Yesterday the messiah uttered these brilliant words:
And, you know, let’s take the example of Guantanamo. What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated.
And the fact that the administration has not tried to do that has created a situation where not only have we never actually put many of these folks on trial, but we have destroyed our credibility when it comes to rule of law all around the world, and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, ‘Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims.
Whoa…where to start?
First, this kind of mindset is what helped cause 9/11 in the first place. al-Qaeda sat and watched as we fooled around with arresting a few people and then washed our hands of the whole terrorism threat until the next attack occurred. Khobar happened and what did we do? Try to treat it as a law enforcement issue. The African embassies? Same thing….as well as the Cole. Oh sure, Clinton would send a few missiles into Afghanistan or bomb a aspirin factory to try to at least “look” like he was doing something about the threat (while alleging Saddam had ties to the factory that AQ used to produce chemical weapons to boot….GASP! Saddam had ties to AQ? No way!) but in the end Osama and pals viewed us as weak. And with that kind of leadership we were.
They didn’t count on a strong leader to change the way this country does business like George W. Bush. Thank god.
Oh, and lets not forget that the criminal trial led to the disclosure through discovery that we were listening to Osama. We all know happened after that.
And now our Supreme Court says the same enemy must have access to our courts and the same kind of discovery. Mind boggling stupidity and Obama loves it.
Secondly we have to look at this part of Obama’s statement:
we were able to arrest those responsible
Wrongo boyo! Jim Geraghty sets him straight and wouldn’t you know it….it involved Iraq once again:
No, not all of them. Abdul Rahman Yasin, an Iraqi native, was twice interrogated by the FBI and then allowed to walk away a free man. He fled the United States in the days after that attack and returned, with the assistance of officials at the Iraqi embassy in Amman, Jordan, to Baghdad. He lived openly in Baghdad with his father and a neighbor interviewed in 1994 by an ABC News/Newsweek investigative team told the reporters that he was working for the Iraqi regime.
There are conflicting reports about how Saddam Hussein treated Yasin after these reports were made public, with some documentation suggesting the Iraqis were holding him under some form of house arrest and other documents that seem to indicate he was being actively harbored — given housing and living allowances — by Saddam Hussein’s regime.
What is not in dispute, however, is that Saddam Hussein’s intelligence services helped Yasin return to Iraq mere days after he helped orchestrate the 1993 World Trade Center attack. According to the 2004 Senate Intelligence Committee report on Prewar Intelligence (signed by all of the panel’s Democrats): “Abdul Rahman Yasin, a fugitive from the attack, is of Iraqi descent, and in 1993, he fled to Iraq with Iraqi assistance.”
Beyond the fact that Obama seems to have been unaware of Yasin’s flight and the role Saddam Hussein’s regime played in it is his odd embrace of law enforcement as the proper way to treat terrorists. It’s as if he wasn’t paying attention in the 1990s.
Oh, he was paying attention. From the pews of the Trinity church as the pastor told him that these attacks were all our fault anyways.
Now this part of his statement is downright funny:
we have destroyed our credibility when it comes to rule of law all around the world, and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, ‘Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims.
I think Allah tackles this well:
Is he so naive as to seriously believe wacko jihadis draw some huge distinction between the legitimacy of Gitmo and the legitimacy of district court trials? Exit quotation from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
“I cannot accept any attorney who is not governed by sharia [Islamic] law. I will represent myself. I will not be represented by anybody even if he is a Muslim, because he will be sworn to your American Constitution. I consider all the U.S. Constitution and laws evil. They are allowing for same-sexual marriages and many things that are very bad … Do you understand what I said?”
This is so obviously not about preventing terrorist attacks for Obama. This is about making himself and this country look good to those who hate us. Our nations security be damned.
McCain smelled blood with this ignorant comment from Obama and wasted no time:
“Barack Obama’s belief that we should treat terrorists as nothing more than common criminals demonstrates a stunning and alarming misunderstanding of the threat we face from radical Islamic extremism. Obama holds up the prosecution of the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 as a model for his administration, when in fact this failed approach of treating terrorism simply as a matter of law enforcement rather than a clear and present danger to the United States contributed to the tragedy of September 11th. This is change that will take us back to the failed policies of the past and every American should find this mindset troubling.”
Right on target.
How does Obama respond? By trying to take some of it back:
My quote, the point I was making and I’ve made before, is without giving full blown rights to those who are being held, we can set up a system of due process, and when I said that the administration didn’t even try to do that, what I have consistently said is that rather than figure out how do we effectively hold these folks, detain them, provide them with some due process, try them, lock them up, the administration decided to take a bunch of short cuts.”…
“We don’t have to treat them in the same way that we would treat a criminal suspect in the U.S., but we should abide by the Geneva conventions. We should at least follow through on the same principals we followed though when dealing with Nazis during Nuremburg, that is not only the right thing to do but it also actually will strengthen our ability over the long term to fight terrorism.”
Asked by Richard Wolffe of Newsweek what he would suggest be done with detainees, Obama said “we can lock them up in military facilities on U.S. soil in the same way that we locked them up in Gitmo. The reason we set up Gitmo is because the administration wanted to set up a black hole where there was no accountability whatsoever…
“It does not have to be before a U.S. district court,” Obama said, “but if we provided some modicum of due process, we can have confidence that we’ve got the right people, that we’re not wasting time on the wrong people. We can send a message to the world that we continue to abide by the standards of rule of law, and we can actually be more effective in our pursuit of terrorism.”
Um, it was Congress that set up the trial process, the same Congress he is currently in. Not the Administration. Also, the Supreme Court just ruled it DOES have to be before a U.S. district court…..did he not get the memo?
Be that it may, would you call this a flip? Or a flop?
I call it ignorance. And dangerous ignorance at that.