Watching Attorney General Eric Holder as he testified recently before the House
Judiciary Committee was a disheartening experience. Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) tried repeatedly to get the
general to acknowledge that “radical Islam” was a motivation for three of the recent
attacks on the homeland--Nidal Hasan’s murderous Fort Hood attack, and the
failed attempts of Abdulmutallab and Shahzad in Detroit and New York,
respectively. The administration has said again and again that these were
“isolated” individuals, only to be contradicted when the facts came out. Could
radical Islam have been even one of the motives of Hasan, Addulmutallab, and
Shahzad, Smith implores of the general. “I don’t want to say anything about a
religion,” replies the general. Not even the radical variant of that religion.
Not even after Hasan cried “Allahu Akbar!” (God is Great) as he gunned down his
fellow soldiers.
Now, we have the New York Times, in one of its typical front page editorials,
anguishing over the Obama administration’s decision to go after Anwar al Awlaki,
Yemeni cleric who communicated via email with Hasan and who seems to have
inspired Abdulmutallab’s failed Christmas Day attack. Awlaki, like Nidal Hasan
and Faisal Shahzad, also holds American citizenship. Here’s what the Times says:
The Obama administration’s decision to authorize the killing by the Central
Intelligence Agency of a terrorism suspect who is an American citizen has set
off a debate over the legal and political limits of drone missile strikes, a
mainstay of the campaign against terrorism.
It’s one of the few things this administration is doing right, but it is
provoking the usual round of hand wringing. When we are attacked by enemy
combatants who declare war on us but who are not “state actors,” operating under
the regular articles of war set out in the Geneva Convention, may we respond
with deadly force? The liberal commentariat would have us send in predator
drones with recordings of Miranda warnings, no doubt.
Liberals invented theater of the absurd. Now, they’ve invented combat theater of
the absurd. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes is a hero of liberals. He famously said in
construing the law, “a page of history is worth a volume of logic.”
During the War of Independence, Gen. Nathaniel Greene conducted military
operations in the Carolinas. During those battles, he directed his Continentals
to fire at Americans who were taking orders from their British superiors. Some
of those
Americans were, most regrettably, killed. None of them was Mirandized.
During the Civil War, Generals Grant and Sherman conducted combat operations
throughout the Southeast. They ordered their men to fire on Confederate
soldiers, all of whom were American citizens. The horror of that fratricidal
conflict lingers with us today, but no one on either side ever suggested that
you cannot shoot at fellow U.S. citizens.
The New York Times waves all such examples away. Those were battlefield
commands. These predator strikes take place “far from the field of combat.”
Where, exactly, is the field of combat in today’s war on terror? You’re having your
morning cup of coffee at Top of the World restaurant in Lower Manhattan. A
civilian jet, hijacked by persons not in uniform and not under the command of a
recognized government, plows into the building in which you are sitting, twenty
stories below you. Are you in the field of combat as the World Trade Center
collapses around you?
It is because of the bravery and skill of our armed forces that the United
States of America has survived in a hostile world. It is not because of
pettifogging lawyers like the ACLU, like those prosecutor Andy McCarthy calls
“the al Qaeda bar.” It is not because of generals like Eric Holder who cannot
even be dragged into admitting that radical Islam might just possibly be one of
the “variety of reasons” we are being murderously attacked.
The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is one of the most honored, hallowed places in
America. It commemorates those who laid down there lives that we might live in
freedom. As of yet, we have no Tomb of the Unknown Lawyer. But if we keep
fighting this war with legal briefs instead of effective weapons, maybe there
will be. If there is, I doubt hordes of tourists will want to go there to pay
their respects.