Skank

Recently, our republican friends have been wetting their pants over the possibility of imprisoning convicted terrorists in the US . Several groups are screaming NIMBY and telling everyone that we should be afraid–very afraid-because we will not be safe if we obey the constitution and laws of the U.S.

Sorry I don’t have the link but I agree with Glenn Greenwald’s comments on this phenomenon:

The crime for which Omar Abdel Rahman was convicted and for which he’s currently serving a life sentence in Colorado is the February 26, 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, of which Rahman was the alleged “mastermind.”  That terrorist attack took place just seven weeks after Bill Clinton was inaugurated, but after that attack — to use the Beltway parlance — Clinton kept us safe, for the rest of his presidency.  No more foreign Terrorist attacks on the Homeland.  It wasn’t until Clinton left the Oval Office and George Bush became President were Islamic Terrorists able to strike the Homeland again.

Therefore, using the reasoning of Bush followers everywhere, this means that Clinton’s counter-terrorism policies — i.e.:  trying accused Terrorists in civilian courts and incarcerating them in U.S. prisons — have been proven to be extremely effective in keeping us safe (since, as any beginning student of Logic will tell you:  if A precedes B, then it means that A caused B — as in:  A = “waterboarding, torture and GITMO,” and B = “no Terrorist attack on U.S. soil from 2002-2008″).  Using that same “logic”:  A = “trying Terrorists in civilian courts and imprisoning them in the U.S.,” and B = “no foreign Terrorist attacks in the U.S. from February, 1993 through the end of the Clinton presidency.”