"When they allow a talk show host to play them like a two-dollar banjo, they demonstrate what kind of backbone they'll bring to the job later on, if we elect them. After they get elected will they continue to allow Jeff Crank to put a nickel in them and wind them up every Saturday morning?"
Barry Noreen, former columnist, Colorado Springs Gazette
Barry Noreen, former columnist, Colorado Springs Gazette
"There's a lot of talent there" - Shannon Fowler
Monday, May 9, 2011
“The war on terror is over…(or is it?)”
by John Alexander Madison
May 9, 2011
أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن is dead. For those of you who don’t read Arabic, that’s Osama bin Laden (a/k/a Usama bin Laden)…or more formally known as Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden. This man was responsible for the deaths of over 3,000 innocent Americans. Long live the Navy Seals.
In the aftermath of last week’s news, one now wonders why our administration is sharing in great detail our intelligence processes used to find bin Laden. Protecting our intelligence sources and methods for obtaining intelligence would seem to be a priority of the highest order. Why do we need to know that telephone numbers, e-mails, and other intelligence was gathered in the raid on bin Laden’s home in Abbottabad when moments later we know terrorists will discard their cell phones and change their e-mail addresses? And why would we talk about information gathered on safe houses? Common sense would seem to dictate we would not want to tell the enemy everything we know or how we know it. But common sense has never been a factor when discussing our current President’s decision making. It’s quite clear the interests of President Obama’s re-election campaign are a higher priority than our national security interests, and that is not a good thing.
Subsequent discussions to the heroic actions of our Navy Seals last week have centered around the use of enhanced interrogations, more specifically water boarding and whether photos of bi Laden, post-attack, should be released.
One wonders why liberal apologists for President Obama would say “it is not up to our standards to engage in “enhanced interrogation of terrorists” (water boarding). Bob Beckel, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and Democrat agenda apologist superstar, opposes water boarding even after CIA Director Leon Panetta acknowledged that enhanced interrogation lead to last week’s raid in Abbottabad. Mr. Beckel, in the same breath, said it was perfectly okay to shoot U.S. Public Enemy #1 in the face, causing his immediate demise. There is something convoluted and irrational about that reasoning, Bob.
Do you really believe, Bob, the U.S. Constitutional rights afforded our citizens also apply to terrorists? Even President Obama, who promised to close Gitmo by June 2010, end military tribunals and try terrorists in civilian courts, has seen the light. And, he has supported enhanced interrogation. I’ve got news for you Bob, this is a war on terror and terrorists have no rules.
It is interesting to note that O.B.L.’s successor has already been listed on the Internet as Ayman al-Zawahiri. So the theory goes we must now devote all our resources to finding the new #1 leader of Al-Qaeda. But does that make any sense whatsoever? “Doing a bin Laden” on al-Zawahiri will merely cause yet another fanatic to step forward as al-Zawahiri’s successor. In other words, the war on terror will never end. Unless…
Do you think, just maybe, it is time to begin to re-think the U.S. policy on foreign aid? Our admittedly untrustworthy ally, Pakistan, has received approximately 18 billion in military and economic aid from the United States from 2008-2010. In February 2010, the Obama administration requested an additional 3 billion in aid, for a total of 20.7 billion. To that I ask would we be better off saving that $20 billion and applying it toward the estimated $1 trillion per year that Mr. Obama wants to spend in support of the poor in the United States over the next decade. The madness has got to end. Obama is fiscally irresponsible and, quite frankly, he is in way over his head. Or to sum it up…he is clueless.
In the first debate for the November 2012 Presidential election Republican candidate Herman Cain was asked about his having no experience as an elected official so how could he run for President. His response was most people in Washington have been elected officials for quite some time, “how’s that workin’ for you?” To that I add “How’s the war on terror and the economy and jobless rate workin’ for you, Mr. President?” I think I’ll buy a Godfather’s pizza for dinner tonight. (If you didn’t know, Cain was former CEO of that national chain.)
Regarding the release of post-raid photos of bin Laden, I ask “why not?” To suggest that the radical Islam followers might get upset and generate a new series of attacks is laughable. Their mission is to generate more attacks until America is destroyed and I do not believe they will be deterred nor inflamed by the release of any photos. The President has flip-flopped on so many of his previous promises I suspect the release of these photos will occur in the not too distant future. Although I really don’t care.
The initial Fox News Presidential debate last week was, well, interesting. The participants were characterized by some as the “second tier” candidates since Governor Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachman, Mitch Daniels, John Kasich and even Donald Trump were not there. (Donald was busy firing Star Jones, if you even care.)
So as we look ahead to November 6, 2012 we have to ask ourselves do we want “four more years” to give Mr. Obama an opportunity to complete his agenda…or will we take just about anybody else as the 45th President of the United States.
As sure as I am writing this I believe the silent and non-so silent majority of Americans will say enough is enough. After all when considering a second term for Obama all you have to ask yourself is “How’s that workin’ out for YOU?”