I am sure you all recall the video played ad nauseum starring the Reverend Wright railing against America defending itself. It now seems to accurately describe the results of the new hope and change administration. After his worldwide apology tour, and banning the term “War on Terror,” replacing it with the limp “Overseas Contingency Operation,” so that, like his presidential campaign, no one would know what he actually meant or stood for, his own chickens are coming home to roost.
Actions Have Consequences
The left used to attack the Bush administration’s approach because being tough on terrorists only served to aid them in their recruiting. Maybe so, but I am less concerned about lines of recruits in Afghanistan than crazed terrorists in New York. Obama’s apology tour shows his weakness and as the terrorist mindset abhors weakness, it encourages attacks. So what would you prefer, attacks on American soil, or an uptick in recruiting on the other side of the world?
War vs. Law and Order
Bush recognized the War on Terror for what it was, a direct attack on the United States and our way of life. In a war, you go after the enemy, you don’t wait for him to come to you. You take prisoners and hold them, until the conflict is over. You dismantle their ability to wage war. It is aggressive and proactive. It is the way America has prevailed in wartime.
The Obama approach is Law an Order. Each act is seen as separate an isolated and as a crime to be investigated and prosecuted after the fact. First responders are more important than the first wave of Marines. To quote today’s Wall Street Journal:
Brian Jenkins, who studies terrorism for the Rand Corporation, says there were more terror incidents (12), including thwarted plots, on U.S. soil in 2009 than in any year since 2001. The jihadists don’t seem to like Americans any better because we’re closing down Guantanamo.
But the Obama Administration is currently considering releasing prisoners held in Guantanamo to Yemen. How long do you think it will be before they are back on the front lines trying to kill us?
Add to the mix the Obama administration’s, or should I say Eric Holder’s, decision to try the 9/11 terrorists in a civilian court. Holder’s testimony before Congress justifying his decision was painful to watch how he had no credible justification. Don’t forget to give Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, his Miranda rights and get him a good lawyer. Let’s pretend his claims to be associated with al Qaeda is just tough talk and braggadocio.
The reality is that whenever America fought a war and politicians pulled punches (e.g., Viet Nam) we lost.
Things are Working Swell
Janet Napolitano, Obama’s head of Homeland Security had this to say, according to the New York Times
“The system has worked really very, very smoothly over the course of the past several days,” Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security secretary said, in an interview on “This Week” on ABC. Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, used nearly the same language on “Face the Nation” on CBS, saying that “in many ways, this system has worked.”
How chilling is that? What exactly does she mean by the system worked? She refers to the number of organizations that were alerted after the fact. How about notifications before the fact? How about listening to the terrorist’s own father who reported him to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria. How about denying him a visa? Or is Napolitano too busy adding funeral homes to her list of organizations to notify after the fact?
Where’s Obama?
If there’s a chance Chicago might get the Olympics, don’t worry, Obama’s on a plane to give it the old presidential push! If there’s a Nobel Prize to pick up, Obama is your man! If there is a terrorist attack on our country, hey, don’t bother me I’m on vacation in Hawaii.
Some pundits on the news pointed out that President Bush didn’t speak out against the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, for several days, so cut Obama some slack. The problem is that no one doubted for a minute that Bush was engaged in the War on Terror, some even saying he was obsessed. Well that obsession kept us safe for seven years. In less than one year we have had Fort Hood and now this airline bombing.
Furthermore, why is Eric Holder making such a monumental decision regarding trying the 9/11 terrorists in New York? Why isn’t this Obama’s decision? Just like so much in this administration, Obama campaigns and gives speeches, and Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Eric Holder make policy decisions on their own.
Here’s to the Heroes
The heroes in this case were a Dutch citizen and the flight attendants, who subdued the terrorist and extinguished the fire. To quote again from the Wall Street Journal:
The lesson here is the same as Flight 93 on 9/11 and shoe-bomber Richard Reid, which is that civilians willing to act in their own self-defense are a crucial part of “homeland security.”
May I suggest that the statists drop their efforts to weaken the 2ndAmendment? As part of “homeland security” we may need to bear arms like at no time since the Civil War.
