Soapbox for al-Qaeda

Slated on Backbone Radio, Nov. 15 Listen every Sunday, 5-8pm on 710 KNUS, Denver... 1460 KZNT, Colorado Springs... and streaming live at 710knus.com.

"A soapbox for al-Qaeda's case against America." That's the verdict from terrorism prosecutor Andrew McCarthy on Obama's evil decision to give KSM and other jihadist monsters a civilian trial in New York. We'll explore the chilling implications on this Sunday's show with John Guandolo, formerly a top counter-terrorism expert with the FBI and now a Centennial Institute Fellow. I will ask him to connect other dots, including the blind denial by American elites of jihadist intent by Major Hasan, the new evidence of Iranian subversion on our soil, and the "Muslim Mafia" book we featured on last week's program.

Here's the lineup for November 15, as Backbone Radio rolls into its sixth year of America without apologies, America with steel in her spine:

5:30 Political Outlook for 2010: Mark Hillman

6:00 American Jihad: John Guandolo

6:30 Health Care: Joseph C. Phillips from Hollywood

7:00 The Absurdity of It All: Columnist Jay Ambrose

7:30 Roots of Our Liberty: Author James C. Bennett

This weekend brings not one but two snowstorms to Denver. Taking down our flag out front as the first one blew in yesterday, I asked myself if there's still a reason to fly it daily, a custom we began on 9/11.

My answer: Yes, now more than ever! Our country is in peril from citizen complacency and weak if not ill-meaning leaders. Patriotic backbone from you and me was never more needed. Let's roll.

Yours for self-government JOHN ANDREWS

Booklists on faith & freedom

Hearing from Greg Schaller, my CCU professor pal, about an online book club starting up at Redstate.com, I compared their list with mineas compiled a few years back at the suggestion of Kevin Teasley, my school-voucher activist pal. The overlap is interesting, and either list is a needed reminder that we're well repaid by devoting more time to the writings that endure, and less to the ephema of journalism, TV-radio, or blogs (this one included). So first, here's the read-and-respond shelf recommended by Redstate:

1. A Message to Garcia by Elbert Hubbard

2. Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg

3. Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt

4. Liberty & Tyranny by Mark Levin

5. The Road to Serfdom by F. A. Hayek

6. The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk

7. Free to Choose by Milton Friedman

8. Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater

9. The Federalist Papers

10. Democracy in America by Tocqueville

11. Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis

12. God and Man at Yale by W.F. Buckley

13. Witness by Whittaker Chambers

14. The Political Writings of St. Augustine

Then here's my list as put together for Teasley back in 2003. He asked for my "ten best" in terms of books that had the greatest impact on my life. The order in which they are listed is a combination of chronology and categories, not necessarily the most impactful from 1 thru 10.

1. Science and Health, Mary Baker Eddy It taught me to love the Bible.

2. The Bible It engaged me with Jesus Christ.

3. The Everlasting Man, G. K. Chesterton It grounded me in Christian tradition.

4. Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis It showed me the beauty of truth.

5. The Conscience of a Conservative, Barry Goldwater It awakened me politically.

6. The Law, Frederic Bastiat It was my primer in political economy.

7. The Road to Serfdom, F. A. Hayek It set me against collectivism.

8. Ideas Have Consequences, Richard Weaver It bonded me to the permanent things.

9. The Lord of the Rings, J. R. R. Tolkien It convinced me that life is a sacred quest.

10. A Man for All Seasons, Robert Bolt It inspired me with the possibility of heroic integrity.

In looking over the authors on both lists, I'm gratified to have met, or seen in person, Bill Buckley, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, Jonah Goldberg, and Barry Goldwater. This is said not to name-drop, but rather to record my sense of obligation for helping to hand on our heritage of faith and freedom to the rising generation of the 21st century, in return for having known -- if only slightly -- some of the giants who handed on that heritage in the 20th century.

For Obama, Afghanistan is a bridge too far

There has been no doubt for weeks now in my mind that President Obama has been planning a retreat from Afghanistan. All the dithering and hand-wringing over the elections, Harmad Karzai and the corrupt Afghan government was just a way to put distance between himself and the "decision" -- or series of decisions -- to create plausible blame on someone else for abandoning the Afghan mission. For those who understand Obama's true goals, this decision was made months ago, and the "high level" discussions within the administration have been nothing but air cover (no pun intended) for the abandonment of the erstwhile war "of necessity". Obama is a craven opportunist, and he sees nothing but messiness in Afghanistan in the years ahead. It will get in the way of his massive goals to restructure America to his liking -- and that's a bridge too far. The reality is that Obama doesn't see the Islamic terrorist threat as particularly significant, in in that vein he has much company among the left-wing intelligentsia (a contradiction in terms, I know.) This is a president who can't bring himself to call the Fort Hood massacre a "terrorist attack". Indeed, this is president who can't bear to even utter the word "terrorism". He doesn't seem to want to deal with the realities of the world we live in, preferring instead to craft a world of platitudes where our words can somehow influence their deeds. Afghanistan, it turns out, is just another "Bush" legacy that threatens to give America a black eye and derail Obama's need to "fix" us in a way that makes us a kinder, fairer place. The redistributionist goals here at home mean we can't really be bothered to fight abroad -- why waste all that energy and money when we can use it to make payments to the Democratic base?

Afghanistan has thus joined Iraq as a "war of choice" and Obama is choosing to bail. According to Jules Crittendon this morning:

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

So Obama will temporize and pick a "middle ground" that rejects General McChrystal's recommendations in favor of a choice that reduces the American footprint and allows us to "retreat with honor". Of course, we've seen this movie before -- we tried retreat with honor in Vietnam and it failed miserably. But past is never prelude with this president, and in his desire to protect his domestic agenda, Obama will make moves that will forestall the fall of Kabul long enough to make it appear that it is someone else's fault.

The script has been written -- now its just a matter of playing out the act. Lots of serious debate, a sober decision. And a strategic retreat.

Of course, this doesn't change the fact that Afghanistan is the crucible of Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and will again become a working base for attacks against the West. Perhaps the president figures he can manage this as a "law enforcement" exercise rather than a war, and send drones and cruise missiles in to try and make life difficult for the enemy. But the reality is that leaving Afghanistan will result in a more dangerous world for America.

And what's the point of health care reform in a nation where 9/11-scale attacks -- perhaps with WMD -- are occuring on a regular basis?