Will Photos Be Obama’s Abu Ghraib? – Not Likely

The liberal mainstream media had a gleeful obsession with the Abu Ghraib incident, exemplified by the NY Times printing front-page stories about it for 32 days in a row. It was an international embarrassment for the United States, a stain on the military, a sinister depiction of our efforts in Iraq, and another way to blame Bush (and Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld) for…everything. What was there not to like for the far-left media?

Perhaps with nostalgia for those good old days, the LA Times recently published two-year-old pictures of soldiers posing with Afghan body parts. They did this against the expressed wishes of the Pentagon. Any reluctance to taint Obama’s ‘good’ war with negativity was overcome by a deep hatred of the military and the chance to snub the evil Pentagon. How could they resist?

Obama, sympathetic to leftist ideology, did not admonish the media over their Abu Ghraib excesses. Instead, he took advantage of the media frenzy with campaign promises to stop torture, close down Gitmo, and get our troops out of Iraq. Now, however, reality may have penetrated his idealistic bubble because the tune he’s singing is in a slightly different key.

Obama’s White House, related by spokesman Baghdad Bob Jay Carney, rebuked the media, saying it is “disappointed…[with] the decision to publish two years after the incident”. The White House (Obama) feared that the photos could put soldiers at risk, a consideration sneered at during the Abu Ghraib feeding frenzy.

Carney further related that “[The] conduct depicted in those photographs is reprehensible and does not in any way represent the high standards of the US military”. This, too, was not in keeping with the Abu Ghraib meme of an out-of-control, evil, military.

With liberal Obama in the White House, it is a safe bet that the NY Times will not break its front-page reporting record. The media can’t resist smearing the military and will force the story, but when the mud begins splattering Obama, they will back off. Elections are coming.

This is just so sadly predictable.

David J. Hentosh

Update:   Networks Dowplaying Photos

Negotiating With Terrorists

Refusal to negotiate with terrorists has been a stern US policy for quite some time but the Obama administration has been quietly replacing it with a softer approach that has yet to deliver positive results. This softer approach failed with Iran, producing only more arrogance and aggressiveness, but the Obama administration seems intent on using it with the Taliban.

News that Talilban “insurgents” (terrorists?) may agree to open a representative office in Qatar is being welcomed by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Obama administration. While negotiations and talks with any enemy in attempts to stop violence make sense, bribing them to talk doesn’t. It is hard to see Obama’s latest gambit as anything more than hopeful bribery.

Talks are underway to release five Taliban prisoners from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in return for the proposed Taliban “headquarters” in Qatar. The hope is that the Taliban will cut ties with al-Qaida, accept the elected civilian government of Afghanistan, and bargain in good faith. The five released prisoners will most probably be allowed to return to fighting the US on the Afghan battlefield.

Fortunately, the US maintains that it will not back off its Afghan military campaign while it “negotiates”, but that can easily fall by the wayside. It is not hard to imagine a “declaration” of an end to the Afghan war resulting from promises made by ruthless terrorists, especially when the US has five released terrorists invested in the process. The political incentive of placating a far-left base in time for November elections could sweeten the pot.

Iran praised and welcomed Obama’s policy of diplomacy which was used as a stalling tactic that allowed continuance of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. It would be naïve and foolish to think the Taliban are above such tactics. Once it becomes recognized that the US is willing to negotiate and pay ransom, there will be other demands from other “organizations”. This could set a precedent that can get very ugly, very fast.

David J. Hentosh

Circus Opening Act

A judge is set to hear arguments about possible violation of the “rights” of the accused terrorist bomber of two US embassies in Africa that killed 224 people, including 12 Americans (http://tinyurl.com/ybqrqjo). Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was moved from Gitmo to NY last spring and is the first Gitmo prisoner to be prosecuted in a US civilian court.

This is the opening act in the circus of US civilian trials for terrorists such as the accused mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, brought to NY for trial by Attorney General Eric Holder. Terrorist defense lawyers will begin splitting hairs and finding legal loopholes to obfuscate the charges, treating these terrorists as if they were nothing more than cat burglars caught with stolen goods.

This first trial begins with matters of the accused’s rights and will no doubt continue down a path portraying the terrorist as victim. The Bush administration, the CIA and our military will be questioned more than the terrorist and America’s foreign policies over the past century will end up on trial while the 224 innocent people killed in the bombings will be given scant attention. The world will watch in fascination as the American Justice System gives comfort and aid to our sworn enemy and allows self mutilation to become the main event.

These civilian terrorist trials are expected to last years and cost millions and millions of dollars. They will probably continue long after Obama is voted out of office and Holder’s decision is universally recognized as the blunder it is. However, the gears of American Justice turn very slowly and once started, they are very difficult to stop.

The show has begun.

David J. Hentosh

Welcome to Gitmo, Illinois

President Obama promised to close down the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay and found it more difficult to accomplish than expected. He delayed the closing until he could decide where to move the inmates being held there. He is now slowly finding a new home for those inmates.

The federal government bought the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Illinois and close to a hundred suspected terrorists are scheduled to be moved from Gitmo to the center (http://tinyurl.com/y942yu3). The closing of Gitmo, a “must” for Obama’s far-left base, is resulting in the importing of suspected terrorists into the US.

Briefing officials said it was permissible to bring in detainees to the US for prosecution, so we can expect more and more circus trials (and platoons of lawyers) to accompany the populating of the center. The official was quoted as saying “Closing the detention center at Guantanamo is essential to protecting our national security and helping our troops by removing a deadly recruiting tool from the hands of al-Qaeda”.

How will our national security be protected by bringing terrorists into the country? If Gitmo was a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda, how does mingling them with other federal prisoners deter that recruiting?

Since the prison is nearly empty, I expect this will eventually show up on the “new jobs created” list and become a glowing example of the stimulus bill at work. You can bet there are lawyers already camped out waiting for their piece of that stimulus pie – at taxpayers’ expense, of course.

David J. Hentosh