Category Archives: Terrorism

Credit where credit’s due

Charles Krauthammer comments today on the latest developments in the nation’s fight against Islamic terrorism (or, “the war on terror” if you prefer). Obama continues to make mistakes, but Krauthammer commends two decisions the president made in the wake of the Christmas Day attack:

“To be sure, after a few initial misguided statements, Obama did get somewhat serious about the Christmas Day attack. First, he instituted high-level special screening for passengers from 14 countries, the vast majority of which are Muslim with significant Islamist elements. This is the first rational step away from today’s idiotic random screening and toward, yes, a measure of profiling — i.e., focusing on the population most overwhelmingly likely to be harboring a suicide bomber.

Obama also sensibly suspended all transfers of Yemenis from Guantanamo. Nonetheless, Obama insisted on repeating his determination to close the prison, invoking his usual rationale of eliminating a rallying cry and recruiting tool for al-Qaeda.” (Emphasis added).

Well said, as usual.

The terrorist threat is not going away anytime soon. But if we take it seriously – more seriously than we do our own pious, aggrandized notions of what it means to be liberal and pluralist – then we can and will defend ourselves with great success and continue to diminish the enemy over time.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Terrorism

Get real, get smart on profiling

I’ve added substantially to an earlier post on “the case for profiling,” which I hope you’ll check out today.  The topic has gotten renewed play in the wake of the attempted terror attack on Christmas Day. We can only get smart after we get real about profiling: certain indicators invite notice, the act of which is one part of a whole when it comes to the sum components of air security.

Leave a comment

Filed under Terrorism

Obama’s “war on terror”

The term “war on terror” was absurd in its ambiguity – terror is a strategy or tactic, but certainly not an identifiable enemy – but Obama has jettisoned even that phrase to define his administration’s weak response to the threat posed by those who would murder us in the name of their religion.

“Islamists,” meaning those who embrace radical Islam and its political objectives, would have been a better word than “terrorists.” Not all Muslims are terrorists, and not all terrorists are Muslim, but it is the threat of radical Islam that is the principal terrorist threat to the United States of America and our interests. Now, the current administration can hardly acknowledge the existence of a terrorist threat, let alone its nature or origin.

I say this by way of preface to Charles Krauthammer‘s latest piece, Hollow Words on Terrorism. A few excerpts:

Napolitano renames terrorism “man-caused disasters.” Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York — a trifecta of political correctness and image management.” ….

“If we find Abdulmutallab in an al-Qaeda training camp in Yemen, where he is merely preparing for a terror attack, we snuff him out with a Predator — no judge, no jury, no qualms. But if we catch him in the United States in the very act of mass murder, he instantly acquires protection not just from execution by drone but even from interrogation.” ….

“Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy — jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon — turns laxity into a governing philosophy.”

Why does President Obama refuse to see the threat for what it is?

UPDATE: 01/01/10, 11:51 a.m. CST: Politico: Ben Smith, Carol Lee:  Democrats’ worse nightmare: Terrorism on their watch

National Review Online, Mark Steyn: The Joke’s On Us

Leave a comment

Filed under General & Miscellaneous, Islam, National Security, Terrorism

Kobach on terror trials

Constitutional law professor and Kansas Secretary of State candidate Kris Kobach explains five reasons why trying 9/11 mastermind Kalid Sheik Mohammed in federal civilian court is a mistake.

From the New York Post, via Real Clear Politics.

Leave a comment

Filed under Terrorism

US Intelligence knew about Hasan’s radicalism

ABC News reports that American intelligence agencies were aware that Nidal Malik Hasan had been attempting to contact al-Queda prior to carrying out a deadly massacre at Fort Hood, Texas. The FBI was apparently aware of his radical blog postings in defense of suicide bombings, and the Army had received multiple complaints from fellow soldiers about him.

Yet a day after the shooting, the President of the United States jumped to tell Americans not to “jump to conclusions” about the incident. This begs the question: Did President Obama know that Hasan had been under investigation by intelligence agencies prior to his attack? If not, why not? If so, why would he mislead the American people by insinuating that this could be something other than what he would every reason to believe it was?

Regarding the US intelligence work itself, to what degree this information was organized and in a single set of hands, the public does not yet know. What we do know is that signs were abundant, and the Army did not act in response to them.

Also:

The public continues to see dishonest news media coverage of this event. It often comes in clever and subtle phrasings from legacy media institutions (whose mechanics are often excellent; and in their deftness they can subtly maneuver into a parsing that may not technically be inaccurate, but is altogether misleading.), like this one from the New York Times:

“Many Muslims have been concerned that their faith will somehow be blamed after an Army psychiatrist, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who prayed regularly at the Fort Hood mosque, was accused of being the lone gunman in the attack.” (emphasis added)

Somehow? As if it it is some giant leap of logic that Islam had anything whatsoever to do with this killing? Somehow? Islam inspired this massacre, and if that was only an inference that can be drawn early on, it is now all but proven with direct evidence. Unfortunately, this is not surprising, coming from the New York Times.

I’ve seen multiple examples of this in the coverage of this event.

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam, Media, Terrorism

Never Forget. Ever.

Many fitting tributes were conducted this week for the victims of September 11, 2001.

Here is a short video (five minutes or so) that documents in moving fashion some of the most horrific moments of that day: when individuals jumped from the burning twin towers and hurtled through the air at speeds reaching terminal velocity – nearly 150 miles per hour – to their death. Their falls in many cases lasted about ten seconds….ten seconds that were unlike anything we, as survivors of that day, can imagine.

Watch the video here.

This is not an easy video to watch. If you choose to do so, brace yourself. I have not sought out much of this type of footage to watch in the years since 9/11, but on this anniversary, I came across it and felt it was appropriate to do so.

Watch the video here.

I was brought to tears during the first part of this video, trying to comprehend the staggering loss of life and the awful choices that those who jumped had to make, and what they must have been thinking in those seconds as they plummeted to the ground below.

Watch the video here.

Later in the video, I was moved to profound anger at the murderers of that day, along with anybody who would justify what they did. Devastation wrought sadness then and now, and we can still grieve those lost. Yet anger is also a necessary and right reaction to what happened on September 11, 2001.

Watch the video here.

Our anger should not be quenched until we have killed or captured (and then killed) every individual responsible for the terrorist attacks of that day.

Watch the video here.

These attacks were carried out in the name of Islam. The masterminds were well educated, and in some cases, wealthy men. The foot soldiers were also generally well-educated, often coming from middle class homes with backgrounds in fields like engineering.  They were not innocent victims forced into refugee camps by Israelis, for example. They were motivated by religious ideology to kill.

Watch the video here.

It’s well and good to “understand” these people (those who orchestrated and carried out the atrocities) and “why they hate us,” but that should be done primarily so as to terminate or neutralize them. We can think about how to improve relations with the broader Muslim world, that’s advisable and fine. But as for mobilized Islamists (and if you don’t know the definition of that word, please see recognized experts like Daniel Pipes or Robert Spencer), lethal force ought to be high on the list of potential options.

Watch the video here.

And never forget. Ever.

Leave a comment

Filed under Terrorism

Missouri’s “Modern Militia Movement” report targets Ron Paul people, others

A report compiled by the Missouri Information Analysis Center and used by the state highway patrol advises law enforcement that Ron Paul supporters may be part of terrorist militia groups. Read about it on the AP here.

1 Comment

Filed under Libertarianism, Terrorism