‘War on Terror’ Ends Because Obama Administration Won’t Mention It

My son Barry came home from school today.  He was dirty, bleeding, and crying.

“What happened?”  I asked.

“Those mean bullies beat me up again,” he finally managed.  It appeared his nose had been broken.  He clearly needed to go to the emergency room.

“Did you try ignoring them?  Did you pretend they didn’t exist, like I told you to?”

“Yes.  And I pretended they weren’t beating me up, too.  But I could still feel them punching me.”

“Well, you’re just going to do a better job ignoring them, little mister.”

None of that actually happened, thank God.  But I can assure you that I would have had a very different response if it had.  “Temporarily insane” would be the legal term I would stick to.

Not so, the Obama administration.  After nearly two months in office, they are clearly permanently insane.

First the Obama administration announced that it was abandoning the phrase, “War on terror.” Then we had the cheesy announcement that one day – Allah willing, and Blessed be the Prophet – we will close Gitmo.   Then Obama decided we weren’t going to bother to try the guy who masterminded the bombing of the USS Cole.  Then we had the announcement from Obama that the Taliban can be a moderate and reasonable bunch, after all.  Then we had the abandonment of the term “enemy combatant” (noting that it comes from the language of the Geneva Convention’s use of “unlawful combatants” who specifically do NOT fall under the Treaty).

Now we get to stand by and watch while the term “terrorism” and “terrorist” gets the goodbye kiss.

Napolitano Avoids Mentioning ‘Terrorism’ in Remarks to Congress

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano avoids mention of the terms “terrorism” or “Sept. 11” in remarks prepared for her first congressional testimony since taking office, signaling a sharp change in tone from her predecessors.

Napolitano is the first homeland security secretary to drop the term “terror” and “vulnerability” from remarks prepared for delivery to the House Homeland Security Committee, according to a copy obtained by The Associated Press.

Tom Ridge, who headed the agency when it was launched in 2003, mentioned terrorism 11 times in his prepared statement at his debut before the oversight committee in 2003. And in 2005 Michael Chertoff, the second secretary, mentioned terrorism seven times, according to an AP analysis of the prepared testimonies.

Napolitano, a former Arizona governor, instead charts a course in very different terms than Chertoff, who used law enforcement and military jargon — “intelligence,” “analysis,” “mission” — to describe the agency’s objectives.

The department’s top priorities are spelled out in legislation that created it in 2001: preventing a terrorist attack in the United States; reducing the vulnerability for such an attack; and helping with the recovery if the U.S. is attacked.

Napolitano’s prepared remarks also show her using the word “attacks” less than her predecessors. She is the first secretary to use a congressional debut to talk about hurricanes and disasters, a sign of the department’s evolving mission following Hurricane Katrina.
Napolitano is not alone in her departure from terror talk.

President Barack Obama largely has avoided using the term “war on terror,” although it has not been scrubbed from the White House lexicon.

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee does not mention terrorism or Sept. 11 in his prepared remarks for Wednesday’s hearing either. Securing the borders, responding to natural disasters, ensuring transportation safety, protecting critical infrastructure and administering grants are the priorities, Democrat Bennie Thompson says.

That is all very, very bad.  It signals not only that the Obama administration is at a pre-9/11 mentality, but a pre-1979 mentality.  And for that matter, it signals a pre-Neville Chamberlain mentality.

But, as these things often do, the situation gets even worse.

In an interview with Der Spiegel, our new director of “Homeland Security” (boy, has THAT ever become a contradiction of terms!), offered the following by way of elaboration:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word “terrorism.” Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?

Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to “man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.

The interview is titled, “Away from the Politics of Fear.”  But it should be called, “Away from the Politics of Reality.”

Remember the outcry over “profiling” to identify terrorists at airports and other places?  We went from being able to specifically identify those who were most likely to pose a threat to having to check 103 year old ladies out of political correctness.  But at least we could still call terrorism “terrorism.”  Now we have to call it, “man-made disasters.”

Meanwhile, Iran is busily working toward a nuclear arsenal – they now have enough material to build fifty bombs – and the means to deliver that arsenal.  And then we will start seeing “man-made disasters” such as the world has never seen with terrorist Iran being impervious to direct retaliation.

The only “man-made disaster” we should be talking about is the November elections.  THAT qualifies for Napolitano’s new term.

P.S. If my hypothetical son had grown up to become an airline pilot, he would be in the same boat as in my intro: the Obama administration just took away the right of pilots who pass certification training to protect their cockpits with guns.

As the Washington Times story begins:

After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

The era of the “Kick Me” sign is back with a vengeance.

2 Responses to “‘War on Terror’ Ends Because Obama Administration Won’t Mention It”


    Speaking of Barack Obama:


    Barack Obama is a racial-minority individual and does not like racism:

    (I) I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention. Many people know what Bush did. And many people will know what Bush did—even until the end of the world. Bush was absolute evil. Bush is now like a fugitive from justice. Bush is a psychological prisoner. Bush often worries. In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.

    (II) It is opined that Bill Clinton committed terrifying, racist, hate crimes during his presidency, and I am not free to say anything further about it.

    (III) What if basically all racial-minority people would subscribe to the interpretations that George Herbert Walker Bush committed monstrous, racist, hate crimes while he was the President of the United States? It will eventually come out: it is only a matter of time.

    (IV) I know it may be hard to believe. However, it is absolutely true that Ronald Wilson Reagan committed horrible, racist, hate crimes during his presidency. Numbers 32:23: “Be sure your sins will find you out.”

    – A.W.

    (I can type 90 words per minute, and there are thousands of copies on the Internet (as of March 29, 2009) indicating the contents of (I), (II), (III), and (IV). And there are thousands of copies in very many countries around the world.)

    ‘If only there could be a ban against invention that bottled up memory like scent & it never faded & it never got stale.’ Off the top of my head, it came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    It will also surely be argued someday that God committed a hate crime in allowing you to learn to type, 90 words a minute or otherwise. But He is clearly off the hook in allowing you to learn to think – because it is rather apparent that you never did.

    Alluding to evidence of something “somewhere out there somewhere” is not quite the same thing as having evidence.

    Lastly, Winston Churchill didn’t commit a “war crime” for fighting the Nazis; Neville Chamberlain committed a war crime for abandoning helpless countries like Czechoslovakia to the Nazis, for appeasement to an evil tyrant, and for utterly failing to prepare his country for a war that any fool should have seen was coming. And Obama is revealing that he will likely be a “war criminal” of the same stripe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: