John Bolton: I don’t want my family in New York during the KSM trial

posted at 6:03 pm on November 24, 2009 by Allahpundit

A shocking display of lameness from an unlikely source, courtesy of the producers of America’s Morning News. What the hell is going on lately? First Fred Thompson issues a public communique to troops in the field that the war in Afghanistan is lost because the C-in-C doesn’t have the stomach to fight it. Now the ‘Stache all but predicts a terror attack during the KSM show trial, the best efforts of the CIA, FBI, and NYPD notwithstanding. Good lord, people, have some faith in American counterterrorism. They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they? As if the left isn’t having enough fun with its “cowardly conservative” meme.

This reminds me of the time Biden told New Yorkers he wouldn’t ride the subway for fear of swine flu. Hey guys? For most of us, there’s no plan B. In which case, how about a pep talk instead? Sheesh.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it ironic that a blogger who uses a pseudonym is calling someone else out for cowardice? Especially when that someone else has been one of the most visible and most outspoken opponents of the terrorists for several years?

trfogey on November 24, 2009 at 9:40 PM

Perhaps, AP, Bolton and Thompson are calling it like they see it. It is not up to them to give a pep talk to the country. We’re all sitting here looking to the POTUS who is letting down the entire country time and time again.

Oink on November 24, 2009 at 9:41 PM

Dave Rywall on November 24, 2009 at 6:06 PM

Can you give us examples of that? John Bolton has a history of being right most of the times. In foreign Policy you can’t find a better guy.

Come on. Don’t dump the good guy. Like all of us he is probably spooked with the Precedent’s behaviour.

antisocial on November 24, 2009 at 9:44 PM

I wouldn’t want to be in NYC even if there never were such a thing as Muslim terrorists.

Dr. ZhivBlago on November 24, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Allah is in full-blown douche mode today. He’s been taken down by other bloggers and is trying to prove he’s not bothered. Not buying it.

Sugar Land on November 24, 2009 at 10:59 PM

There may not be a plan B but AQ will absolutely have a plan A during this frickin’ thing. Dude, at it’s peak there will be 1.5 Billion viewers checkin’ on this thing everyday. It’s like the leftists dream come true with Uncle Sam squirming under the light. There’ll be days where this will be the only thing the media will talk about. Did I say days, hell there’ll be months of 24/7. They’ll try calling Bush and Cheney to the stand. They’ll want the jury to view the pit. This thing is gonna be HUGE~!

Griz on November 24, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Did I mention… if you live in New York, Holder and Barry just crapped on your face.

Griz on November 24, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Are you suggesting that a terrorist attack on a military tribunal being held at Gitmo wouldn’t be able to preempt Dancing with the Stars in primetime?

e-pirate on November 24, 2009 at 8:56 PM

Are you suggesting that a terrorist attack is more likely at Gitmo than Manhattan? Are you saying there’s a bigger media presence at Gitmo than Manhattan?

Jim Treacher on November 24, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Guess not.

Jim Treacher on November 24, 2009 at 11:22 PM

In which case, how about a pep talk instead? Sheesh.

Are you farking kidding me? A pep talk? How chirpy should these guys be when they’re watching the systematic degradation of foreign policy, counterintel and counter-terrorism programs that merged successfully to prevent numerous attacks against the country in 8 years?

Once again, the Dems are stripping the military of needed new systems and support. Homeland Security is taking a back seat – hell, it’s all the way back in the cargo bay – to just about everything. Executive orders on openness threaten to force the release of information that can endanger the lives of our families. 9/11 murderers are getting a civil trial for slaughtering thousands while Navy Seals face courtmartial becaused they got flagged for roughing the terrorist (they probably didn’t do it, but they should be free to do it,IMHO).

Republicans shouldn’t lie or spin any more. If the war seems lost or the country vulnerable due to a lack of strategic will, the Republicans should by all that is holy declare the facts and demand action.

Democrats say the war is over. I guess it got in the way of their agenda.

Does anyone thing the other guy accepts the truce?

Cricket624 on November 24, 2009 at 11:28 PM

They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they?

They couldn’t catch a guy who openly said he wanted soldiers gone and that America was the devil, and that guy worked for them.

I had faith in a system run by people who knew what they were doing. I don’t have faith in a system run by a guy who got the job because he was head of the DNC.

Rbastid on November 24, 2009 at 11:37 PM

Allah this blog topic was a fail.

Bolton is expressing his opinion on Obama’s dangerous behavior and it’s consequences.

scotash on November 24, 2009 at 11:56 PM

What is wrong with Bolton saying \” I have a Plan B for my family\”- that is what this is and if New Yorkers are smart they will start looking RIGHT now at what their Plan B is for them. Weren\’t we suppose to learn from 9-11 and Katrina to have a Plan B?AP- this week or in the last few weeks you have had stories on 1) Hasan 2) detection units not having needed tritium 3) terror cells busted in the US 4) Experts such as McCarthy saying your making NY a bigger target 5) Iran having large scale drills on its Western border 6) Seals having to go through a Court Martial process to HOPEFULLY clear their names of giving a numero uno bad guy a fat lip 7)Obama not making a decision on troop levels 8) European officials came out today and lambasted our ditherer for not making a decision and it hurting Europe\’s chances of rallying around their troops 9)DHS/Army/CIA not communicating well on HasanDo I need to go on? Have a Plan B. Someone already offered you a room with high speed internet. Start from there.

journeyintothewhirlwind on November 25, 2009 at 12:11 AM

***
John Bolton always makes a lot of sense to me.
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on November 25, 2009 at 1:03 AM

“shocking display of lameness”

Huh? She asked for the “most safe” place to be. He said not NY. What’s wrong with that? NYC is most definitely not the safest place to be.

