forgottenliberty.com

Mark Thiessen, author of the book Courting Disaster: How the CIA Kept America Safe and How Barack Obama Is Inviting the Next Attack, called out CNN’s Christiane Amanpour about her inaccuracies regarding water boarding and enhanced interrogation techniques.  Thiessen went into the liberal stronghold of CNN and not only held his own, but also fought back putting Amanpour on the defensive.  He answers the question “is water boarding torture” and makes a great argument for enhanced interrogation techniques including how they saved lives.  I think I need to buy his book!

President Obama, well known for his soaring rhetoric and ability to cause audience members to faint while giving a speech, seemed more like a professor giving a lecture than a Commander in Chief announcing the decision to send 30,000 more troops into harms way Tuesday night at West Point.  The majority of the speech could have meshed perfectly with a power point presentation.  The only part of his speech that was able to wake the sleepy West Point Cadets was when he spoke about the greatness of America (something he has done very little of).

There is nothing inherently wrong with giving a boring speech, but this was not a speech outlining some domestic policy or economic plan.  It was a speech announcing the decision to send more Americans into battle.  If he was ever going to give  an inspiring speech, this was the time for it.  War is a terrible thing, but Americans know that it is sometimes necessary.  We just need a President to assure us that our cause is just and victory will be achieved.  During his speech, Obama never used the word victory.  He never assured the cadets listening to him that we would be victorious.  The closest he came was saying that we will be “successful”.  Is that the politically correct term for victory?  We know he doesn’t like the “V” word, because he said so himself in an interview with ABC,

The Obama administration has decided to bring several 9/11 co-conspirators, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, to New York City to stand trial.  I have to ask… why?  9/11 was an act of war and these terrorists are war criminals.  They should be tried in a military tribunal, not in a civilian court and given access to all the rights of an American citizen!

Obviously, there will be considerable security risks by having these terrorist in NYC, but there will also be serious legal ramifications.  The September 11th attacks have always been treated in a military fashion.  Terrorists were arrested/captured in a military manner as enemy combatants, not as a civilians.  If these terrorists (or should we now say “alleged” terrorists?) are given access to the American legal system and subsequentlygiven all the rights of an American citizen being charged with a crime, we are headed for trouble.

Were these terrorist read their Miranda rights when they were arrested/captured?  Were they formally charged with a crime before a judge or grand jury in a timely manner?  Were they given access to an attorney as soon as one was requested?  Obviously not because they were considered enemy combatants.  These technicalities could cause a case to be thrown out of court by a judge.  Is that going to happen with these “alleged” terrorists?

What about jury selection?  Will it be possible to find an impartial jury, especially in New York City?  What about

In light of the tragic massacre at Fort Hood, President Obama  has asked that we remain calm and avoid jumping to conclusions. Obviously, the conclusion President Obama does not want us to jump to is that this shooting was an act of Islamic terrorism.  From the Financial Times,

Barack Obama cautioned a stunned public on Friday against drawing quick conclusions on a shooting rampage by an officer at a Texas military base that killed 13 people.

The president made the comments as the commander of Fort Hood, the US’s largest base for deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, quoted witnesses as saying the suspected gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, shouted the Muslim declaration “Allahu Akbar” – God is great – as he opened fire. Speaking at the White House, Mr Obama said: “We don’t know all the answers yet, and I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts.”

In my opinion, Major Hasan intended to terrorize his victims and was motivated and influenced by his Islamic beliefs.  He didn’t impulsively start shooting people.   He planned his attack.  Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters, author of The War After Armageddon, wrote a column in the NY Post explaining why he believes Hasan was acting as a terrorist.  In Colonel Peter’s opinion, Islam and political correctness are