arrival in Libya last week.

Notes prepared ahead of Holder’s June 26 conversation with MacAskill were provided to the Associated Press by Frank Duggan, president of Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 Inc. Duggan said a Justice Department official read him notes that Holder used during the conversation.

Duggan also provided notes of a July 9 teleconference between MacAskill and some victims’ relatives, an emotional exchange in which family members told stories of their loved ones and implored MacAskill not to return Megrahi to Libya.

So AG Holder went through the motions with Secretary MacAskill over the release of one of the Lockerbie bombers -who killed 180 Americans– warning him that he might get a hero’s welcome in the land that sent him on his murderous mission.

And then he did… just what, exactly? This news raises more questions than it answers. Did Holder stop here? Did he raise the matter with the Home Secretary in London? Did he take it to his boss, President Obama, and did the President of the United States contact the Prime Minister to demand that Meghrabi, who blasted an American passenger jet out of the sky,  stay in jail? If not, why not?

Or did the Administration even care that Whitehall was cutting a true blood-for-oil deal?

These are questions that demand answers, not that we can expect the Obama-worshipping mainstream media to ask them.

Passing thought: While the UK was in this for the oil, could this also have been payback for releasing the Uighur terrorists to Bermuda?

(via NRO)

UPDATE: Why do I think Attorney-General Holder should be impeached? Forget his career prior to office; the Senate passed him knowing full-well about his role in the Marc Rich pardon and his involvement with corrupt former Illinois Governor Blagojevich. But, after becoming AG, he has tolerated the violation of voting rights in Philadelphia, launched a clearly politically-motivated investigation into the CIA, and likely been behind the dropping of the federal corruption investigation of New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a major early Obama-backer. Any one of these could warrant an impeachment investigation; taken together, and in the wake of this latest revelation,  they demand it.

RELATED: Thomas Sowell on AG Holder and the suicide of the West:

But getting other people killed so that you can feel puffed up about yourself is profoundly immoral. So is betraying the country you took an oath to protect.


Quote of the day

August 25, 2009

I don’t have much patience or understanding for people who play games with national security for political benefit, so let me dismiss the political strategy of this outrage by saying it once again demonstrates the danger of believing your own political spin, and taking the lovestruck panting of a sycophantic media seriously. Real Americans are not anxious to punish the people who shut down al-Qaeda’s domestic operations. While liberals wave the Justice Department’s report on CIA interrogation techniques at the rest of the world and tearfully beg them for forgiveness, the rest of us are wondering why we don’t reduce the deficit by selling the rights to these interrogations on pay-per-view.

You can read the rest here.