They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they?

Tell that to the victims at Fort Hood.

This trial, which will likely drag on for years, will soak up tremendous amounts of counterterrorist man power and resources. It’s wrong in every which way.

As if the left isn’t having enough fun with its “cowardly conservative” meme.

Who gives a damn what these idiots think? Only a coward would care what another coward has to say about such things.

I don’t get Allapundit half the time anymore. Whatever. Just please don’t go completely Charles Johnson on us.

pupik on November 25, 2009 at 1:14 AM

Allah is a douche? Umm, what? hang on, I mean, WTF? You know, all you naysayers, it isn’t about whether he (Allah) is staying in NYC or not–for millions of people leaving it’s not an option, number one. And two, it’s simply poor leadership for Bolton to say “I’m out of here during that deadly circus, so long suckers.”

I really don’t see why this idiocy on Bolton’s part has to be all about someone who reports it.

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 1:43 AM

When they ignore Major Hasan, why wouldn’t they
ignore all of those moderate muslims just like
him, who live in NY?

thgrant on November 25, 2009 at 1:45 AM

I’m all for pep talks, BUT . . . IF I were in a position where my family and I were living in New York, and we had the financial ability to send all of them but me to a second home, I would. I would stay, but they would go.

IF I did not have the financial ability, I would continue to work in New York, but I would move to New Jersey. If my wife had too, she would commute but I would rather her find new employment in New Jersey. Our children would not be in the city except often if at all on days when court was in session.

I would stay, but I would get my family out if I could.

It’s not that I don’t have faith in our counter-terror organizations, I honestly do. BUT. . . they have to be right every time, the enemy only has to be right once. Given this will be a multi-year trial, and a fiasco will ensue EVERY SINGLE DAY with protesters and anti-protesters. A perfect mass target. Remember that if KSM and the others are killed in some sort of terror attack, they still get martyr status.

IF they hit us with a small nuke, KSM and the rest will be the heroes to the extremist Muslim world. I don’t believe for a moment that Obama will Nuke radical Islam back. If they can do it, they will.

If they can’t Nuke us I worry about a biological attack. Saddam had hundreds of thousands of decalitres of bacillus anthracis and thousands upon thousands of decalitres of bacillus thurengiensis. I firmly believe that some of that product got out and into al-Queda hands before we did. Take a cup of either and put it into a milk jug and fill with water (and a bit of bacteria food) and sit it in the sun or under heat lamps for a week. Take some water bottles and fill and head on down to the trial. Hand them out on a hot summers day. Spill some around, run it through one of those little spray bottle fans. Or better yet, sell them.

It’s just too easy for all this to go so very horribly wrong.

We have to bat 1000, they can be happy with 0001.

Jason Coleman on November 25, 2009 at 1:50 AM

Does anybody get the idea that many many wannabe terrorists want beyond their wildest dreams to create an instant name for themselves by any violent means possible during a KSM trial in NYC?

Speakup on November 25, 2009 at 2:15 AM

Jason, what about those of us who even don’t have 1/4 the options you have? If North Korea was about to send a missile towards where I live, I’d have nowhere at all to go. First of all we don’t have another state conveniently across the river; in fact it takes about two days by car to get out of this one. And once I get into Canada, what then? Are you going to support me and my kid indefinitely?

Yeah, no one is arguing that it is too easy for it all to go wrong, but some of us schmucks have to rely on people in leadership positions to tell us what the hell we can do to help ourselves, instead of announce to the world how they plan to leave us to catch the firebombs.

Eff you, Bolton, you make me sick, you parasitic POS.

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 2:16 AM

AP- So are you saying that if Bolton feels that his family would be better served leaving NY, he should lie about it? Or are you inferring that he doesn’t actually feel that way and is being purely political?

‘Cause I read it that he doesn’t think it will be a particularly secure climate surrounding the show trial and he would rather not have his family there. In other words, being honest. I don’t have any problem with him being honest…

ajsleepy on November 25, 2009 at 2:26 AM

STRAWMAN!

N. Korea has nothing to do with it.

The government has chosen to create an ideal target, a challenge to al-Queda to hit us. I also don’t have faith that the Obama administration is going to be as vigilant as they should be.

Bolton informed you where the new “front line” in the battle is, and what you can do to help yourself is to get those you care about out of harm’s way.

As I said, I would stay and fight, but I wouldn’t want my family on the front line.

But obviously you and I are completely different people. For example, I personally will NEVER “rely on people in leadership positions to tell us what the hell we can do to help” myself or my family, that’s my job.

Now you go stick your head back in the concrete.

