

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Hypocrisy, thy name is James Inhofe when it comes to prosecuting terrorists.
Sen. Inhofe is all inflamed right now. Angry. Seems President
Obama's decision to try 9/11 suspects like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is
"an extreme gamble" that puts the Unites States "at extreme risk." But
history tells of a different Inhofe, one who didn't say a word when the
Bush/Cheney Administration tried and convicted 9/11 suspect Zacarias
Moussaoui on U.S. soil. And what is it when you change your tune
because the president comes from a different part? In a word, a
hypocrite. And that's what Sen. Inhofe is pure and simple, playing
politics with national security.
Here's the deal.
Sen. Inhofe is getting ready to drop an amendment that would
prohibit funding to construct housing for detainees in the U.S. Just
one in a series of amendments coming down the pike meant to tie the
hands of the president. He's also bellowing to anyone that will listen
about how horrible President Obama's decision to try Gitmo detainees in
federal courts is.
Sen. Inhofe said this on his Web site:
President Obama has demonstrated an obsession for closing
Gitmo, and this latest announcement proves he is willing to make an
extreme gamble in order to fulfill that political objective. His efforts to please the far left ultra-liberal wing of his party put us at unnecessary risk.
This is the very reason I have repeatedly offered my Gitmo amendment on
multiple funding bills, including on the Military Construction
appropriations bill currently under consideration in the Senate.
He's hopping mad now, but there was a time when a terrorist - foreign
or domestic - could be tried in the U.S. and Sen. Inhofe wouldn't even
say a peep. From the 2006 conviction of 9/11 conspirator Zacarias
Moussaoui to boat hijacking Somali pirates, Inhofe always seem to find
something more "important" to talk about. He says he's outraged about
Obama trying to appease the far left. He says the president has put us
at unnecessary risk. But when the president's last name was Bush all
Inhofe had was silence for those terrorists being prosecuted on our
shores.
Case in point:
Take July 2003, when Zacarias Moussaoui was trying to manipulate his
federal trial to gain access to al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo. A
clear sign that using the civilian courts could create national
security risks, right?* Apparently Sen. Inhofe was just too busy debunking climate change.
And in May 2006, when Moussaoui was sentenced to life in prison on U.S. soil, what was Sen. Inhofe doing? Fighting for English to be the official language.
Or on Nov. 20, 2008, when international arms trafficker Monzer al
Kassar was convicted? On the same day, Sen. Inhofe was worried about
the "terror" of a "Hostile Green Takeover: The Auto Industry Faces Environmental Thuggery."
The Sierra Club is a bigger threat than international terrorism. Clearly.
He's all for keeping the terrorists out now. But Sen. Inhofe was
amazingly mute from 2001 to 2008 when the Bush/Cheney Administration
was the one prosecuting. Heck, he was so used to being silent, he
managed to not say a peep even for most of 2009 when the Department of
Justice was still prosecuting terrorists.
Like earlier this year, when Somali pirates attacked a U.S. ship and
kidnapped captain Richard Phillips. One of those pirates, Abduwali
Abdukhadir Muse, was indicted in April in the Southern District of New
York, where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried. Sen. Inhofe's
concern? Denying amnesty for immigrants.
It seems that whenever someone was going to trial or being sentenced
in America for terrorist acts, Sen. Inhofe wasn't worried about the
safety of Americans or the ability of our federal courts to handle
convictions (which they've done 195 times since 2001...). So of course
Inhofe cares now ... that there's a Democrat in office and he sees a
chance to throw some political punches.
When Bush was ruling the roost, not a peep. But now that Obama is in the house, nothing but complaints.
It's about politics, not national security. Did he say anything in
regards to Bush prosecuting Moussaoui? No. Has he had a cross word to
say about any international terrorist facing trial and sentencing here
in the states until now? Not a word. But let Obama get closer to
closing Gitmo and the hysterics come out.
Stop the games, Sen. Inhofe. We're not interested in playing.
*****
Look for more at New Security Action as we profile some of the biggest right wing hypocrites when it comes to Guantanamo Bay.
*The Judge denied Moussaoui's request, proving yet again that
our federal court system is more than capable of dealing with
terrorists.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Hypocrisy, thy name is James Inhofe when it comes to prosecuting terrorists.
