Mitt Romney, in pledging to turn around the Olympics in 2002, had promised to restore the honor and integrity of the scandal-clouded Salt Lake City. The Games captured the world’s attention and became all the more urgent after terrorists attacked us on 9-11. But while Romney invoked the wellspring of American patriotism after the attacks, he neglected their heroes, the fallen firefighters of that early September morning.

Romney’s executive assistant, Donna Tillery, twice denied requests to provide free or discounted tickets to widows and orphans of the felled firefighters but gave them for free to Utah legislators just six weeks later, according to a new book, The Real Romney (HarperCollins, 2012).

Tillery sent e-mails to A.J. Barto, a former Salt Lake City firefighter helping the 9-11 widows and orphans, citing a policy barring giveaways, but Romney gave 100 free surplus tickets ($885 each) to Utah legislators. “I was outraged at the hypocrisy,” Barto told Kranis and Helman. “In less than two months, he went from saying, ‘We’re going to run a tight ship’ to throwing out free tickets to a group of people who could help him politically.” (221)

The gifts would have helped Romney politically. After living in Utah for three years, Romney flirted with running for office in the Beehive State.  He even reportedly contemplated running as a Democrat, though in the post-Olympics buzz there was no office available until 2004 which was too late for someone riding the successes of the the Games.

Still it isn’t too much of a stretch to consider Romney running in Utah as a Democrat. Romney would likely have taken on Bob Bennett, then among the longest surviving senators in the Congress as a Democrat or replaced him on the Republican ticket like Senator Mike Lee did in 2010. In the shadow of 9-11, Congress had already earmarked $200 million to make the Games safe. After the attacks, Senator Robert Bennett of Utah appropriated $34.4 million. Romney often went with Bennett to lobby legislators to approve the additional funds.

Either way, Romney would have gone on to sure victory if his poll numbers held. A Utah poll taken after the Olympics found Romney had 87% approval. Indeed, even today Romney, according to a recent poll, is very popular among Mormon Democrats, 62% of whom see him favorably.

Part of his success came from the Olympics’ production value. Romney was quick to seize on the theatricality of the attacks now that America had entered the world stage. He read Winston Churchill often and gave a rousing speech to hundreds of staffers and volunteers that culminated in singing ‘God Bless America.’  He also backed the effort to have a tattered American flag, recovered from the World Trade Center, carried into the opening ceremony. Although other nations griped that this politicized the Games, Romney refused to back down, and the flag’s appearance was a quintessential American act of defiance. The silent respect of 55,000 spectators in Salt Lake City and 2 billion viewers around the world was quite a sight.

But in forgetting America’s heroes and rewarding Utah’s legislators Romney may have done the survivors a disservice. Such stories may prove difficult for Romney in his bid for the presidency.

Van Jones (Photo East Bay Express via zTruth)

When Obama administration Green jobs czar Anthony “Van” K. Jones resigned late Saturday night, September 5, 2009 over the long Labor Day weekend, a storm of breaking news about his radical anti-American history was being reported by conservative bloggers. One such storm was about the racist, hate-America rally Van Jones held the day after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks on the United States where speakers cheered the attacks and Jones himself said America deserved it.

World Net Daily was first to report on the rally, on August 28, 2009.

However, it was Powerline’s post the evening of September 3rd (and expanded on at Free Republic), hours before Jones’ resignation was announced, that included the first mention of what Jones said at the rally. The Powerline article was based on a leftwing report made at the time of the rally.

A YouTube video of the rally reported on by BizzyBlog on September 8th captures some of Jones’ remarks at the rally. (The quote from Jones is similar in nature to that quoted in the leftwing article. However, no context is given so Jones could have said both lines, or been accurately characterized but misquoted.)

Jones is featured twice at the end of the five minute video. BizzyBlog transcribed his comments:

(4:38) “It’s the bombs that the government has been dropping around the world that are now blowing up inside the U.S. borders.”

And:

“We’ve got something stronger than bombs, we have solidarity. That dream of revolutionary change is stronger than bombs.”

One unidentified speaker on the video praised the 9-11 attackers as heroes (transcribed by Kristinn Taylor).