Jason Coleman on November 25, 2009 at 2:29 AM

I’m with Bolton.

n0doz on November 25, 2009 at 2:43 AM

Nice try Jason, but ignoring my point doesn’t make it a “strawman.” I don’t live in NYC, so what happens there is quite far removed from me, at least in the short term. NK was brought up only because it IS something that could threaten those in my area, and I believe you got the point but choose to toss it to stick by your lame argument in defense of a so-called leader who doesn’t seem to mind what happens to the commoners.

I’ll also tell you that I’m making this discussion using my second language, so pardon for the flubs (or whatever they’re called), I believe also you know what I mean and choose to ignore that too. I’m talking about how the people of the United States should be able to rely on leaders to stand firm and act like leaders instead of panicked schoolgirls. I’m not talking about relying on them in everyday life.

So how about you stick to the real subject here–Bolton–and stop looking for ways to make this about people who disagree with you.

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 2:47 AM

I’m talking about how the people of the United States should be able to rely on leaders to stand firm and act like leaders instead of panicked schoolgirls. I’m not talking about relying on them in everyday life.

So how about you stick to the real subject here–Bolton–and stop looking for ways to make this about people who disagree with you.

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 2:47 AM

No offense to Bolton, but I don’t consider him a leader. Merely someone asked a question and replying honestly. If you are looking to Bolton for answers or encouragement then that is YOUR problem–not his.

ajsleepy on November 25, 2009 at 3:45 AM

Crap, now who is gonna drive the taxis?

Bolton has the guts to say what America feels.

dthorny on November 25, 2009 at 6:56 AM

Allah,

You’re wrong. There’s no way in hell that the US can prevent terrorists from shooting up the area around the trial, or driving a car bomb there, or just taking 10 cars and running over people in teh area.

Will they be able to break out the terrorists? unlikely. Can they kill 100+ people?

Easily.

For the last 8 years, it hasn’t been worth their while to try something like that in the US. The trial will make it worth their while.

Greg Q on November 25, 2009 at 7:04 AM

You are way off base here Allah. Bolton is a stand up guy. He is disgusted with these shenanigans. Why should he tolerate this crap?

ReneePA on November 25, 2009 at 7:04 AM

Hey, Allah, here’s a nice hole in the sand, now put your head in it. How’s that for a pep talk?

Geesh. Nothing like a little denial to get you through the night.

Dark Star on November 25, 2009 at 7:46 AM

Baldi, what’s with you and all the common sense? It’s freaking out the analysts.

- The Cat

P.S. Does anyone think that maybe this is a warning saying, “Hey New Yorkers, how about speaking up about this?”

P.P.S. ‘Don’t try him here’ tea party in central park?

MirCat on November 25, 2009 at 9:01 AM

Look, the coward at the heart of the cowardice meme is Obama himself. His tepid approach to the Afghanistan War is the noteworthy part. It’s obvious he doesn’t care about Afghanistan.

The Dems have become the single-issue part of healthcare. Everything else is just so much tedious governance.

EMD on November 25, 2009 at 9:26 AM

They should have chosen San Fran.,.

right2bright on November 25, 2009 at 9:27 AM

John has a point. New York may be less than safe. I think I’ll stay in Louisiana for the foreseeable future. Besides, I’ve got 300 million to blow…. can’t get too far from the mailbox don’t you know…

speed on November 25, 2009 at 9:35 AM

Guess not.

Jim Treacher on November 24, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Sorry buddy, I was asleep.

You appear to be arguing that existing media presence is a prerequisite for the terrorists attacking. That is idiotic.

My argument was that a terrorist attack, anywhere, on a trial of KSM, would be heavily covered by the media and thus will fulfill the terrorist goals. Cowardly proclamations about how terrorist attacks are inevitable and we need to run for the hills by folks like Bolton and the HotAir faithful generally play right into the terrorists hands. If we’re terrorizing ourselves, bin Laden doesn’t even need to get out of bed.

So, Jimmy, while I neglected to respond immediately, your point is stupid, and was stupid all three times you posted it. Maybe you ought to stick to your D list blog where there’s no chance anybody will read your embarrassingly bad arguments anymore.

cordially,
e-pirate

e-pirate on November 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM

A pep talk, AP? Who’s side are you on? John Bolten has a tad more knowledge about terrorists than you’ll ever have. You never want to be in the blast zone (so to speak) and this stage will prompt them to act again…I know things are happening at lightning speed but was Ft. Hood so long ago? Read my lips…They want to kill you and they don’t need very much of an excuse. Please believe me. I live and do business in a place where they operate.

Nalea on November 25, 2009 at 9:47 AM

I’m a bit curious as to why Allahpundit believes John Bolton should be providing ‘pep talk’ narrative? Wouldn’t that imply that Bolton supports what is a dangerously foolish move by the U.S. Attorney General? Why should Bolton seek to reassure New Yorkers when the result of the AG’s decision puts them at much greater risk? A responsible person would warn his fellows of impending danger rather than urge them to step into it. In that light, Bolton is behaving responsibly. Cheerleading the Administration’s stupid decisions won’t make those decisions more palatable; it only further endangers the public.

zoyclem on November 25, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Don’t take this the wrong way, Allah, but I think you have it wrong here.