Sen. Inhofe is all inflamed right now. Angry. Seems President
Obama's decision to try 9/11 suspects like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is
"an extreme gamble" that puts the Unites States "at extreme risk." But
history tells of a different Inhofe, one who didn't say a word when the
Bush/Cheney Administration tried and convicted 9/11 suspect Zacarias
Moussaoui on U.S. soil. And what is it when you change your tune
because the president comes from a different part? In a word, a
hypocrite. And that's what Sen. Inhofe is pure and simple, playing
politics with national security.
Here's the deal.
Sen. Inhofe is getting ready to drop an amendment that would
prohibit funding to construct housing for detainees in the U.S. Just
one in a series of amendments coming down the pike meant to tie the
hands of the president. He's also bellowing to anyone that will listen
about how horrible President Obama's decision to try Gitmo detainees in
federal courts is.
Sen. Inhofe said this on his Web site:
President Obama has demonstrated an obsession for closing
Gitmo, and this latest announcement proves he is willing to make an
extreme gamble in order to fulfill that political objective. His efforts to please the far left ultra-liberal wing of his party put us at unnecessary risk.
This is the very reason I have repeatedly offered my Gitmo amendment on
multiple funding bills, including on the Military Construction
appropriations bill currently under consideration in the Senate.
He's hopping mad now, but there was a time when a terrorist - foreign
or domestic - could be tried in the U.S. and Sen. Inhofe wouldn't even
say a peep. From the 2006 conviction of 9/11 conspirator Zacarias
Moussaoui to boat hijacking Somali pirates, Inhofe always seem to find
something more "important" to talk about. He says he's outraged about
Obama trying to appease the far left. He says the president has put us
at unnecessary risk. But when the president's last name was Bush all
Inhofe had was silence for those terrorists being prosecuted on our
shores.
Case in point:
Take July 2003, when Zacarias Moussaoui was trying to manipulate his
federal trial to gain access to al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo. A
clear sign that using the civilian courts could create national
security risks, right?* Apparently Sen. Inhofe was just too busy debunking climate change.
And in May 2006, when Moussaoui was sentenced to life in prison on U.S. soil, what was Sen. Inhofe doing? Fighting for English to be the official language.
Or on Nov. 20, 2008, when international arms trafficker Monzer al
Kassar was convicted? On the same day, Sen. Inhofe was worried about
the "terror" of a "Hostile Green Takeover: The Auto Industry Faces Environmental Thuggery."
The Sierra Club is a bigger threat than international terrorism. Clearly.
He's all for keeping the terrorists out now. But Sen. Inhofe was
amazingly mute from 2001 to 2008 when the Bush/Cheney Administration
was the one prosecuting. Heck, he was so used to being silent, he
managed to not say a peep even for most of 2009 when the Department of
Justice was still prosecuting terrorists.
Like earlier this year, when Somali pirates attacked a U.S. ship and
kidnapped captain Richard Phillips. One of those pirates, Abduwali
Abdukhadir Muse, was indicted in April in the Southern District of New
York, where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried. Sen. Inhofe's
concern? Denying amnesty for immigrants.
It seems that whenever someone was going to trial or being sentenced
in America for terrorist acts, Sen. Inhofe wasn't worried about the
safety of Americans or the ability of our federal courts to handle
convictions (which they've done 195 times since 2001...). So of course
Inhofe cares now ... that there's a Democrat in office and he sees a
chance to throw some political punches.
When Bush was ruling the roost, not a peep. But now that Obama is in the house, nothing but complaints.
It's about politics, not national security. Did he say anything in
regards to Bush prosecuting Moussaoui? No. Has he had a cross word to
say about any international terrorist facing trial and sentencing here
in the states until now? Not a word. But let Obama get closer to
closing Gitmo and the hysterics come out.
Stop the games, Sen. Inhofe. We're not interested in playing.
*****
Look for more at New Security Action as we profile some of the biggest right wing hypocrites when it comes to Guantanamo Bay.
*The Judge denied Moussaoui's request, proving yet again that
our federal court system is more than capable of dealing with
terrorists.