“We’re always seeing America dropping bombs on people. Now the chicken is coming home to roost, as Malcolm say. (Cheers from the crowd.) We gotta deal with it. They got people so dedicated they gonna commit suicide to make their point. We gotta understand there’s a war going on that people are fighting for their own life, for their land. Right? We gotta support those people. We cannot let the lies of the media take our spirits down. We don’t want to see our people dying, innocent people dying. But in fighting a war, they don’t have the army to fight and block our warfare with the American people. Don’t call them cowards. They’re heroes that died. And they’re the people that we have to support in this case. The people of color are rising here and we gotta understand that. I just want to say we gotta support and don’t let this thing turn your spirits down. Turn ‘em up!”

An article posted by “gkt” at the leftwing site Indybay.org in the early hours of September 13, 2001 reported on the rally held just hours before in Oakland, California’s Snow Park:

A recurring theme of the speakers was the brutal violence committed by or supported by the United States government on a daily basis. “The bombs the government drops in Iraq are the bombs that blew up in New York City,” said Van Jones, director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, who also warned against forthcoming violence by the Bush Administration. “The US cannot bomb its way out of this one. Safety at home requires justice abroad.”

In a diverse international community shocked by recent world events, deep feelings about the United States government were expressed. A young Puerto Rican person said that “the belly of the beast had something back to eat.” A young Filipino human rights activist said that “when we found out what kind of place got hit, we were kind of glad to see the Pentagon burning. But we also know that thousands of Puerto Ricans, Haitians and other workers were in those buildings.” An African-American man who works on gentrification issues in West Oakland said that “we’re always seeing Americans drop bombs on people. We watch the Vietnamese get bombed, Iraqis get bombed, Palestinians get bombed, now it has come home to roost.” Japanese-Americans spoke about internment camps and the nuclear holocaust brought on by US militarism.

Violence and repression within the United States was also talked about. A representative of TransAction said, “We know what it’s like to experience police violence on a daily basis.” Mesha Monge-Irizarry, the mother of Idriss Stelley (who was killed by SFPD in June), also spoke: “We pray for many lives killed by this government, of black people, and of innocent black people in the third world who will be slaughtered with this terrorism retaliation.”

United States support, in the form of arms and funding, for apartheid in Israel was also discussed. “You want to know why they hate us?” asked one woman. “Forty Israeli tanks just entered Jericho tonight.”

Those present were determined to make their voices heard in an increasingly hostile, war-mongering climate scripted by the government and recited by corporate media. They also vowed to fight within their own communities against racism and hostility towards Arab-Americans. Everyone sensed that this was an important time in history, and that the stuggle against injustice requires international solidarity. “Everyone should be as wise as these inner-city youth here today,” Van Jones concluded. “We all have more in common with the working people of the earth than we do with George Bush or Colin Powell.”<

The article described the gathering as:

Organized by youth and people of color in Oakland and San Francisco, solidarity speakers included supporters of Palestine, people returning from the WCAR in South Africa, police brutality activists, anarchists and socialists, anti-gentrification activists and other people representing dozens of cultures and ethnicities. International solidarity was the theme as community and activist groups stood together against the threat of more US violence.

The comment by one of Jones’ “wise inner-city youth” cheering the attack on the Pentagon appears on the video and was transcribed by BizzyBlog:

(4:10) “But when we knew what those places represented, we were kind of also glad that there’s a place called the Pentagon where, where, military strategies which have killed millions of people around the face of the world (unintelligible). We know, to see that place burnin’, there was some satisfaction to it.”

A press release for the rally issued by Van Jones’ Ella Baker Center and STORM, bluntly stated the groups’ leftist race-baiting agenda:

Anti-Arab hostility is already reaching a fever pitch as pundits and common people alike rush to judgment that an Arab group is responsible for this tragedy,” said Van Jones, national executive director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. “We fear that an atmosphere is being created that will result in official and street violence against Arab men, women and children.”

“No matter who ultimately is to blame for these bombings, we cannot tolerate stereotypes and blanket attacks against any ethnic group,” said Raquel of STORM. “And we especially don’t want Asian-American, African-American, Latino or Native American communities getting pulled into a frenzy of hatred toward our sisters and brothers. We must stand together.”

Though people of color in particular will be invited to speak at the gathering, but everyone is welcome. (sic)

The groups behind the instant racist hate-America rally were listed in the press release as:

the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, Let’s Get Free, Youth Force Coalition, JustAct, Bay Area PoliceWatch, Underground Railroad and STORM/Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement.