Count to 10 on November 25, 2009 at 9:57 AM

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 2:47 AM

Either remove yourself from the peril, or accept that you chose to stay in harm’s way, and cease trying to make other people feel responsible for your choices.

Chris_Balsz on November 25, 2009 at 9:59 AM

Cowardly proclamations

e-pirate on November 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM

It isn’t cowardly to point out to an idiot standing in a pool of gas about to light a match, that they are indeed standing in a pool of gas.

Your baiting isn’t working. Your socialist pals miscalculated once again and you’re out to defend their bad decision.

Bolton has every right to object to the stupid recklessness of Holder and Bozo in light of the fact that a democratic congress already established a legal process for terrorists where they could be tried safely and without further injury to their victims or anyone else.

Its unnecessary and your pal Holder with his 9/10 mentality is the one helping the terrorists, not Bolton. But we’ve been over and over this, so I suspect you getting off on all the attention.

I suppose the people of Pompeii that managed to escape before Vesuvius erupted were cowards by your measure. I think they’d laugh at you, as I do.

dogsoldier on November 25, 2009 at 10:27 AM

zoyclem on November 25, 2009 at 9:56 AM

It’s unreasonable to expect that millions of New Yorkers can just leave the City to escape the increased threat under which they have been placed unnecessarily. Often, when people have to live with such a vague threat over a long time, they become anxious or upset or hyper-vigilant or angry at others, even those not responsible for the threat. Some will simply not want to think about the threat or have it mentioned, avoidance being a means of being able to continue functioning. Others will only want reassurances that all will be well.

This is the way people are. We react differently to such conditions. AP was simply being a person faced with a situation over which he has no control and no escape. And it’s okay for Allapundit to be a human being.

Loxodonta on November 25, 2009 at 10:27 AM

Um, the fact that KSM will be in NYC for any reason whatsoever is proof that our counter-terrorism efforts have lost some, ah, energy.

spmat on November 25, 2009 at 10:39 AM

how about a pep talk instead? Sheesh

AP, sorry but this IS a pep talk.

desertdweller on November 25, 2009 at 10:41 AM

Yeah its not as if Americans ever had a community threatened with destruction and ruin by hostile forces, and had to rely on their own grit and abilities, facing either lethal odds or a thousand-mile walk back to safety, without the comfort and inspiration of politicians. I believe it was Kit Carson who said “I could not have endured, but that President Van Buren did not undermine me with a bad interview”.

/sarc

Chris_Balsz on November 25, 2009 at 10:47 AM

They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they?

Because President Bush was at the helm. They knew if they tested him their world would only get more heated.

This new dude is weak and they know it. They likely believe he will simply condemn any act and try to engage in dialogue and form a summit to discuss the root cause of terror.

I agree with the Bolton message but I don’t think I would leave necessarily.

FireBlogger on November 25, 2009 at 10:53 AM

IF someone doesn’t worry about the increased possibility of terrorism threats in NYC if the trial is held there – stop and consider the negative impact of the security, traffic, and general disruption.

My son who lives in Manhatten called me just after he saw the first plane hit. He watched the towers fall and people jump from his office window. In spite of being a lib he’s not excited about enduring the trial being in NYC and I’m not either.

katiejane on November 25, 2009 at 10:59 AM

A shocking display of lameness from an unlikely source

Don’t be silly AP, you’re the likliest source of all.

Sharke on November 25, 2009 at 11:03 AM

Gee Allahpundit, can I feel sorry for people who live in NYC when this circus comes to town?

moonsbreath on November 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

Cowardly proclamations

e-pirate on November 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Cowardly proclamations must be the new Obotspeak for “facing reality.”

Dark Star on November 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM

It seems to me to be a lame remark. But then, maybe he’s just a lame guy.

AnninCA on November 25, 2009 at 11:07 AM

Boy AP sounds like you dont like being hit with “your life may be in danger”. Did he scare you? Obama scares me sometimes. Counter terrorism wont help much against a lone islamist with some guns. Look at Fort Hood. One guy in times square with 2 handguns = ALLOT DEAD. Obama should have left the show trials to paris hilton and the Heene’s. As far as fred goes, it might have been harsh but there is some truth to that. Obama keeps sticking his finger in the air seeing which way the wind blows. Cant upset his base but cant be seen as weak. So he keeps assessing or sends in half of what they need. Trying to split the difference. Which is a fail for both sides.

Greed on November 25, 2009 at 11:12 AM

Loxodonta,

Your response makes little sense. Did I advocate that New Yorkers leave their city because I agreed that Bolton was acting reasonably in relaying his warning? No, I did not. I merely stated, that in my opinion, he was correct to alert his fellow New Yorkers of the dangers created by the AG’s plan to hold the Khalid Sheik Mohhammed terrorist trial in their city. And my criticism of Allahpundit’s view, offered in polite terms, does not impinge on his humanity. Where did you come up with that?

zoyclem on November 25, 2009 at 11:14 AM

It seems to me to be a lame remark. But then, maybe he’s just a lame guy.

