<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Interrogation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/interrogation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 15:24:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>The Senate CIA Report and Democratic Treachery</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-senate-cia-report-and-democratic-treachery/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-senate-cia-report-and-democratic-treachery</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-senate-cia-report-and-democratic-treachery/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2014 05:55:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Torture]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247157</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Putting American lives on the line for a political payout.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/feinstein.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-247160" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/feinstein-432x350.png" alt="feinstein" width="315" height="255" /></a>On Tuesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee released the 500-page executive summary of the report on the CIA’s enhanced interrogation of terrorist detainees. Democrats, the media and Republican Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) are using it as an opportunity to <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/09/politics/cia-torture-report/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">hammer</span></a> the CIA and the Bush administration, while American embassies, military units and other U.S. interests are <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/us-prepares-security-risks-torture-report-080155482--politics.html"><span style="color: #1255cc;">preparing</span></a> for possible reprisals. But adding further threats to Americans already in harm&#8217;s way matters not. Beleaguered congressional Democrats are desperate for a political boon and have turned to an old standby: sabotaging national security and sacrificing American lives.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Since their betrayal of the Iraq war, Democrats, particularly in the Senate, have panned the techniques used by the CIA to garner critical information in the days following 9/11 as “torture,” and have claimed that they yielded no useful intel. Though the use of these techniques was long known to Democrats — with virtual indifference toward them at the outset — many Democrats have since claimed they were unaware of what was occurring, which explains their lack of opposition to their government supposedly engaging in “torture.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Leading the way on the latter fabrication was then-House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Her ongoing denials regarding knowledge of the CIA&#8217;s waterboarding of terrorists were ultimately undone by Pelosi herself in 2009, when she finally <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/pelosi-cia-misled-congress-over-waterboarding/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">admitted</span></a> she had known about the program since 2003. Yet even as she admitted it, she continued to promote the “Bush lied, people died” lie, insisting that &#8220;the C.I.A. was misleading the Congress and at the same time the administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Those would be the same weapons of mass destruction whose existence was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?smid=tw-share&amp;_r=3"><span style="color: #1255cc;">acknowledged</span></a> by the <i>New York Times</i> last October.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">As for so-called torture, the report <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/world/senate-intelligence-committee-cia-torture-report.html?emc=edit_na_20141209&amp;nlid=23627335&amp;_r=0"><span style="color: #0433ff;">cited</span></a> sleep deprivation, threatening subjects with death, “rectal feeding” or “rectal hydration” described by the CIA&#8217;s chief of interrogations as a way to exert “total control over detainees,” and waterboarding, as in simulating near drowning. The report further stated that former CIA directors George J. Tenet, Porter J. Goss and Michael V. Hayden hyped the value of those techniques in secret briefings with the White House and Congress.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein admitted that she “could understand the C.I.A.&#8217;s impulse to consider the use of every possible tool to gather intelligence and remove terrorists from the battlefield, and the C.I.A. was encouraged by political leaders and the public to do whatever it could to prevent another attack,” but that “such pressure, fear and expectation of further terrorist plots do not justify, temper or excuse improper actions taken by individuals or organizations in the name of national security. The major lesson of this report is that regardless of the pressures and the need to act, the intelligence community’s actions must always reflect who we are as a nation, and adhere to our laws and standards.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The hypocrisy is breathtaking. While the Left wrings its collective hands about “torture,” they remain silent to Barack Obama’s <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">drone program</span></a>. One that has not only killed terrorists, but America citizens, Samir Khan, and Anwar al-Awlaki. Both men were traitors, but they were executed without the due process the Left supposedly reveres so much in the case of terrorist detainees. So was Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, as well as innocents who were victims of collateral damage. No one was reported to have been killed by the Bush administration&#8217;s enhanced interrogation techniques, yet somehow Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney are routinely <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=Bush+Cheney+war+criminals&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8"><span style="color: #1255cc;">referred</span></a> to as “war criminals” while Obama largely gets a pass.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The <i>Washington Post’s</i> Bill Gerson cuts right through the double-standard, noting intelligence personnel now being excoriated received the same “direction and protection,” consisting of presidential approval, congressional briefing, lawfulness determined by the U.S. Attorney General and target value determined by the CIA Director as those currently participating in the drone program. &#8220;Some may argue a subtle moral distinction between harshly interrogating a terrorist and blowing his limbs apart,” Gerson writes. &#8220;But international human rights groups and legal authorities generally look down on both. The main difference? One is Obama’s favorite program. A few years from now, a new president and new congressional leaders may take a different view.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">This double standard puts the lie to Democrats’ seriousness toward the claim that the Bush administration engaged in “torture,” illegality and human rights abuses in its mission to thwart terrorist attacks against the homeland. In truth, the campaign against tough interrogation is a political cudgel that Democrats have employed to bludgeon their political enemies, no matter the national security cost. It amounts to nothing less than a revisionist effort to turn those entrusted with protecting the country in the immediate aftermath of the worst domestic attack in American history into pariahs, even as the war remains ongoing. As Gerson so rightly notes, the report’s release is an act of &#8220;exceptional congressional recklessness” engineered by Feinstein, whose &#8220;legacy is a massive dump of intelligence details useful to the enemy in a time of war.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our allies are equally appalled. ”Foreign leaders have approached the government and said, &#8216;You do this, this will cause violence and deaths,&#8221;&#8217; <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/08/house-intelligence-chairman-rogers-report-will-spur-attacks/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">warned</span></a> Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. &#8220;Our own intelligence community has assessed that this will cause violence and deaths.&#8221;</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest acknowledged such concerns, but insisted the administration &#8220;strongly supports the release of this declassified summary of the report.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">No doubt. The release neatly coincided with ObamaCare mega-consultant Jonathan Gruber’s Congressional <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/09/politics/gruber-hearing/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">testimony</span></a> regarding his contempt for the American public, and the deception employed to get the ACA passed. Thus, the administration has once again employed a bait and switch effort to distract the public, despite the fact that distraction imperils Americans and our allies.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">CIA veteran Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., who ran the enhanced interrogation program, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/todays-cia-critics-once-urged-the-agency-to-do-anything-to-fight-al-qaeda/2014/12/05/ac418da2-7bda-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html"><span style="color: #1255cc;">destroys</span></a> the contention that Democrats were out of the loop, and that the enhanced interrogation techniques yielded no useful information. &#8220;The leaders of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees and of both parties in Congress were briefed on the program more than 40 times between 2002 and 2009,” he reveals, noting those same lawmakers &#8220;urged us to do everything possible to prevent another attack on our soil.” He was equally forthright about the intel that was garnered. &#8220;After extraordinary CIA efforts, aided by information obtained through the enhanced-interrogation program, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed architect of the 9/11 attacks, was captured in Pakistan,&#8221; he explains.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">He is especially critical of “hypocritical&#8221; Democrats. He cites Feinstein&#8217;s 2002 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/26/weekinreview/all-fronts-getting-more-than-one-step-ahead-of-an-attack.html"><span style="color: #1255cc;">assertion</span></a> that &#8220;we have to do some things that historically we have not wanted to do to protect ourselves,” as well as an <a href="http://votesmart.org/public-statement/15557/cnn-late-edition-with-wolf-blitzer#.VIdvyifFm3d"><span style="color: #1255cc;">interview</span></a> between CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WVA), then the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. In response to Blitzer’s question about whether Khalid Sheik Mohammed might be turned over to friendly countries with no restrictions on torture, the Senator admitted it was possible. “I wouldn’t take anything off the table where he is concerned, because this is the man who has killed hundreds and hundreds of Americans over the last 10 years,” he replied.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Rodriguez then adds a dose of devastating perspective to the mix. &#8220;If Feinstein, Rockefeller and other politicians were saying such things in print and on national TV, imagine what they were saying to us in private….Our reward, a decade later, is to hear some of these same politicians expressing outrage for what was done and, even worse, mischaracterizing the actions taken and understating the successes achieved,” he states.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Current and former CIA leaders <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/defense/226465-spies-push-back-on-senate-report"><span style="color: #1255cc;">bitterly contested</span></a> the report. Bush-era CIA Director George Tenet labeled it &#8220;biased, inaccurate, and destructive,” adding that it &#8220;does damage to U.S. national security, to the men and women of the Central Intelligence Agency, and most of all to the truth.” CIA Director John Brennan said the agency made mistakes, but insisted &#8220;the record does not support the study’s inference that the agency systematically and intentionally misled each of these audiences on the effectiveness of the program.” A <a href="http://ciasavedlives.com/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">website</span></a> launched by a number of intelligence officials blasted the report:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>The recently released Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Majority report on the CIA&#8217;s Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation Program is marred by errors of facts and interpretation and is completely at odds with the reality that the leaders and officers of the Central Intelligence Agency lived through. It represents the single worst example of Congressional oversight in our many years of government service.