Part 2: The Price Of Being Politically Correct Is A “Dirty Bomb”

….The former is a packaged political commodity while the latter is the price we pay. It is what we pay and how, do we come to a grim realization that we are bargaining our chips for survival from the lap of the devil. The result could be Nagasaki and Hiroshima the day after. ed sumcad/04/16/08.

We must learn how to pray for our own deliverance because we might not even have a Chinaman’s chance to say goodbye to America if it happens. For, it is insanity to let Americans die under the “dirty bomb” of terrorists because a candidate we are about to elect president who vowed to change America, wants to be the world’s champion of civil liberties and human rights.

To state this terrifying nightmare in another way, only a madcap president that would replace George W. Bush eight months from now would disarm America of currently installed security devices to uphold the civil liberties of captured terrorist and detained terrorists suspects, so that jihad murderers would enjoy their freedom to roam around and nuclear-bomb this country to smithereens!

Because this is very important to all Americans to think about during this perilous time, at the risk of becoming repetitious, I would like to stress once more this very disturbing national concern: Dismantling America’s effective anti-terrorist apparatus so that the new president to emerge in this November 2008 presidential election would look good to the outside world, is a terrible mistake. It is demonic insanity to let Americans die under the “dirty bomb” of terrorists for political expediency.

In this sense, an opportunist politician running for president who would decide for this nation in favor of what is popular no matter how dangerous that is, is a politically correct mass murderer. And good heavens help us [!!!] … are we not electing president one of this kind this November?

The possibility of a “dirty bomb” exploding in the middle of nowhere which our national security forces are trying hard to prevent by doing their job around the clock, especially in hunting down terrorists, has been posited in unmistakable terms in my previous editorial report read or seen by millions of eyes in cyberspace across the globe, more specifically its recognizance originating and its pulsating info-radiation light emanating from this NWS website base.

At the end of the road to White House lies the catacomb of change for America. With the exception of McCain who would continue the war in Iraq until victory is achieved, Clinton or Obama would pull out American troops from Iraq. When this drastic change of the war in Iraq occurs, our defeat in Iraq is certain and in victory terror will take over Iraq. History repeats itself. We also left Vietnam, and the communist took over – a lesson Clinton and Obama had never learned from.

The only difference between our defeat in Vietnam and our anticipated defeat in Iraq due to withdrawal is that the war in Iraq is a war on terror which the enemy likes to describe as their religious jihad of liberation against the invading infidel and against the invasion of Western imperialism. Unlike the Vietnam War bound by the Vienna Convention, jihad has no legal and moral boundary. Thus, victorious due to our defeat in Iraq, the combined forces of terror from the Middle East, move to our shores. Of course this does not bother the likes of Clinton and Obama … they don’t care. Just to be elected president is all that matters.

What is expected is far worse than the mere possibility of a terrorist “dirty bomb” exploding in the United States.

The truth is, it really makes no difference whether or not it would be McCain, Clinton or Obama sitting in the Oval Office. The nation braces for a “dirty bomb” attack. The enemy will find it favorable and too conveniently advantageous to launch an attack any time within the next four years starting from the inauguration of the terrorist protector-president-elect in January 2009 — God forbids — otherwise the “dirty bomb” byes for its marked time to blow up while we wait for another president to elect to office.

But be that as it may, a million thanks goes to NWS for circulating a safety bulletin in the event of nuclear attack. Every American in this country needs it. View it here now, for you may not have a Chinaman’s chance to see it if you procrastinate to click on it the day after.

As promised in the campaign on the road to White House, any of those three presidential candidates for change, would close down Guantanamo, abolish “waterboarding” as an unacceptable form of “torture” and bring to an end electronic eavesdropping and spying as violations of the privacy rights of terrorists.

Consequently, with the president-elect protecting their privacy rights of not being spied upon, discovered and captured, terrorists would no longer have a second thought to re-activate their dormant nefarious activities with renewed vigor, i.e., to meet and plan to commit murder at their own chosen time. If the president-elect succeeds in doing all these changes as promised, start learning how to pray if you don’t know how, for your own deliverance before saying goodbye to America.

