Moran Out Of Touch On Many Levels

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

May 26, 2009

Congressman Jim Moran is out of touch – with both his constituents, and quite frankly, as well as with reality. Several weeks ago, Moran opined in another publication that the United States should not only close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, but that the detainees would be accepted by the good people of Alexandria – a major city within his Congressional District.

“By and large, Alexandrians are civic-minded people and are ready to do their duty if it serves the greater good,” wrote Moran.

It is not our duty to take prisoners of war, at best, and blood-thirsty terrorists hell-bent on destroying the United States and Western Civilization as we know it, at worst, out of a secure detention center for the purposes of giving them trials for which they are not entitled, on American soil where potential danger is an unnecessary possibility. When did it become the duty of non-uniformed citizens to be purposely put into harms way, Mr. Moran? This is not the kind of sacrifice civilians make during wartime. Cutting back on energy, raw materials, buying war bonds – these are the sacrifices civilians make in support of a war effort as our history has demonstrated.

Alexandrians “have shown this public spirit time and again. The ‘20^th hijacker,’ Zacarias Moussaoui, who participated in planning the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the Pentagon, was held and prosecuted in the Alexandria courthouse,” wrote Moran.

As a former resident of the Carlyle Towers condominiums located directly across the street from the Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse and Detention Center in Alexandria, I can attest to the media circus that gathered day after day, not to mention the inconvenience of the simple exiting and entering our homes on a daily basis while the hearings and trials occurred. I can also attest to the fact that the overwhelming majority of residents opposed those activities, many of whom spoke their minds at a town hall-type meeting hosted by Moran in an effort to assuage people’s concerns.

Several years later, and with the advent of the Patent-Trademark Office and its population, such trials will be a bigger nightmare than Moran can imagine. And he demonstrated his lack of imagination when he wrote “taking the easy route and joining the chorus of those crying ‘not in my back yard’ is appealing. But that’s not the Alexandria I know and have represented in Congress for nearly 20 years.” This, clearly, is not 1989.

Perhaps that’s because you, Mr. Moran, are out of touch with your constituents and no longer know what is on their minds. You win reelection every two years like clockwork without breaking a sweat and often times taking voters for granted. In an unscientific survey of liberals, conservatives and neutrals alike, 84 percent of the people I communicated with are opposed to the shut down of Gitmo in the first place. Then, to top it off, 93 percent of the folks I communicated with oppose holding trials for terrorists in American courts such as here in Alexandria. Granted this is admittedly a non-scientific poll, but the honest, patriotic, generous people of Alexandria running the spectrum from right to left are speaking out, and you, sir are not listening.

Mr. Moran noted JFK’s call to accept challenges for a higher purpose, but this is not such a purpose, nor did he envision al Qaeda or the Taliban. The Soviet Union was tame by comparison.

When people have a mission to take innocent life, they cease to be part of the community of man and surrender the right to be treated as men. The home countries of these miscreants don’t want them back. That Obama wants Gitmo closed my mid-January 2010 is purely an arbitrary decision and deadline, which as more and more members of his own party have come to realize, makes less and less sense as there is no legitimate place to put these terrorists.

Guantanamo has been working out nicely, and to a person, those who have inspected it have commented that it appears in better condition that mainland prisons. The prisoner’s religious observances are being adhered to along with their dietary needs and they even have more exercise and prayer time with their fellow prisoners than if they were in a supermax prison in the US. Gitmo is a far cry from Auschwitz.

Mr. Moran uses as a reason to close Gitmo that both Obama and GOP presidential candidate Senator John McCain (AZ) pledged to shut it down. Fine, so they were both wrong. Using McCain as part of the defense is disingenuous at best, especially since he did not really represent the heart of the Republican Party during the 2008 election.

Further, the Congressman makes the mistake of writing that the enemy combatants are entitled to habeas corpus. Enemy combatants are not entitled to habeas corpus. As for the rules regarding the Geneva Convention, enemy combatants may be held until the cessation of hostilities.

Representative Moran referred to Guantanamo as a “stain” on the reputation of the United States and “on our national character,” when in fact, it is his and this administration’s appeasement to Islamo-terrorism that is the stain on this nation. Closing Gitmo will not endear the United States to the fanatics whose goal is to kill us. Appeasement failed miserably for Chamberlain and it certainly won’t work today.

Priority one is the safety of American citizens, not worrying about what other countries think of us. If our reputation is so tarnished, why then are millions of people trying to enter this country, not flee – and by any means necessary (another topic for another day). This is still the greatest and freest country on G-d’s earth.

