Tag Archive: Gitmo


Bergdahl 5-for-1 Deal Stunk From The Git-Go!

 

 

 

 

Published on Jan 31, 2015
” Judge Jeanine Pirro reprises the astonishing Bergdahl 5-for-1 swap that released 5 top-level radical Islamists for one alleged deserter. In three months the radicals will be freed entirely, and one has already been making contact with his radical buddies.

  In the meantime, Obama spokespersons are desperately defending the indefensible with word games about picayune differences between “terrorists” and “armed insurgents”. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opening Statement – Obama Releasing Gitmo Detainees Despite Paris Events “Be A Friend”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published on Jan 17, 2015

” Judge Jeanine 1-17-2015 open statement talks about President Obama releasing Gitmo detainees back to Yemen after the events that took place in Paris and those terrorists being from Yemen.

Judge Jeanine also speaks about the recent foiled attacks from around the world and including on U.S. soil. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

”  This administration is purposely schizophrenic on terrorism. It’ll drone select terrorists lurking overseas, but so far isn’t lifting a finger to apprehend the terrorists who attacked the US facility at Benghazi last September. Obama wants to avoid the optics of capturing them and then sticking them at Gitmo, and seems to prefer local proceedings to be done against transnational terrorists (some were from Yemen) who attacked and killed four Americans in a quasi-state.”

 

 

 

 

The Panopticon State

Where the government can see, it can send a drone.

 

 

 

” I’m a long, long way from Rand Paul’s view of the world (I’m basically a 19th-century imperialist a hundred years past sell-by date), but I’m far from sanguine about America’s drone fever. For all its advantages to this administration — no awkward prisoners to be housed at Gitmo, no military casualties for the evening news — the unheard, unseen, unmanned drone raining down death from the skies confirms for those on the receiving end al-Qaeda’s critique of its enemies: As they see it, we have the best technology and the worst will; we choose aerial assassination and its attendant collateral damage because we are risk-averse, and so remote, antiseptic, long-distance, computer-programmed warfare is all that we can bear. Our technological strength betrays our psychological weakness.

And in a certain sense they’re right: Afghanistan is winding down, at best, to join the long list of America’s unwon wars, in which, 48 hours after departure, there will be no trace that we were ever there. The guys with drones are losing to the guys with fertilizer — because they mean it, and we don’t. The drone thus has come to symbolize the central defect of America’s “war on terror,” which is that it’s all means and no end: We’re fighting the symptoms rather than the cause.

For a war without strategic purpose, a drone’ll do.”