Saturday, March 20, 2010
Are Liberals Soft On Terrorist?
Of course liberals are soft on terrorism, after all, they don't believe that evil exists in the world. Their approach is to ALWAYS blame America first if someone is mad at us. If you don't believe me, look at all of the liberals that were falling all over each other excusing the terrorist attacks on 9/11 as being justified because it was OUR fault for imposing our ideas about freedom on a part of the world that had never seen it!
Saturday, March 13, 2010
SOMEONE needs to Wake the Hell up these Liberals.
It seems that every time an Islamic Terrorists tries to murder innocent civilians, Liberals scramble to down play the situation. Only this time, it took 72 hours for the executive Branch to address the nation on the thwarted terrorist attack.As it has been with every American priority, the security of the American people was also placed in the back of Obama's mind. Not only did it take him 72 hours to respond to the threat(he waited until his vacation was over), but he downplayed the situation as being an "isolated incident",despite the fact that Al'qaeda quickly took responsibility for the attempted suicide bombing.
After the fiasco that was the slow and delayed response from the president,Obama did what is expected of all liberal government officials;he treated the incident, not as an act of war, but as a common criminal act. The man charged with attempting to suicide bomb a passenger jet was not placed in a military prison. Instead, he was given full and complete access to the Constitution as if he were a common criminal. He also has the full protection of a public attorney.
After the incident, Obama drew out a plan to enforce a one hour "security blanket" policy that would "make airlines safer an hour or so before landing". However, quick ridicule of his overwhelmingly weak security measures forced him to withdraw them.
Obama's Department of Homeland Security Tzar, Janet Napolitano, (the same woman that deemed conservatives and military servicemen "national security threats") responded by saying that their security measures "worked really well", and are the reason the bombing was a failure,,,,despite the fact that the bomber got a passport and Visa while being on the terrorist watch list,despite the fact that the terrorists father warned of his son's Al'qaeda connections,and despite the fact that he was able to board and detonate a bomb on an airplane.
So, what do you think?
After the fiasco that was the slow and delayed response from the president,Obama did what is expected of all liberal government officials;he treated the incident, not as an act of war, but as a common criminal act. The man charged with attempting to suicide bomb a passenger jet was not placed in a military prison. Instead, he was given full and complete access to the Constitution as if he were a common criminal. He also has the full protection of a public attorney.
After the incident, Obama drew out a plan to enforce a one hour "security blanket" policy that would "make airlines safer an hour or so before landing". However, quick ridicule of his overwhelmingly weak security measures forced him to withdraw them.
Obama's Department of Homeland Security Tzar, Janet Napolitano, (the same woman that deemed conservatives and military servicemen "national security threats") responded by saying that their security measures "worked really well", and are the reason the bombing was a failure,,,,despite the fact that the bomber got a passport and Visa while being on the terrorist watch list,despite the fact that the terrorists father warned of his son's Al'qaeda connections,and despite the fact that he was able to board and detonate a bomb on an airplane.
So, what do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
