« | »

WH: We Need No Lectures On Terrorism

Latest example of Obama’s reaching across the aisles, welcoming criticism, encouraging bi-partisanship, from the opinion page of USAToday:

Opposing view: ‘We need no lectures’

Administration disrupts terrorists’ plots, takes fight to them abroad.

By John Brennan

February 9, 2010

Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe.

Immediately after the failed Christmas Day attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was thoroughly interrogated and provided important information. Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court.

The most important breakthrough occurred after Abdulmutallab was read his rights, a long-standing FBI policy that was reaffirmed under Michael Mukasey, President Bush’s attorney general. The critics who want the FBI to ignore this long-established practice also ignore the lessons we have learned in waging this war: Terrorists such as Jose Padilla and Saleh al-Mari did not cooperate when transferred to military custody, which can harden one’s determination to resist cooperation.

It’s naive to think that transferring Abdulmutallab to military custody would have caused an outpouring of information. There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical.

Would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid was read his Miranda rights five minutes after being taken off a plane he tried to blow up. The same people who criticize the president today were silent back then.

Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation. There have been three convictions of terrorists in the military tribunal system since 9/11, and hundreds in the criminal justice system — including high-profile terrorists such as Reid and 9/11 plotter Zacarius Moussaoui.

This administration’s efforts have disrupted dozens of terrorist plots against the homeland and been responsible for killing and capturing hundreds of hard-core terrorists, including senior leaders in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond — far more than in 2008. We need no lectures about the fact that this nation is at war.

Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America’s counterterrorism professionals and America’s system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.

John Brennan is Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

Whatever happened to dissent being patriotic?

But talk about chilling free speech.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, February 9th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

10 Responses to “WH: We Need No Lectures On Terrorism”

  1. proreason says:

    I’m just glad we had that brief 8 year respite when there was no politically motivated attacks on the prior administration.

    That was the time, remember, when the high-minded liberals were the opposition party.

    Oh there was the occasional principled objection, but the debate on all matters, particularly the debates about the oversees contingency operations, were always so respectful. It was a joyful time for patriotic dissent.

    At least, that’s how I remember it.

  2. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “It’s naive to think that transferring Abdulmutallab to military custody would have caused an outpouring of information. There is little difference between military and civilian custody, other than an interrogator with a uniform. The suspect gets access to a lawyer, and interrogation rules are nearly identical.”

    Odd, this is exactly the opposite of their argument last year. They focused their argument that somehow justice would be better served in a civilian court. Now, come to find out there is virtually no difference. My how the wind doth change.

    • Confucius says:

      That statement caught my eye too, Rusty.

      If there is little difference, then what’s the hullabaloo over using military custody and military interrogation?

  3. JohnMG says:

    John Brennan makes me want to vomit.

    ….”Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill……”

    Tell that to anyone who must board international flights from Europe. Brennan is an idiot. But then, what would anyone expect? He’s only mouthing the Obama administration’s positions. What dopes!!

    As to whether of not they need a lecture or two on terrorism, the obvious is, well…..obvious. The public’s contempt pressured the administration to once again begin using the word terrorist instead of some senseless euphemism. This whole administration needs to go sit in the corner and let some adults take over.

    Can’t wait for November.

  4. Reality Bytes says:

    Is it OK if I refer to Obama’s war footing as “Terroshizzle Mazizzle”? It’s catchy & it may even get him another Grammy appearance (or whatever).

  5. GetBackJack says:

    We Need No Advice On Terrorism

    That’s because the Democratic Party is the North American branch of global terror. Or, put another way, the North American franchisee of S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

  6. Liberals Demise says:

    Washington needs to Murtha away quickly so we can see “WHO” are the “Real Terrorist”!!

  7. Chuckk says:

    Brennan should be forced to fly on nothing but commercial flights.

  8. P. Aaron says:

    I thought Democrat Senator Harry Reid said: “The War is lost”. Or, was that in support of our troops and intelligence agencies/


« Front Page | To Top
« | »