AnninCA on November 25, 2009 at 11:07 AM

Regardless of what you think of his current statement about NYC’s safety during the trials, Bolton was a very competent and strong Ambassador to the UN. Calling him lame reveals your ignorance.

Disturb the Universe on November 25, 2009 at 11:18 AM

They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they? As if the left isn’t having enough fun with its “cowardly conservative” meme.

Uhhh…yeah, great job if you don’t count the mass murder at Fort Hood.

bridgetown on November 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM

zoyclem on November 25, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Did I say you advocated that New Yorkers leave their city because you agreed that Bolton was acting reasonably in relaying his warning, or that you impugned AP’s humanity? No, I did not.

I merely stated my opinions about what New Yorkers may be thinking or feeling when faced with this situation, and addressed my views of Allahpundit, in response to your post that started with:

I’m a bit curious as to why Allahpundit believes John Bolton should be providing ‘pep talk’ narrative?

If my post seems to impugn you in any way, that was not my intention. I apologize for any miscommunication on my part.

Loxodonta on November 25, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Jason, what about those of us who even don’t have 1/4 the options you have? If North Korea was about to send a missile towards where I live, I’d have nowhere at all to go. First of all we don’t have another state conveniently across the river; in fact it takes about two days by car to get out of this one. And once I get into Canada, what then? Are you going to support me and my kid indefinitely?

Seriously? This is your argument? What is a nuke were coming your way? Would you really want to ignore it just because you’d need help supporting your still alive kids?

Getting out wouldn’t be easy, but then, you’d be alive, which is the point.

Eff you, Bolton, you make me sick, you parasitic POS.

fireweednectar on November 25, 2009 at 2:16 AM

Parasite? Did you even listen to the interview? Bolton believes New York will be more dangerous during the trial and very few people disagree with him (I don’t even know that AP disagrees). So when asked where the safest place will be, how can anyone expect him to say the place that most agree with be more dangerous? He didn’t say New York won’t be safe. He just said it won’t be the safest place. Is that really such an awful statement as to warrant calling him a parasite?

Esthier on November 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM

In which case, how about a pep talk instead? Sheesh.

Now, now, consider the context. Bolton wasn’t rushing to the mic to warn America to leave NYC. He was asked (prompted by the reporter) where the safest place would be, and he replied honestly

Unlike Biden, Bolton was not blurting something out because he was fixated on himself

I oppose the proposal to put gitmo prisoners in a Michigan prison. Put those prisoners there, and friends, family or political wacks gravitate to the region. I wouldnt drive through the streets warning folk to leave, but I wouldn’t buy a home there either

Bolton has it right about being in war. Obama has banned ‘war on terror’ from the lexicon, so of course his next step is an in-your-face to the (non third world revolutionary) middle class class racists who do not want an honest third world freedom fighter living next door

It isn’t stupidity that moves the WH to set up this circus. It isn’t a simple belief that war criminals are just another class of criminals deserving full Miranda rights. It is an identification with the ‘oppression’ suffered by the ‘freedom fighters’ and a goal to drive this idea down the throats of the US public, just another in a long line of Obama disses

entagor on November 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM

What is everyone so worried about? The trial will not be held in New York. It will be held in Dearborn, MI once the change of venue has been granted by the Judge.

So the people there are the ones who should really worry…but wait….since people are leaving MI in droves…

Scorched_Earth on November 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM

sorry AP, I’m with The Stache here. Get as far from the city as you can. We had 8 years with a real man as president. Now all we have is a telepromptor in chargge.

tai-pan on November 25, 2009 at 11:44 AM

There should be no acquiescence to this LUNATIC decision by Holder.

IT SHOULD BE OPPOSED UTTERLY BY ANYONE WITH A SHRED OF COMMON SENSE.

NoT accepted as a fait accompli, as Bolton does.

Obama has to approve of the transfer from military to civilian custody, so it is his decision, still to come.

Barry needs to be browbeaten into bowing to the will of the people on this MAD MOVE by his imbecilic Attorney General “Americans Are Cowards” Holder.

NO SHOW TRIAL FOR TERRORISTS IN NYC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Military Tribunals~ and then executions.

Our “leaders” in opposition need to STOP THIS LEGALOID INSANITY.

profitsbeard on November 25, 2009 at 11:52 AM

tai-pan on November 25, 2009 at 11:44 AM

The point is terrorists will congregate there, they have a list of weapons they can manufacture and use that are nuclear, biological, chemical and conventional. (many can be created from common stuff under your sink) They have a long list of soft ill protected targets to choose from.

The point here is to FORCE HOLDER TO REVERSE HIS STUPID DECISION and resume the tribunals. These scum are not citizens and the idea they are being given constitutional protection is nauseating.

dogsoldier on November 25, 2009 at 11:53 AM

They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they?

Uh, no, you’re thinking eight of the past nine. There was a “regime change” here last year you might have heard of… it changes the game somewhat.

Akzed on November 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Jihadi pigdogs believe they are guaranteed paradise by being killed or killing for Islam.

If they shoot people near the courthouse, then throw up their hands and surrender, they get the additional benefit of a civil trial and the megaphone it affords them. It could become a fixture of American life.

