Reflections From a Murky Pond

Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani-born naturalized American citizen decided to turn jihadi and join the ranks of Muslim terrorists who plague the Civilized World.  On Saturday, May 1, 2010 Shahzad drove a SUV loaded with improvised explosives into Times Square in NYC and tried to explode it amid the crowd of New Yorkers and tourists, which would have resulted in mass civilian casualties.

Fortunately Shahzad’s training by the Taliban in his home nation of Pakistan didn’t seem to include adequate training in such improvised munitions. The car bomb failed to detonate and within hours the FBI apprehended Faisal Shahzad.

Federal prosecutors have filed a five (5) count indictment against charges against Shahzad on Tuesday, May 4, 2010  in U.S. District Court of Southern New York: attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction, acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries, use of a destructive device in connection with criminal violence, transporting and receiving explosives, and damaging and destroying property by means of fire.

These are five very serious federal crimes. When – there’s no point in bothering with the fantasy of saying “if” – the filthy, failed jihadi terrorist is convicted he will face life in prison, mostly likely effectively without any possibility of parole.

Yet the single most applicable and important federal charge against Faisal Shahzad is sadly and conspicuously missing from the indictment. That is the charge of treason under Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115, § 2381 of the US Code.

Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115, § 2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

The 30 year-old Faisal Shahzad moved from Pakistan to America 12 years ago, studied for and recieved his MBA here in America and, became a naturalized U.S. citizen in April 2009. Shahzad certainly owed allegiance to the US – in the truest sense of that word; he had a debt to America that he should have spent his life trying to pay off.

That’s apparently not how Shahzad saw things. He was seemingly more than happy to enjoy the freedoms and comforts of America but felt know loyalty to the people and nation who were gracious enough to allow him to join them. He chose instead to levy war against them, adhere to their enemies, and give those enemies aid. He chose the path of Muslim jihad.

So why hasn’t US Attorney General Eric Holder instructed the federal prosecutors in this case: Brendan McGuire, John Cronan, and Randall Jackson to include the charge of treason in the indictment? Why hasn’t President Obama instructed his boy, Holder to do so?

Both were quick to defend offering Faisal the protections under the law that even Shahzad deserved as a American citizen, but neither seems willing actually fully apply the law to him.

Trying, convicting, and executing the jihadi, Faisal Shahzad for treason would send a clear and strong message to America’s enemies, both within and without the borders of our country. I just hope that fact is not the reason why neither President Obama nor his Attorney General, Eric Holder want to do so.

There is often both truth and wisdom to be found in humor. Both are found in full measure in Glenn McCoy’s cartoon about the reasons that President Obama and his lackey, Attorney General Eric Holder want to enact the dangerous travesty of trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his subhuman, Islamist ilk in civilian courts.

…So We Can Finally Bring George Bush To Justice

But hey! What can else can one expect from President Obama and his coterie? The boy got himself elected as the POTUS by running a successful Presidential campaign against the “lame duck” incumbent, President George Bush, Jr. – and he has blamed every one of his many failures and pathetic inadequacies upon the man since then. This is just Obama’s next logical step.

Back in October, 2002, when Barack Obama was a neophyte Senator from Illinois and attacking then President Bush’s attack upon the brutal and despotic regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Obama said that  he wasn’t against all wars; he was just opposed to dumb wars.

Now, truth be told, Obama’s outburst had more to do with scoring political points by attacking President Bush then with any firmly held convictions Obama might have possessed, but his point about “dumb wars” had a certain validity.

War is a dirty, bloody, horrific enterprise that should be undertaken, when possible, only after careful planning and with a clear goal and a exit strategy kept firmly in mind.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.

– Sen. Barack H. Obama (D-IL)
October 2, 2002

It’s easy to argue that going into Iraq the second time was unneeded at that time, but harder to describe it as “dumb.” The operation was well-planned and we had clear objectives – though our exit strategy and the preconditions for such involved a time-frame that is largely unpalatable to the modern, “half-hour sitcom” format populace. It is also largely immaterial at this time; we’re pulling out of Iraq close to on schedule and the Administration that launched the war are no longer in power.

What About Afghanistan?

There’s a “dumb” war, if ever I saw one, and one that is growing more and more reminiscent of our protracted and ultimately failed engagement in Vietnam. What started out as a reasonably clear-cut punitive expedition by the US and NATO has become a quagmire.

General Stanley A. McChrystal, Commander of US & Allied Forces in Afghanistan, has pleaded for 40,000 more troops in order to prosecute the war there. President Obama and his administration seem very reluctant to provide those troops. The resulting schism between the US Military and the White House has become fodder for the media and various pundits.

For myself, I find this argument between the troops on the ground and the politicians in Washington D.C. to be ridiculous and a lethally stupid case of “putting the cart before the horse.” How can any decisions be made about the disposition of personnel and materiel before we have decided what the objective is?

What War Are We Fighting?

It’s rally a simple question and one that should have a relatively simple, if not necessarily easy, answer. I haven’t heard anyone – President Obama or Congress – provide that answer though.

• What are our strategic goals?
• What is the scope of our military’s mission?
• What constitutes the victory conditions?
• What is our exit strategy?

President Obama, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of the United States of America, is required to answer those questions; that is his job. So far he hasn’t done so and every day our soldiers, allied Afghan militiamen, and even those who we’re currently fighting against are dying for no defined purpose whatsoever.

On one lone point I agree with what Obama said before he was elected President; I’m opposed to dumb war as well.