BCT Editorial – 8/3/06

This page was last updated on August 3, 2006.

The home front; Editorial; Beaver County Times; August 3, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Shooting at a Jewish charity gives Americans a glimpse at future terrorist attacks

“Five years after Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists can successfully attack anywhere at anytime in the United States.

“Five years from now, terrorists will still be able to hit anywhere at anytime in the United States.

“Pick any date in the future and that will be so.

“When the attacks are made, it won’t be the fault of President Bush or whoever is president at the time. When the attacks come, it won’t be the fault of Bush’s critics or those of the administration then in power.

“The fact of the matter, one that our leaders would rather not tell us, is that the United States is indefensible against terrorist attacks because of the nature of terrorism.

“The shooting rampage in Washington on Friday brought this home.

“Naveed Haq, a 30-year-old U.S.-born Muslim, attacked the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, opening fire with two semiautomatic pistols. He killed 58-year-old Pamela Waechter and wounded five other women, including one who was 5 months pregnant.

“Early indications are that Haq is not a terrorist or affiliated with any such organization. Instead, he appears to be a mentally unstable young man who was acting on his own. (The Associated Press reported Haq has been getting psychiatric help for about 10 years.)

“Although he was not a terrorist, Haq was unstoppable once he decided to carry out his self-anointed mission. In that sense, he is similar to terrorists. Acting alone or in small groups, members of these self-initiating, decentralized cells can go anywhere and do anything they want at anytime. If they get caught, others will be more than willing to take their place in the next attempt.

“The attacks, all of which can’t be stopped, could come in the form of bombings or shootings, the release of biological and chemical agents, even the explosion of small nuclear devices.

“The hard truth is that terrorists can recruit suicide bombers a lot faster than we can infiltrate their cells. They can take advantage of a mindset that places little value on human life - theirs and others. They know they have a deep well of hatred that they can tap for years to come. Most important, they know that a small number of dedicated people can spread fear and panic through an entire nation.

“America is not defenseless.

“Good police work at home and abroad can cut down on the odds of terrorist acts taking place. Heightened security cuts down on the odds, too. Having a civilian population that is alert to these dangers can help anti-terrorism efforts immensely.”

[RWC] If the Times believes what this paragraph says, perhaps it can explain why it constantly publishes editorials attacking surveillance of terrorist international communications. There have also been more than a handful of editorials bashing the Patriot Act.

In just about all of the editorials, the premise was the actions were merely scare tactics employed to garner power for Republicans in general, and President Bush specifically.

“But this combined effort won’t be - and can’t be - 100 percent effective.

“When the attacks come, Americans must endure and move on. War is coming home, and we will have to live with the death and destruction that comes with combat.

“It’s not a matter of if but when.”

[RWC] This is the second editorial in eight days telling us “we’re all targets.” As I noted in the critique of the previous editorial, any time someone in the Bush administration reminds us terrorism is real, the Times accuses President Bush of using terrorism as a “scare tactic” for political gain. Why is it OK for the Times but not President Bush?