A Spy ‘Outing’ Game For Real

So, where are all the libs who were rallying around Valerie Plame a few years ago? They were all screaming about how horrible it was that Plame got “outed” as a CIA agent.

For some reason, all those same libs are now silent (I would say shamefully silent) about John Adams Project defense lawyers for the terrorists who will truly “out” current CIA operatives and expose their families as well. Whereas Valerie Plame showed how much her privacy had been violated by posing for the cover of Vanity Fair, a nationally circulated magazine, the current outings will put agents and their families in danger of reprisals from the terrorists themselves.

(I wonder if Barack Obama realizes this and if so, does he even care? He seems to care more about the terrorists than he does about American lives.)

Writing for the Washington Times, John Armor has the following:

First, the Plame Affair. According to the mainstream media, that was about the “outing” of a CIA “covert operative” in violation of federal law. But that law applies only to people who had been a covert operative “within five years.” The only person who identified her as a CIA covert operative within five years of her service was her husband, who let the cat out of the bag in a Who’s Who entry. Mrs. Plame was not outed by anyone, per the law.

That’s right. Even Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald admitted that there was no violation of Federal law in the Plame case. But, he overstepped his bounds when he went after Scooter Libby on what were obviously trumped-up charges.

Read on:

However, the fraud of the Plame blame game does not detract from the real purpose of the CIA-protective law. It’s designed to protect covert CIA agents from being killed by enemies who would do so in a heartbeat if they knew who these agents are. That brings us to the current situation. The defense counsel for certain Guantanamo Bay detainees is receiving help from the John Adams Project, a combined effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. According to numerous accounts, these defense lawyers have John Adams Project researchers taking photos of CIA covert operatives. And these lawyers have already shown these photos to their clients in Guantanamo Bay and are now seeking the legal right to release the photos to the public.

If the Plame affair were so infuriating to the libs, then they should be surrounding the Justice Department right now demanding that these photos never get released. Because, unlike the Plame situation in which Valerie was never in any danger, the agents that will be outed by this investigation will most certainly be in danger as will their families.

Clearly, The ACLU couldn’t care less about the safety of these people! If anyone from the ACLU wishes to refute this, please feel free to leave a response.

Armor goes on to say:

More likely these photos were taken in the home communities of these agents, placing not only them, but their families and neighbors in the cross hairs of murderers. And that is precisely why the law that never actually applied in the Plame Affair, does apply today. It may be that just showing the photos of the CIA agents to their clients turns the assistants who photographed them and the lawyers who passed them on, into criminals themselves. Beyond that, there is the matter of what happens if these photos are offered as evidence in a trial.

The choice here is clear. If you support protecting innocent Americans, you will be against letting the ACLU out these agents. If you support the terrorists, you will agree with putting these agents and their families at risk by releasing these photos.

I will always go with protecting Americans. It’s clear that the ACLU and other libs want the opposite.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

A Spy ‘Outing’ Game For Real
John Armor
Washington Times
August 26, 2009

Obama Administration To Give Terrorists More Fodder For Propaganda

Yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder decided to move forward with prosecutions against CIA interrogators who protected American lives by extracting information from terrorists. Apparently, Obama doesn’t think it was right for those CIA interrogators to get that information.

So, Eric Holder has appointed John Durham, a Justice Department prosecutor, to go after those interrogators and bring them to trial.

From CBS News:

Holder has appointed John Durham, a Justice Department prosecutor, to determine whether or not any laws were broken during the interrogations.

First, let us remember the Valerie Plame affair in which Plame (a CIA analyst who was not in a covert status at the time) was allegedly “outed” by someone in the Bush Administration. The libs and Dems went crazy screaming about how Plame and her husband were having their privacy violated, even as they both posed for the cover of Vanity Fair magazine.

Now, this investigation will most certainly “out” several CIA agents who are not only covert, but will now have their families exposed as well. That is a treasure trove of information for a terrorist to have. While some CIA interrogators may have threatened to kill a terrorist’s children, terrorists actually go out and kill innocent children.

So, to all you liberal Dems, why is it okay to “out” these interrogators and expose their families to terrorist reprisals but you came to the defense of Valerie Plame who wasn’t even in a covert status? I don’t think any amount of hypocritical reasoning will ever be able to justify that.