Van Jones was a founder of STORM.

Newsbusters was the highest profile outlet to report on Jones’ remarks. After he resigned from the Obama administration, reporting on Jones’ background ceased. Even when he was picked up by Princeton and the Center for American Progress, the media swept his radical past under the rug.

In forthcoming articles, we’ll be picking the rug up to show more of what we and others found and reported about Anthony “Van” Jones that momentous Labor Day weekend of 2009.

When President George W. Bush spoke through a bullhorn to emergency rescue workers at Ground Zero just two days after 9/11, he put the world on notice: We are coming to get those who did this, and we will not stop until we do.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of threats posed by international terrorist organizations. Responding to the attacks, on October 7th President Bush declared a “war on terror” and identified Osama Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network responsible. Within weeks, as opposed to our current Commander in Chief’s dithering for months, a US-led coalition launched air-strikes against targets in Afghanistan, where Bin Laden was believed to be sheltered by the Taliban regime.

The Almanac of Policy Issues wrote: “Iraq’s demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself.”

Following a wasted year of fruitless entreaties to the United Nations to enforce its several Security Council resolutions against Iraq, believed to be in possession of weapons of mass destruction and harboring and supporting Taliban terrorists, President Bush and Congress moved forward, enacting Joint Resolution 114 to authorize the use of military force against Iraq.

And so began the “Global War on Terror”, the war against radical Islamists. We had crossed the point of no return–the war had begun.

Immediately following 9/11, President Bush’s job approval rating hovered at near 92%, his high water mark. No matter what vision President Bush had for his presidency, it would now be defined by this war and those fighting it.

Recall that at the time, the world was behind us foursquare, including a Congress that went along with it – albeit reluctantly – because of his high poll numbers. That 90-plus rating had to make the Democrats nervous because with ratings like that, President Bush could easily push legislation through Congress, thus setting the agenda, secure reelection in 2004, and greatly influence the GOP’s pick for the next president of the United States in 2008. Even “Ike” didn’t enjoy these ratings, but he came the closest.

The Left in Congress could not, would not, allow that to ever take root. So they launched an anti-war campaign, with an obvious assist from the MSM. The theme was quagmire, waste of blood and treasure, Rumsfeld’s war strategy. Even though the war was succeeding, the President’s ratings were going down. When the war effort stalled, he implemented “The Surge”. We took back control of Iraq and were in a mop up operation, yet the drum beat continued in the MSM, pile driving President Bush into the ground daily in a non-stop effort to drop his poll ratings. Recall the now infamous Harry Reid comment, “The war in Iraq is lost.” Reid & Company was hoping for President Bush to have his own personal LBJ/Vietnam Lost moment.

The full-scale attack to discredit President Bush and the war effort didn’t take long. His job approval numbers began slipping after his Jan. 30, 2002 State of the Union address.

The MSM, wasting no opportunity to malign and discredit President Bush, reported that WMDs he said justified going to war were never found, willfully ignored the successful troop surge in Iraq, and generally promoted a pessimistic outlook of the war. The meme would continue for the rest of his term.

On May 3, 2003, landing on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in a Navy S3-B Viking jet, President Bush congratulated the military and later told the nation that major combat operations in Iraq had ended. The speech was delivered from the carrier’s flight deck. Above him, the tower was adorned with a banner that read, “Mission Accomplished.”

The left media plastered that banner across their front pages, spinning the narrative to fit the meme.

CNN:

The picture-perfect landing, covered live on television, marked the latest effort by the White House to showcase President Bush as commander in chief. The president’s address about the success in Iraq comes as Bush’s domestic agenda is under renewed fire by Democrats, especially by a flock of White House hopefuls.

“The president’s going out to an aircraft carrier to give a speech far out at sea … while countless numbers of Americans are frightened stiff about the economy at home,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, who is seeking his party’s presidential nomination.

By the end of April, 2004, President Bush’s numbers had sunk to around 50%. The ongoing drumbeat of negativity from the media was having an impact. Election year posturing was cut throat. Then along came the gift that would keep on giving, toothsome news the New York Times and its acolytes would readily and hungrily sink their teeth into: Abu Ghraib.