I’ll say it again: we will remove 1st Amendment protections from Islam and those who practice it. The only question is, how many Americans die in the mean time?

Akzed on November 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM

***
Islamic nuke #1 will go to Israel. Nukes #2, #3, and #4 will go to Washington, D.C., NYC, and Chicago. The terrorists will “bring it on” when they can–even if it takes 100 years to do so. They have been doing these tricks for 1400 years so far.
***
John Bolton is right–get out of these cities while you and your families still can. HOPE AND CHANGE will not stop the murder being planned now.
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on November 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Geez, Bolton is just giving his druthers honestly like he always does and he shouldn’t be crucified for that. Anyway, to AP and other Bolton critics, would you and your families like to be at ground zero during the trials?

docdave on November 25, 2009 at 1:13 PM

So Bolton should not declare the blindingly obvious conclusion that the KSM Trial decision has put the City of New York at more risk?

Yeah, sure, OK.

[looking around] Is this Bizarro Hotair or something?

When there is evidence that a city will be less safe, a man is fully within his rights to consider getting his family out of that city. End of story!

Edouard on November 25, 2009 at 1:52 PM

They’ll try calling Bush and Cheney to the stand.

Griz on November 24, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Exactly. And after that, they can proceed to demand a trial for Bush and Cheney. Their other goal will be to publicize every secret that the USA has to defend against future attacks. The President and his comrades have as their “end game”, the destruction of this nation. KSM’s trial promises to be the greatest circus ever presented ANYWHERE.

oldleprechaun on November 25, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Now the ‘Stache all but predicts a terror attack during the KSM show trial, the best efforts of the CIA, FBI, and NYPD notwithstanding.

Rah, rah rah, siss , boom, bah! Oh yeah, all the alphabet agencies are on their toes. Major Hasan was just a slight slip up. It’s been years, I think, since I reminded everyone that with our borders being as porous as they are that national security is a laughable conceit.

thegreatbeast on November 25, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I registered to comment way back during the presidential election (which I’ve tried to pretty much block out) and this is the first time I’ve chimed in here. Everything I’ve ever read by or heard from Bolton is solid, rational, common sense stuff and he does not customarily resort to hyperbole. Why wouldn’t it make sense for him, when asked about his family’s safety, to give this answer? I don’t think it smacks of fear-mongering as much as it reflects back on the utter stupidity of Holder’s decision. Everyone likes pep talks, but come on . . . this guy knows perhaps more than the rest of us the vulnerable position we are in. I trust and respect the man.

pianomomma on November 25, 2009 at 4:40 PM

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it ironic that a blogger who uses a pseudonym is calling someone else out for cowardice? Especially when that someone else has been one of the most visible and most outspoken opponents of the terrorists for several years?

trfogey on November 24, 2009 at 9:40 PM

Doofpundit should have been fired and replaced months ago, if not years.

TTheoLogan on November 25, 2009 at 4:47 PM

A pep talk?

You’ve got to be kidding. Having an off day?

Couple of points to make… NYT gave away our best intel collection ability 3 years ago. Those measures would have paid benefits for decades. FBI is so f*cked up right now that they can’t communicate from one coast to another. Homeland Security is being run by an idiot.

I wouldn’t put too much faith in our intel guys right now, and it’s really not their fault.

lionheart on November 25, 2009 at 4:49 PM

What do you mean counter terrorism? Our president doesn’t even call it terrorism and we court martial people that get rough with terrorists so I don’t really have much faith in them keeping us safe right now.
Thompson and Bolton have every right to feel the way they do and SO FAR they still have the right to free speech.

SgtRed on November 25, 2009 at 5:04 PM

I would not either. When there are sharks in the water, don’t go swimming.

For now, truth is still a complete defense.

jukin on November 25, 2009 at 5:47 PM

Loxodonta,

No offense was taken. I just wasn’t sure what point you were trying to make. It’s water under the bridge now.

zoyclem on November 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

Islamic nuke #1 will go to Israel. Nukes #2, #3, and #4 will go to Washington, D.C., NYC, and Chicago. The terrorists will “bring it on” when they can–even if it takes 100 years to do so. They have been doing these tricks for 1400 years so far.

rocketman on November 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Doubtful that the first Islamist nuke will go to Israel, Israel is far more vigilant than we are at the moment, and you can bet if any Shahab was launched from Iran that the IDF’s missile defense forces would probably knock it down. Then Israel would pummel Iran from the air. If it somehow was confirmed to be a nuke shot at Israel, you can betcha that Israel would respond in kind.

It seems far more likely to me that a nuke would be set on NYC or DC first, in an effort to at least stir us up and turn our focus inward however briefly, THEN maybe another shot at Israel in the confusion.

I agree that they are a patient lot and like I and others have said,

We have to be right 100% of the time, they have to be right once.

The KSM trials would be a perfect “opportunity” to make exactly the statement they would like.

Jason Coleman on November 25, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Good lord, people, have some faith in American counterterrorism.

My Gosh, AP…. What is WRONG with you?

Do YOU think having the trial in civilian court in NYC is a good idea? Its not cowardice (you buffoon) to think that doing this moronic thing is wrong…or that we should not INVITE terrorism into our midst.

