Homeland Security

The absurdity of trying 9/11 terrorists in New York City

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who blithely admits to planning the Sept. 11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in downtown New York, deserves to be put to death. Less clear is Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement last week that New York City was the best venue to pursue the case against them.

This is plainly absurd. Holding the trial in New York puts a big bull’s-eye on the downtown area. It is common sense that holding the trial in the twice-attacked lower Manhattan community makes it more likely New York will be attacked again. Moreover, the cost of providing security for the trial could easily exceed $100 million for a city that is already embroiled in a fiscal crisis.


Jihadist in our midst

In all likelihood, the tragedy at Fort Hood would have been avoided if political correctness hadn’t led military and government officials to turn a blind eye to clear signs that Maj. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist.

Even now, after the full extent of this tragedy has sunk in, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey has warned the public not to make any connections between Maj. Hasan and Muslims. “As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty, as well," said Gen. Casey.

It is true that this tragedy should not become an excuse to nurture irrational fear and loathing of Muslims. But we cannot become so neutered by political correctness that we ignore the facts. Maj. Hasan’s killing spree was the most deadly act of terrorism on American soil since Sept. 11, 2001.


New York trials: Smart or dumb (or not sure)?

There is no question that the decision to try the five terrorists (excuse me, alleged terrorists) in New York City has produced a heated and important debate. Everyone and their brother is weighing in on this one.

 The questions raised are almost as interesting as the answers: Is this better or worse for the U.S. and the world than a military trial? Is this, as many believe, a slam-dunk case, with the death penalty the result? Does a trial at the “scene of the crime,” on U.S. soil, result in a “Nuremberg” effect? Do these five become martyrs, or does this show the world the horrendous acts of extremists, pushing Muslims away from violence and terrorism? What happens if they were to get off on some sort of “technicality”? Does a trial in New York invite another terrorist attack, or would a military tribunal at Gitmo be more likely to produce such an attack? Is this a potential political disaster for President Barack Obama and the Democrats, or will this further Obama’s efforts to truly get a handle on the problem of international terrorism?


'One-way ticket to meet Allah'

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is now conscious and being nursed back to health by hospital staff, just days after he opened fire at the Fort Hood Readiness Center, massacring 13 servicemen and -women and injuring 30.

It is inconceivable to me that we are actually helping this man live. Hasan worshipped at the same Virginia mosque that two Sept. 11 hijackers attended in 2001 — a time when radical imam Anwar al Awlaki preached there. Awaki, who now lives in Yemen and who preaches global jihad against the U.S., praised Hasan’s atrocious slaughter of U.S. servicemen as “the Right Thing" and called Hasan a "hero."


FBI asleep at the switch — again

On Tuesday, President Obama gave a very moving eulogy to the 13 Americans shot and killed last week at Fort Hood. But the more we learn about the killer, the more we have to wonder whether this was a mass murder that could have been avoided.

Maj. Nidal Hasan didn’t just crack suddenly and pick up a gun. He had methodically planned to kill — a lot of soldiers. He brought his own handguns onto the base in order to do so. And, almost as if he wanted to be stopped, he let drop several warnings ahead of time.


President Obama, risking America's national security

Unfortunately, a critical shift in the paradigm through which our nation accesses foreign policy has been dramatically modified, leaving America at the mercy of the most vicious of totalitarian dictators the world has to offer.

Over the past month, President Barack Obama continues to naively put America’s security at grave risk. At the United Nations General Assembly meeting in September, Obama unintentionally announced his “Hope Doctrine” to promote world peace.


Panetta Apologizes to Pelosi by Slamming Cheney

CIA Director Leon Panetta got into trouble with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) when he rightfully called into question her claims that the CIA had lied to her and Congress about the use of enhanced interrogation methods. He made the mistake of telling the truth.

Now, several weeks later, Panetta's presented Madam Speaker with a big bouquet of flowers, neatly tied with a bow, as he uttered what will likely end up being the most regrettable statement of his life:

Obama and Miranda Warnings

In case you've missed it: Earlier this year, President Obama told the CBS “60 Minutes” program and the American people that he didn't believe terrorists were entitled to Miranda rights. We've all seen and heard these rights being read on television, but I'll put them here for handy reference:

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, an attorney will be appointed for you.

Prior to interrogating a suspect in police custody, officers must read words similar to those above and the suspect must acknowledge the waiver of such rights if an interrogation is to commence to satisfy Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

Obama's First Great Mistake

Just two weeks after the Guantanamo Bay issue blew up on President Obama and his own party refused to fund its closing, things have only grown more bleak for his plans to shutter the prison by Jan. 22, 2010. As I have written here, it was his first great mistake — an ambitious deadline to solve an enormous problem set in the exuberance of the first week in his historic presidency without consulting the U.S. Congress.

Turning Campaign Promises into Policy

The Hill's A.B. Stoddard answers viewer questions about issues surrounding the Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, and how President Obama should handle closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp.