Monday, May 03, 2010

Times Square Bomb

Was the Times Square bomb scare a teachable moment for the administration? Today Gibbs was asked how he would characterize the event and he called it terrorism, from a terrorist. Gasp--what happened to their earlier ban on the word?

Could it be dawning on these guys that if they still hate us even with a person like Obama in the White House that words alone really don't matter much? Let's hope so, because we need a strong commander-in-chief, even if he's a quasi-socialist.

As to the possible bomber(s), it's odd that Chuck Schumer initially said they didn't suspect an international connection because there was no "chatter" on the lines, only to be replaced with a story the next day about a possible international connection. Maybe that tells us some things. Like one, terrorists have changed their ways and are relying on smaller-scale operators who don't create as much chatter (thanks to Bush's electronic dragnet that was kept intact with Obama) and two, they know enhanced interrogation isn't there to finger the small cells that fall through the cracks in spynet. My God, was Biden actually correct on this? We can hope.

As to the political side, surely there are a few who are disappointed that another Timothy McVeigh wasn't found, itself kind of ironic considering the dud status of this bomb and the fact that all of McVeigh's test bombs didn't work either--until Nichols got back from the Philippines. And you know the rest..

MORE 5/4/10

The Dems just can't resist politicizing the war on terror. For six years they harped over Iraq, even if it meant harming the war effort (dissent was patriotic, remember). That meme, helped along by the leftist press, largely catapulted them to absolute power in 2006-2008. And now that we've had the fourth event in the past year on American soil and the administration is finally using the T word again, Steny Hoyer comes out chest-thumping about how good the Dems are on terror compared to the GOP:
“We're tough on terrorists. That’s our policy. That’s our performance. And, in fact, we've been more successful,” Hoyer said at his weekly press availability.
Clearly they are pushing back on a proposed mid-term campaign theme from the Repubs--not that anyone would dare politicize such a thing. But this was perhaps telling:
“You've got to do everything you possibly can, and pray that you get also lucky,” he added. “Not because luck is what you want to rely on, but because, clearly, it is such a difficult challenge.”
Or maybe luck IS what they are relying on. After all, that's how using law enforcement to fight terrorism works. Kudos to the Feds for wrapping these people up so quickly but let's face it, we got lucky that Abdulmuttalob's underwear was a dud or about 200 people would be dead now. We got lucky this guy was a hack or several hundred more might be joining them. Schumer said there was no chatter in the system--so he just admitted we are blind to these plots. It's clear that's why the Bush people pushed the interrogation side.

MORE 5/5/10

The WaPo is trumpeting Eric Holder's "good week" in catching the Times Sq bomber by quoting such non-partisan luminaries as Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod. OK, so it was a good week for the FBI and law enforcement, who nabbed the perp through some good police work. And so it goes with the law enforcement approach to terrorism--the bomb didn't go off and they got their man.

The question is, was it a good week for the agency heads charged with helping to stop plots before they start, like CIA and NSA? Nobody seems to be asking Panetta.


Debbie said...

They were "lucky" with the Christmas Day underpants bomber, they were lucky with the Time Square bomber. However, they were not so lucky with Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood (14 dead and many others wounded). They were also not "lucky" with Najibulla Zazi, this was police work and tips from the UK that caught this reportedly larger than 9/11 planned attack.

Luck will only hold out so long.

They did use the "T" word but they still fail to use the "I" word.

You read RJ's comments.

Right Truth

Anonymous said...

Yes, I did see the warning at the EPA web site telling me you posted a picture of Janet Napolitano and warning me to stay away, but I couldn't resist coming over and reading what you had to say. Yes, it's true that I'm blind now, but I did at least get to read what you had to say and for that, I am eternally grateful. Now it is time to observe the likelihood that the Time Square Bomber voted for Barack Obama. Scary, huh?

But then I read an email yesterday a suggestion that “Middle Eastern” looking men and women are probing military bases throughout CA. You know, driving up to the main gate and telling the (mostly) civilian guards that they have a package to deliver to "Air National Guard." So far, this hasn’t worked; this is the good news.

I am also hearing that as military men and women, and their dependents, purchase goods and services at "Middle Eastern" owned businesses, there is a keen interest in what units are gearing up for deployment to the Middle East, how many soldiers or airmen will deploy, what kind of equipment they have, and so forth.

I'm sure this is all the result of someone's over-active imagination; such things could never happen with the Obama administration leading us. Yet, I wonder why we aren’t reading of this in the state-run media, or why the FBI doesn’t seem to be very concerned about it.

Semper Fi

A.C. McCloud said...

Yes, I did see the warning at the EPA web site telling me you posted a picture of Janet Napolitano and warning me to stay away

Just don't report me to, that's all I ask.