But even more far reaching is how the terrorists are going to use this as propaganda against us and stir-up even more anti-American sentiment in order to bring more fanatical recruits to their cause of killing as many innocent Americans as possible.

And here is something interesting:

President Obama has said that he does not want to prosecute the former Bush administration officials who created the interrogation policies. But Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, has added that the Attorney General’s investigation into the legality of the interrogations is independent of the administration.

Didn’t Obama say that we should look forward and not back? Apparently, Holder didn’t get that memo. And given Gibbs’ response to the whole thing, it looks as though Obama doesn’t have any idea of what is going on over at Justice or how that department is forcing him to break one of his own pledges. Or Obama is pushing for these prosecutions while trying to keep his hands clean at the same time. I think this last possibility is most likely.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Bush Admin. Official Criticizes CIA Probe
Dana Chivvis
CBS News
August 25, 2009

Holy War In Virginia: Islamic School Wants To Expand

Right in our backyard in Fairfax County. A Saudi-owned Islamic school is trying to expand its campus and a group of local residents are trying to stop it.

From Fox News:

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing Monday night to consider a proposal to expand the campus of the Islamic Saudi Academy, a Saudi-owned college preparatory school. Critics of the plan point to former students of the school who have been convicted in a plot to assassinate former President Bush, and more recently, arrested for trying to board an airplane with a seven-inch kitchen knife.

That is the end result of Wahabbism: young terrorists. And this is a Wahabbi school.

Don’t forget to brush up on terrorist training camps right here in America.

But, there are other issues here as well:

“We’re opposed to the operation of the Islamic Saudi Academy because it teaches and practices Shariah law,” said James Lafferty, chairman of the Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST). … Lafferty said his organization is a coalition with roughly 10 other groups that oppose the land-use expansion. By teaching Shariah law, Lafferty says, the school replaces the U.S. Constitution with a “very backward and barbaric” rule of law. “Shariah law advocates rights via gender and religion,” Lafferty told FOXNews.com. “They allocate rights by gender and religion. If you are a male who is Islamic, you have rights. If you’re not, you have no rights.”

That alone is reason enough for this school to lose any accreditation at the very least.

But, I wonder how the government would respond if this were a Catholic School, or a Protestant Christian Academy, or a Jewish School. Would there even have been a debate? Or would the government simply have told the school “No” and be done with it?

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Coalition Fights Expansion Of Islamic Saudi Academy In Virginia
Joshua Rhett Miller
Fox News
July 13, 2009

Former Gitmo Inmates Returning To Terrorism; Obama Administration Supresses Report

Here is something that every American should be aware of when it comes to the issue of releasing terrorists back in the world. A report describing how these former detainees are going back to militant and radical terrorist groups was supposed to be released back on February 2, 2009. It has not yet been released and according to the New York Times, Obama administration officials were the ones behind keeping the report under wraps:

The Pentagon promised in January that the latest report would be released soon, but Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said this week that the findings were still “under review.” Two administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said the report was being held up by Defense Department employees fearful of upsetting the White House, at a time when even Congressional Democrats have begun to show misgivings over Mr. Obama’s plan to close Guantánamo.

And writing for the Weekly Standard, Thomas Joscelyn has this:

But the contents of the report deal with a hotly contested issue–one that is being debated throughout the media and is not going away any time soon. Therefore, the public has a right to know the facts and evidence accumulated by the DOD regardless of the implications for the Obama administration. This is especially true because the Pentagon had previously released a similar report on June 13, 2008. The report we’ve been expecting since earlier this year, and which only the New York Times now has a copy, is merely an update of that June 2008 report, which is freely available online. There is no good reason the updated report, as well as further updates, cannot be released in a similar fashion. Indeed, the differences between the June 2008 report and its successors are especially troubling. Perhaps those differences explain why an updated version of the June 2008 report would be especially problematic for the Obama administration as it attempts to close Gitmo. The June 13, 2008, report noted that 37 former detainees were “confirmed or suspected” of returning to terrorism. On January 13, 2009, seven months later, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said that number had climbed to 61. Now, according to the Times, the DOD has found that same metric has risen further to 74–exactly double the Pentagon’s estimate just 11 months ago. … Critics point out that even with 74 recidivists the total number of former detainees who have returned to terrorism is “only” 14 percent of the 534 total detainees who have been released from Guantanamo. But this ignores the fact, as explained above, that the recidivism rate is continuously increasing.

