Michigan Radio News

NPR News

« Essay: Reality Check - 6.4.09 | Main | Essay: Before the Dawn - 6.8.09 »

June 05, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jack, I love it! "Al-Qaeda in Ishpeming"! Sounds like the next Jeff Daniels Play. Would also make for a great comedy movie like "The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming". Let's write a screen play.

I think the funniest line in the script for "Al-Qaeda in Ishpeming" is this one:
"Governor Granholm should use her clout and ask President Obama to send them here."

John Conyers doesn't live anywhere near the U.P., either. He might never have been to the U.P.; I don't know.

How does Conyers feel about a new Gitmo in Michigan?

Is he doing any "political grandstanding" these days?

Who gets the role of Conyers in the cast of "Al Qaeda in Ishpeming"?

I at least understand the points made respectively by former Gov. Engler and Pete Hoekstra. Engler says, "We Republicans are going to take Obama at his word, about closing Gitmo. And we'll see how his '08 campaign rhetoric stands up to reality."

Pete Hoekstra says, "Sure, we can build a super-max that nobody will ever escape from. That's not the problem. The problem is if some terrorist organization decides to blow up the Mackinac Bridge, to send a message about the facility. Then, who takes responsibility?"

Either one of those guys is infinitely preferable to the dangerously incompetent and idiotic Conyers, who is much closer to actually letting some of the Gitmo detainees wander the streets of Manistique (Jack, it is "Manistique;" "Manistee" is south of Traverse City) or Munising (you got one out of two on your Michigan geography quiz).

So, good people of Michigan; if you really want a frightening scenario, forget about Engler and Hoekstra and instead consider the spectacle of John and Monica Conyers, and about two dozen ACLU lawyers, in a U.S. District Court in Detroit, deciding the fate of Gitmo detainees. And to make it even scarier, let's make Ann Diggs Taylor the presding trial judge.


What's to stop a terrorist from blowing up Mackinaw to "send a message" ANYWAY?!
Do you think they would want to get THAT specific about the message, they would be trying to send, or make the message "geography specific" or "geographically relevant", for better effect?!. Do you think they REALLY dislike Upr's? Do you think they prefer their prisoners being "put up" in the luxurious Gitmo, rather than moved to a cooler climate? Is that what you call logical thinking?

If they could have done anything by now, don't you think they would have?! Do you think it's because they were afraid of getting tortured if they were caught, or maybe just getting caught in the U.P. when they could have gone to Las Vegas? They don't need any NEW reasons to try. Heck, I bet half of our "well-educated" Americans don't even know where the U.P. is! - you expect terrorists to know where it is! They'd probably get lost in Ontonagon (I don't even know where that is!). Now THAT would be funny stuff to put in this comedy! You don't seem to have much of a sense of humor, I guess, do you - Anonymous? Maybe that's why you're Anonymous, eh? But seriously, why don't you just stock up that underground shelter of yours, if you're that concerned? In fact, selling shelters and supplies for them, might be ANOTHER great business opportunity for the U.P.!

I think Ontonagon is just the place for you.

But more than anything, I'm curious as to how you know which side of the apparent disagreement between Engler and Hoekstra I come down on?

Because I don't know myself.

All that I suggested was that there was sound reasoning, and/or political calculation, on both their sides. It's hard, I know, for Jack Lessenberry to know which side to take if two Republicans disagree. That's such a target-rich environment for Jack. He'd like both of them to lose, naturally.

For me it is just the opposite. If somebody wants to make dumb jokes about terrorists on the streets of America, you really do need to talk to John Conyers and the rest of his friends on the far-left wackadoodle Kucinich-Miller-McKinney wing of the Democrat Party. That's where you will actually find serious discussions about assigning Harvard and Yale lawyers to the detainees, and fighting their cases in U.S. District Courts.

Seems to me it is very American to assign defense counsel to the accused, and let them have their day in court.

Sure, Jack, that works out just fine for people that get picked up by the police or the FBI in the U.S. We get to use niceties like investigators, witness interviews, subpoenaes, surveillance, grand juries; you know all those things we think of as "law enforcement."

Hard to do that in the mountains of the Hindu Kush, where the 82nd Airborne is rightly concerned about where the next rocket-propelled granade is coming from, and not about reading Miranda warnings to suspects.

Oh, and those military commissions? The ones that were enacted into law by a bipartisan Congress, and ridiculed by Candidate Obama? The same ones that President Obama has substantially re-constituted? They provided for counsel for the detainees.

The comments to this entry are closed.

A Production of

***UPDATE 9/2/09: Read the user agreement, effective immediately.***

The Podcast


April 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30