We are at war against a flagless, borderless, nationless enemy – a war, by the way, Mr. Moran publicly blamed on the Jews just a few years ago. September 11, 2001 is not just a passing historical fact – the Pentagon is in Mr. Moran’s district, as is Arlington National Cemetery – the memories of those who rest there are being sullied by Congressman Moran’s callousness.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Israel v. Hamas – No Moral Equivalent

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

January 3, 2009

“We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.” – Golda Meir (1898-1978), former Israeli Prime Minister

For Israel, the axis of evil is Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran with the latter supporting the two terror groups. With all three entities hell-bent on the destruction and eradication of the Jewish state, aside from ignorance and jealousy, one must wonder why.

In the current conflagration pitting democracy against terrorist organization, as usual, Israel is criticized globally for, first, defending itself, then deigning to retaliate in an effort to defeat its enemy. This is an enemy that places martyrdom and the elimination of Israel above the betterment of its own people.

When given Gaza by Israel in 2005, a colossal mistake supported by Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, a candidate for Prime Minister, the Palestinian Authority allowed its rule to be usurped by Hamas who did nothing to create a livable infrastructure, economy, educational system or employment prospects for its own Palestinian people. Instead, Hamas focused its energies on smuggling in weaponry and armament, digging tunnels from which to attack Israel and continuing to blame Israel for its further failures and shortcomings as an alleged society.

Israel, for all its initial restraint, not only has the right to defend itself, but must destroy an enemy emphasizing the extermination of Israel as priority one. If Israel loses a war, it ceases to exist. If Hamas is only defeated militarily, yet remains in existence, eventually they will reload and continue down their destructive path of terror and teaching their children to hate and kill Jews, Israelis, Americans and the United States.

President George W. Bush issued strong condemnation of Hamas for provoking Israel as well as Hamas’s willingness to violate the ceasefire that Egypt helped to arrange. “Another one-way ceasefire that leads to rocket attacks on Israel is not acceptable,” said Bush as part of his radio address on January 3, 2009.

That Israel should be criticized and condemned by so many for alleged disproportionate retaliation against Hamas demonstrates pure ignorance. This is especially true of American Jewish liberals who are so quick to call for land for peace agreements. Should the Nazis have been allowed to continue to exist in a diminished capacity? Of course not, and neither should any other entity whose primary goal is the elimination of any democratic nation. By the way, critics of Israel, what would the appropriate proportional response by Israel be to terrorist attacks? Join hands and sing Kumbaya?

The late, great Rabbi Meir Kahane (1932-90) was absolutely correct when he said that one does not cede land for peace nor does one return captured land in victory. When you lose, you lose, Kahane would frequently remind people. After all, was Panama returned to Colombia? Was the former Czechoslovakia returned to Germany? Is there a free and independent South Vietnam? Did the United States return the portions of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah won after defeating Mexico in 1848?

Former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who hopefully will ascend to that office again this year, correctly opposed the ceding of Gaza, as land for peace is mere lip service. Once the land is gone, it is lost, while peace is fleeting or even mythical at best.

Don’t make the mistaken assumption that there is any moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas. Not only does Hamas have no qualms targeting civilians – including, and especially, women and children, they enlist their own women and children as homicide bombers. Hamas also hides and stores their munitions in civilian-sensitive locales such as schools and mosques knowing that Israel would be faced with a Sophie’s Choice of either not striking those sites, or doing so as the risk of global political and media condemnation. And don’t forget that Hamas leaders also hide within the civilian population for the same reasons. Shrewd, maniacal cowards.

The questions to be asked are why should Israel give a rat’s tuchus about criticism in the pages of the London Times and the New York Times, on the airwaves of NPR and the hardly-viewed MSNBC or in the halls of the useless United Nations? They should not, especially as Israel warns civilians via fliers and leaflets, at their own peril, of pending retaliation. Israel fights a battle or a war first from a defensive tack, then from a position of attempting to limit civilian casualties.

“We don’t thrive on military acts. We do them because we have to, and thank G-d we are efficient.” – Golda Meir

Israel is not seeking to reestablish control of Gaza, but instead end Hamas control over the land that could be a Palestinian homeland. (I object to this strategy and believe Israel should never have ceded Gaza in the first place, but instead push out all of Israel’s enemies toward Jordan, which should be the Palestinian homeland.)

Palestinians should have a homeland in Jordan, but not as a reward for inciting violence and continued terrorist attacks against Israel. Israel has the right to exist and defend itself by whatever means necessary. Peace will occur when terrorists cease and desist and Palestinians begin to care more about their own people than do Israelis. Until that time Israel should forge ahead vigorously to ensure its survival for its own sake as well as for the moral betterment of civilized society.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA