home > archive > 2006 > this article


Search this site Search WWW
Terrorist sympathizers and enablers

By Carol Devine-Molin
web posted July 3, 2006

The circumstances in Iraq continue to improve, albeit slowly, with increasing numbers of Iraqi Security Forces stepping up to the plate, reconstruction efforts ratcheting-up, and an initiative to attract foreign investment developing under the new Iraqi government. Moreover, as aptly noted in the latest Move America Forward ad, our forces have made significant strides in the killing or capturing of major figures in this war on terror, including al-Qaida's Iraq-chieftain Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, his sons Uday and Qusay (who were poised to take over their father's Iraqi terror regime), and al-Qaida lieutenants Mohammed Atef and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, among others. It's a great ad, and it readily reminds us of how far we've really come in routing the bad guys.

That being said, these are still exceedingly difficult Times for the Bush administration, with the enemies of freedom and democracy - rogue nations North Korea, Iran, Syria and the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority - acting out and causing trouble for the US and its allies. The so-called terror states are at the forefront of the news. And, of course, let's not forget the piling-on and disruptive efforts by the Leftist-intelligentsia, who are seeking to undermine President Bush and this war on terror at every opportunity.

Although it exasperates the unenlightened, the truth of the matter is that this war on terror has a deeply moral component: We're fighting tyrannical rogue regimes and their terrorist proxies - promulgators of murder and oppression - that are the epitome of evil in our time. Given the heinous acts of our enemies, any thinking person would naturally view them as a profound peril bent on destroying western civilization. Unfortunately, the Left-leaning crowd just doesn't get it. Plainly put, they're terrorist sympathizers and enablers. They've essentially cast aside logic - and even the propensity for their own self-preservation - and embraced: a) "feelgoodism" toward the terrorists and their benefactors, the rogue regimes or terror states, and, b) a profound animus toward the conservatives who are resolute in fighting this war on terror (including Iraq), most notably members of the Bush administration who are, of course, leading-up the charge.

Clearly, the ongoing conflict in Iraq has been an especially contentious point for the Leftist Democrats, who have exhibited their usual tactics – their modus operandi – in assailing President Bush and the GOP. The Left attempts to skew the truth, rewrite history, confuse and confound, and throw a monkey wrench into GOP efforts, even if those efforts are in the best interests of the nation. It really speaks to the narcissism, shortsightedness and manipulative ways of the political Left, which is obsessed with spoiling any Republican victory, come hell or high water. That's precisely why the Democrats want us out of Iraq forthwith; they see the positive trend slowly emerging in Iraq, and they want to preempt GOP success. If we "cut and run" as the Left-leaning bunch would have us do, the GOP would forfeit any victory.

Sadly, the Left doesn't give a flying-fig about the Iraqi people, promoting democracy, or fighting the war on terror that's keeping us safe against the threat of Islamo-fascism. Nor do they give a rat's patoot about our military personnel. In fact, in their heart-of-hearts, they have contempt for the military and our warriors. This contemptuous attitude slips out now and then, but remarks are quickly pooh-poohed as "misspeak" or ignored (i.e. inappropriate comments by Senator John Kerry about our troops "terrorizing" Iraqi children and women in the dead of night, and Congressman John Murtha's claim that our troops killed Iraqis in "cold blood", come to mind). Generally speaking, the Left is politically savvy in this respect: They know darn well if they were to blatantly express their true thoughts and feelings about the military, they wouldn't win any elections. And heaven knows, the political Left is constantly scheming to win elections. It's all about garnering power, and fulfilling their sense of entitlement as the ostensible ruling class. And let's speak more truth to Leftist power: There's no denying that the political Left possesses a discernable anti-American, even traitorous, streak. But then again, they have no shame.

One need go no further than the current brouhaha generated by the New York Times, to observe how the political Left will go through incredible mental gyrations to defend the indefensible: The New York Times sees nothing wrong in publishing details of a classified program during wartime designed to monitor the financial transactions of terrorists ("Terrorist Finance Tracking Program"). Well the terrorists can read also, and the Times has given them a heads-up on the government's methods of financial scrutiny. In fact, members of the Bush administration begged the New York Times not to print the story since it would undercut the war efforts and place lives at risk.

But no, the Times gave short-shrift to the current administration and felt justified in disclosing the secret program, noting that their "publication has served America's public interest". That's a fairly arrogant statement, and a rather flimsy excuse to disseminate classified material. The salient point is that the article provided details of the secret program that made it useful to terrorists. For the Times to say that it's off the hook because many people knew that our government was following financial transactions in order to catch terrorists is patently absurd. To reiterate, the big sticking point is that the Times provided details. And, if the war effort is being thwarted, how did the New York Times piece serve the public interest? As we say in New York, who died and made executive editor Bill Keller pope? The New York Times should have acceded to the request of the Bush administration.

The House of Representatives is so miffed that it adopted a resolution condemning the press for publishing details of the secret program in question. That being said, this is déjà vu all over again. It wasn't many months ago when the Times revealed that the National Security Agency was implementing a secret program involving surveillance of overseas phone calls when at least one party was a suspected terrorist. At this juncture, the New York Times and "leakers" must be sent a strong message. Representative Peter King is recommending that a full investigation be conducted, with a view toward the prosecution of both the publication and the leakers. And from the perspective of many Americans, the New York Times is apparently in the habit of giving aid and comfort to our enemies.

Carol Devine-Molin is a regular contributor to several online magazines.


Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story

 

Home


Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story



Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
e-mail:
Subscribe
Unsubscribe

 

 

1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.