April 13, 2004
Liberals Outraged at Anti-Terrorist Immigration
Enforcement
By
Michelle Malkin
The Bush-bashers who have relentlessly accused the
president and his
War on Terror team of acting like jack-booted
bigots are now imperiously attacking them for acting
like light-footed fumblers. This self-serving display of
liberal hypocrisy has provided more idiotic
entertainment than the
Nick and Jessica Variety Hour.
In an editorial this week that embodies the Left’s
unmitigated gall, the New York Times castigated
President Bush for not doing enough after receiving an
August 6, 2001, briefing memo warning vaguely of Bin
Laden-planned domestic terrorism. According to the
Times, Bush should have “rushed back to the White
House, assembled all his top advisers and demanded to
know what, in particular, was being done to
screen airline passengers to make sure people who
fit the airlines'
threat profiles were being prevented from boarding
American planes.”[The
Silent President]
That’s right. The same
editorial board that has barbecued the Bush Justice
Department after the September 11 attacks for
fingerprinting young male temporary visa holders
traveling from terror-sponsoring and terror-friendly
nations (editorial,
June 6, 2002); temporarily detaining asylum seekers
from
high-risk countries for background screening
(editorial,
December 28, 2002); and sending undercover agents to
investigate
mosques suspected of supporting terrorism
(editorial,
May 31, 2002) now
expects us to believe it would have applauded Bush
for his vigilance if he had swiftly ordered
airport security officials to stop thousands of
young Middle Eastern men at airports during the summer
of 2001 on
the basis of an ill-defined threat.
Rear-view mirror know-it-alls from Bob Kerrey to
Maureen Dowd berate the Bush Justice Department for
ignoring the
“Phoenix memo”—a prescient July 2001 warning
about Arab flight students from Arizona-based FBI agent
Kenneth Williams. The memo revealed that Arab terrorists
had infiltrated Arizona civil aviation schools and urged
the FBI to check on the backgrounds of
flight students nationwide.
When the Phoenix memo surfaced two years ago, the
Times characterized the FBI’s failure to heed
Williams’ recommendation as
“one indicator of the paralytic fear of risk-taking”
at the bureau. But the Times smugly ignored the
real problem that the racial grievance-mongering
newspaper itself has contributed to: the fear of a
politically correct backlash from
civil liberties absolutists,
ethnic lobbyists, and
open borders activists. As one law enforcement
official close to the Williams investigation told the
Los Angeles Times, “If we went out and started
canvassing, we'd get in trouble for targeting Arab
Americans.”[Missed
Memo Stirs More Trouble for FBI, May 25 2002]
In addition to the Phoenix memo, Bush critics have
resurrected Minnesota-based FBI agent
Coleen Rowley’s May 2002 memo complaining about
legal barriers to searching terrorist suspect
Zacarias Moussaoui’s laptop and residence. The
duplicity of civil rights absolutists attacking the FBI
for upholding the probable cause standard in this case
is simply stunning.
While they heap praise on Rowley for her post-Sept.
11 analysis, Richard Ben-Veniste, Jamie Gorelick, and
the other finger-pointing blabbermouths on the
9-11 Commission refuse to credit the Bush
administration for its use of immigration law to detain
Moussaoui in mid-August 2001 (he had violated the terms
of the
Visa Waiver program). This unheralded enforcement
decision before the terrorist attacks quite possibly
saved thousands of lives. Transcripts of interrogations
with al Qaeda’s purported operations chief,
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, released three weeks ago
reveal that Moussaoui was training for a
post-September 11 suicide mission on the
West Coast.
At the time Moussaoui was detained, the Justice
Department had no evidence he had done anything illegal
other than overstay his visit to the U.S., a
transgression that is routinely pooh-poohed by liberals
and other
open-borders advocates as a “minor” or
“technical”
immigration violation that shouldn’t be
punished.
Unsuprisingly, when Attorney General
John Ashcroft acted
decisively to detain more than 1,200 potential
Zacarias Moussaouis after September 11 he was lambasted
by Democrats, the ACLU, minority groups, and, yes, the
New York Times editorial board, which attacked
Ashcroft’s “extreme measures” (Nov.
10, 2001) against illegal alien detainees who were
merely
“Muslim men with immigration problems” (Sept.
10, 2002).
Like the boy who cried “wolf,” the liberals
who cry that the Bush administration “didn’t do
enough” to fight terrorism should be dismissed as
sniveling children stuck in an indulgent world of
make-believe.
Michelle Malkin [email
her] is author of
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists,
Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores.
Click
here for Peter Brimelow’s review. Click
here for Michelle Malkin's website.
COPYRIGHT
CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.