And what would be the main reason for this recidivism rate increase? Simple. Terrorists no longer fear what the American government will do to them if captured. No, this didn’t start with the Obama administration.

Democrats had been working to undermine the anti-terrorism efforts of the Bush administration long before Obama got elected. Those efforts are now paying off for the terrorists who see a Democrat-controlled U.S. government that is weak on terrorists, but hard on those who would protect us from terrorists.

Not only have the Democrats been undermining those would who protect us from terrorists, but they are also undermining our security by pretending that such terrorists are not that big of a threat to us. Hence, the supressed report.

Any Democrats reading this blog can feel free to defend their party by commenting on this post.

You can access the original Weekly Standard article on-line here:

See No Evil
Thomas Joscelyn
The Weekly Standard
May 20, 2009

And you can access the original New York Times article on-line here:

Later Terror Link Cited for 1 in 7 Freed Detainees
Elizabeth Bumiller
New York Times
May 20, 2009

A Letter From The American Legion To Homeland Security

David K. Rehbein, National Commander of the American Legion is firing back at DHS for the slander against America’s Military Veterans:

Secretary Janet Napolitano Department of Homeland Security U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 April 13, 2009 Dear Secretary Napolitano, On behalf of the 2.6 million-member American Legion, I am stating my concern about your April 7 report, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence and Recruitment.” First, I want to assure you that The American Legion has long shared your concern about white supremacist and anti-government groups. In 1923, when the Ku Klux Klan still yielded unspeakable influence in this country, The American Legion passed Resolution 407. It resolved, in part, “…we consider any individual, group of individuals or organizations, which creates, or fosters racial, religious or class strife among our people, or which takes into their own hands the enforcement of law, determination of guilt, or infliction of punishment, to be un-American, a menace to our liberties, and destructive to our fundamental law…” The best that I can say about your recent report is that it is incomplete. The report states, without any statistical evidence, “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.” The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation’s uniform during wartime. To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical “disgruntled military veteran” is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam. Your report states that “Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages.” Secretary Napolitano, this is more than a perception to those who have lost their job. Would you categorize union members as “Right Wing extremists”? In spite of this incomplete, and, I fear, politically-biased report, The American Legion and the Department of Homeland Security share many common and crucial interests, such as the Citizen Corps and disaster preparedness. Since you are a graduate of New Mexico Girls State, I trust that you are very familiar with The American Legion. I would be happy to meet with you at a time of mutual convenience to discuss issues such as border security and the war on terrorism. I think it is important for all of us to remember that Americans are not the enemy. The terrorists are. Sincerely, David K. Rehbein National Commander The American Legion

Love the reference to Osama Bin Laden as a reality check.

Looking Deeper Into The Pirate Attack On MAERSK ALABAMA

In my post from yesterday, I wondered whether or not the Somali pirate attack on the U.S.-flagged MAERSK ALABAMA may have been a result of the pirates being emboldened by Obama’s various shows of weakness during his European tour.

Other are thinking exactly what I was thinking. An editorial from Investor’s Business Daily notes some interesting circumstances that we must not be dismissive of and what the consequences of any action by the Obama administration would be.

From the article:

At 7:30 a.m., 280 miles off the Somali coast, a gang of pirates attacked the U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama carrying 17,000 tons of U.S. humanitarian aid to Kenya. It was the sixth ship hit since Saturday, but the first U.S.-flagged vessel hit since 1804. … It poses an important test for the new Obama administration, still not 100 days in power, and it’s critical the response be decisive. First, it’s likely the pirates knew it was an American ship, given the planning and firepower it takes to hit one 280 miles off the coast. If that’s so, then the attack had a political aspect, and the pirates wanted to show the U.S. as weak. Two, the pirates aren’t the only bad actors in that region. Terrorists will watch the U.S. response closely and adjust their calculations accordingly. Unlike the foreign affairs jaunts Obama has participated in, involving only talk, this incident will be judged by the concreteness of the response.