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">Cheney also remains <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/us/politics/white-house-and-gop-clash-over-torture-report.html?emc=edit_th_20141209&amp;nl=todaysheadlines&amp;nlid=62431058&amp;_r=1"><span style="color: #1255cc;">resolute</span></a> about the necessity and legality of the program. “What I keep hearing out there is they portray this as a rogue operation, and the agency was way out of bounds and then they lied about it,” he said in a telephone interview with the <i>New York Times</i>. “I think that’s all a bunch of hooey. The program was authorized. The agency did not want to proceed without authorization, and it was also reviewed legally by the Justice Department before they undertook the program.” Cheney also had nothing but praise for those who participated. “As far as I’m concerned, they ought to be decorated, not criticized,” he added.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The alternative viewpoint? &#8220;Showing respect even for ones enemies. Trying to understand and in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view,” <a href="http://www.ijreview.com/2014/12/212850-hillary-remarks-beat-enemies-may-just-killed-chances-presidency/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">said</span></a> Secretary of State and likely presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Americans have a choice to make between competing worldviews. The wrong choice will have deadly consequences.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-senate-cia-report-and-democratic-treachery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>62</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush Led, Bin Laden Dead &#8212; Where&#8217;s the Credit?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/larry-elder/bush-led-bin-laden-dead-wheres-the-credit/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=bush-led-bin-laden-dead-wheres-the-credit</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/larry-elder/bush-led-bin-laden-dead-wheres-the-credit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 04:42:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Larry Elder]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Afternoon Edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[affairs columnist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enhanced interrogation techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john brennan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Osama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vice President Dick Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yorker]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=92273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Suddenly, the Bush-Cheney "assassination ring" is not so bad. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/208641-barack-obama-george-bush.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-92274" title="208641-barack-obama-george-bush" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/208641-barack-obama-george-bush.gif" alt="" width="375" height="312" /></a></p>
<p>Osama bin Laden was a) killed by a unit overseen by what New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh denounced as Vice President Dick Cheney&#8217;s &#8220;executive assassination ring,&#8221; which was b) sent into action based on intel derived from the now-outlawed &#8220;enhanced interrogation techniques,&#8221; which were c) used on detainees captured during the George W. Bush administration, who were d) being held in now-outlawed &#8220;secret prisons&#8221; or in the intended-to-be-closed Gitmo.</p>
<p>President Obama&#8217;s deputy national security advisor, John Brennan, confirmed that the death of bin Laden resulted from &#8220;a mosaic (of intelligence) appearing over time and by &#8230; people who have been following bin Laden for many, many years.&#8221; This explains why 81 percent of Republicans give former President George W. Bush &#8220;at least some of the credit&#8221; for bin Laden&#8217;s death. U.S. security forces tracked and were able to kill bin Laden through the use of the discredited, maligned, and — in some cases — the discontinued terror-fighting policies and practices of Bush.</p>
<p>So how much credit do Democrats give Bush?</p>
<p>Not much. Only 35 percent of Democrats, according to The Washington Post, believe that Bush deserves &#8220;at least some of the credit.&#8221; Yet Obama took advantage of policies the left attacked — at least under Bush — as wrong, illegal and immoral.</p>
<p>&#8220;Enhanced interrogation techniques&#8221; — The Washington Post&#8217;s associate editor and foreign affairs columnist, David Ignatius, writes, &#8220;Some of the detainees (who gave information that led to bin Laden&#8217;s location) were subjected to &#8216;enhanced interrogation techniques,&#8217; the CIA&#8217;s formal name for what is now widely viewed as torture.&#8221;</p>
<p>Gitmo and secret prisons, aka &#8220;black sites&#8221; (now closed by Obama) — &#8220;The revelation,&#8221; writes The Associated Press, &#8220;that intelligence gleaned from the CIA&#8217;s so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.&#8221;</p>
<p>Rendition, the practice of moving a detainee to a country with more severe interrogation policies — &#8220;Current and former U.S. officials,&#8221; according to The Associated Press, &#8220;say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden&#8217;s most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed&#8217;s successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.&#8221;</p>
<p>Bush-Cheney &#8220;executive assassination ring&#8221; — Navy SEAL Team Six is part of the Joint Special Operations Command.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/larry-elder/bush-led-bin-laden-dead-wheres-the-credit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Andy McCarthy: While You Are Distracted by the Summit, Obama Democrats Are Targeting the CIA &#8211; National Review Online</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andy-mccarthy-while-you-are-distracted-by-the-summit-obama-democrats-are-targeting-the-cia-national-review-online/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=andy-mccarthy-while-you-are-distracted-by-the-summit-obama-democrats-are-targeting-the-cia-national-review-online</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andy-mccarthy-while-you-are-distracted-by-the-summit-obama-democrats-are-targeting-the-cia-national-review-online/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:32:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cia officer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congressional leaders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degrading treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interrogator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[members of congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[provision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[republican amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speaker Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[today]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=52081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama Democrats have outdone themselves. While the country and the Congress have their eyes on today’s dog-and-pony show on socialized medicine, House Democrats last night stashed a new provision in the intelligence bill which is to be voted on today. It is an attack on the CIA: the enactment of a criminal statute that [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Obama Democrats have outdone themselves.</p>
<p>While the country and the Congress have their eyes on today’s dog-and-pony show on socialized medicine, House Democrats last night stashed a new provision in the intelligence bill which is to be voted on today.  It is an attack on the CIA:  the enactment of a criminal statute that would ban “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.” (See here, scoll to p. 32.)</p>
<p>The provision is impossibly vague – who knows what “degrading” means? Proponents will say that they have itemized conduct that would trigger the statute (I’ll get to that in a second), but it is not true.  The proposal says the conduct reached by the statute “includes but is not limited to” the itemized conduct. (My italics.) That means any interrogation tactic that a prosecutor subjectively believes is “degrading” (e.g., subjecting a Muslim detainee to interrogation by a female CIA officer) could be the basis for indicting a CIA interrogator.</p>
<p>The act goes on to make it a crime to use tactics that have been shown to be effective in obtaining life saving information and that are far removed from torture.</p>
<p>“Waterboarding” is specified. In one sense, I’m glad they’ve done this because it proves a point I’ve been making all along. Waterboarding, as it was practiced by the CIA, is not torture and was never illegal under U.S. law.  The reason the Democrats are reduced to doing this is:  what they’ve been saying is not true —  waterboarding was not a crime and it was fully supported by congressional leaders of both parties, who were told about it while it was being done. On that score, it is interesting to note that while Democrats secretly tucked this provision into an important bill, hoping no one would notice until it was too late, they failed to include in the bill a proposed Republican amendment that would have required full and complete disclosure of records describing the briefings members of Congress received about the Bush CIA’s enhanced interrogation program. Those briefings, of course, would establish that Speaker Pelosi and others knew all about the program and lodged no objections.  Naturally, members of Congress are not targeted by this criminal statute — only the CIA.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDVhNWUzMjJkMjY1OWMyYmExMjRkMDc0NTJjMDk3Zjg=">While You Are Distracted by the Summit, Obama Democrats Are Targeting the CIA &#8211; Andy McCarthy &#8211; The Corner on National Review Online</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andy-mccarthy-while-you-are-distracted-by-the-summit-obama-democrats-are-targeting-the-cia-national-review-online/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Andrew C. McCarthy: Kill or Capture? &#8211; National Review Online</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-kill-or-capture-national-review-online/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=andrew-c-mccarthy-kill-or-capture-national-review-online</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-kill-or-capture-national-review-online/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alien enemy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew c]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew C. McCarthy - National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clarence thomas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[due process rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy combatants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy operatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Expert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hellfire missile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international humanitarian law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intrusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jihadist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judicialize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice Clarence Thomas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leftists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military expert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national review online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[point of contention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[position]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second guessing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[situation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sound discretion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thesis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[valid options]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warfighters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=50909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few years ago, I got into an argument with an expert on military operations. I had written a white paper proposing the creation of a national-security court for terrorism cases. In the paper I criticized the trend to “judicialize” warfare, arguing that, in our system, judgments about the detention and treatment of alien enemy [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few years ago, I got into an argument with an expert on military operations. I had written a white paper proposing the creation of a national-security court for terrorism cases. In the paper I criticized the trend to “judicialize” warfare, arguing that, in our system, judgments about the detention and treatment of alien enemy combatants are the preserve of the political branches, not the politically unaccountable courts. It was not my overall thesis to which the military expert took exception. The point of contention had to do with the incentives the legal system creates for soldiers.</p>