The publication of graphic images of prisoners being mistreated and humiliated by a handful of U.S. guards in an Iraqi prison was front and center in the mainstream media for months. Though President Bush condemned the guards’ behavior and held them to justice, his critics clamored that it was authorized at the highest level to “soften up” terrorist suspects, implying that it was just one more thing wrong about this war: torture and roughing up the “detainees”, a term the media deliberately used instead of “prisoners of war”.

In July, 2004, despite lack of evidence that the Bush Administration had tried to coerce officials to fudge their findings, the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded the CIA overstated the threat posed by Iraq. As a result, they said, the U.S. and its allies went to war based on “flawed” information. The media had another chew toy, playing with the report for months, keeping it front page and above the fold and leading the 24-hour cable newscasts. President Bush’s approval ratings dropped into the 40’s.

The media, in Cronkite fashion, dutifully tallied the number of war dead. On October 7, 2004, the MSM touted the 1000th death with the loss of three soldiers in Sadr City and another in a roadside bombing north of Baghdad. To his credit, Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld reminded Americans that fighting terrorism has its cost. Photos of flag draped caskets punctuated the shrill cries of antiwar groups like Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan to “bring them home!”

Despite the hammering he’d taken from the left media and his critics, and a job approval drop of 40 points since 9/11, President Bush was elected to a second term in November 2004, fending off the challenge of Vietnam anti-war activist John Kerry, with help from “Swiftboaters”, men who had served with Kerry in Vietnam, who put their comforts aside and reputations on the line to reveal what they knew about Kerry’s questionable character. The left media consistently tried to discredit these Vietnam vets — some of them POWs and Medal of Honor recipients — by ignoring or ridiculing them, casting the term “Swiftboater” as a pejorative.

The following summer, the nation’s gulf coast was slammed by Hurricane Katrina. New Orleans was particularly hard hit, the full force of the hurricane whipping into the city that lies below sea level. Despite the fact that Louisiana’s Democrat governor Kathleen Blanco and New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin did little to nothing to prepare and evacuate residents ahead of the Cat 5 storm, the media blamed FEMA and President Bush for their “incompetence”. Relentless hammering in the media, many running with the headline “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job”, derisively targeted President Bush’s comment to FEMA director Michael Brown, sinking President Bush’s approval rating below 40%.

The MSM avoided reporting the President’s devotion for the troops and their families. In fact, it could be argued that he was able to slip into Iraq unnoticed because the media was asleep, literally and figuratively. When President Bush flew covertly into harm’s way to surprise the troops for Thanksgiving 2003, his life and all on board were at risk.

Our military service men and women never doubted that President Bush had their “six”. He never left his post when it came to supporting our troops. He never hesitated or waffled. In fact, unlike our current commander in chief, President Bush even gave up playing golf because he didn’t think it appropriate when we had men and women in harm’s way.

He cried with Gold Star families, giving his time and attention to those whose loved ones had given the final measure in defending freedom. During a refueling stop in Alaska on his way to Asia, President Bush met privately with the Gold Star family of Spc. Shawn Murphy, 24, of Ft. Bragg, NC.

Sean’s father. Lt. Col Mark Murphy recalled the moment: “…A short time later, the Secret Service opened the door and President Bush walked in. I thought we might get to shake his hand as he went through. But instead, he walked up to my wife with his arms wide, pulled her in for a hug and a kiss, and said, ‘I wish I could heal the hole in your heart.’ He then grabbed me for a hug, as well as each of our sons. Then he turned and said, ‘Everybody out.’ A few seconds later, the four of us were completely alone behind closed doors with the president of the United States and not a Secret Service agent in sight.”

President Bush lingered with the family for so long, Air Force One was late getting wheels up, a rare occurance. Milblogger Matt Burden of Blackfive tells the rest of story.

Pres. Bush meets with the troops during a refueling stop at Eielson AFB, Alaska. (Aug. 4, 2008)

In a historic moment, President Bush met with influential military bloggers, acknowledging the important work they do in communicating troop concerns, experiences, events, and the role they play in bolstering troop morale. Among the bloggers meeting with the President in the Roosevelt Room was Master Sergeant CJ Grisham, seated to President Bush’s left, whose blogsite “They Have Names” is a tribute to those who have died in the service of our country. Also seated at the table was “Mrs. Greyhawk” of Mudville Gazette, whose husband was deployed to Iraq at the time.

