In a recent post, one of our favorite fellow bloggers, Always on Watch, commented on President Obama’s entertaining Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood terrorist leader at the White House.

Hmmmm…

Now we also see where, well, our government under Obama’s “leadership” evidently has a problem classifying a terrorist organization…a terrorist organization.

In the past three years, over 1,000 Christians in Nigeria have been brutally murdered by an extremist Islamic group known as Boko Haram and the United States has refused to classify the group as being a terrorist organization.

Nigeria’s Christian leaders had asked the United States government to place Boko Haram on the list of terrorist organizations. The radical Islamic group has vowed to eradicate all Christians from Nigerian soil and will continue to murder men, women and children in the process unless something is done to stop them.

Instead of declaring Boko Haram a terrorist organization, the U.S. government only placed three of the group’s leaders on a terrorist blacklist and then said that it was more important to address social inequalities in the country first. Christian leaders in Nigeria said the actions or perhaps lack of action by the United States has only served to make the group bolder and more aggressive in their pursuit to exterminate the remaining Christians.

Appearing before House Foreign Affairs Committee, Christian Association of Nigeria President Ayo Oritsejafor said the decision was:

“The equivalent of designating (Osama) bin Laden a terrorist but failing to designate Al-Qaeda a terrorist organization.”

“By refusing to designate Boko Haram as a foreign terrorist organization, the United States is sending a very clear message, not just to the federal government of Nigeria, but to the world that the murder of innocent Christians and Muslims who reject Islamism — and I make a clear distinction here between Islam and Islamism — are acceptable losses.”

Of course, and par for the course given whom we’ve got in the Oval Office at present:

However, Assistant Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Johnny Carson told the committee that designating Boko Haram a terrorist organization would be counter-productive in trying to improve the governing of Nigeria, especially in the Muslim dominated northern region.

Carson testified,

“Boko Haram thrives because of social and economic problems in the north that the government must find a way of addressing.”

“A coordinated government effort to provide responsible, accountable governance to all Nigerians, while creating opportunities for economic growth, will diminish the political space in which Boko Haram operates.”

From everything I’ve read, Boko Haram is just like so many other Muslim groups that have vowed to cleanse their lands of Christians and Jews. In reality, they are not any different than Hamas or al-Qaeda.

What concerns me about Carson’s comments is that it sounds like he wants the U.S. to start pouring millions of dollars into northern Nigeria to ease their financial strain in hopes that Boko Haram will stop murdering Christians. This is a typical Democratic response to any problem – throw money at it and hope it fixes the problem, which it never does.

Amen to that!

At least we know that in his own roundabout way, Barack Hussein Obama is protecting his kindred spirits, the Boko Haram, which I suppose proves a kind of loyalty… just not to anyone we’d assume a U.S. president might be loyal to.

This “problem” will obviously not go away by itself.

NAIROBI, Kenya - Islamic terrorist gunmen killed two policemen guarding a church, snatched their rifles and then opened fire on the congregation with bullets and grenades on Sunday, killing at least 10 people and wounding at least 40, security officials said.

Terrorists from Somalia were immediately suspected.

Police commander Philip Ndolo said the bloodiest attack was on the African Inland Church in Garissa, a town some 195 kilometers (120 miles) west of the Somali border.

Attackers threw two grenades inside the church, only one of which exploded, Ndolo said. But as the congregation stampeded out of the church, gunmen opened fire, doing significantly more damage. Ten people died and about 37 were wounded at the church, Ndolo said.

Another security official, though, said that two attackers walked up to the two policemen guarding the church, shot them at point-blank range and took their rifles. The gunmen then opened fire on the church and threw the grenades. The official spoke only on condition he wasn’t identified because he is not allowed to speak to media.

The police were guarding the church because of the perilous security situation near the border with Somalia and because Somalia’s Islamist militants have made Christian churches a common target.

While Seth and Wolf have long held that the “only way to deal with these folks is the Root & Branch approach”, I have been a little more moderate as I know many Muslims, immigrants from Islamic countries, here in New York who are peaceful and peace loving and who seem as distressed at all the violence tht goes on in the name of their religion as the test of us are.