I know that somewhere along the line Obama said that he “had no patience” for those who blow up bombs for political ends, but those are simply words. I highly doubt that if Obama comes out and says that he “has no patience” with Somali pirates that the pirates will suddenly release their hostages and free all of the ships they captured.

Words do not deter criminals and terrorists. Effectively forceful responses do. Say what you want about President Bush, but you have to acknowledge the fact that there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001. If the terrorists still hated us afterward, what stopped them from mounting anymore attacks? The effective use of force by the Bush administration, that’s what.

Obama’s response is one we must watch carefully. And here is why:

Precedent is worth noting. In 1993, with Bill Clinton’s presidency just beginning, Somali hoodlums also attacked and murdered American troops delivering aid to the indigent. They dragged the troops’ bodies through the streets and crowds cheered. Instead of making the barbarians pay, Clinton ordered American troops out. This alerted the region’s terrorists that Americans were easy to push around. One of these terrorists was Osama bin Laden. According to the 9/11 commission report, a bin Laden fatwa in 1996 praised the Somali attack because the U.S. “left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you.” The report goes on to say that bin Laden was behind the attacks on the American helicopters. Lawrence Wright, in “The Looming Tower,” noted that whether he was or not, he thought it important to claim credit.

Despite the fact that this pirate attack is ultimately a failure, it is a failure because of the fortitude and resourcefulness of the crew, not because of anything the Obama administration did. As of this writing, they still haven’t done anything in response. Pirates and terrorists around the world are not looking at the crew of MAERSK ALABAMA as a measure of risk for future attacks; they are looking at how the U.S. government will respond as their measure of risk.

IBD is right. This is the first real test of the resolve and mettle of the Obama administration. If Obama fails this test, it will be a major repeat of the first major international mistake of the Clinton administration.

And we all know exactly where that mistake led to.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Somali Pirates Lay Out Another Test
Investor’s Business Daily
April 8, 2009

Obama Makes Plans To Release Terrorists Into The United States

Back on March 11th, I posted the following blog entry:

Gitmo Prisoners Defend ‘Blessed’ 9/11 Attack
84rules
March 11, 2009

I recieved a few responses to that post, none of which I could publish because of the use of profanity or because the responders made illogical and irrational arguments without providing any evidence to back them up.

But one responder wrote: “This isn’t ****ing true. You ***hole Conservatives only make this **it up to promote Rush Limbaugh. There are no plans to release any of these people!” You can see why I refused to publish that response.

But, I like to reference back to these stories when new stories crop up that are directly related.

The most recent such story is that the Obama Administration wants to release several terrorists being held at Gitmo directly into the United States. That’s right. They are to be released right here on American soil.

From AFP:

President Barack Obama’s intelligence chief confirmed Thursday that some Guantanamo inmates may be released on US soil and receive assistance to return to society. “If we are to release them in the United States, we need some sort of assistance for them to start a new life,” said National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair at his first press conference.

Now, who among us believes that any terrorists released from Gitmo onto U.S. soil would not immediately turn around and start planning attacks against American citizens right here within our own borders?

Apparently, we have a president who is naive and ignorant enough to believe it.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Terror Inmates May Be Released In US: Intel Chief
AFP via Breitbart
March 26, 3009

Obama’s Afghan Folly: Talks With The Taliban?

History will look back on these times and identify the key events that shaped the world. One of those events will be the recent announcement by Barack Obama that he intends to talk to the Taliban. Yes, the same Taliban that helped to plan and carry out the September 11, 2001 attacks that killed 2,996 innocent poeple.

Obama made the announcement in an interview with the New York Times this past weekend and already the experts are coming out and saying how foolish such a policy is.

From Reuters:

Obama, in an interview with the New York Times newspaper published on its website on Saturday, expressed an openness to adapting tactics in Afghanistan that had been used in Iraq to reach out to moderate elements there. … “Obama’s comment resemble a dream more than reality,” said Waheed Mozhdah, an analyst who has written a book on the Taliban. “Where are the so-called moderate Taliban? Who are the moderate Taliban?” asked Mozhdah, who was an official in both the Taliban and the Karzai governments. … “‘Moderate Taliban’ is like ‘moderate killer’. Is there such a thing?”, asked writer and analyst Qaseem Akhgar.

Apparently, the reality of extremists like the Taliban are completely lost on Obama and his cronies.

Here is a recap of what the Taliban did to the people of Afghanistan:

The Afghan people have been the primary victims of Taliban misrule, since the Taliban came to power in 1996. The Taliban militia was formed in 1994, in response to human rights abuses by other warring factions in Afghanistan. By 1996, the Taliban had captured Kabul, and, with claims to religious as well as political authority, began a reign of terror. The Taliban have made the Afghan people the unwilling hosts of foreign armed terrorists, who have exploited and endangered the Afghan people, and made Afghanistan a pariah in the world community. This fact sheet outlines documented atrocities and human rights abuses committed by the Taliban against the Afghan people. Massacres The Taliban have massacred hundreds of Afghan civilians, including women and children, in Yakaolang, Mazar-I-Sharif, Bamiyan, Qezelabad, and other towns. Many of the victims of these massacres were targeted because of their ethnic or religious identity. Massacre at Yakaolang: January 2001 Taliban forces committed a massacre in Yakaolang in January 2001. The victims were primarily Hazaras. The massacre began on January 8, 2001, and continued for four days. The Taliban detained about 300 civilian adult males, including staff members of local humanitarian organizations. The men were herded to assembly points, and then shot by firing squad in public view. According to Human Rights Watch, about 170 men are confirmed to have been killed. According to Amnesty International, eyewitnesses reported the deliberate killing of dozens of civilians hiding in a mosque: Taliban soldiers fired rockets into a mosque where some 73 women, children and elderly men had taken shelter. Massacre at Robatak Pass: May 2000 The May 2000 massacre took place near the Robatak pass. 31 bodies were found at one site, of these, 26 were positively identified as civilians. The victims were Hazara Shi’as. Massacre in Bamiyan: 1999 When the Taliban recaptured Bamiyan in 1999, there were reports that Taliban forces carried out summary executions upon entering the city. According to Amnesty International, hundreds of men, and some instances women and children, were separated from their families, taken away, and killed. Human Rights Watch reports that besides executing civilians, the Taliban burned homes and used detainees for forced labor. Massacre in the Shomaili Plains: July 1999 Human Rights Watch reports that a Taliban offensive here was marked by summary executions, the abduction and disappearance of women, the burning of homes, destruction of property, and the cutting down of fruit trees. According to a report by the U.N. Secretary General on November 16, 1999, “The Taliban forces, who allegedly carried out these acts, essentially treated the civilian population with hostility and made no distinction between combatants and non-combatants.” Massacre in Mazar-I-Sharif: August 1998 In August 1998, the Taliban captured Mazar-I-Sharif. There were reports that between 2,000 and 5,000 men, women and children — mostly ethnic Hazara civilians — were massacred by the Taliban after the takeover of Mazar-I-Sharif. During the massacre, the Taliban forces carried out a systematic search for male members for the ethnic Hazara, Tajik, and Uzbek communities in the city. Human Rights Watch estimates that scores, perhaps hundreds, of Hazara men and boys were summarily executed. There were also reports that women and girls were raped and abducted during the Taliban takeover of the city. Massacre in Mazar-I-Sharif: September 1997 Retreating Taliban forces summarily executed Hazara villagers near Mazar-I-Sharif, after having failed to capture the city. Amnesty International reported that the Taliban massacred 70 Hazara civilians, including children, in Qezelabad, near Mazar-I-Sharif. There were also reports that the Taliban forces in Faryab province killed some 600 civilians in late 1997. Other Massacres: On at least two occasions, according to Human Rights Watch, the Taliban killed delegations of Hazara elders who had attempted to intercede with them. Human Rights Abuses Against Women and Girls Taliban rule has been particularly harsh for Afghan women and girls. Taliban restrictions against women and girls are widespread, institutionally sanctioned, and systematic in Taliban-controlled areas of Afghanistan. — Girls are formally prohibited from attending school. — Women are prohibited, with very few exceptions, from working outside the home, and are forbidden to leave their homes except in the company of a male relative. These restrictions are devastating for the thousands of Afghan war widows, who have reportedly been reduced to selling their possessions or begging to feed their families. — The Taliban have significantly reduced women’s access to health care, by decreeing that women can only be treated by women doctors. — The Taliban threaten and beat women to enforce the Taliban’s dress code for women. The Taliban and the Humanitarian Situation The humanitarian situation in Afghanistan is grim. Twenty years of internal armed conflict, and four years of devastating drought have contributed to this situation, but the Taliban have made an already grave situation much worse, holding the Afghan people hostage to their political agenda. — The Taliban do not share the hardships they have imposed on the Afghan people, and they have done nothing to alleviate these hardships. — The Taliban have not only failed to provide security, food, and shelter for the Afghan people, but they have disrupted the efforts of international relief agencies to deliver desperately needed food and medical supplies to the Afghan people. — The Taliban have harassed international and Afghan aid workers. — On October 16, the Taliban seized control of two UN warehouses, containing more than half the World Food Program’s wheat supply for Afghanistan. The UN Security Council on October 16 demanded that the Taliban should cease obstructing aid destined for the Afghan people. The Taliban and Islam The Taliban have imposed their own interpretation of Islam on the Afghan people. — Taliban interpretations of Islam are not widely shared in the Muslim world. — Taliban words and actions misrepresent Islam. — The Taliban have used Islam as a cloak to practice ethnic cleansing in Afghanistan. — Warning against “converting our countries into another Afghanistan,” Saudi writer Turki Al Hamad, writing in As-Sharq Al Awsat, put it this way:”…[under the Taliban], Islam would be relegated from a world religion with a global human and civilized mission to a Taliban-like dogma that bans pigeon breeding, long hair, kite flying, and listening to music…. That, at a time when the rest of the world is de-coding the genome, experimenting with cloning, inventing information chips, exploring outer space and tackling the wonders of laser beams and infra-red radiation. If we want to have an impact on today’s world, the only way to do so is by interacting with it.” Destruction of Afghan Culture The Taliban have perverted Afghan customs, tradition, and religious practice for their own narrow political interests. — The Taliban and their foreign armed militant “guests” have set about destroying traditional Afghan culture. — They have prohibited all forms of music, and even traditional recreation, such as kite flying. — They have looted and destroyed the historical and cultural patrimony of the Afghan people — the Kabul Museum, formerly one of the finest museums in the region, is largely empty; the centuries-old Buddhist statues in Bamiyan have been reduced to rubble. — They have deprived the people of Afghanistan both their history, and their future. Documenting Taliban Abuses — Several non-government organizations maintain web sites documenting Taliban abuses. — The web site of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (www.rawa.fancymarketing.net) maintains a gallery of still photos and video clips documenting massacres, beatings, and executions by the Taliban. The documentary photos and videos were clandestinely made by Afghan women to provide evidence of Taliban atrocities. One video clip on this site documents the public execution of an Afghan mother of seven. — Several human rights organizations maintain web sites documenting human rights abuses by the Taliban and other factions in the Afghan conflict. Human Rights Watch (www.hrw.org) and Amnesty International (www.amnesty.org) provide extensive documentation of these abuses.

Exactly how delusional is Barack Obama if he actually believes that such extremists can be rationally negotiated with?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama’s Call On Moderate Taliban Useless – Analysts
Sayed Salahuddin
Reuters
March 9, 2009

Not By Word But By Action: Obama Declares The Terrorists Have Won

No, you didn’t misread the headline. Barack Obama has effectively given the terrorists what they wanted: rest, respite and a chance to regroup. Obama has ordered that all anti-terrorism policies, the same policies that kept the United States safe from attack for the past seven years, be halted.

I have no doubt that terrorists all over the world are rejoicing at the opportunity Obama is giving them to rearm and plan new attacks without any hindrances on them.

Writing for the Washington Post, Dana Priest has this to say:

President Obama yesterday eliminated the most controversial tools employed by his predecessor against terrorism suspects. With the stroke of his pen, he effectively declared an end to the “war on terror,” as President George W. Bush had defined it, signaling to the world that the reach of the U.S. government in battling its enemies will not be limitless. … Key components of the secret structure developed under Bush are being swept away: The military’s Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, facility, where the rights of habeas corpus and due process had been denied detainees, will close, and the CIA is now prohibited from maintaining its own overseas prisons. And in a broad swipe at the Bush administration’s lawyers, Obama nullified every legal order and opinion on interrogations issued by any lawyer in the executive branch after Sept. 11, 2001.

