Filed under: Conservative Perspective, Terrorism, The Islamic Conspiracy, The Left
The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Attorney General of the United States
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Dear Attorney General Holder:
This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases. An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading.
The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.
Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government.
Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities. This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case. Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay…. President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]” (Emphasis added.)
Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself. For what it may be worth, I will say this much. For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated. Essentially, there have been two camps. One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s. The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission. Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people.
There are differences in these various proposals. But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing: Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted. We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans. Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces. The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight. Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year. The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules. Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January.
Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities—like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance. I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees. According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training. Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs’ impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration’s propensity to deride its predecessor’s purported insensitivity to the rule of law.
I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness. But I can decline to participate in the charade.
Finally, let me repeat that I respect and admire the dedication of Justice Department lawyers, whom I have tirelessly defended since I retired in 2003 as a chief assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. It was a unique honor to serve for nearly twenty years as a federal prosecutor, under administrations of both parties. It was as proud a day as I have ever had when the trial team I led was awarded the Attorney General’s Exceptional Service Award in 1996, after we secured the convictions of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his underlings for waging a terrorist war against the United States. I particularly appreciated receiving the award from Attorney General Reno—as I recounted in Willful Blindness, my book about the case, without her steadfastness against opposition from short-sighted government officials who wanted to release him, the “blind sheikh” would never have been indicted, much less convicted and so deservedly sentenced to life-imprisonment. In any event, I’ve always believed defending our nation is a duty of citizenship, not ideology. Thus, my conservative political views aside, I’ve made myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, who’ve thought tapping my experience would be beneficial. It pains me to decline your invitation, but the attendant circumstances leave no other option.
Very truly yours,
/S/
Andrew C. McCarthy
cc: Sylvia T. Kaser and John DePue National Security Division, Counterterrorism Section
Since first taking office, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned an imminent apocalypse awaits mankind — for which Iran will be the catalyst. With his impending re-election, Ahmadinejad’s threats need be taken seriously.
Ahmadinejad believes this apocalypse has been in the making for eleven centuries. He — and his bosses, the ayatollahs — believe divine destiny has set events in motion — and their mission is to precipitate their evolution. Ahmadinejad believes next week’s presidential election is an important step in this evolution.
Ahmadinejad is, by our standards, a madman. But in his culture — among the Iranian Shia who believe that the return of the “twelfth imam” can be precipitated by a man-created apocalypse – he is entirely sane. Ahmadinejad’s re-election is one he believes he must win for the final phase of this divine plan to evolve. And, because theocratic Iran “elects” presidents under a sham democratic process controlled by its religious leaders, it is an election he already has won.
It is important to understand the driving force behind Ahmadinejad and how it will dictate his actions following his re-election. Such an understanding explains why there can be no peaceful resolution to stop Iran’s quest to develop a nuclear weapon — i.e., because everything Ahmadinejad does is preparation for the inevitable apocalypse.
The apocalypse Ahmadinejad sees looming on the horizon will usher in the return of the “Hidden Imam” — an event into which he has injected a role for himself. Shia Islamic belief is the last direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammad, also known as the “Mahdi,” was but nine years old when he disappeared eleven centuries ago — destined to remain hidden from mankind until his pre-ordained return by Allah. For Muslims, the good news is his return will restore Islam to greatness and to a world ruled by=2 0a Sharia dictatorship. For both Muslims and non-Muslims, the bad news is the Mahdi’s return only occurs after the world experiences extreme chaos. The Shia “twelvers” believe Jesus will accompany the Mahdi and, in submission to Islam, acknowledge the supremacy of the Koran to the Gospel.
In 2005, one of Ahmadinejad’s first acts as president demonstrated his determination to build a nuclear weapon. Tehran had halted its uranium enrichment program in 2003, allowing international inspectors to seal its equipment. Immediately after taking office, he re-started the program, also acquiring 18 North Korean BM-25 long range, land-mobile missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
Unbelievably, a 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), using intelligence provided by a questionable defector suspected of being a double agent, asserted the Iranians had halted work on their nuclear weapons program in 2003 and had not yet restarted it. Critics pointed out the NIE’s conclusion was reached without even reporting on the activities of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps — the group actually holding the keys to the country’s nuclear weapons program.
The 2007 NIE has since been discredited. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, even President Obama acknowledged Iran’s “pursuit” of a nuclear weapons capability in a news conference and CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted in his confirmation hearing, “From all the information I’ve seen, I think there is no question that they (the Iranians) are seeking that capability.”
Needing to buy time for Iran’s nuclear weapons program, Ahmadinejad undoubtedly viewed the NIE report — as well as the international community’s continuing inability to agree on a unified approach to stop Tehran — as yet another sign of Allah’s divine intervention to ensure the program remains on track.
Ahmadinejad has repeatedly made clear his intention to destroy Israel and the US. As the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini asserted and Ahmadinejad has agreed, “Islam makes it incumbent [for believers] to prepare for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country of the world … [by fulfilling Islam's mandate to] kill all unbelievers.” Those believing nuclear retaliation deters Ahmadinejad from launching a first strike against the US or Israel should know he also supports Khomeini’s 1981 position: “I say let Iran go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.”
Ahmadinejad’s true intentions, revealed by his actio ns as researched by author Ron Cantrell, are also most telling.
- While mayor of Tehran in 2004, Ahmadinejad mapped a parade route for the Mahdi to follow through the city. One of the outgoing mayor’s last orders to city officials was to widen a major boulevard to prepare for Mahdi’s return.
- Upon becoming president, Ahmadinejad declared his mandate was “to pave the way for the coming of this Islamic messiah.”
- The site of the Mahdi’s return is the site of his disappearance — a well behind a mosque in the village of Jamkaran in the holy city of Qom. As president, Ahmadinejad has funded millions of dollars in improvements for the mosque and well.
- To prepare for the eventual pilgrimage from Tehran to Jamkaran following the Mahdi’s return, Ahmadinejad has ordered construction of a railroad line connecting the two locations.
- In speeches caught on camera, Ahmadinejad repeatedly prays to Allah to expedite the Mahdi’s return.
- After returning to Iran after a UN speech, Ahmadinejad informed religious leaders he felt a halo of light engulfing him as he spoke. A video reveals Ahmadinejad telling them, for the duration20of his speech world leaders were mesmerized, not moving “an eyelid…as if a hand was holding them there, and had just opened their eyes to the message of the Islamic Republic.”
- In conversations with some world leaders, Ahmadinejad confides the Mahdi’s return is imminent.
The Christian Science Monitor’s Scott Peterson reports Ahmadinejad’s “presidential obsession” with the Mahdi’s return has brought him to “a certitude that leaves little room for compromise…every issue is designed to lay the foundation for the Mahdi’s return.”
The light from Ahmadinejad’s halo appears to have blinded him from reality and the world community from taking meaningful action. No nation — save Israel — seems intent on really stopping Iran’s nuclear pursuit.
For Iran’s theocratic leadership — and especially Ahmadinejad — it is truly “Apocalypse Now.”
by James Zumwalt, retired Marine who served in the Vietnam and Gulf wars. He has written opinion pieces on foreign policy, defense and security issues for dozens of newspapers. He is president of his own security consulting company.
When I heard about the possibility that the terrorist detention camp at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base (Gitmo) will move to Alcatraz Island in the middle of the San Francisco Bay, I got excited. Ideas from economic stimuli to renewed patriotism started flooding my mind.
Here are the top 10 reasons I believe Gitmo should be moved to Alcatraz:
10. D-Block. Not the hip-hop group, but the row of solitary confinement cells at Alcatraz. Need I say more? (Of course, “Gitmo and the Golden Gates” might make a hit rap song, too.)
9. It is rumored that “Dirty Harry” (Clint Eastwood’s notoriously tough San Francisco cop character) still roams the streets with his .44 Magnum. Would terrorists really try to escape if he were across the bay? Do they feel that lucky? Well, do they?
8. It would give Congress something better on which to spend those hundreds of billions of dollars in bailout money than the absolute waste of more Wall Street bonuses and partisan pork.
7. My buddy the Governator needs a bailout, and the new “Hasta la Vista, Alcatraz” tour could be a gigantic boost for California tourism.
6. It’s about time for a sequel to “Escape From Alcatraz,” called “Bet Your A– That You Better Stay on ‘The Rock.’”
5. Tony Bennett wants to produce his new smash single, “I Left My Terrorist in San Francisco.”
4. The only text in the prison library and school would be my latest book, “Black Belt Patriotism — How to Reawaken America,” with daily memory tests to see whether the detainees can recite the appendices containing the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and the Ten Commandments.
3. Because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was a big advocate for Gitmo’s closing and seeing as her district includes Alcatraz Island, let her deal with its aftermath. Pelosi even could help guard the captives with binoculars from her San Francisco high-rise.
2. Recently commuted border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean need new jobs and are willing to train and head up Alcatraz’s new team of correctional officers.
1. I’m volunteering to be the new warden, and I pledge to make “The Rock” a Chucktatorship.
Are you with me?
All joking aside, remember when America was known as being tough and compassionate? Will we now polarize from waterboarding to being pantywaists?
Do most really believe it makes sense to shut down Gitmo for world adulation, while we possibly put Americans at greater risk by relocating these jihadists within our borders?
Is Time magazine serious when it suggests six possible domestic military facilities, from New York City to San Diego, as the new home for these enemies of the state?
Was Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) serious when he told Fox News last week that he’d offer his own district as a future dwelling place for the 245 Gitmo terrorist detainees? He said: “Sure, I’d take them. They’re no more dangerous in my district than in Guantanamo. … There’s no reason not to put them in prisons in the United States and handle them the way they would handle any other prisoners.”
Do Americans really want terrorists — such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11 — on our soil?!
In Robert Spencer’s excellent new book, “Stealth Jihad,” he documents well how radical Islam is subverting America via intentional and pervasive subtleties throughout our culture. Rather than crashing into our buildings with planes, they’re breaking down every stratum of society using our tolerance and passivity. Rather than overpowering America through combat, they are influencing Americans of all ages by saturating the soils of our minds that there is nothing to fear from extreme Islam’s theology or presence. We’ve shifted from protecting Americans to defending the terrorists. Our universally accommodative spirit literally is opening the doors for those who seek to destroy us, and Gitmo is just more proof of that.
While we worry about the way the rest of the world sees us, we are stomping upon the souls of Americans. Have we forgotten so quickly? Can our politicians not see? Have we lost our 9/11 minds? Gitmo’s closing and future relocation reflects upon the families and friends of those precious souls who sacrificed everything on the battlefields of the Middle East, in the Twin Towers, on Flight 93 and at the Pentagon. We’ve memorialized their sacrifices; let’s not bury their memory.