However, when so much grief is pouring unendingly out of one essential community in a nonstop, mindless manner for so long, we truly need to draw some sort of a line.

The political correctness our liberals peddle and the interference running B.S. that jihadi protective and apologist organizations like CAIR shovel out are simply not cutting it, these mad dogs within the world community of Islam are still coming out of the proverbial woodwork, still murdering, destroying…causing mayhem.

Meanwhile, they are protected to large extent by fellow Muslims who do so without consideration for the Infidels and their families who fall victim to terrorism.

Thanks, of course, to the above Muslims, you have to wonder where the collective heart of Islam lies… I mean, either they’re for or against, I do not believe there is room here for any middle ground, and the “peaceful” ones must prove themselves on the side of human decency by not only denouncing these terrorists, but by helping in any way to bring them down (cooperating with authorities, etc) rather than simply giving lip service to how bad terrorism is.

The concept of survival of (or the good of) the community is not new, and that concept should govern the actions of both our and other governments, and the Muslims who purport to oppose terrorism, as they should oppose fundamentalist Islam’s irritating “convert to our beliefs or die!” method of “sharing”.

Save the political correctness for liberals to discuss at their pot and Kool-Aid Bar-B-Cues… The rest of us want to live, watch our children succeed and bear us granchildren, each of us free to worship as we believe and walk the streets without fearing, however remotely, the possibility that an explosion or bursts of randomly aimed weapons fire might ring down the curtain prematurely…

Hard Astarboard is a pro-Israel blog.

We view the Jewish State as a staunch ally and friend of the United States, and the only real free country/democracy in the Middle East. We view those entities such as European countries, third world cesspools and the U.N. who support Palestinian terrorism to be lower than dirt, and yes, we do not for a second believe that countries like France or orgs like the U.N., or Barack Obama and his pastor Rev. Wright, for that matter are and among others are, despite any protestations to the contrary, spineless scumbags who endorse anything, no matter how abominable, that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the rest of those cowardly murderers of women and children do to the Israelis.

That said, what happened a few days ago aboard the Mavi Marmara, the circumstances surrounding the events and the subsequent “outrage” directed toward Israel have all been typical in that once again, Israel’s actions of self defense have been translated as acts of monstrous aggression against innocent “victims”.

Right.

A couple of videos of what actually transpired are here and here.

These so-called “peace” activists attempting to run the Gaza naval blockade under the transparent guise of ferrying in humanitarian supplies, actually came equipped with bats and other blunt instruments to use in assaulting Israeli military personnel when they boarded the ship, Mavi Maramara, to inspect her cargo, and assault them they did.

The Israelis acted in pure self defense and with great restraint and there people on both sides were tossed in the hurt locker, some terminally so, and as is forever the case the corrupt, left wing world smelly body known as the United Nations and the rest of the usual suspects made victims of the aggressors.

Protests were held throughout the Middle East and Europe on Monday in reaction to Israel’s commando raid on a Turkish ship ferrying supplies to Palestinians that left at least nine people dead.

Israel defended the raid and posted video on the Internet showing Israeli soldiers during the raid being attacked with metal pipes and knives by the Turkish ship’s crew.

The incident prompted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel a planned visit to Washington for a meeting with President Obama set for Tuesday.

In New York, the U.N. Security Council, prompted by Arab governments, convened a special session to discuss the incident, which took place in international waters near Gaza. The Palestinians and Arabs, backed by a number of council members including Turkey, also called for Israel to lift the blockade on Gaza, immediately release the ships and humanitarian activists, and allow them to deliver their goods.

Assistant Secretary-General Oscar Fernandez-Taranco said in his briefing to the U.N.’s most powerful body that the early-morning bloodshed would have been avoided “if repeated calls on Israel to end the counterproductive and unacceptable blockade of Gaza had been heeded.”

The White House issued a statement saying it regretted the loss of life. “The president also expressed the importance of learning all the facts and circumstances around this morning’s tragic events as soon as possible,” it said.

At the State Department, spokesman P.J. Crowley, said, “We are working to ascertain the facts, and expect that the Israeli government will conduct a full and credible investigation.”