President Bush meets with Military Bloggers. Present were: General Lute, Kevin Sullivan, Mark Pfeifler, Dana Perino, Tony Snow. Milbloggers present were: The Armorer of Argghhh!; Matt Burden of Blackfive; Mrs. Greyhawk of Mudville Gazette who sat in for the deployed Greyhawk; NZ Bear of the TTLB and the Victory Caucus; Steve Schippert of Threats Watch; Ward Carroll of Military.Com; CJ Grisham of A Soldier's Perspective; Mohammed of Iraq the Model. Linking in from Iraq were: Bill Roggio of the Long War Journal, and Bill Ardolino of INDC Journal. White House photo. (Sept. 2007)

How President Bush handled the war will be the subject of discussion and study for years to come. But the one thing he did that scholars and historians alike will agree upon: the irrefutable resolve President Bush had in defending our country, supporting our military, and staying the course. He had his heart in it.

Despite a job approval rating of 38% at the end of his second term as Commander in Chief, when it came to supporting our military and their loved ones, President Bush was rock solid. “Stay the course” was his order of the day when it came to taking the fight to the enemy, and it was his motto when it came to bolstering troop morale or comforting the families who had lost loved ones. His love, respect and support for the American fighting man and woman was ingrained into his very being. On this point, he never wavered, never once leaving his post.

If people’s eyes were truly open, they would be closely examining the path Gitmo detainee Said Ali al-Shihri took to Yemen, where we are now learning he helped plan the Christmas Jihad.

Said reportedly left Gitmo, went through “rehabilitation” in Saudi Arabia, then moved to Iran before ending up as a leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen.

For example, Said Ali al-Shihri left Gitmo in 2007 and became a patient in Saudi Arabia’s terrorist rehabilitation program. Upon graduation, he went to Iran, and then became the deputy leader of Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Abdullah al-Qarawi following a similar path, also traveling to Iran after finishing the program, where he know oversees over 100 Saudi Al-Qaeda operatives. Mohammed al-Oufi, a former Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula commander, also was released from Gitmo. Luckily, he defected later and informed the Saudis about Iran’s secret involvement with Al-Qaeda in Yemen and a plot to bomb the Saudi oil infrastructure. [READ MORE...]

Iran and al-Qaeda have a common goal in Yemen: Destroy the Saudi Royal Family.

The United States has known for a long time about the Iranian al-Qaeda connection related to Said Ali al-Shihri, but you shouldn’t take an evil libertarian-conservative’s word for it. You can read all about Said Ali al-Shihri and his history operating in Iran, in the New York Times:

The other inconvenient truth for the Obama Administration and the Progressive Left as a whole, is that Said Ali al-Shihri and his fellow Jihad terrorists who went from Gitmo to Yemen, were probably clients of Eric Holder’s law firm, Covington & Burling.

More info on the Yemeni Jihad connection to Eric Holder’s law firm Covington & Burling is available at Gateway Pundit, and Jammie Wearing Fool.

Bush might have let them go, but does anyone seriously believe he would have ever done so if not for the constant pressure applied by the American Progressive Left?

These Yemeni Jihad terrorists are the Progressive Left’s chickens coming home to roost on all of us!

The truth of the matter is that prior to the 9/11 Jihad attack, there was no way in the world the American people would have stood for the large scale war that was necessary in order to fight this new kind of Jihad army.

Think about it this way, even after the Jihadis have murdered thousands upon thousands of people all around the world, including here in America on 9/11, the American Left still think it’s all America’s fault and that we deserved it, and therefore we have no legitimate right to fight back. Just image how much resistance there would have been toward going into Afghanistan prior to 9/11.

Add to the whack-o Left the fact that the Right would have accused Clinton of simply trying to distract attention away from his perjury case, and it should be obvious that Clinton didn’t have much political capital in reserve to convince the country that a preemptive war was necessary to avoid a large scale attack against an American city.

All of that slack aside, where the Clinton-Democrats truly failed the nation and the world is evidenced in the way they responded to the Jihad attacks which had taken place prior to 9/11. Think Cole, Kobar Towers, Kenya, WTC ‘93, (Oklahoma City?), etc….

