Arizona Governor Signs Additional Controversial Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trust officials? Now that's food for thought. Can't even use the word "terrorism" and instead replace it with "man caused disaster." Does that count for women who blow themselves up, too?
 
kokonut said:
Trust officials? Now that's food for thought. Can't even use the word "terrorism" and instead replace it with "man caused disaster." Does that count for women who blow themselves up, too?
Click to expand...

re-read this

But....my point is we all know where we stand on it. No reason to rehash it or use it to incite others.
Click to expand...
 
TXgolfer said:
That is a great approach.....If you trust the officials.

However, the ideology of this admin. makes it unlikely that anything will ever be counted as a terrorist attack. :shrug:

I am personally on the fence as far as Fort Hood being terrorism. But....my point is we all know where we stand on it. No reason to rehash it or use it to incite others.
Click to expand...

In speaking of trusting officials you have Obama who criticized the Arizona law without ever reading it. You have Holder who admitted that he hadn't read the bill or understood the context of the law yet criticized it first without looking. You have Janet Napolitano who did the same thing without reading it first. And now you have the State Department spokesman who was critical of the Arizona law admitted he, too, has not read it.
Breitbart.tv State Department Spokesman Critical of Arizona Law Admits He Too Hasn’t Read It

Unreal.

Perhaps if they want real credibility as officials they need to read the bill first before criticizing it because Arizona is following what the Federal law requires them to do. And what's even incredulous is that you have people defending those who never bothered to read the bill in the first place!
 
They could not have read the healthcare overhaul bill given the time allotment they had to read through it.
 
kokonut said:
In speaking of trusting officials you have Obama who criticized the Arizona law without ever reading it. You have Holder who admitted that he hadn't read the bill or understood the context of the law yet criticized it first without looking. You have Janet Napolitano who did the same thing without reading it first. And now you have the State Department spokesman who was critical of the Arizona law admitted he, too, has not read it.
Breitbart.tv State Department Spokesman Critical of Arizona Law Admits He Too Hasn’t Read It

Unreal.

Perhaps if they want real credibility as officials they need to read the bill first before criticizing it because Arizona is following what the Federal law requires them to do. And what's even incredulous is that you have people defending those who never bothered to read the bill in the first place!
Click to expand...

Don't forget passing health care reform without reading it. I wish I could live for 200 years so I could read how history treats "We have to pass the bill so we can see what is in it" :lol: Maybe it will be on coffee mugs at Starbucks.
 
In the legal battle over Arizona’s new immigration law, an ironic subtext has emerged: whether a Bush-era legal opinion complicates a potential Obama administration lawsuit against Arizona.

The document, written in 2002 by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, concluded that state police officers have “inherent power” to arrest undocumented immigrants for violating federal law. …

The author of the Arizona law — which has drawn strong opposition from top Obama administration officials (who never bothered to read the law - koko) — has cited the authority granted in the 2002 memo as a basis for the legislation. The Obama administration has not withdrawn the memo, and some backers of the Arizona law said Monday that because it remains in place, a Justice Department lawsuit against Arizona would be awkward at best.

“The Justice Department’s official position as of now is that local law enforcement has the inherent authority to enforce federal immigration law,” said Robert Driscoll, a former Justice Department Civil Rights Division official in the George W. Bush administration who represents an Arizona sheriff known for aggressive immigration enforcement. “How can you blame someone for exercising authority that the department says they have?”
Click to expand...

Right. How can anyone blame Arizona for excercising their authority that the Justice Department says they have? And as for those officials who never bothered to read the Arizona bill are certainly not the self-described geniuses we see them as. More like bumbling imbeciles.

washingtonpost.com
 
Jiro said:
Army. Pentagon. White House. whoever.
Click to expand...
Fort Hood shooting was terrorism, U.S. says
Phil Stewart
WASHINGTON
Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:45pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The shooting rampage at a U.S. Army base in November was "an act of terrorism," an Obama administration official said on Friday, as the Pentagon ordered an overhaul of protocols to spot threats within the military.

Reviews ordered on Friday by the Pentagon and White House exposed shortcomings in both intelligence and oversight before the November 5 shooting, which authorities blame on a military psychiatrist.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said his department was still "burdened by 20th century processes and attitudes mostly rooted in the Cold War," and needed to do more to combat self-radicalization.

"Our counterintelligence procedures are mostly designed to combat an external threat such as a foreign intelligence service," Gates told reporters at the Pentagon, adding there was not enough focus "on internal threats."

Major Nidal Malik Hasan faces 13 counts of murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder for the rampage at Fort Hood Army base in Texas.

The case has drawn criticism after it became known Hasan had been in contact with a Muslim figure sympathetic to al Qaeda.

A senior official in President Barack Obama's administration declined to say whether Hasan might have been taking orders from abroad but did call the shooting "an act of terrorism."

It was a rare use of the phrase by an administration official to describe the Fort Hood killing spree.

"It certainly in my mind was an act of terrorism as far as the tactic that was used," the official, who declined to be named, told reporters....
Click to expand...
Fort Hood shooting was terrorism, U.S. says | Reuters
 
Gandhi and Mother Teresa said it was terrorism. My ouija board told me so :roll:

It was an act of terrorism.
 
"senior official" - seems pretty official to me.

So, the Ft. Hood shooting was indeed an act of terrorism. Period.
 
kokonut said:
"senior official" - seems pretty official to me.

So, the Ft. Hood shooting was indeed an act of terrorism. Period.
Click to expand...

who? name? how do I know they're not making it up?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top