The last two weeks were the deciding ones for Barack Obama.
He seemed irrevocably to be a close shot to clinching the World Cup for wrongheaded decisions, and a frontrunner to being known as the worst president in U. S. history. It started with the malfeasance connected with the Fort Hood terrorist outbreak and continuing with the plan to try Ground Zero Terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and the four other planners of 9/11 in a federal civilian court in New York.
In Manhattan, their pro-bono liberal lawyers can use the trial as a bullhorn to cause us to disperse our military secrets and propagandize for Islam to the applause of The New York Times and Katie Couric who will celebrate it as ratification of our system “under law.” In reality, Attorney General Eric Holder and Barack Obama have given the terrorists a show trial to dramatize their case and demonize George W. Bush—which is a major reason it was rigged this way.
There have been a small number of incompetents and paranoids in the White House, especially in the last few decades: JFK bamboozled by Khrushchev, the megalomaniac LBJ seeking to buy off the poor and ingratiate himself in the process, then wimping out on Vietnam. And Richard Nixon, who after a brilliant overture to China which split the Sino-Soviet bloc, becoming a hapless Captain Queeg-like wretch who got entangled in a 3rd rate burglary and who spent his last presidential hours tearfully saying goodbye to the portraits on the White House wall.
But how has Obama thus far exceeded all the others to take the lead for possession of the World Cup?
Let’s look at what he’s done thus far. Start out with the fact that the first requirement is patriotism or love of country.
We have good reason to suspect that for him patriotism to America is non-existent. He has said publicly…in defiance to all other presidents… that America is no longer exceptional. Beyond that it was reasonable to hope that the one quality that we would hope were in this Mystery Man who is our president is wise counsel: the gift that assists the mind and perfects the virtue of prudence by enlightening its possessor to make reasonable decisions i.e. concern for the safety of the people of the United States. The spiritual under-girding of his predecessors has always been Judeo-Christianity: but the Mystery Man has declared that in his estimation we are no longer a Christian nation—and his implacable hostility to Israel certain excludes the Judeo part. What happens to his supposed—and expected—wise counsel to make reasonable decisions guided by prudence? It’s not visible. If it exists, it’s likely of a Third Indonesian species.
In summary: He is totally unconcerned with the well-being and safety of this country. If the Fort Hood story isn’t all that’s needed to entitle him to be condemned for misfeasance of duty, his decision to bring the terrorists right in our backyard in Manhattan for trial is malfeasance.
The Fort Hood Massacre.
The second is determination to protect the safety of the United States.
Which brings us to Fort Hood.
At roughly 1:30 p.m. on November 5 Army Major, physician and psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, exploded in a rampage at Fort Hood and shot his military colleagues indiscriminately, murdering 14, counting an unborn baby and wounding more than 40. Since then we have learned some significant things. We know that as he murdered, he shouted the Islamic phrase “Allahu Akbar!” [God is Great]. We know he justified suicide bombings, writing favorably about them on the Internet—equating those who strap themselves with bombs and enter a crowded supermarket to self-detonate to those soldiers who have thrown themselves on live grenades to save their buddies. We know he defended the rhetoric of jihad to his colleagues. We know he warned direly of bad things to happen to the U. S. if Muslims were not permitted to leave the military. We know he tried to convert some of his psychiatric patients to Islam (capitalizing on the emotional weaknesses of his patients, converting them to his prey). He distributed business cards that failed to mention his military connection but identified himself as “SOA,” soldier of Allah.
We know that in a lecture at Walter Reed in June, 2007 he declared the Koran is filled with peaceful verses by saying “It’s getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims.” We know that Hasan described the gradual evolution in the Koran and Islamic thinking—ranging from at first sanctioning total pacificism, then following Muhammad’s emigration to Medina “self defense was allowed” and finally “offensive fighting was allowed” and the earlier peaceful verses no longer apply. We know that in his lecture Hasan cited this from the Koran “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His messenger have prohibited nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.” [Italics mine].
We know he sided continually in arguments with jihadists over the United States. We know that he sent emails to Anwar al Awiiaki, an al Qaeda enthusiast who had strong ties to three 9/11 hijackers. We know about the emails because the FBI intercepted them. We know that members of the FBI-led Joint Terrorism task force only dabbled with Hasan’s case sketchily and dismissed it, saying it didn’t warrant an investigation. We know that in his own psychiatric exam at Walter Reed, his comments led officials to worry that “if Hasan deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak secret military information to Islamic extremists.” Finally we know that some of his Walter Reed colleagues wondered whether Hasan “might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who in 2003 killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kabul.”
What was Obama’s reaction to the terrorist attack on Fort Hood? On November 10—five days after the attack—he told the media that the cause of the terrorism outbreak is, and may continue to be, a “mystery.” “It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy.” Twisted logic? But the FBI hastened to agree, saying “The investigation to date has not identified a motive [sic] and a number of possibilities remain under consideration” including—get this—“anti-Muslim bias.” The anti-Muslim bias came to him from us, or any non-Muslims—therefore we may well all be guilty—the typical liberal mantra. But then Obama said he would direct a bureaucrat named John Brennan to re-study the original information on Hasan. How comforting.
Then came the FBI’s statement that it would “continue” the probe of Maj. Hassan. Too late, boys, you muffed it. Followed by the appearance of the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. George Casey, Jr. on CNN’s “State of the Union.” If you can imagine a chief of staff saying a dumber thing, please let me know. This is what he said: “The army hasn’t missed anything” in its follow-through on the matriculation of Major Hasan: nothing. Then: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.”
This shows that the man who learned nothing as commander in Iraq and who opposed the Surge that won the war because “it will suck out all the army’s flexibility” for which he was replaced and mistakenly kicked upstairs by Bush be chief of staff, still is obtuse and a prisoner of political correctness. First: his definition of the event as “a tragedy.” A “tragedy” when Casey’s army ignored the evidence that Hasan is a terrorist and leveled gunfire on Casey’s troops yelling “Allahu Akbar”? And weeding out potential Islamic terrorists would possibly threaten military “diversity”—a 1960’s concept—which would be worse than the lives it would have saved at Fort Hood?
The answer should be…from any president other than Barack Obama…from the worst ones you can imagine: all the way back to and including Franklin Pierce (who drank himself into insensibility every night), Millard Fillmore and James Buchanan (who refused to see slavery as a moral and political question)…to instantly fire both Casey and the director of the FBI, Robert Mueller. You’ll get only vague meandering statements from Obama. Vague statements are his trademark: he who earlier said victory in Afghanistan is not an option. Reason: As a man of no absolutes beyond saving his own political neck, he mysteriously glides along dropping an occasional nihilistic Muslim sentiment. This waffling is not just here but on all other things involving U. S. security. He’s been dithering for three months and through eight meetings with the Joint Chiefs over whether to follow Gen. David Petraeus’ recommendation for reinforcements in Afghanistan and now has called for “different options.” Dithering while American troops are dying.
But his irresolution on Fort Hood is not alone. A week later his attorney general announced a decision that has ramifications for wholesale endangerment of America—and which can once more send jihadists back to New York to add a bloody Round Two which could endanger all our lives.
Trying Terrorists in the U. S. in Federal Court.
Waiting until Obama was conveniently out of the country in Japan (where he bowed so low in deference to the Japanese Emperor and his wife that he almost fell on his head), Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. announced that the government will prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the 9/11 attacks and four other terrorists for “murder” for which the government will demand the death penalty – again “for murder,” no different than ordinary law-breakers --in a Manhattan federal courtroom, a locale historically reserved for common murderers, rather than trying them as they truly are: combatants who waged war on this country and killed more than 3,000 in the first phase of that war. Thus Holder…as slippery a weasel as has held the job… has ordered them to stand before the bar of justice embodied by this nation’s values they so thoroughly detest—rather than in a court of military justice, tried as the war criminals they are.
The decision is, from the standpoint of public safety, the worst one ever made by a sitting president.
It has serious ramifications for the safety of this country which both men have sworn to uphold. Obama and Holder prattle about “the rule of law.” It doesn’t hold water. These terrorists are not simple murderers or burglars: they’re mass-murderers enlisted in a war to defeat this country. We are in effect giving them exactly what they want: give them the same constitutional rights as American citizens, allow them to put on a show-trial, giving them a forum to talk about how they wage jihad, encouraging others to wage jihad. Moreover as they will be tried in a civilian court with rights conferred on all Americans, the terrorists have the right to present their evidence of being water-boarded so as to advocate the means of another attack—and they can make New York city the object of another attack.
