President Trump not opposed to sending latest terrorist to Gitmo.

The Hill reports:

President Trump said Wednesday he would "certainly consider" sending the suspect in Tuesday's attack in New York City to the U.S. military prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

“I would certainly consider that, yes," Trump said when asked by a reporter at the White House. "Send him to Gitmo.”

The alleged attacker, Sayfullo Saipov, killed eight people and injured nearly a dozen others when he drove a truck through a bike path in Lower Manhattan.

The 29-year-old Uzbek national entered the U.S. in 2010.

Beyond that he's justifiably lashed out at the Visa Lottery Program and one of it's architects, Chuck Schumer:

The terrorist came into our country through what is called the "Diversity Visa Lottery Program," a Chuck Schumer beauty. I want merit based.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 1, 2017

We are fighting hard for Merit Based immigration, no more Democrat Lottery Systems. We must get MUCH tougher (and smarter). @foxandfriends

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 1, 2017

Did you know? Islamic extremists blew up historic Palmyra

Palmyra is definitely a historical site. But it's not an Islamic one, and apparently, that was the problem. So it's being ruthlessly disassembled.

The Arch of Triumph was "pulverised" by the militants who control the city, a Palmyra activist told AFP news agency.

It is thought to have been built about 2,000 years ago.

IS fighters have already destroyed two ancient temples at the site, described by Unesco as one of the most important cultural centres of the ancient world.

By the way, this happened weeks ago. But it doesn't look good on Obama, especially when he's trying to shut down the detention center at Guantanamo. So while you can hear it on the BBC, not so much on the American mainstream media.

Ironic Obama War on Terror Moment

The president has been criticized for an air strike that killed an American citizen who was classified as an enemy combatant.  Now you can add his son to the list.

A son of the U.S.-born Al Qaeda cleric Anwar Al Awlaki was among seven suspected jihadist militants killed in a trio of apparent U.S. air strikes in Yemen, a member of his tribe said Saturday. 

"Abderrahman Anwar Al Awlaki was killed in the raid," the tribal source said, adding that he received confirmation from the militant-controlled Yemeni hospital where the dead and wounded from Friday evening's strikes were taken.

The irony?  Look back to March 2009.

The Obama administration stopped calling Guantanamo inmates "enemy combatants" on Friday and incorporated international law as its basis for holding the prisoners while it works to close the facility...

The Obama administration has said some of the Guantanamo detainees, now numbering about 240, will be freed while others will be put on trial. A third category involves some prisoners deemed too dangerous to be released.

Go back two and half years and the enemy combatants were to be freed or given a non-military trial.  Now, the president is approving drone strikes on people without a trial of any sort.  It looks like there is a fourth category the president and Eric Holder failed to disclose back in 2009:

Too dangerous to live. 

President Obama, War Criminal

That's right, I said it.  Perhaps you missed it because you don't read certain leftward-tilting websites. The left is absolutely up in arms over President Obama's recent decision on detention and military trials for terrorist prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Daily Kos and MoveOn.Org were all over this story, and by all over it I mean nowhere in sight. But by the standards to which they held President Bush, President Obama is an even bigger war criminal than his predecessor, especially in light of some under-reported details of President Obama's recent directives.

Military trials resuming at Guantanmo. Obama be praised.

Another quick hit: President Obama has resumed military trials at Guantanamo, pleasing absolutely no one. The left will be livid at this, while the right realizes they never should have stopped in the first place. Seriously, do we give the man credit for finally realizing what he should have understood from Day 1?  If you really want to scratch your head consider this one: when he called for closing the detention facility he called it a rallying point for Muslim extremists around the world, yet he's resuming the trials while the Middle East is undergoing a sea change of revolution and chaos. Dumb, dumb, dumb, in the sense of consistency with one's own argument. Then again, that's never stopped them before.

Actually, what irks me most is a scan of the news on the subject. Everyone calls it a resumption or an end to the freeze, as if all along the President had planned to resume the trials at some point.  When the President ordered a temporary halt to the trials, I'm pretty sure everyone thought it was the first step on the way to a complete dismantling of Guantanamo detention and trials. I wonder how the far left human rights activists like Code Pink will take this news. I take that back, we already know, don't we.

KEEP Guantanamo OPEN!!!

Does anyone need yet more proof that keeping Guantanamo open, and erring on the side of caution with detainees would be advisable? Here's more.

