January 01, 2010
Obama The Appeaser May Have Violated Executive Order Against Negotiating With Terrorists
I completely missed this story yesterday, where Bill Roggio noted that the Obama Administration fell into a trap laid by Iranian-backed extremists, and released terrorists that killed American soldiers:
The US has released the leader of an Iranian-backed Shia terror group behind the kidnapping and murder of five US soldiers in Karbala in January 2007.Qais Qazali, the leader of the Asaib al Haq or the League of the Righteous, was set free by the US military and transferred to Iraqi custody in exchange for the release of British hostage Peter Moore, US military officers and intelligence officials told The Long War Journal. The US military directly implicated Qais in the kidnapping and murder of five US soldiers in Karbala in January 2007.
"We let a very dangerous man go, a man whose hands are stained with US and Iraqi blood," a military officer said. "We are going to pay for this in the future."
The US military has maintained that the release of members and leaders of the League of the Righteous is related to a reconciliation agreement between the terror group and the Iraqi government, but some US military officers disagree.
"The official line is the release of Qazali is about reconciliation, but in reality this was a prisoner swap," a military intelligence official said.
The Brit released in this uneven exchange was purposefully kidnapped to be used as swap-bait, and our American Chamberlain showed he was precisely the cultured rube they expected.
Today, Roggio follows up by noting that Obama may have violated an executive order issued by Ronald Reagan that expressly forbid negotiating with terrorists.
To the best I can determine, there are two possible answers to the question of whether or not Obama violated National Security Decision Directive Number 207.
The first possible answer is that yes, the Administration did violate the Directive. If that is the case, I'm not sure what the ramifications could or should be. I suspect that even if criminal laws were broken by the White House, the Holder Justice Department would not seek to prosecute. In the unlikely event that they would prosecute, you can be assured that a lower-level staffer would be the fall guy.
The other possible answer—and perhaps the more likely one—is that shortly after taking office President Obama issued an executive order of his own that authorizes negotiations with terrorists.
Whether he broke the Reagan-era directive or cravenly issued a secret one of his own, the fact of the matter is that our nation's enemies know that taking hostages is now a viable option to win concessions with this President.
Hell of a job, Barry.
Hell of a job.
"The other possible answer—and perhaps the more likely one—is that shortly after taking office President Obama issued an executive order of his own that authorizes negotiations with terrorists."
If he didn't, he will tomorrow morning!!
And trust me, you'll never, ever hear of Eric Holder prosecuting a Democrap...Just not going to happen. And it's just as well; his legal expertise will be put to a severe test in the KSM "circus trial" in NYC.
Posted by: Dell at January 1, 2010 01:40 PMHow do we get this fool out of office before he gets us killed?
He ran for office to destroy America....not protect her.
Posted by: torabora at January 1, 2010 09:39 PMConstitutional Law Professor? Which predecessor will get the blame for not explaining the weight of Executive orders to this neophyte? Not only is common sense lacking, but his staff is clueless. Dangerous clueless!
Posted by: hutch1200 at January 1, 2010 10:10 PMThis is going to be a long year.
Posted by: Marc at January 2, 2010 12:52 AMThe phrase I got from Ace's website, that I think applies to this is "It's a feature, not a bug."
I've been saying that a lot, lately. It's fun.
Posted by: brando at January 5, 2010 09:08 AM