- Marionville mayor ‘kind of agreed’ with Kansas City shooter’s views
- Rev. Al Sharpton’s Easter message: Politically ‘crucified’ Obama has risen again
- Supreme Court to weigh challenge to ban on campaign lies
- UNICEF launches ‘Mr. Poo’ mascot in India to curb public defecation
- Teen taking selfie by train: ‘Wow, that guy just kicked me in the head’
- Goodbye, Afghanistan — hello, Africa: Air Force to shift as U.S. exits Middle East
- Iran mulls ban on vasectomies, decrease on abortions to bolster population
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers ‘more deadly than jihadists’
- Classes resume at high school rocked by stabbings
- ABC News accuses Center for Public Integrity of stealing Pulitzer-winning work
GORDON: ‘Wrong-Way’ Obama
President champions rights for Gitmo detainees while harassing Americans
For a former senior lecturer in constitutional law, President Obama sure has an interesting viewpoint on the U.S. Constitution. It’s a position that likely would mystify the Founding Fathers and most other presidents in our nation’s history.
Team Obama has gone after Americans through the Internal Revenue Service targeting of conservative political groups, the Justice Department’s seizure of two months of Associated Press phone records and now a possible criminal prosecution of Fox News’ James Rosen. At the same time, it is fighting hard to close the Guantanamo detention facilities and grant full constitutional rights to 166 foreign terrorist suspects.
It’s almost stranger than fiction, a worrisome step beyond George Orwell’s “1984.” Instead of Big Brother merely watching our every move and curtailing our freedoms, it kicks it up a notch by helping those who are out to destroy us. Literally.
In a speech to senior military officers Thursday at the National Defense University in Washington, Mr. Obama is expected to discuss the successful dismantling of al Qaeda’s core, share his rationale for drone strikes and reiterate his plan for closing Guantanamo.
It will be a challenge, however, to explain positions that are inherently non-sequiturs — wiping out more than 3,000 terrorist suspects overseas on a “secret kill list” while treating those captured as if they had only robbed liquor stores.
Team Obama also has complained thousands of times about the CIA’s use of coercive interrogations, specifically about waterboarding three detainees, which left Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and two other top al Qaeda leaders unharmed. Yet somehow, this same team views death by drone strike without any due process — including those of U.S. citizens Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year old son, Abdulrahman — as perfectly acceptable.
The president has repeatedly invoked “core values” as reasons for closing Guantanamo. It’s his top talking point, followed closely by his comments on the “rule of law.”
However, shouldn’t our “core values” reflect our right to be protected against all enemies — foreign and domestic? It’s the key element in the military’s oath of enlistment.
Adhering to our “core values” means the government should protect public safety so Americans don’t have planes flown into our buildings or attend sporting events and have their limbs blown off.
Yet those who share Mr. Obama’s ivory tower don’t pay sufficient attention to those “core values.”
Instead, they would rather focus their efforts on securing constitutional rights for the Sept. 11 co-conspirators, the USS Cole bombers, the Bali nightclub bombers and scores of other dangerous men who have collectively killed thousands of innocent civilians worldwide. Let’s keep in mind that roughly one-third of detainees who have left Guantanamo have returned to terrorism, so facilitating the release of more is a dangerous prospect.
As for the “rule of law,” it’s called the “law of war,” which stems from centuries-old customary international law, and is meant to protect a country during wartime. It’s why we have detainees at Guantanamo and trials by military commissions in the first place.
Taken together, the president’s robust use of drones and obsession for closing Guantanamo don’t make sense — perhaps even less so than the Benghazi talking points.
We can learn a lot from that debacle. The talking points’ 12 revisions plainly showed White House and State Department senior officials attempting to deceive the American people about the terrorist attack by blaming an entirely unrelated YouTube video that practically no one watched. It speaks volumes about Mr. Obama’s terrorism policy.
It doesn’t have to be rational, truthful or even in our best interests. As long as Mr. Obama thinks the majority of Americans will buy into his plan, that’s all that matters to him.
TWT Video Picks
By John R. Bolton
Reality calls for attaching Gaza to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan
Get Breaking Alerts
- 'Culture of intimidation' seen in Nevada ranch standoff
- FISHER: Shades of Berlin in the South China Sea
- HURT: Wilson and Obama ... 100 years apart, but so alike
- Rand and Ron Paul ride to the rescue for Bundy in Nevada standoff with feds
- Atheists rush to stage Easter display: 'Jesus Christ is a myth'
- Secret U.S. assessments show Afghanistan not ready to govern on own
- U.S. military on high alert as Ukraine troops trade gunfire with pro-Russian militants
- Nevada Bundy ranch standoff could leave dirt on Harry Reid reputation
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers 'more deadly than jihadists'
- IRS emails reveal discussion with Justice about suing nonprofits for election activities
Recent Letters to the Editor
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Bundy support demonstrates voters' distrust
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obamacare disasters were avoidable
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Muhammad wouldn't condone Boston bombing
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: High heels: Hazardous to one's health?
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Marshall's comments hurt GOP, pro-lifers