<p>I contended — and still contend — that the leftists who were pushing for judicial intrusion into the capture, detention, and interrogation of enemy operatives were subverting the human-rights agenda they purport to serve. There are many scenarios in which our forces are in a position either to kill or to capture the enemy, situations in which both are valid options under the laws of war. In a kill-or-capture situation, capture is the more merciful option. From an intelligence perspective, it may also be the more advantageous. The underlying objective of international humanitarian law is to civilize warfare. Yet, I posited, by freighting capture with judicial second-guessing, rather than leaving the matter to the sound discretion of our professional warfighters, the Left was virtually guaranteeing that more combatants would be killed. As Justice Clarence Thomas has observed, a Hellfire missile targeted at a jihadist who has not been given notice or an opportunity to be heard is an extremely prejudicial termination of his due-process rights.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/425301/kill-or-capture/andrew-c-mccarthy">Kill or Capture? &#8211; Andrew C. McCarthy &#8211; National Review Online</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-kill-or-capture-national-review-online/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Breaking the Taliban</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/ryan-mauro/breaking-the-taliban/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=breaking-the-taliban</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/ryan-mauro/breaking-the-taliban/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 05:08:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan Mauro]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abdul Ghani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Baluchistan Province]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Baradar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cia drone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dadullah]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign minister]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ghani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heart Province]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[helmand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[helmand province]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indian embassy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamabad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Karachi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[karachi pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Laden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[last spring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mullah]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mullah omar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Omar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[outrage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pakis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pakistani government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pakistani isi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pressure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[previous year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[progress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quetta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[raid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[role]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second-in-command]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taliban]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taliban leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tuning point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.K.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war in afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[year]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=50610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The capture of a top Taliban commander may mark a crucial turning point in the Afghan war. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/16intelspan-articleLarge.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-50611" title="16intelspan-articleLarge" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/16intelspan-articleLarge.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="344" /></a></p>
<p>The war in Afghanistan may have reached a decisive tuning point this week. Just as a U.S. offensive into Helmand  Province is making progress, a joint Pakistani-American raid has resulted in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/world/asia/16intel.html">capture</a> of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the second-in-command of the Taliban.</p>
<p>Strategically, Mullah Baradar’s capture may be even more important than taking out Mullah Omar, the Taliban’s leader. If a successful interrogation of Baradar is completed, it will result in an intelligence coup that can cripple the terrorist networks in the region and dramatically turn the tide in the ongoing conflict.</p>
<p>Baradar was captured in Karachi, Pakistan, proving that the Taliban leadership operated on that country’s soil. The Pakistani role in the raid is significant, as they have supported the Taliban and have only taken action against them under severe pressure. Last spring, U.S. officials <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/asia/26tribal.html?_r=1">complained</a> to <em>The New York Times</em> about how the Pakistani ISI intelligence service was covertly helping the Taliban, providing them with supplies and even holding meetings to strategize. In October, the foreign minister of Afghanistan <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/6338349/Pakistans-ISI-still-supporting-the-Taliban-say-Afghans.html">claimed</a> that his nation provided the U.S. and U.K. with proof that ISI officers were directing Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, specifically mentioning an attack on the Indian embassy the previous year.</p>
<p>The Pakistani ISI’s role in arresting Baradar is therefore extremely significant. It shows that one of the Taliban’s important allies has turned against them. This has happened for several reasons. Pakistani opinion has turned against the Taliban as they have established Sharia Law where they take power and have carried out ruthless attacks on the country’s citizens. They have attacked ISI offices and last spring, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/22/AR2009042200863.html">advanced</a> to within 60 miles of Islamabad. At the same time, outrage over CIA drone attacks is putting pressure on the Pakistani government that can only be alleviated by doing the work that the Americans have been forced to do for them. This does not necessarily mean that the Pakistanis will undertake a full-fledged offensive against safe havens in their country, but it’s a notable improvement in their behavior.</p>
<p>The Taliban first denied that Baradar had been caught, perhaps honestly believing that it was simply Western propaganda. Taliban commanders then tried to <a href="http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/02/taliban_confirm_mull.php">say</a> he was captured in Helmand  Province, probably in an attempt to disguise the fact that they do indeed rely upon Pakistani safe haven to operate.</p>
<p>Baradar has been the operational leader of the Taliban for years. He is responsible for reorienting the Taliban strategy to focus on guerilla warfare similar to that practiced in Iraq, rather than engaging American forces in the open. His orders to focus on ambushes and the use of improvised explosive devices led to a significant increase in casualties over the past year. His skill has caused him to be <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7248549/Taliban-commander-Mullah-Abdul-Ghani-Baradar-a-formidable-foe.html">called</a> a “brilliant commander” by one expert on Afghanistan. He also led the Shura Council in the Pakistani Baluchistan Province capital of Quetta, controlled the Taliban’s finances and managed the “shadow government” of Taliban governors, mayors and other officials. In <em>Newsweek’s </em><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/208637">words,</a> “A cunning, little-know figure, he may be more dangerous than [Mullah] Omar ever was.”</p>
<p>This picture of Baradar’s role indicates that the Taliban effort is more centralized than is often assumed. This means that there will be leaders that can quickly replace him, but it also means that his oversized role in all of the Taliban’s affairs makes his absence extremely destabilizing for them. It also means that he has a treasure trove of knowledge about all of the organization’s functions. He likely knows where Mullah Omar is hiding, and his history of close dealings with Osama Bin Laden means he will know much about his operations. It’s been believed for a long time that Mullah Omar is residing in Quetta, and last fall, the U.S. deputy chief of mission in Islamabad <a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2009/10/01/Bin-Laden-Mullah-Omar-in-Quetta-US-says/UPI-79241254428768/">said</a> it was believed that Bin Laden also was there. If that report is true, then there is a very good chance that Baradar knows the location of Bin Laden as well—or that if he doesn’t, he can reveal the people closest to him.</p>
<p>One other area he can certainly shed light on is Iran’s alliance with the Taliban. Small arms and IEDs became the staple of the Taliban’s attacks under Baradar’s guidance, and the U.S. military knows that these are being <a href="http://www.worldthreats.com/?p=1655">provided</a> by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, along with training. In one raid in Heart Province in August, over 100 BM-1 rockets and dozens of C4 explosives made by the Iranians were <a href="http://www.worldthreats.com/?p=1609">seized.</a></p>
<p>It’s possible that the removal of Baradar from Taliban’s hierarchy could spark some internal strife. It is known that he has had several major rivals in the past, with the sharpest <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/208637/page/3">challenge</a> coming from Mullah Dadullah Akhund, who Baradar viewed as reckless. As their conflict escalated, Dadullah was killed in a raid that “was clearly guided by inside information.” Dadullah’s younger brother then began attacking Baradar, resulting in his expulsion from the Taliban. Soon after, someone provided inside information on his location allowing the Pakistanis to arrest him, just as had happened to his brother.</p>
<p>Luckily, U.S. officials claim that Baradar is talking and giving up intelligence. This will be a test of the Obama Administration’s interrogation policy, although the Pakistanis are also involved, with their much more lax restrictions. If Baradar’s information leads to more captures, causing a domino effect that turns the war in Afghanistan around, the Obama Administration will undoubtedly use it to vindicate their policy on Pakistan and interrogations. If the information he provides is limited, President Obama’s opposition will take aim.</p>
<p>Baradar’s inability to serve won’t end the Taliban, as he has trained many of his fighters in his tactics and strategy. It would not be an exaggeration, however, to state that the intelligence he gives could begin the Taliban’s darkest days. A large amount of the information will only be useful, though, if it can be acted upon and the willingness of the Pakistanis to act quickly and aggressively against the safe havens on their territory before such intelligence becomes outdated is still in question.</p>
<p><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /></p>
