Krauthammer on Obama on terrorists
Krauthammer gets it, Obama doesn’t:
Obama reassured the nation that this [Knickerbomber] “suspect” had been charged. Reassurance? The president should be saying: We have captured an enemy combatant — an illegal combatant under the laws of war: no uniform, direct attack on civilians — and now to prevent future attacks, he is being interrogated regarding information he may have about al-Qaeda in Yemen.
Instead, Abdulmutallab is dispatched to some Detroit-area jail and immediately lawyered up. At which point — surprise! — he stops talking.
This absurdity renders hollow Obama’s declaration that “we will not rest until we find all who were involved.” Once we’ve given Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, we have gratuitously forfeited our right to find out from him precisely who else was involved, namely those who trained, instructed, armed and sent him.
But, the Left says, what about Bush’s treatment of Richard Reid, the somewhat-analogous shoe bomber, who was tried and convicted in civilian courts for his attempted airline attack? I wrote about some of the differences between the two cases here: by then, Bush had already proven his seriousness about fighting terrorism through his behavior during the crucible of 9/11, the subsequent anthrax scare, and the Afgan war, all of which had occurred very recently and which completely dwarfed anything Reid had done.
But here’s another point: the prison at Guantanamo for illegal enemy combatants had not yet been set up when Richard Reid was taken into custody. Reid acted on December 21, 2001, but the first prisoners in the war on terror only came to Guantanamo (with a great deal of fanfare, and a great deal of media disapproval even at the outset) on January 11, 2002, to be housed in the temporary wire cages that featured so prominently in articles of the time. How could Reid have been sent to a place that didn’t yet exist, and tried under a system that had not yet been set up?
I suppose he could have been transferred there later, ex-post-facto. But no doubt that would have set up a host of legal appeals from his attorneys in the civilian court system under whose jurisdiction he already was at the time, and it probably would not have seemed worth the risk and trouble. Remember, again, it was only a few short months after the trifecta of 9/11, the anthrax scare, and the Afghanistan war. Reid seemed like small potatoes then, but only in comparison.
And not only had the alternative military legal system at Guantanamo not yet been set up and operating, but in addition, the vast majority of Americans were aware that our more muscular and serious response to terrorists was still being developed by the Bush administration. In stark contrast, by the time the Knickerbomber tried to bring down a Northwest Airlines plane over Detroit on Christmas Day, 2009, we expect a great deal more from our government. A great deal of time has passed. It has been almost a decade that we’ve been inconvenienced much more than ever before while traveling, and we would like something to show for it.
But instead we have a president who has trouble uttering the word “terrorists,” and who took many months to decide to listen to his own general’s request and send some of the troops he’d asked for into an Afghan war that Obama himself had hyped mightily during his own campaign. This same president has been relentless in criticizing the Guantanamo prison for illegal enemy combatants, and the system of military justice there that most Americans perceive as having helped kept us safe during the Bush administration. Despite this, Obama hasn’t been able to think of a better one, at least not in most people’s eyes.
In addition, as part of Obama’s war against the Guantanamo prison and the system of military justice for terrorists, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, is the official front man for the administration’s dreadful and dangerous decision to try the 9/11 terrorist (and Daniel Pearl beheader) Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in our civilian criminal justice system. Holder showed a remarkable combination of ignorance, incompetence, stupidity, and/or mendacity in public Senate questioning that many Americans were able to view on You Tube.
In short, Obama has not proven his mettle in fighting Islamicist terrorists. Americans are very uneasy; many are very angry. And rightly so.
Charles the Great nails it, as always.
Now, at the risk of being critisized for insensitivity towards other cultures, here’s my suggestion: Take the punk to an interrogation by intelligence operatives. Wet his nasal membranes until he divulges everything. March him, forthwith, to a Military Tribunal. Find Guilty. Pass Sentence. Hang or Shoot. Bury or Burn & Scatter.
