Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Our President is Not Protecting Us

"The president’s job is to use every tool he has to keep America safe. The words we’ve heard from Mr. Obama tell us that this president refuses to confront the seriousness of the dangers we face."


"President Obama’s team has scared the nation over the past week with pronouncements so crazy they leave you breathless. But worse still are the decisions they’ve made, decisions that show America is in danger, and that those charged with protecting us are failing to treat this life-and-death struggle as the war that it really is.

------- First, after a terrorist attack was thwarted only by a detonation malfunction and brave airline passengers, a blissfully-clueless Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told an incredulous nation that our “system worked.” That comment was so absurd that no further comment is necessary. She should have been forced to resign within hours.

...

------------- But the worst words came from the president himself. First is “allegedly.” President Obama said that Nigerian Islamic terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab “allegedly” tried to blow up an American airliner to kill hundreds of Americans You use the word “allegedly” if you’re in the media or if you’re prosecuting a criminal, not referring to undeniable acts of war.

The second is that Obama labeled this terrorist act an “isolated extremist.” We know that: (1) he’s affiliated with Al Qaeda, (2) he had help getting onto the plane, (3) he carried military-style high explosives that were likely prepared for him by experts, and (4) was in contact with the same radical Muslim imam who encouraged the Fort Hood terrorist. There are also reports that there may have been an accomplice on the plane. To call him an “isolated extremist” in the face of such facts willfully ignores the obvious truth that this was a coordinated terrorist attack.

And third is the longstanding criticism that Obama does not allow his administration describe what we are involved in the "War on Terror." They speak of "wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan—usually with a gratuitous slap at George Bush or Dick Cheney—but not the fact that America is in a global war with Islamic jihadists.

What do these words tell us about President Obama? We need only consider his actions, which are perfectly consistent with his words.

He’s ordered the Christmas bomber to be treated as a criminal defendant in our domestic law enforcement system. That means he’s presumed innocent and protected by every provision in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments in the Bill of Rights, including all the Federal Rules of Evidence and Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

One of those rights is the right to legal counsel. As a lawyer, if I were the court-appointed attorney for Abdulmutallab, the first thing I would tell him, “You have the right to remain silent. So shut up. Don’t tell anyone anything, except me. We’ll let the Feds know that you have things you could share, and that they’ll have to offer you a pretty sweet deal if they want to get a peep out of you.”

We should all feel for Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan, who had to go on the Sunday morning talk shows and suggest that somehow this decision to put the bomber in the civilian system was for our nation’s benefit. -- America gets nothing out of that deal. There’s no trade-off. There’s no advantage.

Everything we can do in a law enforcement setting, such as using the FBI for investigation and interrogation, can also be done with someone held by our military for acts of war. We can use every tool of national power when acting against our wartime enemies.

Since he wasn’t wearing a uniform, Abdulmutallab is not even covered by the Geneva Conventions or entitled to prisoner-of-war status. Obama could simply have him executed without a public hearing as a foreign saboteur, the way Democratic President FDR did to Germans we captured on U.S. soil in 1942. (A decision which was upheld after-the-fact by the Supreme Curt in "Ex parte Quirin.")

By contrast, our hands are tied when we’re dealing with a criminal suspect.

This is the same mindset that brings known terrorists to New York City for civilian trials. It’s the same mindset that says we must close Gitmo and put these terrorists in federal prisons.

It’s the same mindset that this nation had the day before 9/11. It’s a mindset that refuses to accept that we are at war, that the Bill of Rights is a unique set of protections intended for American citizens in our own country, and that our president must use every power granted to him under Article II of the Constitution to defeat our wartime enemies and protect this nation.

Instead, the words that we’ve heard from our president and his team over recent days—words confirmed by actions—tell us that this president refuses to confront the seriousness of the dangers we face.

The president’s job is to use every tool he has to protect us. We are being ill-served by our commander-in-chief."

By Ken Klukowski, a fellow and senior legal analyst at the American Civil Rights Union. He is a frequent contributor to the Fox Forum.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/05/ken-klukowski-obama-christmas-terror-attack/

--------------

Shocked right? This is the "let's put guns in the rifles" mentality that is destroying us. The idea that if we do nothing we'll be left alone and appease the creeps trying to kill people for no reason. I really think some people don't GET that we got attacked originally for the following reasons "SUPPORTING ISRAEL" and probably women walking around without head coverings and showing leg on TV, etc.
The blame America and Apologizer in Chief gig is so pointless. Here are your options for ending being attacked: abandon Israel to the Middle-East mad house, pull every single troop from every other country and build a HUGE wall (and coast to coast missle shield maybe) around our entire nation, and then prevent anyone else from being allowed in. Bam, attacks over. Oh, and for good measure, go on TV some more and apologize for slavery (again), Christianity, small pox blankets given to the "Native Americans" (which is a lie, btw), freedom, voting, democracy, and even THINKING we should do anything to help anyone else.

And here's the other way: KILL THEM. Thanks GWB for doing the harder and more effective option of these two. Obama....not mad, just SOO disappointed in you.

6 comments:

  1. Yes, our supporting Israel is completely what caused this...in no way does religion play a part, right? Have you stopped and thought about how devout you are to your faith? How blindly you follow god without one shred of evidence for him? That's the same thing this is...religion...its their religion telling them that women aren't equal...telling them that they have to blow themselves up to reach martyrdom.

    So your idea is to "KILL THEM?" You mean like how GWB DIDN'T do? They attacked us and we went to Iraq...not the people who attacked us..So your "point" of GWB being more effective is entirely mute.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And child PLEASE...we SHOULD apologize for slavery...it was really fucked up... Maybe you being a naive white person makes you a little less inclined to see the horrors of what black people had to go through and instead bitch about having to "apologize (again).".I think the church should apologize for the crusades and countless people who were burned alive because they didnt accept christianity.

    And why do you put quotes on native Americans? Are you going to go against history now and say that this wasn't their country before we took it from them?

    Small pox: Lord Jeffrey Amherst, commander of British forces in North America during the French and Indian War (1756-'63)considered infecting the Indians with smallpox as a good tactical strategy. There is even documented postscripts of this.

    http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/lord_jeff.html

    Where do you get your information from? Wherever it's from..veer away from it...it is very, very incorrect.

    :-)

    www.evilgayagenda.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. In a country where we're supposed to treat people as innocent until proven guilty, I think he's required to say "allegedly" by law. He's not trying to euphemize (if that's a word) Umar Farouk's actions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The entire paragraph following this sentence "He’s ordered the Christmas bomber to be treated as a criminal defendant...." is an extremely ignorant statement. You are so blinded by your self-righteousness, idignance, and patriotism that you are criticizing one of the very tenets that this country was founded on that makes it so great. Right to a fair trial is so important, whether you are a crazy suicide bomber or not. If you really love your country, you would respect these principles and understand that it is totally appropriate that fair trial by jury was applied to Umar Farouk. As Americans, we can't have double standards.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Build a huge wall? What the hell is that going to do. Airplanes can clearly fly over walls. Also, that sounds borderline fascist/authoritarian to me.
    Also, the whole terrorist attack thing has very little to do with supporting Israel. Jihadists are after one thing, killing EVERYONE that doesn't belong to their faith, they believe that they will be straight sent to Allah if they do so. Israel or not, they're out to get us and we just have to deal with it.

    ReplyDelete