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak telephoned Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and National Security Adviser James L. Jones to explain the raid. In a statement from Mr. Barak’s office, the minister said the raid was within maritime law. “The passengers on the Marmara beat our soldiers with every object they had and wounded some of them,” the statement quoted Mr. Barak as saying. “The soldiers defended themselves.”

Not, of course, that that makes any difference, and being of one mind with their fellow leftists in the U.S. Justice Department, such as Attorney General Eric Holder who condemned the recently passed Arizona anti-illegal immigration bill without first reading the ten page document, the U.N. Security Council was quick to condemn Israel without first investigating the chain of events involved in the flotilla incident.

From CNS News:

The rapid condemnation of Israel by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), made without a full knowledge of the facts, makes the international body look “ridiculous,” says a leading Middle East expert.

“It makes the United Nations look ridiculous when it comes to solving world problems,” Michael Rubin, a Middle East scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, told CNSNews.com. “After all, the United Nations reacted much more swiftly and with much more fervor to this than they did with regard to the North Korean sinking of the South Korean boat, which could precipitate a war that could kill millions.”

The U.N. is ridiculous when it comes to anything it does, in a tragic sort of way.

The UNSC statement, issued May 31, “condemns” Israel’s actions in boarding a fleet carrying pro-Hamas activists, an operation in which activists aboard one of the vessels attacked Israeli sailors who had boarded the boat. Ten of the so-called activists were killed when the Israeli sailors returned fire in what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called self-defense.

However, the UNSC condemnation repeatedly admits that the Security Council has no “independent information” and no idea as to the actual chain of events.

According to the statement, U.N. Assistant Secretary General for Political Affairs Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, who briefed the Security Council on the incident, nonetheless “[made] clear the United Nations has no ‘independent information on what transpired.’”

Fernandez-Taranco also told the council that “it is not possible to state definitively the sequence or details of what happened.”

Nevertheless, the council condemned Israel, citing the loss of civilian life and saying, “The Council, in this context, condemns those acts which resulted in the loss of at least 10 civilians and many wounded, and expresses its condolences to their families.”

The UNSC condemnation does not offer condolences or express its regret for the six Israeli sailors who were injured after being attacked by activists with knives, stun grenades, and guns.

…does not offer condolences or express its regret for the six Israeli sailors who were injured after being attacked by activists with knives, stun grenades, and guns.

Why would they do that, when it is their unwritten policy to support anti-Israeli terrorism and anything that supports the terrorists?

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu…

…hotly rejected calls to lift a blockade on Hamas-ruled Gaza on Wednesday, insisting the ban prevents missile attacks on Israel and labeling worldwide criticism of his navy’s bloody raid on a pro-Palestinian flotilla as “hypocrisy.”

“This was not the ‘Love Boat,’” Netanyahu said in an address to the nation, referring to the vessel boarded by commandos, setting off clashes that led to the deaths of nine activists. “It was a hate boat.”

Shortly after his address, planes carrying hundreds of activists detained after the raid on the six-boat flotilla started leaving for Turkey and Greece. Turkey has been pressuring Israel to release the detainees, most of whom are Turkish. Also on the planes were the bodies of the nine dead.

While Israeli officials spent most of the day trying to contain the flood of diplomatic condemnation of the raid, Netanyahu was anything but conciliatory in his first nationally broadcast comments since Monday’s military action.

“Israel is facing an attack of international hypocrisy,” he said, asserting that the Jewish state is the victim of an Iran-backed campaign to arm the Hamas rulers of Gaza with missiles that could hit Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Netanyahu said the aim of the flotilla was to break the blockade, not to bring aid to Gaza. If the blockade ended, he warned, hundreds of ships would bring in thousands of missiles from Iran, to be aimed at Israel and beyond.

The result, he said, would be an Iranian port on the Mediterranean. “The same countries that are criticizing us today should know that they would be targeted tomorrow,” Netanyahu said.

Which sums things up nicely, I would say.

Thank GOd Netaniahu won the last election. Had the bribe taking, far left Ehud Olmert or his equally treasonous minion, Tzippi Livni still been in charge over there, they’d probably (assuming, of course, that there would even have been a blockade for the international criminals to run) have smooched U.N. and Palestinian butt and ceded all of Jerusalem to the Arabs to “make amends”.

Here, Lawrence J. Haas weighs in with Surprise! Violence erupts, Israel condemned.

And from Wesley Pruden, a favorite columnist of Hard Astarboard’s, in its entirety:

When the going gets tough, the not-so-tough call in the cliches. The world’s “leaders” are shocked! — shocked! — when Israel defends itself. Actually, they’re about as “shocked” as Claude Raines, the police inspector in “Casablanca,” who was shocked to learn that gambling was going on in the casino at Rick’s Cafe.

Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations who rarely sees third-world evil, shocking or otherwise, says he was “shocked” by the Israeli navy’s stopping a convoy attempting to break through the blockade of Islamist terrorists in Gaza. The governments of Sweden, Greece and Jordan were so “shocked” they recalled their ambassadors to Israel to get the inside dope to fuel further “shock.” Tony Blair, who is some sort of “peacemaker”-at-large in the Middle East, was “shocked,” too. If he is, it’s only because he hasn’t been in the Middle East long enough to unpack his Gladstone. France was not just a little bit “shocked,” but “profoundly shocked.” There was so much “shock” in the air that the mourning became electric.

The convoy of six ships not only carried thousands of tons of supplies, but hundreds of “activists” and when the smoke cleared nine or so “activists” — the count varied through the day — had been rendered “inactivists,” and capable of no further mischief. The European Union demanded an official inquiry, so profound was its “shock.” The United Nations went into emergency session to recover from “shock.”

The usual suspects went riding off in several directions even before they could mount their horses, but an investigation, official or otherwise, is not really necessary. Verdict now, facts later. The Associated Press, which once took pride in its reporting but is awash now in activists and pundits, set out the early story line: “Dozens of activists and six Israeli soldiers were wounded in the bloody predawn confrontation in international waters. The violent takeover dealt yet another blow to Israel’s international image, already tarnished by war crimes accusations in Gaza and its 3-year-old blockade of the impoverished Palestinian territory.”

The account of the Israeli commandos tells a different story. The Mava Marmara, the lead ship in the flotilla, was told to change course and not land in Gaza. When it ignored the warning Israeli marines and commandos boarded the ship, some by rope ladders from helicopters. A fierce fight erupted on deck and only after taking severe casualties and fearing for their lives the commandos, armed only with pistols and paint ball rifles because they were expecting genuine peace activists and not trained street fighters, fired back, trying to aim first at the feet of the “peace activists.”

Israel is at war, fighting for its very existence, surrounded by hostile Islamic regimes, some more hostile than others. Not all the hostile regimes approve, or so they say, of the Islamist campaign of extinction of Israel by attrition (until Iran gets a working nuclear bomb). None of these hostile regimes, so in love with peace, will do anything to persuade or compel the Palestinians to give up the dream of destroying Israel in a second Holocaust. This is the reality in the Middle East and the cowering milklegs in Washington, London, Paris and the other capitals of the West know it. Who could be shocked when the Israelis do what they must do to survive?

The facts on ground and sea are, as usual, ignored in the bang and clang of rioting in the streets and the din of diplomatic argle-bargle, with the media peddling the usual story: The flotilla of “peace” ships was only intended to relieve the suffering of women, children and maybe even an occasional cute kitten or adorable puppy. But the “activist” account is bunk.

Adequate supplies of food, medicine and other necessary goods are regularly delivered to Palestinians in Gaza — and by the Israelis. The government in Jerusalem invited reporters to the Kerem Shalom crossing to see, and photograph, the convoys of trucks delivering these goods to Gaza. The Israelis even offered to transfer the goods from the flotilla as soon as the ships could be unloaded and inspected. The sponsor of the flotilla, the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation, is regarded by Israel as a radical Islamist organization, part of a global fund-raising operation of Hamas. If the Israelis allow such flotillas to deliver supplies to Gaza, other ships will follow, not with rice and beans but with explosives, rifles and long-range Iranian Fajr-5 missiles.

But the attack of the “peace” ships was intended for a larger and more important purpose — to undermine Israeli determination to continue the struggle against the radical Muslims who are determined to kill Jews. The Israelis are determined there won’t be a second Holocaust. This shouldn’t shock anyone who’s been paying attention.

******UPDATE******

This article, of the aftermath and some background on Hamas and Gaza by Steven Emerson is a must read.

Nope.

Congress is apparently being overlooked as well where our supposedly transparent Administration is concerned.

A top lawmaker on the House intelligence committee said Sunday the Obama administration is withholding information about the botched Times Square bombing from Congress, continuing a pattern in which Capitol Hill isn’t getting the information it needs to conduct oversight.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the panel’s ranking Republican, said he agrees with the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate intelligence committee, who last week sent a letter to the White House accusing the administration of putting national security in jeopardy by failing to keep lawmakers apprised of the probe into suspect Faisal Shahzad.

“Having to fight over access to counterterrorism information is not productive and ultimately makes us less secure,” wrote Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein and Vice Chairman Christopher S. Bond in a letter to President Obama on Thursday, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.

If I’m not mistaken, that’s against the law, isn’t it? I mean, isn’t Congress supposed to be apprised of such things, what with the U.S. not being a dictatorship?

Mr. Hoekstra said the lack of information prevents Congress from evaluating whether the government is adequately prepared to thwart future attacks.

“One of these days there will be an attack, it will be successful, and then people will want to know what was done and why weren’t things done to stop it, and it will all be on the heads of this administration because they ran it and they didn’t involve Congress in the process,” he said. “On the most recent terrorist attacks they’ve given us no opportunity, no invitation to work with them, to enhance or modify our intelligence tools … and that we did everything we could to try to get them to work and be more open about it.”

In the letter, the senators say U.S. intelligence agencies repeatedly refused to provide relevant information on the Times Square case that would allow the committee to conduct oversight without hampering the ongoing investigation. Senate intelligence staffers were told that the Department of Justice had instructed the agencies not to convey information on the Times Square plot without its approval, they said.

However:

The White House wouldn’t comment on the charges…

What’s new?

…but a spokesman for the Justice Department said the department reached out to Congress “shortly after” the May 1 incident, providing information by phone and e-mail beginning on May 3.

Spokesman Dean Boyd said officials from the FBI, Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center provided a classified briefing to members of the House intelligence panel on May 6 and briefed their Senate counterparts on May 11. He also said the Justice Department did not tell intelligence officials not to cooperate with lawmakers.

“The Justice Department did not order anyone in the intelligence community to withhold information from the Senate intelligence committee in connection with the attempted bombing,” Mr. Boyd said. “In fact, when the Justice Department was notified by certain intelligence agencies that they were planning to make calls to the House and Senate intelligence committees, the Justice Department encouraged those agencies to do so.”

A spokeswoman for Rep. Silvestre Reyes, head of the House intelligence panel, said the Texas Democrat — the only one of his counterparts not to sign — was generally “pleased at the detailed level and the timeliness of the briefing, given we were briefed less than 72 hours after Shahzad’s arrest.”

Reyes, a combat vet, was a career mover and shaker on the U.S. Border Patrol, but he is also one of today’s Democrats, who haven’t exactly distinguished themselves of late in the “protect and defend the Constitution” arena.

“So,” we ask, “what’s the story?”

But, Mr. Hoekstra countered:

Ah! A “but”!

“It’s a joke when the administration says ‘well, Justice, they’re fully cooperating and they’re telling everybody else to cooperate’ but then they put handcuffs on them about what they can tell and actually share with us.”

Dissatisfaction with the administration on oversight matters goes beyond the intelligence panels. Last month, Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins, the top members of the Senate panel on homeland security, issued the administration its first congressional subpoenas over the Fort Hood shootings in Texas. Mr. Hoekstra argued that that case has documents — such as Maj. Nadal Malik Hasan’s e-mails — that the administration could share with lawmakers without jeopardizing the investigation.

“They’ve got enough information to convict Hasan and probably send him to jail for the rest of his life; he killed 13 Americans in front of what, 100 people,” Mr. Hoekstra said.

Barack Hussein Obama is not very “talkative” for the nucleus of a “transparent administration”, now, is he?

The only transparent things about his presidency are the “czars” he appointed ‘way back in every sector so that he’s got people on the scene who can go around Congress and deal directly with him and his moving the results of the U.S. Census into the white house so he and his cabal of convict material can manipulate demographic information to suit their political agendas.