<p><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /><input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/ryan-mauro/breaking-the-taliban/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Andrew C. McCarthy: Holder on Holder &#8211; National Review Online</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-holder-on-holder-national-review-online/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=andrew-c-mccarthy-holder-on-holder-national-review-online</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-holder-on-holder-national-review-online/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:10:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew c]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew C. McCarthy - National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assertions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bomber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal defendant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Justice System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doj]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fundamental problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[handling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hostile forces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[letter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass murder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miranda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miranda warnings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[missive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitch McConnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national review online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peacetime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[s line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senate minority leader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senate minority leader mitch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senate minority leader mitch mcconnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[umar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=48983</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Attorney General Eric Holder has responded to criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of the Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, with an “all’s well that ends well” letter to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell. Holder’s missive vigorously defends what he says was his decision to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant, to impose peacetime law-enforcement [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Attorney General Eric Holder has responded to criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of the Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, with an “all’s well that ends well” letter to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell.</p>
<p>Holder’s missive vigorously defends what he says was his decision to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant, to impose peacetime law-enforcement protocols on his interrogation, and to charge him in civilian court. He argues that the use of the criminal-justice system has been vindicated because the terrorist is talking again (thanks to whatever undisclosed deal the Justice Department had to make with him). The letter contains various misleading assertions but is a fair statement of Holder’s philosophy — and it is good to have such a statement, given that the DOJ’s practice under his leadership too often has been to stonewall.</p>
<p>The fundamental problem with the attorney general’s line of argument is that it unfolds as though there were no war and no president. Abdulmutallab, Holder believes, is just like any other person arrested in the United States: When an arrest happens, government officials automatically employ “long-established and publicly known policies and practices.” It does not matter who sent the person or what he was arrested trying to do. Miranda warnings are given, lawyers are interposed, charges are filed, and trials are conducted. Even if the nation is at war, we don’t inquire into whether the arrested person is an operative dispatched here by hostile forces to commit mass murder. We don’t concern ourselves with whether he knows about other people plotting the same thing. All that matters to Holder is that we have our procedures, and they must be followed.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/424019/holder-on-holder/andrew-c-mccarthy">Holder on Holder &#8211; Andrew C. McCarthy &#8211; National Review Online</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/andrew-c-mccarthy-holder-on-holder-national-review-online/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defending the Indefensible</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/defending-the-indefensible/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=defending-the-indefensible</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/defending-the-indefensible/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 06:31:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bomber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bombing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[british police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[combatant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crevice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal defendant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal matter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy combatant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[example]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence failure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investigators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[matter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military commanders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miranda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miranda rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitch McConnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mohammed Atta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nigeria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obstacle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reason]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[republican senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Mitch McConnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shortcomings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Son]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.K.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[View]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welcome news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=48746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Treating the Christmas bomber like a common criminal was a national security blunder. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alg_umar_abdulmutallab.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-48747" title="*Dec 28 - 00:05*" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alg_umar_abdulmutallab-300x225.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="225" /></a></p>
<p>After being roundly condemned for charging Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant – a decision that granted the would-be Christmas bomber the <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2010/01/26/abdulmutallab-stops-talking-after-being-read-miranda-rights-wsj-com/">right to remain silent</a> after a brief 50-minute interrogation session – the Obama administration this week went on the offensive against its critics. Not only is the abrupt end to Abdulmutallab interrogation not the intelligence failure it appears to be, the administration insists, but it actually vindicates its view of terrorism as a criminal matter.</p>
<p>The administration’s new line is that Abdulmutallab has been <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584655,00.html">cooperating with investigators since last week</a> and has even provided intelligence in several ongoing terrorism investigations. This is, to be sure, welcome news. Yet the administration’s decision to read Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights, instead of treating him as an enemy combatant under the laws of war, remains deeply troubling. It also epitomizes the shortcomings of the administration’s view that the criminal justice approach is the most effective one against the country’s terrorist enemies.</p>
<p>If the administration is to be believed, Miranda rights and other criminal protections are no obstacle in terrorism investigations. In a <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/AG_Letter_2-3-10.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody">letter</a> to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell yesterday, Attorney General <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2357">Eric Holder</a> argued precisely this point, citing as an example Operation Crevice, in which British police busted up a Pakistani al-Qaeda cell. In the course of that investigation, Holder notes, “law enforcement agents gained valuable intelligence regarding al-Qaeda military commanders and suspects involved in bombing plots in the U.K. from a defendant who agreed to cooperate after being advised of, and waiving his <em>Miranda </em>rights.”</p>
<p>This invites the obvious question: What if the defendant had not waived his Miranda rights? Indeed, that is what initially happened in Abdulmutallab’s case. Informed of his right to remain silent, he promptly chose to exercise it. The reason he has since waived that right seems entirely fortuitous. Following his failed bombing attempt, several FBI agents traveled to Nigeria to plead with Abdulmutallab’s family for assistance. Ultimately, the family traveled to the U.S., where they persuaded Abdulmutallab to cooperate.</p>
<p>Yet this is not a counterterrorism strategy; it’s sheer luck. It’s lucky, for instance, that the Abdulmutallab family – including his father, who first warned U.S. authorities about his son’s extremist extracurriculars – disapproved of his jihadist ambitions. More typical in the Muslim world are families who, like many Palestinians, <a href="http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=18773">praise</a> their children’s choice to become “martyrs” or who, like the parents of lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1550856.stm">deny the overwhelming evidence</a> that their children are terrorists. Had the Abdulmutallabs been more representative of the Islamic world, their son might never have cooperated.</p>
<p>That would have left the administration with few options. With harsh interrogation techniques already banned under the Bush administration – a position supported by the current White House – Abdulmutallab would have been free to withhold intelligence from interrogators.</p>
<p>If Abdulmutallab’s cooperation is not a convincing argument in favor of the administration’s criminal justice strategy, what is? Attorney General Holder has advanced two, both of them diversionary.</p>
<p>The first is that several terrorists have been successfully prosecuted under the criminal justice system. Among Holder’s examples is “shoe bomber” Richard Reid, who is serving a life sentence despite being read his Miranda rights within minutes of being removed from the transatlantic flight he had hoped to blow up.</p>
<p>Reid isn’t a particularly strong example, however. One reason the Bush administration pressed criminal charges against Reid instead of charging him as enemy combatant is that the military commissions system for dealing with enemy combatants <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/02/mukasey-calls-holder-doj_n_445654.html">did not yet exist</a>. That is no longer the case. Moreover, Reid’s conviction was obtained in no small part because he chose to <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/10/04/reid.guilty.plea/">plead guilty</a>.</p>
<p>Still, it’s hard to hard to dispute that the criminal justice system has in the past secured the convictions of terrorists. But at what cost? What intelligence information was lost in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks because of the decision to Mirandize Reid? For that matter, what could intelligence services have learned had they been able to interrogate Abdulmutallab at length sooner? As the administration admits, he has been silent for nearly a month. In light of reports by senior U.S. intelligence agents this week that al-Qaeda is expected to attack the United States in the next three to six months, that silence – and the resulting gap in knowledge on al-Qaeda activity – could prove perilous.</p>
<p>Holder’s other argument is that no one in the intelligence community objected to the government’s decision to pursue criminal charges against Abdulmutallab. But it’s a stretch to see such silence as an endorsement. What else could one expect under an administration that has repeatedly floated the possibility of criminal investigations against CIA officers for carrying out interrogations of terrorist detainees? If the intelligence agencies have not challenged the Justice Department on Abdulmutallab, it may be because they do not want to be its next target.</p>