And the interesting thing about those interrogations was that Congressional leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid knew about them back in 2002 but never said a word. They waited until it was politically profitable for them to speak out which means they didn’t really care about the methods used, they only cared about how to grab more political power as a result of them.

More:

As the CIA recruited young case officers, polygraphers and medical personnel to work on interrogation teams, the agency’s leaders asked its allies in Thailand and Eastern Europe to set up secret prisons where people such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh could be held in isolation and subjected to extreme sleep and sensory deprivation, waterboarding and sexual humiliation. These tactics are not permitted under military rules or the Geneva Conventions.

Neither is killing innocent civilians in the pursuit of the fanatical religious cause of Islam. That is why they are called terrorists. They are not covered under the Geneva Convention. Anyone care to guess why Dana Priest and the Washington Post deliberately misled their readers like that?

Obama has seriously deluded himself and his followers into thinking that the terrorists are going to be swayed by the relaxing of our security measures. Islamic thinking says that when one shows weakness, one should be attacked even more rigorously. Obama should know this having attended a Muslim school when he was a teenager. The weakness he is showing the terrorists will come back to haunt us, even moreso than September 11, 2001.

We, the people, should be ready to hold Obama accountable when that terrible day comes.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Bush’s ‘War On Terror’ Comes To A Sudden End
Dana Priest
Washington Post
January 23, 2009

And read about what happens when terrorists are freed. This show’s why Obama and his followers are completely delusional about ending the anti-terroism policies. The terrorists are not going to stop trying to attack us just because we start being nice to them:

Ex-Gitmo Detainee Joins Al-Qaida In Yemen
TownHall.com
January 23, 2009

A Heart-Warming Story To Begin The Holidays: Outnumbered Almost 10 To 1, Marines Make Terrorists Pay Dearly

Here is a story that you will not read in the uber-liberal Washington Post or New York Times. You will also not see it broadcast on NBC, ABC, CBS or CNN as all of these news outlets have made it clear that they will never report on the good news or the victories we are seeing in the War on Terror. These news outlets have also made it clear that they will only report on that which will embolden the enemy.

Thus, it falls to bloggers like me to make sure that stories like this get out to the public and the truth about how we have been winning the War On Terror becomes known.

In the city of Shewan, Afghanistan, 30 United States Marines went up against 250 terrorists and sent the terrorists packing minus a good number who were killed in the battle. No Marines were lost.

From Military.com, Marine Corps News:

Shewan had been a thorn in the side of Task Force 2d Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force Afghanistan throughout the Marines’ deployment here in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, because it controls an important supply route into the Bala Baluk district. Opening the route was key to continuing combat operations in the area. “The day started out with a 10-kilometer patrol with elements mounted and dismounted, so by the time we got to Shewan, we were pretty beat,” said a designated marksman who requested to remain unidentified. “Our vehicles came under a barrage of enemy RPGs (rocket propelled grenades) and machine gun fire. One of our ‘humvees’ was disabled from RPG fire, and the Marines inside dismounted and laid down suppression fire so they could evacuate a Marine who was knocked unconscious from the blast.” The vicious attack that left the humvee destroyed and several of the Marines pinned down in the kill zone sparked an intense eight-hour battle as the platoon desperately fought to recover their comrades. After recovering the Marines trapped in the kill zone, another platoon sergeant personally led numerous attacks on enemy fortified positions while the platoon fought house to house and trench to trench in order to clear through the enemy ambush site. “The biggest thing to take from that day is what Marines can accomplish when they’re given the opportunity to fight,” the sniper said. “A small group of Marines met a numerically superior force and embarrassed them in their own backyard. The insurgents told the townspeople that they were stronger than the Americans, and that day we showed them they were wrong.”

And here is how it all turned out:

After calling for close-air support, the small group of Marines pushed forward and broke the enemies’ spirit as many of them dropped their weapons and fled the battlefield. At the end of the battle, the Marines had reduced an enemy stronghold, killed more than 50 insurgents and wounded several more.

Now, why wouldn’t the major news networks report this story? Because it makes America look good and makes us proud of our troops in the field.

All I can say is: “OOH-RAH! GET SOME!”

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Marines Make Insurgents Pay The Price
Cpl. James M. Mercure
Marine Corps News via Military.com
November 18, 2008