After all these changes are done, Al Qaeda will look at our national security program and see a tiger without teeth. Thus this time a “dirty bomb” — nuclear, chemical or biological and what not marked by crossbones — is much easier for Al Qaeda operatives to plan, plant and detonate anywhere in America. The tiger that terrorists fear could no longer bite without a fang and razor-sharp teeth. America is no longer armed to the teeth, so to speak.

What are the changes that are expected to take place after the president-elect, security-wise, disarms America and in a delirious celebration of human rights prevailing over national security, raises the banner of civil liberty over the rubbles and flying debris of destroyed buildings and what remains of the bodies of dead Americans blasted by terrorists to bloody little pieces scattering all over the place? This gruesome scene is too ad nauseam it makes one feel sick in the stomach even just to think about it.

For, the answer to this chilling question is publicly anticipated: Right after the new president takes the ceremonial oath of office by January next year, changes expected to occur after America is disarmed of its protective security programs, are at least, a “dirty bomb” detonated by civil liberty protected terrorists, and at its worst, a horrifying transformation which makes a repeat of 9/11 possible, or even worse.

Let’s explain these foretold tragic events in unmistakable terms and in a way that we could make it crystal clear to the layman’s understanding as possible. Security-wise, the changes that disarm America are precise. These changes are as follows:

Closing down Guantanamo brings forth a radical change in our war against terror. Guantanamo is not within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Terrorists confined in prison camps at Guantanamo, cannot invoke a resident’s or citizen’s right to habeas corpus in view of the ruling of the high court to that effect, because they are not inside the United States.

Outside the United States, terrorists caught under extensive and intensive intelligence surveillance or captured in action could be detained indefinitely for as long as proofs and/or intelligence reports show that they have been and still are a threat to national security.

Once Guantanamo is closed, terrorists that are moved to prison camps inside the United States, would be entitled to file a writ of habeas corpus – a constitutional right given to citizens they murdered or about to murder. The petition would set them free while awaiting trial … free to roam around, free to plot and once more blast away our buildings to fragments and send the bloody splintered bodies and spirit of their victims to afterlife.

The rationale for closing down Guantanamo is not of this Earth, namely, that detaining mass murderers and captured terrorist suspects that long, is a violation of their civil rights. Think about it … the civil rights of terrorists are more important than thousands of Americans they killed or blown up dead.

Furthermore, terrorists must be charged first in the court of law, and brought to trial at the earliest time possible because our Constitution warns that justice delayed is justice denied. That’s the right we as citizens of this country enjoy in a constitutional democracy during peace time, and now at war on terror, is unbelievably given to this Islamic enemy we confront who believes that in their religious jihad Americans have to be murdered to earn a pass to heaven.

The new president thinks that this kindness shown in the treatment of terrorists will make America look good in the eyes of the world. We are familiar with this presidential thought process because we are currently listening to the speeches of candidates in the campaign trail to White House, which announced this strange agenda clearly. Never mind even if it is a dead America – blown up to smithereens by terrorists who were given constitutional rights equal to that of American citizens they murder.

Does this make sense? No, it does not. But even our commonsense will change to nonsense by January 2009. That’s the kind of change that we expect, which we need to really understand well.

“Waterboarding” that McCain, Clinton and Obama want to abolish once elected president because it is “torture” which America normally abhors, is an intelligence interrogation technique used to extract information from captured terrorists and terrorist suspects detained mostly in Guantanamo. This interrogation technique is part of our national security program authorized under the Patriot Act as amended, passed by Congress upon our persuasion as a people in a representative democracy, now held hostage by terror.

When it was challenged in court on the ground that this interrogation technique was a violation of the Constitution, the high court ruled that “waterboarding” used by the military in this war on terror, was neither unconstitutional nor a violation of human rights. Facing an imminent danger, national security and the survival of the State preempt the civil rights of the individual.

The information that our intelligence community had gathered by using this interrogation technique on hardened criminals in this war on terror – repeat, a war without any legal and moral boundary – had exposed murderous terrorist plots, thus saving millions of American lives, yours and mine included.

Secret terrorist plans to blow us up to kingdom come, were discovered and aborted through electronic eavesdropping and spying. Millions of American lives were saved, including yours and mine.

All of these have been in place up to now. It explains why we have no terrorist attacks since 9/11.