<p>That Abdulmutallab is now cooperating with intelligence agencies is encouraging. But it’s important to note that this is happening despite – not because of – the administration’s wrongheaded decision to charge him as a common criminal. It’s all well and good for the administration to claim that it will use all tools, from the criminal justice system to intelligence gathering, to keep the country safe. But the beginning of wisdom on national security is the recognition that treating terrorists as common criminals can diminish the very intelligence this critical job demands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/defending-the-indefensible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Airline Terror Suspect Provides Key Intelligence &#8211; FOXNews.com</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/airline-terror-suspect-provides-key-intelligence-foxnews-com/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=airline-terror-suspect-provides-key-intelligence-foxnews-com</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/airline-terror-suspect-provides-key-intelligence-foxnews-com/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 04:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[administration official]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[airliner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blind spot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bomb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cooperation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Detroit-bound]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fbi officials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foxnews com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence officials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawmakers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local news news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nigeria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nigerian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nigerian man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[official]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political rivals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sen. Susan Collins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senior administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[susan collins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terror suspect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tuesday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[umar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[underwear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=48602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[WASHINGTON — The Nigerian man accused of trying to use a bomb hidden in his underwear to bring down a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas has been cooperating with investigators since last week and has provided fresh intelligence in multiple terrorism investigations, officials said Tuesday.Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab&#8217;s cooperation could prove to be a national security victory [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584655,00.html"><img src='http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2_63_a320.jpg' alt='' /></a></p>
<p>WASHINGTON —  The Nigerian man accused of trying to use a bomb hidden in his underwear to bring down a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas has been cooperating with investigators since last week and has provided fresh intelligence in multiple terrorism investigations, officials said Tuesday.Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab&#8217;s cooperation could prove to be a national security victory and a political vindication for President Obama, who has been under fire from lawmakers who contend the administration botched the case by giving Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, rather than interrogating him as a military prisoner.In the days following the failed bombing, a pair of FBI agents flew to Nigeria and persuaded Abdulmutallab&#8217;s family to help them. When the agents returned to the U.S., Abdulmutallab&#8217;s family came, too, according to a senior administration official briefed on the case. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.FBI officials continue to question Abdulmutallab, working in collaboration with CIA and other intelligence authorities, the official said. Obama has received regular updates on the interrogation, according to the official.While the interrogation continued, White House and intelligence officials quietly seethed as political rivals accused them of putting lives at risk. That criticism peaked last weekend when Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, in the weekly Republican address, accused the administration of having &#8220;a blind spot when it comes to the war on terrorism.&#8221;</p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584655,00.html">Airline Terror Suspect Provides Key Intelligence &#8211; Local News | News Articles | National News | US News &#8211; FOXNews.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/airline-terror-suspect-provides-key-intelligence-foxnews-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>David B. Rivkin Jr. and Marc A. Thiessen: A Tale of Two Terrorists &#8211; WSJ.com</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/david-b-rivkin-jr-and-marc-a-thiessen-a-tale-of-two-terrorists-wsj-com/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=david-b-rivkin-jr-and-marc-a-thiessen-a-tale-of-two-terrorists-wsj-com</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/david-b-rivkin-jr-and-marc-a-thiessen-a-tale-of-two-terrorists-wsj-com/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ahmed Ghailani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bomber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christmas day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cia interrogations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutional right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David B. Rivkin Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[day bomber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expertise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal district court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Focus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence failure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interrogating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kenya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marc A. Thiessen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[massive proportions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military commissions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miranda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miranda rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[preet bharara]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right to a speedy trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rivkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Southern District]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[southern district of new york]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tanzania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[umar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wsj]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=48512</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama administration&#8217;s decision to read the Christmas Day bomber his Miranda rights has rightly come under withering criticism. Instead of a lengthy interrogation by officials with al Qaeda expertise, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was questioned for 50 minutes by local FBI agents and then later advised of his &#8220;right to remain silent.&#8221;It&#8217;s well understood that [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575039201390613906.html"><img src='http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/ED-AK907_rivkin_G_20100201173753.jpg' alt='' /></a></p>
<p>The Obama administration&#8217;s decision to read the Christmas Day bomber his Miranda rights has rightly come under withering criticism. Instead of a lengthy interrogation by officials with al Qaeda expertise, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was questioned for 50 minutes by local FBI agents and then later advised of his &#8220;right to remain silent.&#8221;It&#8217;s well understood that the focus on gaining evidence for a criminal trial was an intelligence failure of massive proportions. Not well understood is that the most powerful recent argument for aggressively interrogating terrorists, keeping them in military detention, and prosecuting them in military commissions comes to us from the Obama Justice Department itself.On Dec. 18, 2009, days before the Christmas attack, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara, made a secret filing in federal district court that was aimed at saving the prosecution of Ahmed Ghailani, another al Qaeda terrorist. Ghailani is facing charges for helping al Qaeda bomb U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. Ghailani argues that those charges should be dropped because lengthy CIA interrogations have denied him his constitutional right to a speedy trial.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575039201390613906.html">David B. Rivkin Jr. and Marc A. Thiessen: A Tale of Two Terrorists &#8211; WSJ.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/david-b-rivkin-jr-and-marc-a-thiessen-a-tale-of-two-terrorists-wsj-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Defiant</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/obama-defiant/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-defiant</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/obama-defiant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 07:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bipartisanship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob McDonnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bomber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congressional budget office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic base]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[example]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[feature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freeze]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mohammed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nostrums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[package]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Ryan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[playbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poll ratings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[republican senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sector]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[skeptical view]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state of the union address]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stimulus package]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[umar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unmistakable message]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=47947</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unchastened and unbowed, the president doubles down on the Democrats’ agenda. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-47948" title="capt_photo_1264646697177-3-0" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/capt_photo_1264646697177-3-0.jpg" alt="capt_photo_1264646697177-3-0" width="399" height="284" /></p>
<p>In a speech that signaled his intention to “start anew,” perhaps the most notable feature of President Obama’s first-ever <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/27/text-of-obamas-first-state-of-the-union-address/">State of the Union address</a> was how remarkably stale it sounded.</p>
<p>Against the backdrop of plummeting poll ratings and the election of a Republican Senator in Democrat-friendly Massachusetts – an unmistakable message about the broad unpopularity of the policies supported by the administration and its allies in the Democratic Congress – President Obama last night hewed to a partisan playbook that can only be described as business as usual. From economically ruinous “cap-and-trade” legislation, to the widely disliked health care “reform” package, to specious left-wing nostrums like “equal pay for equal work,” the president pledged to work for a sharply ideological agenda that would have pleased the Democratic base even as it would have disappointed those who took seriously his repeated appeals to bipartisanship.</p>