Even after Osama bin Laden openly telegraphed his fatwa of Jihad against all Americans (specifically civilians included) the official American response to each act of war was designed to deny the Jihadis the status of being capable of waging war against the great and powerful United States.

The more the Clinton Administration refused to deal with the Jihad as a full blown war against the United States, the more  9/11 became necessary for the Islamists. The Jihadis needed to perpetrate an attack so grand in scale that there would be no way what-so-ever for the US to deny that there was a war going on, and it was being waged by people long underestimated by the average American.

Perhaps if the Clinton Administration had bothered to treat Jihads as real warriors who deserved to be defeated in battle, rather than common criminals who should to be convicted in court, 9/11 could have been avoided.

Coincidentally, while the United States was on a strong war footing during the Bush Administration, rejecting the criminal paradigm of the previous administration, we were not attacked again.

Coincidentally again, now that we are back to a strategy of denying the Jihadis of warrior status, treating them like criminals who simply need to be found guilty in a court of law, there is an apparent uptick in attempted/successful attacks against Americans on American soil.

Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s reaction to the Ft. Hood Jihad massacre. The official response has thus far been to refuse to admit that Hassan committed an act of Jihad when he gunned down dozens of Americans.

Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s decision to bring the 9/11 Jihadis to NYC to face trial in a common criminal court, rather than a military court.

Evidence that Democrats have returned to the 9/10 mindset of treating Jihadis as nothing more than common criminals, not worthy of the status of warrior, can be found in the Obama administration’s reaction to the failed Christmas Jihad of 2009.

Via Instapundit:

There is a reason why Obama hasn’t given a public statement. It’s strategy.

Here’s the theory: a two-bit mook is sent by Al Qaeda to do a dastardly deed. He winds up neutering himself. Literally.

Authorities respond appropriately; the President (as this president is want to to) presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his Secretary of Homeland Security.

But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation. [MORE...]

Yeah, it is strategy. It’s a strategy that should feel familiar. It’s the failed strategy the Democrats led with for 8 years under President Clinton.

The “two-bit mook” comment is quite revealing of America’s dangerous and ignorant return to the failed strategy of underestimating our extremely capable enemy.

Just as Osama openly declared war against America, and arrogant Americans reacted with near indifference, this wing of jihadis who planned the Christmas massacre have recorded a video, openly declaring their war against us. [via Gateway Pundit]

Will we react arrogantly again, assuming that this is just another crazy camel herder making crazy threats again? Or will we react with the full force of our American military?

Judging by the apparent Democrat 9/10 strategy, we can guess what the reaction of the Obama administration will be. They will send the FBI to Yemen, and complain about the lack of help we are getting on the ground in that Islamist country. Just like the way President Clinton responded to the Kobar towers Jihad bombing in Saudi Arabia.

Change….back to 9/10. You can believe in that!

Yesterday, I wrote about the curious connection that major Obama and ACORN supporter Bruce Ratner has to the Department of Justice – the very department that refuses to initiate a criminal trial of ACORN. It just so happens that Bruce Ratner’s brother, Michael Ratner, shares the terrorist coddling sympathies of Attorney General Eric Holder.  As Michelle Malkin documents, Holder not only pushed for the pardoning of actual terrorists in his last stint at DOJ, but he was also a senior partner at a law firm representing detainees at Guantanamo. While Michael Ratner has not represented Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he did represent a handful of terrorists and won them the right to challenge their detention in U.S. courts under habeas corpus. This is just one of many legal “victories” that have paved the way for folks like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to be tried in civilian court on our soil.

This particular example highlights the underlying notion that terrorists should be privy to the same rights as United States citizens. In this instance, President Obama did in fact exercise his discretion (if you can call it that) by allowing the trial to take place in civilian court.  Attorney Brian Levi serves as the Director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University.  As Levi noted today, “As a legal matter President Obama could very well also have tried these five detainees before military tribunals, as five others are…”

There is longstanding precedent for the use of military tribunals to deal with the difficult situation of unlawful combatants captured in a time of war.  As Arthur Herman wrote in Commentary, this is the original path the Department of Justice and the Bush administration sought:

The rules on Gitmo detention and on interrogation constituted a valiant attempt to deal with an unprecedented legal situation. The same was true of the system of military “commissions” or tribunals for trying suspects at Gitmo. Here the Justice Department largely followed the precedent of tribunals used by the American military during World War II, and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1942 decision Ex Parte Quirin.

