By Rick Krug
GCC/Staff
Dec. 30, 2009

It’s not so much that Americans don’t trust President Obama’s ability to defend our safety; it’s that we don’t quite understand just how he plans on doing so.

Christmas day, 2009, on a Michigan bound flight from Europe, a Yemen national is subdued by other passengers while trying to ignite an explosive device he smuggled on the plane by strapping it to his underwear.

Not long after the story hit, Homeland Security boss, Janet Napolitano ran to the national mics and told us all, “the attack failed because the system worked well.”

This statement left many of us scratching our heads and asking, “What system?” Was Napolitano referring to the “Co-passengers are hereby instructed to wrestle guys who flame their shorts” system?

Understand, no cabinet-level official speaks without the blessing of the President. But again, just what system was intact?

Christmas day was on a Friday. The vacationing President (yes, he gets to chill from time to time – no problem there – after all, no president is ever really “on” vacation) should have at least shot off a statement from the back nine, but he was silent.

During that silence, the above mentioned system was still in question.

The entire day after Christmas, HLS chief Napolitano was hammered by the press for her assertion things were under control and were working out just fine. Wouldn’t you like to have listened to that phone call from the 50th state to Washington, DC?

Can’t you just hear Rahm, or even Obama himself saying, “Janet, maybe we should rethink that “system” thingy you mentioned….”

All day Sunday, Napolitano reversed her original statement by demanding “The system has failed.” To be fair, it was not the American TSA who allowed the terrorist on the plane in The Netherlands, but it was an American Executive official who basically told us, “Don’t worry, be happy.” I would imagine Janet has a call into her realtor in Phoenix.

Finally, on Monday – that’s four days later, for those of you keeping score at home – President Obama took to the airwaves to tell us all, in fact, the system did fail.

Much like the President’s delayed response to the request by his hand-picked general’s request for more troops in Afghanistan, one wonders just how long does it take to decide when a system works or not?

To make matters even more unclear, the President, with a straight face, called the Underwear Bomber, a “sole extremist.” Really?

As if this poor misguided and probably only mentally ill assailant was really going solo with a high-tech explosive? Gratefully, the bomber was as competent as Napolitano in his mission, or nearly 300 passenger would have met their death at 30,000 feet.

Then, when it seemed as if the President had finally gotten a grip in things, he comes out and calls the bomber, “A suspect.” Suspect?

This man, with known Al Qaeda ties, whose own father contacted officials to inform them his son had terrorist intentions, whose third degree burns to that part of his body closest to his underwear, was now a protected “suspect” and until he is proven guilty by a jury of his peers (irony intended) he is considered innocent.

So how far into a terrorist attack does one have to go to be called, “The guy who tried to kill hundreds of Americans?”

Look, Obama may actually have things scoped out. He may, in fact, have his hand on the pulse of any threats to America – but for the life of me, I don’t know how one could be sure.

The President has stated the war on terror is over, and probably was a mistake to begin with.

He refuses to use terms like “Muslim Jihadists” or even to admit there just might some sort of coordination of attempt to attack America. Last Summer, he apologized for “all the sins of the USA” to a willing world whose jealousy of our success and exceptional nature was all too anxious to nod their heads like the bobble headed doll on the back dashboard.

 And he still sees both the Fort Hood attack and this latest attack as “Sole extremists.” Call my crazy, but it seems like those with a history of America hating and the means and opportunity to cause harm, might just do what they say they are wanting to do…..if they get the chance.

Unclear leadership brings very clear results: confusion, weakness, and less safety. I honestly hope President does know what he is doing – I really do. So far, I am just not clear on how he plans to pull this off.

Source: Rick Krug

 

Editor’s Note: We would like to know what you think. dan@goldcoastchronicle.com