<p>Obama began with the confession that he has “never been more hopeful about America’s future than I am tonight.” America has a more skeptical view. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported this week that the current 10 percent unemployment rate is no closer to receding in the near term. Add to that a runaway national debt expected to triple to $22 trillion over the next decade, much of it caused by government spending, and it’s not surprising that Americans are dissatisfied with the administration’s stewardship of the economy.</p>
<p>The president did little to boost their confidence. Obama’s assurance that his administration’s policies – namely, the $787 billion stimulus package – have saved two million jobs from being lost is by definition impossible to corroborate. Easier to measure is the stimulus’s effect on hiring: Economists agree that it has <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/27/news/economy/stimulus-but-no-jobs/index.htm">created no jobs</a>. Unsurprisingly, in touting the economic benefits of stimulus spending, Obama cited only jobs in the public sector. Given how little the administration has done to encourage hiring in the private sector, the president’s self-serving claim to have averted an economic disaster and saved the country from a “second Depression” was difficult to credit.</p>
<p>No more credible was the president’s promise to trim the country’s swelling debt. In keeping with a proposal floated earlier in the week, Obama called for a freeze on some discretionary spending programs. That this spendthrift administration is prepared accept some fiscal belt-tightening is of course a welcome development. But critics have been quick to note that the proposed cuts will be the equivalent of a drop in the ocean – especially since the costliest government programs – including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security – would be unaffected by the freeze.</p>
<p>Equally unfortunate was the president’s penchant, once again on display, for caricaturing and distorting the arguments of his political opponents. While Republicans like Wisconsin’s Paul Ryan have offered <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904575025080017959478.html">innovative solutions</a> for reforming high-cost government programs and restraining government spending, the president simply repeated his standard jibe that the GOP is “just saying no to everything” and offering no proposals of their own. Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell<strong>,</strong> himself a beneficiary of the populist backlash against the administration, paid a modest compliment to the intelligence of the American people and performed a legitimate public service when he used his rebuttal to call attention to the <a href="http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare">website</a> of Republican policy proposals. Indeed, McDonnell’s response was a textbook example of the kind of respectful and genuinely conciliatory tone that the president seems to endorse only in theory.</p>
<p>Obama missed his biggest opportunity to forge a political middle ground when he discussed national security. By significant margins, the American public favors more assertive counterterrorism measures. To that end, the administration could do much for American security, and its own political fortunes, if it supported the use of harsher interrogation techniques on terrorists like would-be Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and abandoned its plans to stage civilian trials for high-level jihadists like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The latter would not even be a particularly dramatic compromise, since the administration has already allowed for terrorist trials to continue in the military commissions system.</p>
<p>Instead, the president used his speech to denounce coercive interrogation techniques as “torture,” while chiding critics for presenting a “false choice” between defending national security and upholding the country’s values. Yet such tradeoffs arise all the time. The latest example would be underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Interrogated for just 50 minutes before being passed into police custody, he seems to have revealed little about terrorist operations abroad as a result. That such incidents have been allowed to occur on Obama’s watch inspires little confidence in the president’s claim that his administration is doing “what it takes to defend our nation.”</p>
<p>Unusually for Obama’s scripted speeches, the State of the Union showed a spectacular lack of self-awareness. Concluding his remarks, the president lamented that Americans have lost faith in the country’s institutions, not least the government itself. It was a statement as politically tone deaf as Obama’s recent <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/president-obama-scott-brown-massachusetts-victory/story?id=9611222">claim</a> that “the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office.” In fact, Brown was elected on the strength of an electoral insurgency against the administration and its domestic policy agenda. As he puzzles over Americans’ growing skepticism of big government, the president seems not to recognize that he is the change they seek.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/obama-defiant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brown’s National Security Victory</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/brown%e2%80%99s-national-security-victory/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=brown%25e2%2580%2599s-national-security-victory</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/brown%e2%80%99s-national-security-victory/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew c]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columnist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common sense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterterrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electorate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[encounter books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy combatants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Healthcare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ideology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indonesia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innocent lives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jamie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Janet Napolitano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jihadist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[martha coakley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mccarthy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[memoir]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national security issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[need]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[play]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[preface]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saul Alinsky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security front]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sen. McCain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TIME]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-states]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[willful blindness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=47472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Massachusetts voters reject treating our terrorist enemies like common criminals. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-47474" title="Democrats' Bad Week" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/brown1.jpg" alt="Democrats' Bad Week" width="450" height="323" /></p>
<p>Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and a columnist for <em>National Review</em>. His book <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Willful-Blindness-Andrew-C-Mccarthy/dp/1594032653/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1262125302&amp;sr=8-4">Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad</a> </em>(Encounter Books, 2008), has just been released in paperback with a new preface. Check out <a href="http://www.encounterbooks.com/">a description</a> from Encounter Books.</p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-47525" title="andymccarthy" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/andymccarthy.jpg" alt="andymccarthy" width="320" height="240" /></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Andy McCarthy, welcome to Frontpage Interview.</p>
<p>I would like to talk to you today about Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts and how it was the issue of national-security that put Brown over Coakley.</p>
<p>Can you talk a bit about that? The people seemed to have cared about terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants, yes?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> Jamie, great to be here as always.  And you’re right.  The Brown campaign’s internal polling told them something very interesting.  While it’s true that healthcare is what nationalized the election and riveted everyone’s attention to it, it was the national security issues that put real distance between the two candidates in the mind of the electorate—in blue Massachusetts of all places.  Sen.-elect Brown was able to speak forcefully and convincingly on issues like treating our jihadist enemies as combatants rather than mere defendants, about killing terrorists and preventing terrorism rather than contenting ourselves with prosecutions after Americans have been killed, about tough interrogation when necessary to save innocent lives.  Martha Coakley, by contrast, had to try to defend the indefensible, which is Obama-style counterterrorism.  It evidently made a huge difference to voters.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> What do you think of how Bush was treated on this whole issue?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy: </strong>As many of us predicted during the Bush years when the president was being hammered by the Left and the press, history is treating him much more kindly on the national security front.  His movement of the country to a war-footing rather than treating international terrorism as a criminal justice matter was common sense, but common sense cuts against the Washington grain so it took a strong president to do it.  Now, on issue after issue, he is being vindicated—he and Vice President Cheney, who has become the country’s leading voice on national security, after spending years being vilified.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> What role did McCain play?</p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> Sen. McCain is, as ever, a mixed bag.  He’s recently been very good on the need to treat the enemy as an enemy, not as a defendant. So that was helpful to Brown. But it can’t be forgotten that McCain was the force behind the libel of Bush as a torture monger and the consequent ruination of our interrogation policy.  And it was the “McCain Amendment” that gave us, as a matter of law, the extension of Fifth Amendment rights to our enemies overseas, which has had awful ramifications even outside the issue of interrogation practices. McCain is responsible for a lot of the fodder that made Obama possible.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> What lessons should Republicans take from Brown’s success?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> These national security positions resonate with voters.  Healthcare, TARP, and the economic issues in general are very important, but they’re complex and make people’s eyes glaze over sometimes.  The national defense issues, besides being the most important ones confronted by a political community, are comparatively easy to wrap your brain around.  And strong, unapologetic national defense in a time of terrorist threat is appealing to voters.  So we should be arguing these issues forcefully, and not worry about the fact that the left-wing legacy media will say nasty things about us.  Their instinctive America-bashing is why they are speaking to—or, better, speaking <em>at</em>—a steadily decreasing audience.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> The Left pretends that its positions in how to confront terror (or not to) are somehow founded on the Constitution. What’s the mindset here?</p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> Yes, because they reject the foundational fact that the Constitution is a compact between the <em>American people</em> and the government they created.  They think every person on planet earth is an American waiting to happen, born with the full panoply of American constitutional rights that can be asserted against the American people.  And they think the courts, rather than being a peer branch of our government, stand over and above our government:  a forum where the rest of the world, including enemies of the United States, is invited to make its case against the United States.  That’s a warped understanding of the Constitution.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>What hope does Brown’s victory give? What do you think Obama, Holder and Napolitano are thinking – or not thinking?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy: </strong>Well, I think it’s Brown combined with what’s happened in New Jersey and Virginia, with Obama’s plunging numbers, the unpopularity of the Democrats’ healthcare, employment and national-security policies, and the disgusting wheeling-and-dealing the supposedly “transparent” Left is doing behind close doors (i.e., not on C-SPAN). All these things give hope that freedom is on the march, that people are broadly rejecting statism.  But I don’t think Obama is a normal politician and that his administration is a conventional “let’s modulate to remain viable” administration.</p>