As 9/11 victim relatives  Debra Burlingame and Tim Sumner lay out in a letter and petition to President Obama, and as anyone who has watched an episode of Law and Order can surmise, there are a host of thorny issues that could arise in the civilian trial of an unlawful military combatant. These detainees weren’t Mirandized. Secondly, their extended detention, a defense attorney could claim, was in violation of the assurance of a swift and speedy trial.  Furthermore, given that they were caught on a battlefield, the chain of evidence is not up to par with the (rightly) strict standards of our civilian courts.  Could their cases be dismissed outright? These are legitimate legal concerns raised with these cases.

The actual threat to New York City that high value detainees bring is even more frightening. The security and logistics necessary to bring these people to New York and secure them there are both expensive and risky. If only we had a special place where we could keep these guys safely away from American cities and citizens, away from terrorist stunts to release them, and still give them three square Halal meals a day, a copy of the Koran, art classes and inter-cell block soccer leagues.  Oh wait…we do, but the President is closing it.

I have the solution. Perhaps Bruce Ratner is willing to donate a portion of his real estate empire to house Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his buddies in New York.  Maybe he could come up with another eminent domain-stimulus-ACORN scheme where he doesn’t even have to pay as much for it or where he could even turn a profit?  Now that’s a win-win-win!

In all seriousness, what’s a concerned citizen to do?  As with any policy concern, you can call your elected officials to respectfully register your opinion. Then you can sign the petition headed for President Obama’s desk.

If you remember, when President Bush was informed of the second plane crashing into the World Trade Center, while his photo op with school children at the Emma  E. Booker elementary school was about to start. For the next several minutes, (much maligned by Michael Moore, in “Faranheit 9/11″) we saw a man confused by the situation. It has been joked about by comedians as him wanting to see how the story ended.

Every time I watch this footage, I always saw a strong man, who knew that twenty school children had looked forward to their chance to read to the President, for weeks. He decided they would not be disappointed. And knowing that this was an attack on the United States, the President did his best to neither disappoint nor alarm the children.

I’ve always imagined his narcissistic predecessor bolting straight out of the room and into a bunker, stepping over any children in his path. In reality, what could the President do? In that moment of confusion there really was nothing that could be done, other than have him sit there uncomfortably, and pretend that everything was normal. It takes a strong man not to flinch under adversity.

After he left the classroom, he went in front of the cameras, for what was supposed to be a prepared speech about education in America, and his initiatives. Instead, he went completely off-script, and directly into a speech that was most probably ad-libbed due to time constraints. He said that this is a difficult time for America, and promised to get the folks responsible.

Fast forward to last week. President Obama was also supposed to pose for a photo op, when possibly the biggest attack on US soil since September 11^th occurred. While the other media still tries to sort out the motive for the shooting at Ft. Hood, I think most of us are pretty clear on what “Allah Akbar” means.

But there was no moment of reassurance from this President. Instead, he went into his prepared speech, and made a special point to give a “shout-out” to “Dr. Joe Medicine Crow” before he even addressed the issue.

In the President’s defense, I’m fairly certain that the “Shout-Out” had already been loaded into the teleprompter, and the tech didn’t know whether to delete it or not. The tech was obviously eMailed a Ft. Hood statement, but it took a while to get it up.

If you watch the video, you can see the clumsy transition (around 1:38). He stalls for a couple seconds while the new speech is being loaded: “Now, …I have to say though, ..that uhhh,…beyond that… uh I had planned to make some broader remarks, uh about the challenges that lay ahead for Native Americans as well as collaboration with our administration..”

Then suddenly his eyes lock on the right teleprompter as his Ft’ Hood statement begins to roll, and the stuttering stops: “uh but as some of you might have heard there has be a tragic shooting at the Ft. Hood Army base in Texas…”

I think this will be defining moment for this Administration. While he might be unclear on whether this was just a rampage, or an attack on the United States, I am certain that there is no question in the minds of the men and women of our military, that this event only differed from Pearl Harbor in scale.

And let it be known, that from this day forward, anytime a Leftie brings up “My Pet Goat” it will be retaliated with a “Shout Out to Dr. Joe Medicine Crow.”