Originally Posted By dlkozy Does Rehab for Terrorists Work? Said Ali al-Shihri Went Through 12-Step Terrorist Rehab Before 'Underwear Bomb' Plot By RUSSELL GOLDMAN From ABC news: Jan. 1, 2010 The leader of the al Qaeda group that claimed responsibility for trying to blow up a U.S. airliner on Christmas Day was released from the Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorists on the condition that he be sent to a terrorist rehab center in Saudi Arabia. Terror suspect released from Guantanamo now fronts Yemen al-Qaeda group. The rehabilitation of terrorist Said Ali al-Shihri was an obvious failure and it now raises serious questions about the Obama administration's plan to send another 100 Yemeni prisoners from Gitmo to Saudi rehab camps in an effort to empty the Gitmo prison and close it down. <<< Maybe this administration's plan needs some more thinking.
Originally Posted By dlkozy The question was not who sent them-but does it work. And raises the question of whether O's administration's plan to send more should be done.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Sure it raises questions - also about the so-called "rehab" in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure they're looking into it.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>He was sent back in November of 2007 - by the Bush administration.<< It doesn't matter. As the past few days of post after grating post by dlkozy show, facts don't matter to these people. Terrorist set free? MUST'VE been the Obama administration. Truthiness dictates that - it just feels right, don't it? I mean, Bush the Jesus Freak would never do such a thing. Good god the stupidity knows no bounds. What's interesting is the article dlkozy quotes says this outright. But she didn't provide a link or quote that part. So either she didn't bother to read the whole article or she disingenuously left that part out to attack the Obama administration. Pick your poison: ignorance and obfuscation?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>The question was not who sent them-but does it work.<< Nice attempt at moving the goalposts. You said: >>Maybe this administration's plan needs some more thinking.<< "This administration" clearly means the current one, the Obama administration. You said it was their plan. It was not their plan. Caught in your ignorance of the facts, you try and make it about the overall plan.
Originally Posted By dlkozy Gee ecdc-can you ever post without being nasty? You throw the first punch everytime someone actually disagrees with you. This topic was no different.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Said the Pot.<< What's bizarre is she goes after everyone - even Kar2oonMan, for cryin' out loud - and then when called on it, just plays the "I know you are but what am I" game. She's not even clever in her nastiness. Just insists that everyone else is. Is she twelve years old or just not bright enough to come up with actual responses? You be the judge.
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"Nice attempt at moving the goalposts. You said: >>Maybe this administration's plan needs some more thinking.<<"<<< Moved nothing. O's plan as the ABC article said and I quote... "The rehabilitation of terrorist Said Ali al-Shihri was an obvious failure and it now raises serious questions about the Obama administration's plan to send another 100 Yemeni prisoners from Gitmo to Saudi rehab camps in an effort to empty the Gitmo prison and close it down"<<< Said it from the get-go-try reading exactly what is posted. My comment after that article was >>>" Maybe this administration's plan needs some more thinking."<<< Are you really so ignorant that you have not read that O has said that he was going to send more prisoners to rehab camps?
Originally Posted By ecdc But really, the whole topic is DOA. Another attempt to malign Obama when it turns out it was a Bush era program and a Bush era decision to release the guy. Oops. So...how's everyone's New Year's goin'?
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"or just not bright enough to come up with actual responses?"<<< Nasty, name calling, lack of any real kind of info-guess it wasn't in your New Year's resolutions. Typical behavior.
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"Another attempt to malign Obama when it turns out it was a Bush era program and a Bush era decision to release the guy."<<< And it happens on O's watch-OOPS
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"**Gee ecdc-can you ever post without being nasty?*** Said the Pot."<<< And another without any kind of real comment on a topic just nasty to be nasty. Gee, X, do you really do anything but post on LP? Sometimes less is more.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>And it happens on O's watch-OOPS<< Why do you call him O? You have that little of respect for him? And it happened on his watch? Is that what you said when 9/11 happened to Bush? I don't really recall any topics here started by you that said that. We've had topic after topic with you accusing President Obama of the most absurd, patently ridiculous activity. A so-called "booze junket" by the FAA that "happened under his watch." You provided no evidence of his link, knowledge, or involvement, beyond "it happened on his watch." You were of course silent when I drew a comparison to Mormon sexual abuse happening on church leaders' "watch." You go after him for using a teleprompter. Now you go after him for this. Each and every time it's shown that your "facts" are not facts at all, but opinion pieces or just flat out wrong (it was Bush that sent this guy back). What's the point? To rile people up? To satisfy your own deep-seated loathing of Obama? Is it racism? Is it because he's a Democrat? With Bush, we had Iraq, Katrina, Terri Schiavo, climate failure, torture, No Child Left Behind - failure after failure to discuss and debate. Real issues that affected real people in very real ways. His failure on the economy is still affecting us. But teleprompters and fake controversies linking Obama to booze junkets are meaningless. Your desperation is transparent. Your vindictiveness is creepy. Your ignorance is laughable. Your grating personal attacks on decent people here is tiresome. Your lack of critical thinking is sad. Next time you try, use the President's full name. We might take you more seriously. And come up with a real topic that actually involves him and his actions that affects the country.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Gee, X, do you really do anything but post on LP?*** And here I was about to comment on the fact that you can't even manage to scare up some newer and more relevant talking points, preferring to wallow in the old, stale ones...and you kindly prove my point in just one sentence. I've been largely away from LP, and particularly WE, for quite some time now. Mostly because I'm bored of idiotic conversations with the likes of you.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I've been largely away from LP, and particularly WE, for quite some time now.<< I've noticed. Hope you can come back and participate a bit more in the future!
Originally Posted By Mr X ***With Bush, we had Iraq, Katrina, Terri Schiavo, climate failure, torture, No Child Left Behind - failure after failure to discuss and debate*** With all due contempt to ex-President Bush, much like I give President Obama a lot of leeway with the wars this year, I can't say that you can put climate failure in Bush's lap. That problem has been snowballing, literally, for centuries now. He truly inherited it. Now, that's not saying he did anything to help matters. Frankly I wouldn't expect that from ANY right wing administration. But I can't endorse blaming him for it. The other stuff? Definitely YES.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Your desperation is transparent. Your vindictiveness is creepy. Your ignorance is laughable. >> Not to mention the hypocrisy, ecdc. Over on the airline thread, I posted the factual info about Senate voting records during the election. McCain spent less time on the Hill, doing "his job" as Senator, than Obama. Yet dlkozy bashes Obama for being "too busy" with his "personal agenda," i.e., running for President. Seems to me that McCain spent more time on the campaign trail than Obama did. Yet, dlkozy gives him a free pass. In dlkozy's world, Dem politicians must be absolutely perfect, candidates for sainthood. Conservative Republicans can basically do whatever the heck they want. Lemme see... what's that called again? Oh yeah. H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Hope you can come back and participate a bit more in the future!*** Oh, I'll jump in from time to time. It just seems like at the moment there's a lot of rehashing of the same old arguments from the same old people (no offense...I include myself in that comment lol), along with unpleasantness from the likes of Kozy that I just don't find worth my time to bother with anymore.