<p>Enacting their agenda is more important to them than being reelected, and they are not to be underestimated.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Why do you think that when I see or think about Janet Napolitano I am engulfed with a profound sense of doom and despair?</p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> Well, if I have this right, she is an official who is in charge of securing the homeland but &#8212; after ballyhooed, years-long investigations, including by the 9/11 Commissions &#8212; she didn&#8217;t know how the 9/11 hijackers got here, thought they snuck in from Canada, and believes that what they did when they got here was a &#8220;man-caused disaster&#8221; that had nothing to do with jihadist ideology (indeed, she thinks that saying &#8220;jihadist&#8221; is problematic). She does see ideology as a problem, of course, but only if it is &#8230; <em>conservative</em> ideology.  That is, she thinks the <em>real </em>terror threat comes from people with radical ideas like limited government, the sanctity of life, and the Second Amendment &#8212; especially if they&#8217;re military vets who&#8217;ve served in George Bush&#8217;s wars of aggression. And she is in charge of enforcing the immigration laws but wasn&#8217;t aware that entering the country illegally is a criminal offense.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t imagine why you&#8217;d have a problem with any of that, Jamie.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Who needs horror movies or a tragic film to make you cry when you have things like this to think about?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>Well, let’s move on:</p>
<p>What was this whole thing about Brown’s pick-up truck and Obama making fun of it? I thought Obama represented the common man?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy:</strong> This president has lived a very different kind of life from most Americans.  He lived his early, formative years in Indonesia, a majority-Muslim police state. After he returned to America at age ten or so, he dove into the fever-swamps of the Left and was steeped in the cynicism and nihilism of Saul Alinsky. For years, he&#8217;s surrounded himself with fawning sycophants who&#8217;ve told him he&#8217;s &#8220;The One.&#8221; And he&#8217;s extremely insulated from the real world of everyday Americans.  I don&#8217;t think the sudden burst of Obama-style populism is going to fly &#8212; and going after Brown&#8217;s pick-up is a good indication of why.  He thinks people who like their pick-up trucks are bitter-clingers.  Actually, they&#8217;re Americans.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Brown vs. Obama, 2012?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>McCarthy: </strong>I don’t think we should get ahead of ourselves.  Brown’s an impressive, talented guy, but he’s also someone no one outside of Massachusetts had heard of until a few short weeks ago.  But this does underscore something I’ve been saying for a long time.  As late as 1991, few people really knew who Bill and Hillary Clinton were, and yet they’ve towered over our politics from 1992 forward.  The world changed on a dime on 9/11.</p>
<p>A year ago today, with Pres. Obama just inaugurated and with the Democrats having wide margins in Congress, the Republican party seemed dead and even conservative intellectuals were telling us we had to abandon Reagan conservatism—the conservatism that’s leading us out of the woods.  This is all a long-winded way of saying:  We may not yet know, even today, who the leaders will be when 2012 rolls around.  We’ve got a ton on our plate right now, and the unknown tomorrow.  You know the old saw, “You want to make God laugh—tell Him about your plans.”  Right now, I’m worried about today, and content to figure 2012 will take care of itself.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Well before we say goodbye for now, what is on your mind the most right now? What can you tell our readers that will give us all some hope that America, despite its current leadership, can prevail against the threats it faces?</p>
<p><strong>McCarthy: </strong>After slumbering for too long, the public &#8212; the great swath of Americans that is basically conservative, patriotic, and thinks the country is the best the world has ever known, not in dire need of transformative &#8220;change&#8221; &#8212; has asserted itself.  But even if he&#8217;s held to one term, Obama will leave us in a deep hole.  The reckless borrowing and spending would take decades to dig out of even if we stopped it tomorrow. There is a lot of mischief a sprawling executive bureaucracy can do in four years, and Obama is likely to stock the federal courts with very left-wing judges who will try to impose transnational progressivism by fiat if the Republicans don&#8217;t have the gumption to stop the president from appointing them.  And that last point is what I think about most.</p>
<p>The challenge for Republicans is not to win the next elections.  The smart Democrats have already factored elections in.  Obama Leftists are not conventional politicians. They are true-believers. Of course they hope their friends at ACORN and similar outfits will soften the blow come November.  But if not, they are willing to endure electoral losses for what they see as the greater good of using this one-time opportunity they have to transform this country radically.</p>
<p>Republicans don&#8217;t so much need a plan to win elections &#8212; the Democrats&#8217; statist policies and their irresponsible positions on national security will take care of that.  Stopping bad government is not enough. Republicans need a plan, after they win elections, to roll back what the Left has done and is doing.  That will require courage and skill.  I hope we have it, but I confess to worrying about whether we do.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Andy McCarthy, thank you, and a pleasure and honor as always to speak with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/brown%e2%80%99s-national-security-victory/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Consequences of Obama: Terrorism is Back &#8211; by Dick Morris</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dick-morris/the-consequences-of-obama-terrorism-is-back-by-dick-morris/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-consequences-of-obama-terrorism-is-back-by-dick-morris</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dick-morris/the-consequences-of-obama-terrorism-is-back-by-dick-morris/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 06:11:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dick Morris]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abdulmutall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adequate justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[airspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Beset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blind spot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disarmament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[farouk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal prison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ft hood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guess]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harsh interrogation techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[home]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hunch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence operatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeremiah-wright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rev. Jeremiah Wright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[timidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unilateral disarmament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[watchful eye]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[witness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wrong conclusion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=45044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The tragic results of the President's unilateral disarmament in the terror war. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-45129" title="obamascowl" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/obamascowl.jpg" alt="obamascowl" width="370" height="256" /></p>
<p>Rev. Jeremiah Wright said that the &#8220;chickens came home to roost&#8221; on 9-11.  He was wrong.  But they have now, indeed, come home to roost as we witness the results of the unilateral disarmament President Obama has practiced in the war on terror.  Beset once more by terrorism on our soil and in our airspace, we find ourselves suddenly overmatched by those who the Bush Administration kept away from our shores for seven years.</p>
<p>This new onset of terrorism is not the product of any change in the international environment or some new &#8220;systemic&#8221; flaw in our intelligence operations.  It is due to the policy of President Obama in letting down our guard and inhibiting those charged with our protection.</p>
<p>Under Obama, the hunters have become the hunted as America inverted her priorities.  Those who have been working to keep us safe have, themselves, come under scrutiny for profiling, harsh interrogation techniques, and a failure to give terrorists constitutional rights they don&#8217;t have.</p>
<p>The result is predictable:  Timidity and caution have become the order of the day in our intelligence community.  In a world where hunch, guesswork, and a willingness to leap to conclusions by imagining the worst are vital to success, a cover your butt mentality has taken over.  If you come to the wrong conclusion, if you profile without adequate justification, if you accuse incorrectly, you are finished.  Your career and your pension will be gone.  Guess right and you are accorded anonymity.  Guess wrong and you&#8217;re through.</p>
<p>The failure of the intelligence operatives to pass along the information about the Ft. Hood shooter or the airline bomber did not flow from a blind spot or a lack of co-ordination, they stemmed from terrorism of a different sort &#8212; the terror of making a mistake and falling on the harsh mercies of Eric Holder.</p>
<p>Now Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutall sits, lawyered up, in a federal prison.  His interrogation will proceed, if at all, under the watchful eye of his counsel.  He will not finger other operatives nor warn us of other impending attacks.  He will receive the full panoply of constitutional rights, none of which he is entitled to.</p>
<p>Barack Obama does not seem to understand that these terrorists come here to use our laws and our system, not to protect us, not even to shelter themselves, but to destroy us.</p>
<p>Abdulmutall should be interrogated by the military, without benefit of counsel. The evidence we obtain should not be admissible in a court of law nor used as the basis for his sentencing.  But it must be used to ward off future threats and attacks.</p>
<p>But Obama is a true believer.  His persistence in downgrading the war on terror to a criminal investigation will continue.  And we will experience more and more attacks.  Because pessimism is the bodyguard of liberalism, he will explain to us that the world has become more threatening and that he is doing all he can to keep us safe.  But the truth will be that it will have been his policies and priorities that are leaving us exposed.</p>