Baa-Daa-Bing. Like dat.
Disgustingly, the Obama White House reacted politically: taking action to attempt to favorably compare themselves to the GWB White House. American Spectator:
I remember, either in Spring or Summer 2009, hearing Karl Rove commenting about Axelrod’s presence in national security briefings. Rove asked: What is a POLITICAL DIRECTOR doing in a national security meeting?
gcotharn: Hmm…sounds like the Shoe Bomber talking point in defense of Obama’s inept handling of the Christmas Bomber came straight from the White House.
In any event, I’m sure tired of all the “What about Bush?” responses to criticisms of Obama.
Ever since he took office I notice that his supporters usually defend Obama on the basis of his high poll numbers (though not since the summer when his polls began tanking), blaming Bush, or ad hominems against the critics, but rarely on the merits of Obama himself.
Obama supporters can turn on a dime- I thought everything Bush did was horrible? How can it be cited as an example of good policy? It’s almost as if their only arguments are ad hominem (“Hypocrisy!”)
“… Reid seemed like small potatoes then…”
Only by pure luck, imagine if he had been successful… It’s one of the problems, and not a highly complex one at that, with the Democrats that should be personal for every American; unfortunately most still don’t think any further than their self-limited exposure to the MSM; or the recent Obamahellcare legislation wouldn’t have been railroaded through. Some people have learned a lot, but human civilization on this planet isn’t generally anymore sophisticated than 1933…
gcotharn cited this:
“… ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns – if any – from the Bush Administration.”
Does that mean there might be a new cabinet department in the future?
The Department of Scapegoating?
The Department of Reverse Responsibilty?
The Department of Patsies, Pawns and Finks ?
I can see their latin motto now:
Tu Quoque & Ad Hominem…Ad Nauseum
Several times recently the behavior and reactions of the Obamites simply leave me speechless and searching–in vain–for descriptives.
Frontpage has a good interview with VDH. I especially liked the message he says we should be sending to potential jihadis.
http://frontpagemag.com/2009/12/31/obama%E2%80%99s-tortured-rendezvous-with-reality-by-jamie-glazov/
We’re going to try Harry Reid in civil court? O-KAY!!
Oops. Sorry. Never mind.
More seriously.
Your reference to Bush’s previous credibility is an important point. History will give a clearer verdict whether W made a right or wrong choice there. But there was no sense that he was making the choice to try Reid in civil courts as a purely political choice.
I do not have that confidence with Obama. Results might vindicate the choice and it all work out just find. But I can’t shake the impression that the politics are the dominant part of all Obama’s decisions. He doesn’t have enough credibility in the bank to draw on.
“Tu Quoque & Ad Hominem…Ad Nauseum”
LOL
Ass Vill Id:
Similar to GWB’s forthrightness re national security: GWB actually tried to keep his campaign promises. In this area, as compared with most politicians, GWB was golden. I think GWB’s unusual (for a politician) forthrightness – in both national security and in keeping campaign promises – was part of what lulled the nation into believing Barack would also be forthright. The nation either forgot – during the GWB years – that the promises of most politicians are worthless, and that national security needs can easily (Clinton) take a back seat to political necessity; or, as with my son, who voted for the first time, some young voters have never learned what the promises of most politicians are worth. GWB was unusually trustworthy. Ironically, that lulled the nation’s voters to sleep.
Obama Friends Ayers, Dohrn, and Evans Join Up on Behalf of Hamas
They’ve all been in Egypt agitating on behalf of Hamas terrorists:
Top President Barack Obama funder Jodie Evans and her terrorist sympathizing group Code Pink have provoked a violent crisis in Egypt over an attempt to deliver “humanitarian aid” to Hamas-run Gaza to mark the one-year anniversary of Israel’s response to repeated provocations by Hamas terrorists. Evans was joined in Cairo by Obama pals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorhn, both former terrorists with the Weather Underground.