“Don’t turn around, uh oh uh oh, der kommissar’s in town, uh oh uh oh…”

…at blaming ‘radical Islam’ for terror attempts

Of course he does!

Despite crediting the Pakistani Taliban with fostering the recent failed car bombing in Times Square, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. was reluctant Thursday to say radical Islam was part of the cause of that and other recent attacks.

Mr. Holder, testifying to the House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly balked at a half-dozen questions from Rep. Lamar Smith, the ranking Republican on the committee, about whether “radical Islam” was behind the attempted car bombing, last year’s so-called “underpants bomber” or the killings at Fort Hood in Texas.

“There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious,” Mr. Holder told the committee Thursday, though he would not go further than saying people who hold radical views may have “had an ability to have an impact” on Faisal Shahzad, the man the Justice Department says tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square.

There are a variety of reasons why people do these things

may have “had an ability to have an impact”…

Oh, yeah, this is the guy who declared that the Arizona illegal immigration law is so dastardly that he needs to take action against it, then admitted he hadn’t read the law.

What a friggin’ clown! I take pride in high ranking U.S. officials who address their respective offices in a mature, honest and informed manner. This jamoke is comic relief.

Of course, some of that is just his way of towing the Obama line.

The exchange comes as President Obama and Republicans spar over whether the administration is taking a tough-enough approach to the war on terrorism. Critics want the president to hone his criticism, while he and his advisers have sought to avoid painting the conflict as a battle against a religious belief or its adherents.

The long and the short of it seems to be that everybody except the administration of B.Hussein Obama knows we are presently at war, as defenders, with Islamofacism, under constant threat of attack by Muslims, who started it and continue to strive to demoralize the citizens and governments of western nations in order to bring about change — change to the slavery of Islam and Sharia Law, but the Obamanation POV is that there is no danger to us from anyone even remotely connected with the Religion of Peace ©.

No, in all the terrorist attacks from the bombing of the Khobar Towers to 9/11 to the most recent Times Square mutt it was mere coincidence that everyone involved was Islamic and claimed their motives were related to their being Muslims.

The exchange comes as President Obama and Republicans spar over whether the administration is taking a tough-enough approach to the war on terrorism. Critics want the president to hone his criticism, while he and his advisers have sought to avoid painting the conflict as a battle against a religious belief or its adherents.

So let me understand this, now… we are not fighting radical Islam, we are at war with “the nameless enemy”.

Sure.

…ala Barack Hussein Obama.

This is what the Obama Administration considers Homeland Security.

A Department of Homeland Security official told a Senate panel on Wednesday that the Christmas Day bomber, who was allowed to board a U.S.-bound plane from Amsterdam, probably would have raised a red flag at the airport when he arrived in the United States.

“In the Abdulmutallab case, had he arrived in Detroit, it is possible we would have–it is likely that we would have noted the derogatory information, gone to the secretary and perhaps made a recommendation to the State Department to refuse the visa,” David Heyman, an assistant DHS secretary, told the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

…probably would have raised a red flag at the airport when he arrived in the United States.

Lovely, and if Abdulmutallab had known that, he wouldn’t have attempted to set off his bomb until after the plane had landed in Detroit and everyone had debarked.

“In the aftermath of the Abdulmutallab case, there was some confusion over which agency considered itself ultimately responsible for revoking a visa on terrorism grounds,” Collins said. “I remember the National Counter-Terrorism Center director testifying before us and expressing his bafflement at some of the comments that were made by the State Department personnel.”

Collins quoted a State Department spokesman — shortly after the Christmas Day bombing attempt – as saying, “It would be up to the National Counter-Terrorism Center to make the determination whether to revoke a person’s visa or take other action.” And Collins noted that when the spokesperson was later asked why the State Department did not revoke Abdulmutallab’s visa, the spokesperson said, “Because it’s not our responsibility.”

“Because it’s not our responsibility.”

“Ees not my yob, hombre.”

Hokay…

“The idea was to ensure that security considerations were given the weight they deserve. Eight years later, I’m sorry to say it seems clear this program has not been a priority for either department,” Lieberman said.