George Washington put the first military court in place. In our time, special military tribunals were created by the Military Commissions Act of 2006, passed with bipartisan congressional approval after the Supreme Court under the Hamdan decision required the president and congress to approve a detailed plan to prosecute the illegal “enemy combatants” captured since 9/11. Nor are military tribunals something strange to U. S. legal procedure. The eight Nazis who stealthily entered the U. S. in June, 1942 (including, ironically, a Chicagoan, graduate of Schurz high school) were tried by a military court since they were combatants and hanged within two months. That’s when we had a decisive, patriotic president in charge—albeit a liberal one whom I’ve criticized severely in the past: Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The risks for this country: (1). A grave threat of another jihad for Manhattan and this country as the court hosts a show trial…a priceless opportunity for jihadists to skulk into this country and bomb again as a bloody Phase 2 of 9/11. Another terrorist outbreak will be on Obama’s head but for him it is inconsequential: His leftist ideology must be served. (2). A threat of wholesale disclosure of military secrets as lefty lawyers aided by the ACLU and a battalion of liberal lawyers from the wackadoodle blue chip firm Sherman & Sterling seek to make their names and fortunes with the Left by tangling with the government—opening the door to challenging all evidence obtained “by torture” which is in synch with what Obama believes anyhow. If you think these dangers are only theoretical, consider the other endangerments this president has opened the door for our populace to sweat out. On his first day in office without the slightest bit of preparation he called for the dismantling of the prison at Guantanamo.
(3). The laughable statement made of certainty by Holder that the terrorists will be convicted. Oh? How does he know? Has he fixed the jury? And what happens if they are not—and freed to walk the streets and to plot again with America becoming the laughing stock of the entire world?
Guantanamo Out: Illinois In?
Two days after he was inaugurated, Obama announced that he would keep a campaign promise by closing Guantanamo Bay prison as a holding place for suspected terrorists. No matter that the feds had spent $100 million to update the place and equip it with a modern courtroom. Politics came first. All during the campaign he had been running up and down the country inveighing against the “injustice” of the camp, decrying that those held there were being deprived of their liberties under the 3rd Geneva Convention. No recognition of the fact that the Geneva Convention pertains to uniformed combatants, not terrorists who skulk into nations without uniforms.
Last week news erupted here that Illinois may become the next Gitmo. A huge, near-empty prison in rural Illinois 150 miles west of Chicago near the small Mississippi river town of Thomson is slated at this point to become The Place. Gov. Pat Quinn, a loyal member of the Democratic Squid who is up for election is ecstatic because the Washington, D. C. Squid has bought him off. In 2001 the state completed construction of the $145 million maximum-security prison designed to house the most dangerous inmates—but a state budget crisis due to overspending has left the place practically unused for the past eight years. It holds 1,600 cells yet is housing only 144 prisoners. What’s good for Quinn and the tiny town of Thomson is that the federal bureau of prisons will buy the place and run it as a federal institution—which means boom times for the town’s businesses.
So everybody in Thomson, Illinois (population: 559) is happy, expecting with the expansion of the prison they will get jobs. There are already 335 terrorists incarcerated at the Marion, Ill. federal prison—but those who would be imprisoned at Thomson are likely to be tried in Chicago: which opens Chicago…as well as New York… to prospects of jihad and terrorist attack.
The First “President of the Pacific”?
Devoid of any interest or knowledge in the 233 previous years of U. S. history, Obama the Great Narcissist promulgated the statement while in the Far East that he is the “first president of the Pacific,” relating that as a child his mother took his to Japan (although all he can remember was its ice cream.” Interesting, isn’t it? William McKinley’s venture through Secretary of State John Hay to initiate the “Open Door” policy which started nations trading with China meant nothing. Theodore Roosevelt’s negotiated peace peace treaty between Russia and Japan meant nothing. Richard Nixon’s disruption of the Sino-Soviet axis of Communism which developed a split in their otherwise solid relationship in the Cold War means nothing.
In summary: this was one helluva week: helping terrorists assume all the rights of U. S. citizens, enabling them to make their cases in U. S. civilian courts and jeopardizing public safety in two major U.S. cities in the process.
No comments:
Post a Comment