- Scott Brown struggles for political traction in New Hampshire Senate race
- California’s Jerry Brown cites God, ‘religious call’ to embrace illegals
- Hamid Karzai’s cousin killed by suicide bomber at Eid al-Fitr party
- Obama thanks Muslims for ‘building the very fabric of our nation’
- Israel flattens home of top Hamas leader, takes out power plant
- Texas man arrested for powder-letter hoax
- Islamic State opens ‘marriage bureau’ for single jihadists
- Drone almost blocks California firefighting planes
- Tornado rips off roofs, downs trees near Boston
- GOP: Environmental rules keeping agents from accessing border
BRUCE: Confusing an Iranian terrorist with a diplomat
Obama, Kerry may issue a U.N. visa to a Tehran hostage-taker
Question of the Day
As a sign that we have officially entered the Twilight Zone phase of the Obama administration, the State Department is actually finding it difficult to say whether or not it will issue a visa for Iran’s newly appointed “envoy” to the United Nations, a man who also happens to be widely recognized as a terrorist.
We have a policy barring terrorists from being granted visas, and yet in responding to the outrage engendered by the revelation that Mr. Aboutalebi played a role in that obscene act, the most the State Department could muster was a whimper that the situation “troubled” them and that they “object” to it.
That’s sort of like how the Obama administration is troubled by, and objects to, chemical weapons in Syria, Russia’s taking of Crimea, the Taliban killing, well, everyone, al Qaeda taking over large swaths of Iraq, and North Korea shooting at South Korea.
At this rate of being unable or unwilling to perform, I’m beginning to think President Obama and the men on Capitol Hill are suffering from a chronic case of Low T.
According to ABC, when asked specifically if it would issue the visa for the Iranian envoy-terrorist to live and work in New York, the State Department refused to say how it would handle the situation, noting the United States was “obligated to admit the chosen representatives of member states to U.N. headquarters in New York.”
Really? I’m sure Pakistan is kicking itself right now. They could have saved themselves so much trouble if they simply named Osama bin Laden as their U.N. ambassador.
But this is Iran we’re talking about — a nation that is still holding several Americans hostages, including a pastor, Saeed Abedini, an Idaho resident who converted from Islam to Christianity and was in Iran to open an orphanage. He was summarily arrested while on a bus and dragged off to prison for his Christian faith.
When Iran isn’t kidnapping Americans and supporting terrorism worldwide, it manages to squeeze in threatening to wipe Israel off the map, as it not-so-clandestinely builds a nuclear bomb program to do just that.
Yet when the American president seems none too interested in capturing and punishing the killers of American diplomats in Benghazi, perhaps the Iranians have understandably assessed this as a favorable time in America for their ilk.
There are a multitude of reasons to ban every single Iranian government official and representative from the soil of the United States. In fact, civilization has a duty to reject and punish states who kill their own citizens in broad daylight simply because they dare to protest.
Mr. Obama did nothing in the summer of 2009 when the Iranian regime was shooting students in the streets of Tehran. (Remember Neda?) To this day, he remains strangely solicitous to that monstrous regime.
Taking a principled stand supporting the American people and our values in the international arena has never been Mr. Obama’s strong suit. Instead, his playbook is jammed with bowing to leaders of other nations, complaining about the American people on foreign stages, apologizing to other countries for our nation’s history and laughing while shaking the hands of avowed enemies of this country.
Is it possible this Democratic administration will go so far as allowing a hostage-taking terrorist to enter the United States to assume a “diplomatic” position? I think so, unless there’s enough pushback from the American people.
With Mr. Obama’s history, we certainly can’t rely on common sense and decency determining his administration’s position on this issue or any other that requires principles rooted in love and respect for our great nation and her people.
About the Author
Opinion Columnist — Tammy Bruce, an Independent Conservative, is a radio talk-show host, New York Times’ bestselling author, blogger, Fox News’ on-air political contributor and a columnist at The Washington Times. Ms. Bruce served as president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) and worked on several political campaigns as well. Her nationally syndicated talk ...
TWT Video Picks
Get Breaking Alerts
- Hillary Clinton: Forget Obama, George W. Bush made her 'proud to be an American'
- Border surge puts Obama legacy on immigration at stake
- White House says Russia 'losing' war in Ukraine
- D.C. seeks to stay judge's order allowing gun owners to carry in public
- EPSTEIN: All IRS roads lead to the archivist
- Illegal immigrants demand representation in White House meetings
- PRUDEN: When the hangman botches the job
- Federal appeals court rules against Virginia's gay marriage ban
- KEENE: Thinking outside nanny-state box with Paul Ryan
- Obama thanks Muslims for 'building the very fabric of our nation'