Hypocrisy, thy name is James Inhofe when it comes to prosecuting terrorists.
Sen. Inhofe is all inflamed right now. Angry. Seems President
Obama's decision to try 9/11 suspects like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is
"an extreme gamble" that puts the Unites States "at extreme risk." But
history tells of a different Inhofe, one who didn't say a word when the
Bush/Cheney Administration tried and convicted 9/11 suspect Zacarias
Moussaoui on U.S. soil. And what is it when you change your tune
because the president comes from a different part? In a word, a
hypocrite. And that's what Sen. Inhofe is pure and simple, playing
politics with national security.
Here's the deal.
Sen. Inhofe is getting ready to drop an amendment that would
prohibit funding to construct housing for detainees in the U.S. Just
one in a series of amendments coming down the pike meant to tie the
hands of the president. He's also bellowing to anyone that will listen
about how horrible President Obama's decision to try Gitmo detainees in
federal courts is.
Sen. Inhofe said this on his Web site:
President Obama has demonstrated an obsession for closing
Gitmo, and this latest announcement proves he is willing to make an
extreme gamble in order to fulfill that political objective. His efforts to please the far left ultra-liberal wing of his party put us at unnecessary risk.
This is the very reason I have repeatedly offered my Gitmo amendment on
multiple funding bills, including on the Military Construction
appropriations bill currently under consideration in the Senate.
He's hopping mad now, but there was a time when a terrorist - foreign
or domestic - could be tried in the U.S. and Sen. Inhofe wouldn't even
say a peep. From the 2006 conviction of 9/11 conspirator Zacarias
Moussaoui to boat hijacking Somali pirates, Inhofe always seem to find
something more "important" to talk about. He says he's outraged about
Obama trying to appease the far left. He says the president has put us
at unnecessary risk. But when the president's last name was Bush all
Inhofe had was silence for those terrorists being prosecuted on our
shores.
Case in point:
Take July 2003, when Zacarias Moussaoui was trying to manipulate his
federal trial to gain access to al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo. A
clear sign that using the civilian courts could create national
security risks, right?* Apparently Sen. Inhofe was just too busy debunking climate change.
And in May 2006, when Moussaoui was sentenced to life in prison on U.S. soil, what was Sen. Inhofe doing? Fighting for English to be the official language.
Or on Nov. 20, 2008, when international arms trafficker Monzer al
Kassar was convicted? On the same day, Sen. Inhofe was worried about
the "terror" of a "Hostile Green Takeover: The Auto Industry Faces Environmental Thuggery."
The Sierra Club is a bigger threat than international terrorism. Clearly.
He's all for keeping the terrorists out now. But Sen. Inhofe was
amazingly mute from 2001 to 2008 when the Bush/Cheney Administration
was the one prosecuting. Heck, he was so used to being silent, he
managed to not say a peep even for most of 2009 when the Department of
Justice was still prosecuting terrorists.
Like earlier this year, when Somali pirates attacked a U.S. ship and
kidnapped captain Richard Phillips. One of those pirates, Abduwali
Abdukhadir Muse, was indicted in April in the Southern District of New
York, where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried. Sen. Inhofe's
concern? Denying amnesty for immigrants.
It seems that whenever someone was going to trial or being sentenced
in America for terrorist acts, Sen. Inhofe wasn't worried about the
safety of Americans or the ability of our federal courts to handle
convictions (which they've done 195 times since 2001...). So of course
Inhofe cares now ... that there's a Democrat in office and he sees a
chance to throw some political punches.
When Bush was ruling the roost, not a peep. But now that Obama is in the house, nothing but complaints.
It's about politics, not national security. Did he say anything in
regards to Bush prosecuting Moussaoui? No. Has he had a cross word to
say about any international terrorist facing trial and sentencing here
in the states until now? Not a word. But let Obama get closer to
closing Gitmo and the hysterics come out.
Stop the games, Sen. Inhofe. We're not interested in playing.
*****
Look for more at New Security Action as we profile some of the biggest right wing hypocrites when it comes to Guantanamo Bay.
*The Judge denied Moussaoui's request, proving yet again that
our federal court system is more than capable of dealing with
terrorists.