This story speaks for itself. Northwest Flight 253: al Qaeda Leaders Behind Terror Plot Were Released by U.S. - ABC News.  While your at it, let's stop blaming the previous administration and take some responsibility for something, anything.

Why keep Guantanamo open? Because there are terrorists there.  They are enemies of the United States.  They do not merit the protections of the Constitution as would an American citizen.  There is no benefit to moving them to prisons inside America.  If you buy the argument that the prison at Guantanamo is a recruiting poster for al Qaida then explain to me what would be the benefit of having them imprisoned in Illinois.  Why would that help stamp out al Qaida propoganda?

Is Der Speigel Getting The Real Obama Now?

It seems like Der Spegiel has started to figure out The One. Or at least the contradictory nature of President Obama. Clearly still anti-Bush, the paper comes to some startling revelations (to itself at least) that President Obama has made some promises he can't keep.

Specifically they have become a bit disillusioned on Guantanamo prisoners, their release and the implications of actually treating them like terrorists rather than American citizens. Parenthetically, it appears Germans too do not understand the differentiation between the rights granted to enemy combatants and the rights granted to American citizens.

Or at least Der Speigel still doesn't get it. They seem to have also fallen sway to Obama's Jedi mind trick and they truly expected he could deliver on his promises without so much as raising a sweat. If it had been that simple, somebody in the Bush administration would have come up with the solution. Obama isn't the only person in America with synaptic fibers firing.

You wouldn't think it would be that hard for Der Spiegel to realize that Obama made promises he could not possible keep without some sort of difficult decision needing to be made.

Obama has never categorically rejected the military commissions ...Any return to using such military commissions would be a major disappointment to human rights groups who were hoping that Obama's election signalled a new era in America's handling of terror suspects. As German editorials show on Monday, frustration across the Atlantic is equally high.

In an editorial entitled "Obama's Great Mistake," the center-left daily Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

"Obama's people certainly imagined things differently. But reality has caught up with them. ...Obama is thus considering holding on to the military commissions with a couple of extra rights for the suspects. Bush light, so to speak...Obama is thus discrediting both himself and the US. "

The left-leaning daily Die Tageszeitung writes:

"The US government has asked Germany to accept former Guantanamo prisoners.
Exactly the same government is apparently planning to continue the military commissions to try those prisoners. One could hardly be more contradictory."

"It is the same tactic that President Barack Obama has already used when it came to the torturers from the CIA -- punish with one hand, stroke with the other. Whenever he takes a step forward, he stumbles backwards as well. That will likely be enough to disappoint all those Europeans who had expectations that Obama would be an almost messiah-like healer. It was expected that he would demolish all of the ugly monuments from the Bush era and then, together with Al Gore, plant a Garden of Eden over the top, through which he would drive fuel-efficient compacts from Chrysler."

Okay, so Germany doesn't completely get it, at least not from the left. But over there, liberals are seeing Obama more for what he truly is than the left here is seeing him in that way. Obama's goal is clearly about maintaining power for Barack. Perhaps the liberal voters of America have truly become Obama's useful idiots.

With friends like these, Mr. President

Libyan crackpot Moamer Kadhafi believes America has turned a page with the election of Obama. Great news for America! The once and future terrorist state that knuckled under after Reagan and then later the UN taught them lessons in international behavior, has said America deserves a second chance now. How glorious. Obama's earned a new friend already. One who's probably rubbing his hands at the weakness he expects to be facing for the next four years.

Part of his glee involves the closing of Guantanamo (i.e. potentially freeing up jihad terrorists), withdrawal from Iraq (potentially contributing to regional instability), and a review of policy in Afghanistan (which we know he will end up being disappointed in since President Obama plans to ramp up, not down). It sounds like the making of at best a strained relationship, and at worst, a re-emboldened Kadhafi that supports anti-American terrorism.

If I were Obama who is trying to impress both the center and the left and right, I don't think I would want to reconcile my accomplishments with the backing of a lunatic Libyan dictator in the 'friends' column. No matter how it turns out - Kadhafi pleased or displeased, at least one of the three major voting blocks will be disappointed. If the President plays hardball with Kadhafi, then the left will be upset about the lack of international goodwill in the approach and see it as a go-it-alone style reminiscent of his 'dreaded' predecessor. If he cozies up to Khadafi, then the center and the right will see him as yet another liberal dove on foreign policy, reinforcing a concern of many.

With friends like these in the world, Mr. President, you're going to inevitably bleed some of those supporters who anointed you as savior.