Well, that went as planned

Attorney General Eric Holder another Obama putz, failed in his bid to bring another terrorist to justice. His plan of trying the detainees beginning with Ghailani, ended with a acquittal on all save 1 count. That is 105 not guilty verdicts to 1 guilty. It is now a 100 to 1 chance that a terrorist will go free. Good work, Eric.

First (non)conviction unlikely to help Obama shut Gitmo.

Ghailani Verdict: Guilty on Only 1 Count

FOX News By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Matt Apuzzo, AP – Thu Nov 18, 6:10 am ET

WASHINGTON – The first court conviction of a Guantanamo Bay detainee did little to push President Barack Obama closer to shuttering the island prison, making it increasingly likely his campaign promise will remain unmet by the time his current term expires.

Jurors in New York City on Wednesday convicted Ahmed Ghailani of conspiracy to blow up government buildings in the al-Qaida attacks on two U.S. embassies in 1998, but they acquitted him on more than 280 other charges. He is the only person transferred from Guantanamo Bay for trial since the U.S. began filling the military prison in Cuba eight years ago.

In some ways, the conviction was a vindication for an administration that believes the judicial system established by the Constitution has proved itself capable of handling terrorism cases.

Predictions of new terrorist attacks and huge police expenses surrounding the trial never materialized. Ghailani now faces 20 years to life in prison, longer than three of the four sentences handed down by military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.

Despite the acquittals, which included murder counts for each of the 224 people killed in the bombings, the Justice Department said it was pleased Ghailani faces up to life in prison and said it would seek that sentence.

But senior officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss private discussions, conceded that the one-count conviction, combined with big electoral wins for Republicans this month, will make it harder to close the prison.

The administration had hoped for an overwhelming conviction to help ease congressional opposition to Obama's long-stymied plan for moving the detainees to U.S. soil. The administration must notify Congress before any transfer, and Republicans have said they would block such efforts.

"They couldn't come close to getting that done when the Democrats were in charge," said Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who is expected to be the next chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. "There's no way they're going to get it now that Republicans are in charge."

Administration officials believe there are only a handful of options for closing Guantanamo Bay:

• Prosecute the detainees. Some, like Ghailani, could face criminal trials. Others could face military commissions. Regardless, the administration wants those trials in the U.S., not at Guantanamo.

• Transfer some prisoners to other countries. Many already have been cleared for release. But Yemeni citizens make up the largest contingent, and the U.S. doesn't trust Yemen to monitor them if they are released. Two failed airline bombings originating in Yemen in the past year have made such release efforts even more difficult.

• Hold prisoners indefinitely. Top administration officials have said they don't like the idea but would consider it in some form, if the detainees were held inside the U.S. with some review by courts.

Ghailani's conviction does not make any of those options easier. When Obama announced, days after his election, that he would close Guantanamo within a year, he had hoped to move detainees to a refurbished old prison in Thomson, Ill.

Even if, somehow, that plan were to get resurrected early next year, much of 2011 would be spent renovating the facility. Actually transferring detainees would get pushed back to 2012, a presidential election year in which political differences are amplified and compromises are rare.

The Ghailani case also did little to resolve the question of what will happen to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other masterminds of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacks.

The Justice Department had planned to prosecute those cases in civilian courts, but the administration reversed course amid political opposition. The move left a sour taste with some prosecutors, who felt the White House was letting political considerations influence the department, a criticism Democrats often lobbed at President George W. Bush.

Ghailani, like Mohammed, was held for years in a secret CIA prison overseas and subjected to some of the harshest interrogation tactics. His trial was seen as a test of whether those actions would sink the case or whether prosecutors could salvage a conviction. Prosecutors could face the same challenge in the 9/11 trials.

A federal judge prohibited prosecutors from calling a key witness in the Ghailani case, saying the witness had been identified while Ghailani was interrogated at the CIA prison.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is seen as key to any deal to close Guantanamo, said late Wednesday that he was disappointed with the Ghailani verdict and said the government was endangering the nation "by criminalizing the war."

"We are at war with al-Qaida," Graham said. "Members of the organization and their associates should be treated as warriors, not common criminals."

Brantigny

More TSA woes.

Well PBo has been in the White House now for a little less than 2 years. Here is an example of his change... A seven year old terrorist or is it a case of unreasonableness.