Barely eight months from today all of these will no longer exist once the president-elect has his/her way of dismantling and obliterating them. Your life and my life and that of the rest of Americans, become an open game to jihad’s dark hunters of doom.

The problem of being politically correct in decision-making is that implementing security measures that invade individual rights is repulsive and therefore has never been popular. Protested continuously, commotions are daily occurrences in the airport, to cite a specific example. In implementing them to save your life and mine, President Bush’s popularity rating plummeted down and dropped to the floor with a big thud never to get up or ever rise again.

To attack our existing security shield, especially under the guise of protecting human rights, is deemed politically correct by opportunist politicians. ACLU and a cabal of activist movements that support them, specialize on this congenital opportunism.

Any of the candidates we are about to elect president is afflicted by this ecstatic moral disability. Without any feeling of remorse, guilt or shame, always politically correct opportunist politicians like they are, ride this popular horse of political expediency to win not only the presidential race but also the standing ovation of the world as champion of the alleged victims of human right abuses.

Terrorists and their faceless sympathizers are deemed victims of said abuses. McCain, Clinton and Obama are overexcited to grab the opportunity to defend victims of human right abuses even if they are terrorists. They know that this public duty to defend is popular. It could get any of them elected president – never mind if the terrorists they protect blow up America to kingdom come.

In this weird irony of victimization, the victimizer becomes the victim for sympathy which the enemies of freedom capitalize on in their war against America.

What this unmistakably tells us is that it is politically correct to commit a terrible wrong, and tragically, the consequences are horrifying.

Do you think we are thankful that since 9/11 we have not been attacked? Not necessarily. The Liberal mind argues backward that we have not been attacked because we deprived terrorists of their civil liberties and their personal freedom to move around and do what they want to do. Our security watch that invaded their rights to privacy had disabled their ability to hatch up a plot to kill.

As stated earlier, McCain, Clinton and Obama promised to close down our security umbrella and banish it from the scene. The fact that as a result of scrapping them off would make it much easier for terrorists to explode a “dirty bomb” in the middle of the crowd does not stop this madness.

This political obsession of playing the right to freedom and civil liberty against the security of the state and the lives of terror-stricken Americans, lands four-square within the argument of terror against America, and falls directly into the lap of the revolutionary Left that relentlessly taunt America of this issue at the slightest provocation, in every opportunity possible twenty-four hours a day. Hardly Americans notice this stalking threat comparable to a hooded serial killer that tiptoes its way to the bedroom in the middle of the night for the kill.

This fearful nemesis which is alien to reason, bugs the imagination. For instance, this political chant urging the president-elect to look good to the outside world is an overpowering hubris to any politician who dreams of global leadership. Such powerful attraction is not humanly possible to resist. Unfortunately, the price we pay for such irreversible political addiction is not of this planet.

To the outside world, America’s cosmetic face and toothpaste-ad smile are pretty on human rights and that seems to be all that matters – never mind even if it is a dead America, blown up to high heavens by terrorist bombs while terrorism is on the rise as a result of such masquerade. It is a third-dimensional reality where dead Americans eventually move into and settle down [imagine ghosts converging in a ghost town]. Thus deciphering the logic behind this insane philosophy becomes academic; it is no longer for the living of this Earth to remorsefully contemplate.

Would it matter to McCain, Clinton or Obama if any of them is president of a few million dead Americans? The most educated guess is simply this — hardly would there be a bothered conscience of a president who is committed to political expediency as a principle larger than life itself.

After all, there are more than 250 million Americans in America today since the last census was taken, not including the fertility-rate incremental portions added to it annually since then, plus those residing abroad, therefore some few million lives lost to terror may not be too bad to a national leader who desperately aspires to go down in history as one of the greatest presidents known to be always politically correct. A good reading reference for this is at:

But in the vortex of change about to gobble up America, the radical Left in cohort with any elected liberal-minded leadership whether it is McCain, Clinton or Obama, may yet explode the “dirtiest bomb” in America and restructure completely the socio-political landscape we used to know.

The price tag attached to it, which we have to pay, is a “dirty bomb”. #

© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Access NWS April 16, 2008.

The author is a veteran journalist and a recipient of excellence awards in journalism. Click on the columnist button of NWS’ homepage to know more about the writer or you may e-mail your comment at

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply