AIRLINE TERROR AND FOREIGN POLICY – AT 5:51 P.M. ET:  ANDY McCARTHY, WHO PROSECUTED MAJOR TERRORIST CASES IN NEW YORK, HAS A FEW COMMENTS ABOUT THE AIRLINE GUY AND HIS RELATION TO OBAMA'S "OUTREACH" TO THE WORLD.  FROM NRO:

I couldn't help but be struck by this ambiguous passage in the Washington Post's report this morning: "The incident marks the latest apparent attempt by terrorists to bring down a U.S. aircraft through the use of an improvised weapon, and set in motion urgent security measures that disrupted global air travel during the frenetic holiday weekend." No doubt the Post means that "the incident" has "set in motion urgent security measures," but it was just as clearly "an attempt by terrorists" — and a successful attempt, at that — to "set in motion urgent security measures." It sounds trite but it's worth repeating: The object of terrorism is to terrorize, and obviously the mission has been accomplished even if the plane was not brought down.

Correct.  And McCarthy notes that this incident took place despite all the well-publicized attempts by the Obamans to change American foreign policy and be kind to everyone:

I wonder what the media would be saying if George Bush were still president.

Hadn't Abdulmutallab heard that we are closing Gitmo? Hadn't he heard that we're phasing out military-commissions so we can show the world that we give even the worst mass-murderers civilian trials with all the rights of American citizens? Hadn't he heard that President Obama has banned torture (yes, yes, I know, actually Congress banned it 15 years ago — details, details ...)? Hadn't he heard that the president has called for "a new beginning" in America's relationship with the Muslim world? Hadn't he heard that this is our new, smarter strategy to safeguard the nation from man-caused disasters?

I suspect he's heard all those things.

Yes he has, and he isn't moved.  Is anyone surprised, except maybe the so-called "intellectual" elites, who thought it would be so easy?

December 27, 2009