bin Laden Killing is Emotional Victory, Not Strategic

Osama bin Laden has been killed by US Navy Seals. This is good news and a time to reflect on our War on Terror.


First and foremost, our brave military carried out the execution. We can always rely on the World’s Finest when courage is required. These guys are awesome. And we probably will never know their individual identities because they also are humble.


The US apparently offered bin Laden’s body to several different nations which all refused. Bin Laden then was “buried at sea”.


‘Dumped into the ocean’ would be a better description.


So does bin Laden’s execution change anything?


Yes, but mostly no. The 9/11 deed is long done, and killing him is an emotional victory that gives us a temporary boost, where we can celebrate retaliation against the beast who masterminded the attacks . But in a few days it will be mostly forgotten.


Because terrorism has changed. Bin Laden no longer is strategically important. Jihad today is preached in mosques in London, not from training camps in Afghanistan or Somalia. And terrorism itself still is carried out under the same old regime that allowed 9/11 to happen – apathy, political correctness and negligence.


After all if you want to commit a terrorist attack today and you are an American Muslim, you should join the US Army, rise to the rank of major, rant and rave about Islam while on duty, visit extremist websites, alarm your Army commanders who do nothing because you are a Muslim and they are afraid of offending you, and then kill 13 good Americans as Nidal Hassan did at Fort Hood in November 2009.


So why go all the way to Pakistan to kill bin Laden? His spirit is and will be alive and well right here in America in apathy, political correctness and negligence.  When Faisal Shahzad tried but failed to blow up Times Square with a car bomb on May 1, 2010, he almost got away when he waltzed onto a Middle East-bound aircraft two days later with not a question asked.


The fact is that 9/11 never should have happened in the first place. President Bill Clinton even was offered bin Laden in the 1990s, but declined to take him, telling a Long Island, NY audience on February 15, 2002: “I did not bring (bin Laden) here because we had no basis to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America”.


So rather than treat bin Laden like an international terrorist, Clinton viewed him as just a common criminal with American Constitutional rights, the way his administration treated the 1993 World Trade Center bombers.


In fact, it was Clinton’s prosecution of the 1993 bombers in civilian court instead of in secret terrorist tribunals that allowed certain national security details to leak into the public domain, like that US agencies were tracking bin Laden through his satellite phone. Bin Laden stopped using it.


This is a good time to reflect on the events leading up to 9/11.


Bill Clinton was president from January 1993 until January 2001. During that time, Clinton ignored terrorism. But when those pesky Christians were praying at their Mount Carmel compound in Waco, Texas, boy, we sure had to kill every one of those dangerous people. Clinton assistant attorney general Jamie Gorelick then solidified the “wall” between CIA and the FBI so that they could not share intel on terrorism.


Repeatedly during the Clinton years, red flags were ignored, like the Phoenix FBI field report on suspicious Middle Eastern males taking flying lessons. Less than a month before 9/11, bureaucratic ineptitude explained here prevented the computer of suspected terrorist Zacharias Moussaoui from being searched. The information in that computer could have stopped the Attacks That Changed America.


But this negligence goes was back to the February 26, 1993 attack on the World Trade Center – in which a truck bomb was detonated in the parking garage under the North Tower –  an attack which should have alerted us eight full years in advance to the impending danger of September 11, 2001.


Indeed when evil people like bin Laden see weakness and apathy, they rub their hands in glee. When Clinton refused to retaliate against repeated terror attacks on US interests in Africa and the Middle East, bin Laden knew that the time was ripening.


Of course George Bush was president at the time of the 9/11 attacks. And liberals love to say that Bush bears the blame, even that he was reading to school children in Florida and did not respond for several minutes after the first plane hit the Trade Center.


But this gap of a few minutes, or even the eight months of the Bush presidency, was nothing compared to eight full years of Clinton neglect of terrorism. Because an attack like 9/11 does not happen overnight. It takes years of planning and a fertile environment in which to blossom. Bush began shortly after he took office to ramp up anti-terror policies. But it was too late. The seed already had taken deep roots.


And now that bin Laden is dead, nothing will really change. The wacky response by the ACLU left to the Bush policy to eavesdrop on certain terrorist phone calls is a prime example of how lenient the climate still is for terrorism in America. Because there are always people seeking to block our defensive efforts.


Sure we got our ultimate retaliation by killing bin Laden, and it feels good. But unless we continue to stand strong on terror, we may repeat 9/11. And the party of Obama – and the party of Clintonare the ones who always have seemed to want  to make sure that we are never really secure.


Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can read excerpts from my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.