In truth, I and many people know that this sort of search and the place where it is conducted really do not solve the problem. All terrorists know that they will get searched. How many terrorists have we caught in the TSA line? We have caught terrorist in the plane, lighting his underwair, lighting his shoes, or carrying a couple of bottles of explosive.

All a terrorist need do is go into the check-in counter and detonate himself or herself.

Stop the terrorists before they get into the airport. Profile! Profile! Profile!

This video was shown to me by my daugther Genevieve, who through no fault of her own looks middle eastern, named by me with a name which is almost unpronounceable by everyone except Frenchmen, and who can not go into an airport with out being searched.

Here is another story...

TSA pats down a screaming toddler

You might think a 3-year-old would whiz through security. A child is non-threatening, wears slip-on shoes, and carries little luggage.

Mandy Simon suffered through a TSA pat down.

Not the case for Mandy Simon who was passing through security with her dad at the airport in Chattanooga, Tenn.

A TSA employee gave Mandy the pat down and she started screaming and kicking her legs. Her dad, Steve, happens to be a TV reporter and caught 17 seconds of the ordeal on his cell phone (watch video).

Why was Mandy searched in the first place? She started crying when she was asked to put her teddy bear through the X-ray machine. This made it difficult for her to walk calmly through the metal detector and she set the machine off twice, which meant she "must be hand-searched."

If the TSA is going to search kids, maybe they need a little training on how to do it--or at least employees should have a few lollipops or stickers in their pockets.

A picture may be found here...

Brantigny

I'm done talking about this now.

The terrorists have won...

When we are afraid of a nuns...and not Muslims. er... What's this thing with a cross and these bed things?

Brantigny

Nanny State Attacks

The same California city which reelected Cruella de Ville's twin sister Nancy, has become the arbiter of what you get to serve your children in San Franciso. The Nanny Stae strikes back.

San Francisco bans most Happy Meals

The city's board of supervisors votes to forbid restaurants from giving away toys with meals with high levels of calories, sugar and fat
Santa Clara By Sharon Bernstein, Tribune Newspapers

7:27 p.m. CDT, November 2, 2010

San Francisco's board of supervisors has voted, by a veto-proof margin, to ban most of McDonald's Happy Meals as they are now served in the restaurants.

The measure will make San Francisco the first major city in the country to forbid restaurants from offering a free toy with meals that contain more than set levels of calories, sugar and fat.

The ordinance also would require restaurants to provide fruits and vegetables with all meals for children that come with toys.

"We're part of a movement that is moving forward an agenda of food justice," said Supervisor Eric Mar, who sponsored the measure. "From San Francisco to New York City, the epidemic of childhood obesity in this country is making our kids sick, particularly kids from low income neighborhoods, at an alarming rate. It's a survival issue and a day-to-day issue."

Just after the vote, McDonald's spokeswoman Danya Proud said, "We are extremely disappointed with today's decision. It's not what our customers want, nor is it something they asked for."

The ban, already enacted in a similar measure by Santa Clara County, was opposed by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who was vying to be lieutenant governor in Tuesday's election. But because the measure was passed by eight votes — one more than needed to override a veto — his opposition doesn't matter unless one of the supervisors changes his or her mind after the promised veto.

Under the ordinance, scheduled to take effect in December 2011, restaurants may include a toy with a meal if the food and drink combined contain fewer than 600 calories, and if less than 35 percent of the calories come from fat.

Over the last few weeks, the proposed ban caused a stir online and on cable television, with supporters arguing that it would help protect children from obesity, and opponents seeing it as the latest example of the nanny state gone wild.

Supervisor Bevan Dufty, whose swing vote provided the veto-proof majority, said critics should not dismiss the legislation as a nutty effort by San Franciscans. "I do believe the industry is going to take note of this. I don't care how much they say, 'It's San Francisco, they're wacked out there.'"

Proud, the McDonald's spokeswoman, said the city was out of step with the mainstream on the issue.

"Public opinion continues to be overwhelmingly against this misguided legislation," she said. "Parents tell us it's their right and responsibility — not the government's — to make their own decisions and to choose what's right for their children."

Oak Brook-based McDonald's is not the only fast-food chain to offer toys with children's meals, but because it is so prominent the company has become a key face of opposition to the ban.

Daniel Conway, spokesman for the California Restaurant Association, bemoaned the ordinance's passage and contrasted it with San Franciscans' exuberant feelings after the Giants won the World Series on Monday night.

"One day you're world champions, and the next day, no toys for you," Conway said.

He said the industry could respond in a number of ways to the ordinance. Some might continue to include toys but charge separately for them. Others might reformulate their meals so that they comply with the law. Restaurants might also simply stop offering children's meals altogether, he said.

Proud said the company does offer more healthful menu options, including apple slices that can be ordered with kids' meals instead of french fries.

The vote was held the same day that McDonald's reintroduced nationwide its McRib sandwich, a pressed pork patty that gets half its calories from fat and has a cultlike legion of fans.

Mar said it would lead the fast-food giant and other restaurants to provide more healthful food for kids. The ban, he said, was crucial to the fight against childhood obesity and the illnesses that go along with it, including diabetes and the risk of heart problems and stroke. The cost of fighting those diseases, he said, will be in the billions.

"It's astronomical how much it's going to cost if we don't address it," Mar said. "It's incredible the crisis that's going to hit us."

Brantigny

What's in a name?

Spain decends into the pit. Shame on the King for being such a woose.

Spain may upend name game in gender equality push

MADRID – A name in Spain might not stay the same.

Spain's Socialist government has found a new place to push for gender equality, seeking to erase all vestiges of male bias from the country's double-barreled last names.

Spaniards have two surnames, and under current law for registering babies, either the father's or the mother's can come first. Traditionally, however, it is the dad's and in cases of disagreement among the parents, the father's name automatically takes priority.

But under a bill presented to Parliament, if a couple does not specify an order or cannot agree on one, a child's last names would be assigned in alphabetical order.

"I think this is good and also much more egalitarian," Jose Antonio Alonso, a Socialist Party spokesman in the lower chamber of Parliament, said Thursday.

Opposition conservatives called the change unnecessary and vowed to fight it.

Most Spaniards use both last names, such as Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, although some use just one, like the singer Julio Iglesias. In some Latin American countries, people are also legally obliged to have two last names.

Zapatero prides himself on being a defender of gender equality and women's rights.

Brantigny

on this Date

November 4, in 1501 Arthur, the Prince of Wales, and this betroved, Katherine of Aragon, daughter of Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon, met for the first time. More is here...

Also on this date, in 1755, Marie-Antoinette, the Reine-martyr is baptised...

Lastly today in 1911, Charles I of Austria marries Princess Zita of Bourbon-Parma.

Jhesu+Marie,
Brantigny

Waid a minit!

Obama: A “Credible Terrorist Threat Against Our Country”
October 29, 2010 5:17 PM

Calling it a “credible terrorist threat against our country,” that the administration is taking “very seriously,” President Obama came to the briefing room of the White House today to brief press on the terror threat.

The president confirmed that the two suspicious packages were bound specifically for two places of Jewish worship in Chicago – located in Dubai and East Midlands Airport in the United Kingdom.

“An initial examination of those packages has determined that they do apparently contain explosive m material,” he said.

The president said he was alerted last night by his top counterterrorism advisors, John Brennan.

“I directed the Department of Homeland Security and all our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to take whatever steps are necessary to protect our citizens from this type of attack,” the president said noting that the measures led to additional screening of some planes in Newark and Philadelphia and DHS also taking steps to enhance the safety of air travel, including additional cargo screening.

“We will continue to pursue additional protective measures for as long as it takes to ensure the safety and security of our citizens. I have also directed that we spare no effort in investigating the origins of these suspicious packages and their connection to any additional terrorist plotting.”

The president said they are still pursuing the fact, but they do know the packages originated in Yemen.

“We also know that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a terrorist group based in Yemen, continues to plan attacks against our homeland, our citizens and our friends and allies.”

Noting that John Brennan spoke with President Saleh of Yemen today he said the Yemeni government has pledged their full cooperation to an investigation.

“The events of the past 24 hours underscores the necessity of remaining vigilant against terrorism,” Obama said, “As we obtain more information, we'll keep the public fully informed. But at this stage, the American people should know that the counterterrorism professionals are taking this threat very seriously and are taking all necessary and prudent steps to ensure our security.”

The White House says the president’s schedule, at this time, will not change, He is due to appear at a rally this evening in Charlottesville Virginia and spend most of the weekend campaigning in the lead up to the midterm elections, hitting stops in Chicago and Philadelphia, among others.

-Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller

I thought we weren't going to call them terrorists anymore. So is the leader of the regime saying we are threatened by terrorists?

We don’t use the word terrorist anymore….

Brantigny