<p>And the attacks will continue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dick-morris/the-consequences-of-obama-terrorism-is-back-by-dick-morris/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>56</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama’s Tortured Rendezvous With Reality &#8211; by Jamie Glazov</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jamie-glazov/obama%e2%80%99s-tortured-rendezvous-with-reality-by-jamie-glazov/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama%25e2%2580%2599s-tortured-rendezvous-with-reality-by-jamie-glazov</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jamie-glazov/obama%e2%80%99s-tortured-rendezvous-with-reality-by-jamie-glazov/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:03:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abdul Mutallab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Arabiya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cairo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[classicist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contingency operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guantanamo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[historian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hoover institution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innocent lives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interrogation techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamic Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Janet Napolitano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Khalid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[khalid sheik mohammed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KSM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Los Angeles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Major Hasan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man made disasters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass murderer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national humanities medal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qaeda leader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Secretary Napolitano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sheik Mohammed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soldier at war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stanford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stanford university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[style attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terror attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[today]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Victor Davis Hanson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[way ticket]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[West]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=44142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The President learns there are thousands of al-Qaeda terrorists who don't give a damn that his middle name is Hussein.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-44144" title="APTOPIX Obama" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/obama4.jpg" alt="APTOPIX Obama" width="450" height="276" /></p>
<p>Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Victor Davis Hanson, a classicist and historian at Stanford  University’s Hoover Institution. He is a <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzFlMGZkZjYxMTU2NDkwOWFhYWQxNGQ1Njk5MDk2YTA=">columnist for National Review </a>and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.<em><span> </span></em></p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-44146" title="hanson" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/hanson.jpg" alt="hanson" width="400" height="280" /></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Victor Davis Hanson, welcome to Frontpage Interview.</p>
<p>First things first, let me ask you this.</p>
<p>If our government was serious about fighting Islamic terrorism and saving lives, wouldn’t Abdul Mutallab be getting water-boarded just about now?</p>
<p>We know that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al-Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed – which included waterboarding – forced KSM to give up crucial information that ended up preventing countless terrorist attacks and saving an infinite amount of innocent lives. It allowed, for instance, the U.S. to capture key al- Qaeda terrorists and to thwart a planned 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles.</p>
<p>But now, thanks to the Obama administration and its approach to the terror war, Abdul Mutallab will probably be getting a lawyer and not have to say anything. This, naturally, drastically increases, rather than minimizes, the possibilities of a future terror attack on our soil and against our citizens.</p>
<p>Your thoughts?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> I don&#8217;t think right now the question is over interrogation techniques, but rather not giving this foreign national would-be mass murderer full rights, as if he were a common criminal rather than a non-uniformed soldier at war.</p>
<p>Mutallab apparently, has been happy to tell all he knows without even being interrogated formally, which makes the entire foiled attack even more absurd: a Nigerian radical Muslim buys with cash a one-way ticket, carries no check-in luggage, was previously reported by his own father as a threat to America, and boards a plane to America after previous stays in Yemen?</p>
<p>Before we even get to questions of interrogation, how about first some sanity? And in reaction to all this, Secretary Napolitano nonchalantly talks about the system working like &#8220;clockwork&#8221;? I think very soon we will hear of no more &#8220;overseas contingency operations&#8221; and &#8220;man-made disasters&#8221;—and no more Janet Napolitano as head of our homeland security.</p>
<p>And when the next official struts and says &#8220;Bush did it&#8221;, the public will sigh &#8220;Thank God, he did&#8221;, since in comparison with the seriousness with which the prior administration dealt with terrorism, the Obama team seems to consider radical Islam an interesting catalyst for a civil liberties debate. &#8220;Reset&#8221; button probably won&#8217;t be used any more either—the phrase is too ironic now, and would mean going back to our anti-terrorism policies from 2001-9, which are preferable to the present mess. In political terms, one cannot ask millions of Americans to take off their belts and shoes, and then not put someone like Mutallab on a no-fly list.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> The fate of Gitmo?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> With over 100 Yemenis in Guantanamo, I doubt the facility will be closed; perhaps it will be virtually closed like the Iranian deadlines to stop building a bomb, or the health-care deadlines. I doubt too that Khalid Sheik Mohammed is ever tried in New   York; that partisan gambit will be quietly Guatanamoized.</p>
<p>The present Obama diffidence—trash the Bush anti-terrorism protocols, bow, and apologize abroad, contextualize the US in the Al Arabiya interview and Cairo speech, promise to try KSM in New York, shut down Guantanamo—does not quite work in the context of a new series of human IEDs being unleashed against the US. Surely there are one or two astute advisors who will take the President aside and quietly say, &#8220;Your present rhetoric and policy are nuts! And you will destroy the Democratic Party for 30 years if you continue!&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Abdul Mutallab doesn’t seem to come from the ranks of the poor, the oppressed and the downtrodden. What does this do to the Left’s belief that the devil made them do it when it comes to our enemies?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> Well that debate was over long ago, when we learned of the past profiles of the 9/11 killers, the West  Bank suicide monsters, and many of the human bombs who went off in Iraq.</p>
<p>The angriest at the West are those with enough money, and education to have developed a full sense of inferiority, self-disappointment, envy, and jealousy. A Major Hasan or Mutallab or Atta inside the West sees the prosperity, liberality, informality, and success around him, begins to figure that no such thing exists in the world of the Middle East and Islamic world, and, presto, believes America and the Jews ensured that there is no resurgent majestic caliphate. We excite the appetites in these characters faster than radical Islam can repress them. That we too often apologize and convey a sense of shame about our own culture only emboldens these killers in their fantasies.</p>
<p>Every bit as important as our military response and vigilance, is our moral tone, which should be along the following lines: &#8220;Dear radical Muslims, you, not us, created your present misery through religious intolerance, gender apartheid, statism, corruption, tribalism, anti-scientific fundamentalism, and autocracy, and we have neither regrets about our own success nor responsibilities for your own self-induced miseries, unfortunate as they are.&#8221; Until they get that message, we will have the sort of image conveyed by Obama in Cairo and his Al Arabiya interviews: pleasing to the world, but a signal to those who despise the US that we really do not believe in our own exceptional history and institutions.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> You mentioned Napolitano, her moronic statements, and how she might not be around much longer. What’s the psychology here of this administration and its overall dance with denial?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> They seem very naive and inexperienced, almost as if to say: &#8220;This is not supposed to be happening to me; I was elected to undo George Bush&#8217;s anti-constitutional, so-called war against terror, not actually fight real life terrorists.&#8221; In this administration everything is &#8220;isolated&#8221; and &#8220;allegedly&#8221;, unless you&#8217;re the Cambridge police, and then we really can snap to instantaneous judgement.</p>
<p>Again, I think the Obama administration felt that it would prance in, and end the bad war in Iraq, finish off the good war in Afghanistan, and dismantle the unnecessary Bush crusade against mythical dragons. Instead, they learned that Iraq was essentially won by Bush, Afghanistan is heating up, and there are thousands of al Qaeda terrorists who hate us for who we are, and don&#8217;t give a damn that our President&#8217;s middle name is Hussein. We are no longer dealing here with college deans and TV pundits who are wowed by split-the-difference, hope-and-change soaring rhetoric.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Two of the four leaders behind the Northwest Airlines passenger jet appear now to have been released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007. Significance?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> It reminds us of what happens when the Bush administration caved to the popular slur that Guantanamo was a veritable Gulag, and also reminds us that those in Guantanamo were there for a reason.</p>
<p>We have this la-la land fantasy that there are perfectly good and bad choices. But there are no such things. We are targeted by premodern killers, out of uniform, who are keen students of Western doubt and guilt. And in dealing with them, there are no easy solutions, as is always true when the postmodern meets the premodern.</p>
<p>Guantanamo was a bad solution amid far worse alternatives. Candidate Obama demogogued the issue, as he did tribunals, renditions, and the Patriot Act, and now, invested with responsibility rather than mere rhetoric, can&#8217;t close it when he promised. &#8216;Guantanamoize&#8217; is a good verb for incessant rhetorical deadlines that are never met. Ask Ahmadinejad.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Concluding thoughts? What most worries you about the threat we face and the people who are supposedly overseeing our protection?</p>
<p><strong>Hanson:</strong> Our well intentioned leaders see radical Islam more as an alternative world view that has grievances, rather than a sick, perverted Nazi-like creed that wants to take the world back to a 7th century theocracy, where freedom is denied, heretics and gays stoned, and women relegated to servile status&#8211;all overseen by rather creepy autocrats that destroy almost any modern institution they encounter.</p>
<p>Too often Obama, Biden, Holder, Napolitano, etc. see terrorists in terms of domestic criminals, not as enemy combatants. But once one wades into that legalistic mess of war being a judicial circus, nothing good comes from it: is it a supposed sin to water-board the confessed architect of 9/11 to find out about future mass murdering, but OK in legal terms to be district attorney, judge, jury, and executioner in a nanno-second when sending Predator drone hellfire missiles into the mud-brick compounds of suspect terrorists and their families in Waziristan?</p>
<p>We are in a race between sober people around Obama trying to apprise him of the danger, and his natural Carter-like take on America&#8217;s partial culpability for world tensions. Let us hope that the serious people win.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Victor Davis Hanson, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2009/jamie-glazov/obama%e2%80%99s-tortured-rendezvous-with-reality-by-jamie-glazov/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1976/1989 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 10:37:57 by W3 Total Cache -->