January 28, 2009
Barry, Honey, can we talk about Gitmo?By Kyle-Anne Shiver
"President Obama" seems a far too stiff and stilted salutation for you, dear Sir, our most populist-appealing leader ever. So, I'm quite certain you won't mind one little bit if I take the liberty of addressing you in the same informal manner you seemed to prefer on the campaign trail. Your calling female reporters, "sweetie," and chatting it up with workingmen in American neighborhoods has set the tone for my conversations with you dear, Mr. President.
I love having a down-home people's president.
Now, Barry honey, can we talk about Gitmo?
Since you've discovered the power of that mighty Presidential pen, and have moved so quickly to keep your campaign promise to close Gitmo within one year, I'm getting pretty nervous down here in Georgia. So is every other mother I know.
Now, Barry honey, I'm well aware that some in your crowd think orange jumpsuits are stigmatizing, black hoods are cruel, and denying non-citizens the Constitutional rights of citizens has tainted America's image abroad. That you seem to agree with this fringe of your Party does trouble me, though. You, being a Constitutional lawyer trained at Harvard and holding this opinion, scare the very wits out of me.
I'm sitting down here wishing that your attempts to channel Lincoln extended further than trains, themes, food and folderol. When Lincoln aimed to settle the Civil War, he fought to win, don't you know. He suspended Habeas Corpus for United States citizens, honey. Surely you don't think Abraham Lincoln had less than the best interests of this Republic at heart. Now, if Lincoln went this far to preserve the perpetuity of our Constitutional contract, can't you just protect our innocent children from terrorists?
When you told Jake Tapper of ABC News last June, that prosecuting individual terrorists in U.S. Courts worked just fine after the 1993 WTC bombings and that we ought to pursue this policy for all terrorists, I broke out in a cold sweat and grabbed for my babies. Surely you're aware that those public trials with the incumbent discovery process led to high-impact consequences for our national security.
You do know surely, Barry honey, that during the trial of the blind sheik, our prosecutors had to turn over a list of 200 unindicted co-conspirators, and that sure enough within a few days that list made it all the way to downtown Khartoum and was put right slap-dab into the hands of Osama Bin Laden.
In one heartache of a New York minute, the evil Bin Laden knew which of his covert agents here had been outed. Now, I'm not the President and I have no degree in Constitutional law, but even I suspect that this was not a good thing -- at least not for the innocent workers in the WTC on 9/11, it wasn't.
In another case, someone -- someone seemingly unimportant -- testified about delivery of a cell phone, and wouldn't you know it! The terrorists got the transcript, culled that little detail and shut down their cell phone communication network, knowing -- due to the public trial -- that our guys were onto them.
I'm not really in favor of announcing to every terrorist cell around the globe exactly how we're waging our war against them. Surely, you're not either, but public trials like the kind we give real citizens, would certainly do that.
Those unintended consequences can become real snafus, honey.
Now I really do hope you've taken the time to read the NYPD's report on Radicalization and the Homegrown Threat, a threat that even as I write you, breeds like a deadly virus among our very own citizenry. Just as Lincoln had to face the ugly fact that domestic threats were real, so do you, honey.
According to this very detailed and elaborate report, done in the interest of national security, these homegrown Islamic terrorists fly under the law-enforcement radar, have no prior records, are bred under cover of religious institutions, and prey upon the hopes of disaffected youths who are indoctrinated to see themselves in glorious terms as warriors in the global Jihad. Most are just walking among the rest of us law-abiding citizens as secret agents awaiting their call to individual missions.
Which brings me, Barry honey, to the nit and grit of this Gitmo matter.
Once you actually bring those terrorists to American soil and house them close to our neighborhoods and our innocent school children, won't some of these homegrown, secret warriors find that a temptation just too juicy to ignore? Won't someone here activate cells of plotters nearby to spring their comrades? Couldn't they take over a school and kill hundreds of innocent children the way they did in Beslan a few years back?
You see, we ordinary American citizens don't have 24/7 Secret Service protection and the like. We must travel the open road with only ourselves and our wits to protect us, and we've grown accustomed to having a President who gave higher priority to protecting us than he gave to protecting the "rights" of terrorists. If you follow through with this cockamamie promise to close Gitmo, where does that leave us and our children, honey?
You're not really serious about this, are you?
Time to face facts. You're most likely going to have to rise to the levels of Lincoln and Bush to get your job of protecting America done. And the sooner you start talking this way, the sooner the terrorists will get the message. That Presidential pen works both ways; time to undo what you've so capriciously done.
Oh, and Barry honey, dissing Medal of Honor winners and wounded vets in favor of hip-hop artists is probably not the best way to start as protector of the people of the United States of America.
You need those military guys and gals, honey. Oh boy, do you need them.
Wil-I-Am ain't going to save American school children from vicious attacks.
You must remember, Barry honey, the watchword of the Presidency:
Prioritize. Prioritize. Prioritize.
Until our next chat, I remain your faithful constituent.
Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She welcomes your comments at email@example.com.