Posts Tagged ‘terrorist’

12th May
2014
written by Sean Noble

The kidnapping of more than 200 young girls by the terrorist group Boko Harem in Nigeria is horrific.

We can debate how we got to the point that this terrorist group was able to pull this off.  We can, in part, blame Hillary Clinton, who, while she was Secretary of State, worked against listing Boko Harem as a terrorist group, despite strong evidence of their close ties to Al Qaeda.

We can also blame this administration’s general position on terrorism – or probably better said, lack of strong position against terrorism.

Case in point:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously? The reaction by the greatest nation on earth to the horrific kidnapping of more than 200 young girls is a twitter hashtag? What, exactly did they expect to accomplish with a Twitter hashtag and a profile picture?

Even what the President said about it is incredibly disappointing:

“I have this remarkable title right now, the president of the United States,” Obama said, “And yet every day when I wake up, and I think about young girls in Nigeria or children caught up in the conflict in Syria — when there are times in which I want to reach out and save those kids.”

What Obama doesn’t seem to understand is that he has more than a “remarkable title” – he has remarkable responsibility that he is supposed to employ.

But, when you think about it, the vast majority of President Obama’s tenure has been more style than substance.  It isn’t about doing something, it’s about projecting – expressing opinion rather than doing the hard work of affecting actual change.

In a word, our president is a slacktivist.  Like so many other high-minded liberals, he thinks that tweeting something out, or creating a hashtag about an issue is actual activism.  Well, it’s not.

It’s past time for this administration to understand that we can’t conduct foreign policy with a hashtag. #Seriously

 

19th April
2013
written by Sean Noble

It’s been a tragic week for America.  Boston was terrorized during what is normally a joyous occasion – its annual marathon.  The Boston Marathon is prestigious.  You must qualify to enter.  Runners dream about it.  Even some who don’t want to run it, use its qualifying time as a benchmark when setting goals for other races.  On Monday, for many athletes, their dream-come-true became a nightmare when two bombs went off near the finish line.  At least three people are dead, with more than 100 injured.

 

Two days later, a fertilizer plant in Texas exploded.  At this time, that tragedy doesn’t appear to involve criminal activity or terrorism.  The explosion, which registered as a 2.1 magnitude earthquake, caused severe damage within a five-block radius.  Dozens or more are feared dead and hundreds are injured.

 

Much of this blog, like all political blogs, focuses on what divides us.  Not today.  Our fellow Americans are hurting.   We empathize with their sadness and fear and wish to soothe their pain.  During times like these we often ask ourselves what we can do.  We can donate blood, money, or time to charitable organizations.  We can also be thankful for what we have.  I’m thankful for my five wonderful children.  I’m thankful for their good health and for my own.  I’m thankful for the freedom we enjoy that is uniquely American.  I’m thankful that I can make a living doing what I love, and that, in my small way, I’m helping preserve our American freedom for future generations including my own children.

 

What are you thankful for?  In Boston on Wednesday night, many Bruins fan found a way to express their gratitude a mere two days after chaos struck their city – they sang the national anthem at the top of their lungs.  You can hear the Boston accents while they sing with pride, with love, and with gratitude for the things that weren’t lost on Monday. They got back up together – and we can join them.

1st November
2012
written by Sean Noble

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This editorial by the Las Vegas Review Journal is devastatingly spot on describing the failure of President Obama to adequately respond to the attack of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.  It is a must read in its totality:

 

Benghazi blunder: Obama unworthy commander-in-chief

U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other Americans died in a well-planned military assault on their diplomatic mission in Benghazi seven weeks ago, the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. So why are details surfacing, piecemeal, only now?

The Obama administration sat by doing nothing for seven hours that night, ignoring calls to dispatch help from our bases in Italy, less than two hours away. It has spent the past seven weeks stretching the story out, engaging in misdirection and deception involving supposed indigenous outrage over an obscure anti-Muslim video, confident that with the aid of a docile press corps this infamous climax to four years of misguided foreign policy can be swept under the rug, at least until after Tuesday’s election.

Charles Woods, father of former Navy SEAL and Henderson resident Tyrone Woods, 41, says his son died slumped over his machine gun after he and fellow ex-SEAL Glen Doherty – not the two locals who were the only bodyguards Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration would authorize – held off the enemy for seven hours.

The Obama administration was warned. They received an embassy cable June 25 expressing concern over rising Islamic extremism in Benghazi, noting the black flag of al-Qaida “has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities.” The Obama administration removed a well-armed, 16-member security detail from Libya in August, The Wall Street Journal reported last month, replacing it with a couple of locals. Mr. Stevens sent a cable Aug. 2 requesting 11 additional body guards, noting “Host nation security support is lacking and cannot be depended on,” reports Peter Ferrara at Forbes.com. But these requests were denied, officials testified before the House Oversight Committee earlier this month.

Based on documents released by the committee, on the day of the attack the Pentagon dispatched a drone with a video camera so everyone in Washington could see what was happening in real time. The drone documented no crowds protesting any video. But around 4 p.m. Washington received an email from the Benghazi mission saying it was under a military-style attack. The White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA were able to watch the live video feed. An email sent later that day reported “Ansar al-Sharia claims responsibility for Benghazi attack.”

Not only did the White House do nothing, there are now reports that a counterterrorism team ready to launch a rescue mission was ordered to stand down.

The official explanation for the inadequate security? This administration didn’t want to “offend the sensibilities” of the new radical Islamic regime which American and British arms had so recently helped install in Libya.

The official explanation for why Obama administration officials watched the attack unfold for seven hours, refusing repeated requests to send the air support and relief forces that sat less than two hours away in Italy? Silence.

An open discussion of these issues, of course, would lead to difficult questions about the wisdom of underwriting and celebrating the so-called Arab Spring revolts in the first place. While the removal of tyrants can be laudable, the results show a disturbing pattern of merely installing new tyrannies – theocracies of medieval mullahs who immediately start savaging the rights of women (including the basic right to education) and who are openly hostile to American interests.

When Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney promptly criticized the security failures in Benghazi, the White House and its lapdog media jumped all over him for another “gaffe,” for speaking out too promptly and too strongly. Prompt and strong action from the White House on Sept. 11 might have saved American lives, as well as America’s reputation as a nation not to be messed with. Weakness and dithering and flying to Las Vegas the next day for celebrity fund-raising parties are somehow better?

This administration is an embarrassment on foreign policy and incompetent at best on the economy – though a more careful analysis shows what can only be a perverse and willful attempt to destroy our prosperity. Back in January 2008, Barack Obama told the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle that under his cap-and-trade plan, “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them.” He added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” It was also in 2008 that Mr. Obama’s future Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, famously said it would be necessary to “figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” – $9 a gallon.

Yet the president now claims he’s in favor of oil development and pipelines, taking credit for increased oil production on private lands where he’s powerless to block it, after he halted the Keystone XL Pipeline and oversaw a 50 percent reduction in oil leases on public lands.

These behaviors go far beyond “spin.” They amount to a pack of lies. To return to office a narcissistic amateur who seeks to ride this nation’s economy and international esteem to oblivion, like Slim Pickens riding the nuclear bomb to its target at the end of the movie “Dr. Strangelove,” would be disastrous.

Candidate Obama said if he couldn’t fix the economy in four years, his would be a one-term presidency.

Mitt Romney is moral, capable and responsible man. Just this once, it’s time to hold Barack Obama to his word. Maybe we can all do something about that, come Tuesday.

29th January
2010
written by Sean Noble

President Obama is telling the Justice Department to find a different location than New York City for the terror trial. Mayor Bloomberg had expressed concern about the trial taking place in Manhattan and even liberal Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer wanted it somewhere else.

It begs the question: if you can’t do it in New York, where, pray tell, do you think you can do it? It certainly won’t be well received anywhere else. Maybe since Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid have been so gung ho about civilian trials of terrorists, they should do the trial in either San Francisco or Las Vegas.

Actually, Vegas seems like the perfect venue. It’s all for show anyway.

This whole episode is going to continue to damage Obama’s credibility on the war on terror, or whatever his administration calls it these days. The bottom line is that terrorists should not be tried in civilian courts in the first place.