Criminal Activity or Terrorism

L. Gordon Crovitz' article in today's Wall Street Journal points out the fallacy of treating suspects in the war on Terror the same way we would treat potential terrorists. The Obama administration has taken us back to the pre-911 days of the Clinton administration, and is making it easier, not harder, for those who hate our country to plot and conduct their murderous mayhem.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Smarter Security, not More Money

The Heritage Foundation published an article this morning regarding how our bloated Federal bureaucracy is responding to the recent foiled terror attack. Read the article; here's a tidbit from it:

"The Flight 253 attack was the 28th foiled terror plot against the United States since 9/11. What is notable is that of the 28 failed plots, 26 were stopped by intelligence, military, and law enforcement agencies. Only two were stopped by citizens on the scene - Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in 2009, and Richard Reid in 2001. In both these cases, America just got lucky - the plots were clumsy and the passengers and crew responded bravely and quickly. There are many valuable lessons to be learned from the failed Christmas attack on a Detroit-bound airliner; throwing more money at airline security is not one of them."

"What Were You Thinking?"

Protesters or Terrorists? Update #2

In 2006, Hillary Clinton said the following:  "I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration." 

 

But to listen to some of the Lefty Liberals today, you would think that Democrat politicians like Hillary Rodman Clinton are the only ones allowed to disagree with a sitting administration.  Au contraire, mon frere!  As long as BHO is conducting the business of the United States in a manner inconsistent with the principles laid down by the founding fathers, thinking people everywhere will continue to express their disagreement.  They will continue to carry the debate forward, trusting that as an increasingly bloated government bureaucracy intrudes even further into their lives, even those now supporting the Lefties will come to their senses.

 

"Ignorance" can be remedied by education, but "Stupidity" is the most expensive commodity in the country today.  "Willful Ignorance" is the most egregious component of Stupidity, and unfortunately seems to be a state of bliss for those who helped elect BHO..

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Protesters or Terrorists? Update

Fox News interviewed Steven Robertson, Director of the National Legislative Commission at the American Legion, and got his opinion of the report issued by the Department of Homeland Security.

 

Then this morning, the Fox News team interviewed Janet Napolitano, who is in Mexico with the President for talks about the border.  She was asked about the DHS report.  After a lot of stammering and stuttering, she gets pushed to admit she had not even read it, but said she was briefed (although she wouldn't admit to having "signed off") on the report.

 

Steven Robertson interview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FixBaPxUFs

Janet Napolitano interview:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78wulwAB5b0

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Protesters or Terrorists?

Does anyone else remember Hillary Clinton's speech when she railed against those who thought her criticism of George Bush was a bit "over the top"?  I know it was on YouTube, but a persistent search failed to find it this morning.  Hillary's speech came to mind yesterday as I read about the current administration's take on political dissent.  Apparently Obama doesn't feel the same way about those who would criticize him.

 

The Department of Homeland Security put out an Assessment document (dated 7 April 2009) titled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgance in Radicalization and Recruitment.  If you try to find the document on the DHS web site you will be directed to a press release (dated April 15, 2009) by Director Janet Napolitano about the document, but probably not the document itself.  We can, however, thank WorldNet Daily for publishing the entire PDF document -- http://wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf -- which should be read by anyone who values liberty and would like to see it remain for our grandchildren.

 

Roger Hedgecock reported on the DHS assessment Monday and Michelle Malkin did so the next day. Michelle also provides the document for your inspection.  Ed Morrissey provides more commentary, building on what Roger and Michelle reported.  Let me just add this:  I saw an interview this morning with Napolitano, who is in Mexico today with the current occupant of the Oval Office, and heard her use the word "terrorist" in the same sentence with the term "military veterans."  I sincerely hope that I misunderstood what she believes about those of us who have honorably served our country in uniform.

 

We reported here on 23 March that the current administration had chosen not to use the term "Terrorism" for the actions of those Islamo-fascists who pose a violent threat to the security of our country, instead choosing to call it "Man-Caused Disasters."  It is extremely discouraging that the Director of the Department of Homeland Security would now think it acceptable to use the term "terrorist" for members of our own honorable military services.

 

Intelligence Assessment Document, dated 7 April 2009 -- http://wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf

Napolitano Statement dated April 15, 2009 "clarifying" -- http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1239817562001.shtm

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

'Man-Caused Disasters' New Term for Terrorism

Newsmax editor Ronald Kessler calls Obama's administration on the carpet today.  read the first few paragraphs from his interesting article below, then click the link to read the entire thing.  Then ask yourself, how does using more touchy-feely language change the essence of the threat?

    The new term for terrorism being used by President Obama's secretary of Homeland Security would be comical if it were not so scary.

    Instead of referring to threats from terrorists, Janet Napolitano is referring in her speeches to 'man-caused disasters.' In an interview, a reporter for Germany's Spiegel Online asked Napolitano whether her avoidance of the term terrorism means that "Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose[es] a threat to your country?"

    "Of course it does," Napolitano replied. "I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word 'terrorism,' I referred to 'man-caused' disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur."

    By this logic, the FBI should refer to serial killers and serial rapists as 'man-caused afflictions.' After all, we do not want to create fear about serial killers.

    Any parent knows that the way to protect children is to teach them about the dangers they face. But in Obama Land, calling a threat by its real name is politically incorrect. Thus, in a press briefing, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that Obama is using "different words and phrases [than war on terrorism] in order to denote a reaching out to many moderate parts of the world that we believe can be important in a battle against extremists."

    By confusing terrorists with moderates, the White House is adding to prejudice toward Muslims in general. More importantly, the effort to avoid calling terrorists what they are signals a return to the risk-averse, complacent atmosphere that led to the 9/11 attacks.

The current administration, reflecting a denial of reality that brought them to the White House, continues to seek ways to appease our enemies.  Neville Chamberlaine found out, to the dismay of the entire world, that such methods never work.

 

"What Were You Thinking?"