WAR

[Woody]

For the first time ... BO finally has recognized that and clearly stated that we are at WAR. He actually said the word. After a year in office and playing games of being nice to the terrorists .... he has finally given up the 'nice' tone and firmly declared we are at WAR.

Way to go BO. It's just a little late in coming. Perhaps you should have listened to GWB.

[karl]

For the first time ... BO finally has recognized that and clearly stated that we are at WAR. He actually said the word. After a year in office and playing games of being nice to the terrorists .... he has finally given up the 'nice' tone and firmly declared we are at WAR.

Way to go BO. It's just a little late in coming. Perhaps you should have listened to GWB.

The president himself has yet to refer to Abdulmutallab as a terrorist, calling him an "extremist" instead, and only adopted stronger rhetoric on the Christmas Day incident after receiving public backlash to his initial tepid response on the matter.

Abdulmutallab is not the first terrorist to receive the kid-glove treatment by President Obama. Others, such as Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are being tried in civilian courts as though they are common criminals and not the radical Islamist terrorists they are, whose stated goal is to overthrow America's government and Constitution, and impose Shariah (Muslim/Islamic) Law on all of us. The terrorists' publicly stated method for achieving such dominance is primarily through killing as many Americans as possible, and they have done a good job in backing their words with action against U.S. citizens here and abroad. Yet some are being granted the same rights guaranteed by the very Constitution they seek to abolish.

In the meantime, the Administration's reluctance to profile demonstrates more weakness in our war on terror. While clearly nobody believes all Muslims are even close to being potential terrorists, and profiling is not a complete guarantee of rooting all terrorists out, the hard truth is that nearly all of the deadliest terror attacks across the globe in the past few decades have been executed by young male Muslims from Arab countries in the Middle East.

But rather than risk offending one particular group, the U.S. practices equal-opportunity offense to everyone by expending as much scrutiny on 85 year-old grandmas trying to board a flight to Wichita as they do anyone else. In fairness, this knee-jerk reaction has been in place since the last presidential administration, which, to digress momentarily, has become the automatic scapegoat anytime criticism is levied against President Obama and his camp. However, if Bush's policies were so terrible, shouldn't the current president change those policies?

The president is not alone in this weak approach to terrorism. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has renamed terrorism "man-caused disasters" and even made the outlandish statement that the real threat to America comes from U.S. veterans returning from war, proponents of gun rights, and opponents to illegal immigration, among other things.

[phkrause]

REDWOOD

I GUESS it is better late than never

dgrimm60

I agree dgrimm. At first the President wanted to change what the previous admin did and try a new approach, because it looked like the people didn't like what the Bush admin were doing. So I hope that now the american people can see that that approach didn't help one iota. So lets hope the Pres starts changing his tacticks(sp).

pk