I won’t be partaking of the Broadway theatre while Bambi and Holder and putting on their anti-American political fest there, and needlessly endangering American lives in the process. Does that make ME a coward?

Why don’t you buck up, a bit, my man, and take a principled stand on something yourself, rather than trying to appear rational and reasonable to the 3 or 4 lefties who patronize HA.

seanrobins on November 25, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Bolton is just giving a heads up is all.

Even Col. Ollie North was afraid of Bin Ladin. He took steps to protect his family back in 1987.
Here is the transcript.

mechkiller_k on November 25, 2009 at 8:14 PM

You appear to be arguing that existing media presence is a prerequisite for the terrorists attacking. That is idiotic.

That must be why Atta & Co. hit Boise.

So, Jimmy, while I neglected to respond immediately, your point is stupid, and was stupid all three times you posted it. Maybe you ought to stick to your D list blog where there’s no chance anybody will read your embarrassingly bad arguments anymore.

cordially,
e-pirate

e-pirate on November 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM

No, you’re a doody-head.

Jim Treacher on November 25, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Putting the people in NYC in unnecessary jeopardy so that the Islamists can put Bush on trial isn’t brave. And it takes a pretty stupid person to think it is.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Why doesn’t anyone mention that 9/11 was the day the so-called blind sheik “mastermind” of the first attack on the world trade center was supposed to be sentenced?

Laura in Maryland on November 25, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Ambassador Bolton’s caution
is probably a product of intel viz missing soviet era nuke suitcases, weapons-grade anthrax, etc etc etc, as well as the Islamist world’s well known commitment to demonstrating their global penchant for mass murder.

Whatver the jihadi weapons & platform choices for delivering mega-death to NYC, the B. Hussein political wing has ensured that the terrorist planners have a high-value target in the belly of the beast they’re determined to destroy.

How many trillions in damage they’ll be able to inflict on the US and world economy, if they’re successful again this time, is anybody’s guess.

Yes, barring a last minute change of venue back to a military installation, the KSM trial is another good reason for Americans to give New York, New York a wide berth over the next few years.

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on November 26, 2009 at 12:41 AM

I’m with Bolton on this one. This is going to be a terrorist showcase. Who knows what can happen? With the huge media attention this is going to get, the terrorists would get tremendous publicity if they could pull something off. I think you have to assume the threat level goes up on few notches on that alone.

tballard on November 26, 2009 at 3:12 AM

Wrong again, Allah. The possibility of an attack is quite real.

ahem on November 26, 2009 at 10:28 AM

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it ironic that a blogger who uses a pseudonym is calling someone else out for cowardice? Especially when that someone else has been one of the most visible and most outspoken opponents of the terrorists for several years?

trfogey on November 24, 2009 at 9:40 PM

EXACTLY!!

theaddora on November 26, 2009 at 10:49 AM

Not having the time or inclination to read through 4 pages of comments to see if anybody already made the point…

AP: We’ve already had a terror attack on U.S. soil in Obambi’s first ten months in the saddle. While we won’t know for a while (and may never) if Ft. Hood was the result of a Obama Justice Dept. decision to chill the investigation into Hasan, the fact remains that this administration is NOT as committed to national security as the former. The fact that they would even entertain a trial on U.S. soil, would cede civilian rights to unlawful combatants, and will allow these show trials to occur even while stating that the ‘alleged’ terrorists will be found guilty (no pre-trial prejudice there), betrays their lack of seriousness.

Bolton is stating the obvious: there will be huge incentive for the bad guys to make a splash during this circus.

PD Quig on November 26, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Good lord, people, have some faith in American counterterrorism. They’ve done okay for eight years, haven’t they?

They are being dismantled by the Obamacrats.

It’s not Bolton’s job to be a cheerleader for Obama and where he’s taking America.

modifiedcontent on November 26, 2009 at 12:09 PM

***
HI JASON COLEMAN–11/25@6:42PM. A few comments on Israel’s ability to prevent a nuclear attack. Yes–they are an “armed camp” used to terrorist attacks. And they have the best “human intelligence” in the world–I hope someone is sleeping with a high Iranian military person who will alert them when they start to “bring it on” nuclear style.
***
As far as defending against an incoming TBM–I worked at White Sands Missile Range for many years in the anti-aircraft and anti-TBM arenas. Lots of times something went wrong at the most critical point during firings. Hardware failures, undiscovered software bugs suddenly brought “out of the closet” by some overlooked low level problem.
***
Yes–we had a lot of successes in a tightly controlled environment. But a lot went wrong–think about some of the Patriot engagements on TV during the first Gulf War. You wouldn’t believe some of the “sea stories” I heard from some of our engineers who supported both Iraq wars.
***
And the nuke may come from a 10 mile range TBM from Gaza or Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley. With such a short range and limited reaction time–coupled with a high speed low altitude trajectory–the nuke may get through. It may not come from long range and high altitude where long real time warnings are available. Israel can’t intercept every homemade rocket that attacks them–a barrage attack may happen. Which one is the “real McCoy?” With possible decoy TBM’s providing chaff and IR saturations also.
***
And the nukes may be “backpacked” in. It’s a real tough nut to crack–let’s hope the Israelis understand the problems and take out Iran’s factories before this nightmare comes to pass.
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on November 26, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Did Bolton say he wouldn’t go or work in NY? I don’t think so. He would not want his family there. That is what a concerned family man does: He gets his family out of danger.

mbabbitt on November 26, 2009 at 2:43 PM

One merely has to look at the trackbacks to understand what Allah hath done.

unclesmrgol on November 26, 2009 at 6:42 PM

You need an electron microscope to measure the amount of sympathy I have for NYC. They overwhelmingly wanted The One and they got him. Now they have to live with it.

TheBigOldDog on November 26, 2009 at 7:59 PM

BTW AP, (yes, I know this is a waste of time but anyway…) Under Bush, those counterterrorism people you are relying on, weren’t being threatened with prosecution for their efforts. Other than that little motivation buster, you have nothing at all to worry about. No Plan B needed.

TheBigOldDog on November 26, 2009 at 8:03 PM

A shocking display of lameness from an unlikely source,

I have always admired John Bolton. He knows his stuff. It seems to me that he is issuing a stark warning that this travesty of “justice” is being carried out with pre 9/11 thinking and actions. If we are lulled as in the past, then as sure as the sun shines each day there will be another attack, worse than before. There is absolutely nothing lame about it and thinking about why he is saying this is more important than labeling it as a shocking display of lameness. AP’s reaction, on the other hand, does surprise me or rather, is shocking to me.

Miss Molly on November 26, 2009 at 9:50 PM

Good lord, people, have some faith in American counterterrorism.

Yeah, they got the Big Apple locked down like a White House state dinner!

Chris_Balsz on November 28, 2009 at 12:14 AM

John Bolton is merely stating the obvious. New York is not going to be anywhere near as safe a place during the KSM trial — or, possibly for years thereafter — as it would have been in the absence of deciding to hold this civilian trial there. Even if one were to conclude that a trial in civilian court was preferable to a military commission under the circumstances (which I personally do not) there is precious little justification for holding that trial in New York City.

The reasons for holding it in NYC seem to be purely ideological, and are primarily theatrical in nature, as opposed to being driven by legitimate judicially-based factors.

The whole notion seems to reflect a sort of childish bravado on the part of both Obama and Eric Holder, a “we’ll show them how our criminal justice system works . . .”

This does not mean that there will undoubtedly be an Islamist attack aimed at maximizing civilian deaths. But if a chance arises — even with a “lone wolf” actor — who seriously believes that the opportunity would not be exploited to the hilt?

It is just that it is unnecessarily risky.

And there are other unnecessary dangers associated with the trial. For example, who in their right mind would ever willingly serve on such a jury?

Oh, they will somehow find a jury, I’m sure! But given what we know will ultimately happen post trial, with jurors being identified, and the selling of the “inside story,” who in their right mind would want to have such a target painted on them and on their family forever?

And how do we benefit from such a trial?

We absolutely know from experience that such criminal trials do not act as a deterrent to future terrorist activity. I think even the average person could make a very convincing argument that the opposite may be true. And I’d bet that someone like Andrew McCarthy could make a very compelling argument in that regard, one based on the historic record — i.e., that the trial and conviction of the Blind Sheik and the other conspirators in some ways spurred on al-Qaeda in their ultimate quest to “finish the job.” That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have tried them, but there is little doubt that the Clinton Administration dropped the ball when it came to simultaneously combatting al-Qaeda, and Osama bin-Laden on some international level.

Trochilus on November 28, 2009 at 11:38 AM

Found this piece from a few days ago by Andrew McCarthy reacting to the public support given Eric Holder by former Bush Justice Dept. lawyers, James Comey and Jack Goldsmith, for concluding that Holder’s decision to hold the civilian trials is a “reasonable” one.

He reviews the Commission record to the civilian trial record, re: terror trials, and in the process rips Comey and Goldsmith a new one for their analysis.

And, in the process, it looks like Andy has nailed the real reason for trying the Cole terrorists using a military commission — Holder is forum shopping, and in a way that will set an extremely bad precedent for the future.

Holder’s untenable distinction between the Cole jihadists and the 9/11 jihadists exposes him to what Comey and Goldsmith concede are “charges of opportunistic forum shopping.” They’re being kind. This is not just a charge; Holder is engaged in opportunistic forum shopping — Comey and Goldsmith’s own theory for why the Cole case is going to the military system attests to that. Even worse is the fact that under the MCA, the American people’s representatives sensibly prescribed military-justice processes for combatant detainees and war criminals, but now, thanks to Holder, all terrorists consigned to that system will be able to claim that giving them less due-process protection than that given to the barbaric KSM violates the bedrock American principle of equal protection under the law.
. . .

Andy does not address the deterrence issue in the article, nor potential jury issues. But his argument against Holder and his supporters is compelling, especially where he discusses the conflict of interest issue.

Trochilus on November 28, 2009 at 1:10 PM

I dont think Bolton et. al. are cowards. However, I do think the “trial” should be held in Washington DC–so all the “lovliness” of the trial fallout will be in Holder’s and Obowma’s area—gotta love it!

kittyAJ on November 28, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4