"Obama wakes up" [???]

... the [Obama] administration did an abrupt about-face regarding terrorism.
...the administration's biggest policy reversal to date came from Holder, the longtime advocate of terrorist "rights," who offered one of the most belated acknowledgments in history when he told a TV network,
"We're now dealing with international terrorism".
...there wasn't a single mention of "man-caused disasters" this time around.
Every administration point person talked "terrorism."
Next thing you know, somebody in the White House will use the term "Islamist terrorist.
...This sudden policy shift and media mobilization by an administration that's usually lethargic on security issues means that folks at the top are worried about the political costs of a successful terrorist strike.”
 [all emphasis mine]
– Reference (1) at bottom.

It should be obvious to even a casual observer that every coordinated talking-points message delivered by Obama's Orwellian, publicity corps has a carefully crafted political goal for the Obama administration.  The week-end of May 9th was no exception. 

Ralph Peters, in the article referenced at top, describes an apparent talk-show-revealed Obama policy shift; and in the process Peters identifies an on-going Obama administration problem.  I have labeled it an apparent Obama policy shift for the simple reason that it may only be a rhetorical shift, and not really an important change in policy.  Because so much of Obama's campaign-styled presidency has consisted of false promises and factually inaccurate statements, it may be a misinterpretation to view talk-show pronouncements as genuine policy shift.  Time will tell.  Don't be distracted by what Obama says, watch what he does, and what he doesn't do.

The on-going Obama administration problem is:

"Since Inauguration Day, reality denial has been an integral part of this administration's culture [emphasis mine]. But reality's a persistent intruder. For reasons we don't yet know in detail, the failed Times Square bombing appears to have brought the White House at least part way to its senses."  – Ralph Peters

The Obama approach to this problem in relation to terrorism is not yet completely known.  What can be known, from the talk-shows, is that the Obama administration is laying the ground-work to mitigate the inevitable political damage of any successful terrorist strike.  What is not known is what practical and appropriate steps the Obama administration is taking to provide for the safety of America in view of the increased probability of terrorists strikes.

The most accurate and concise description of Obama's approach toward terrorism and, in fact, toward governance in general has been: reality denial.  This is because Obama's Alinskyite-community-organizer style of governance is ideologically built on progressive, utopian social thought; and reality denial is the single most accurate characterization of any utopian social framework.  

The pressing practical problem for Obama, if he has truly awakened to the urgent danger of terrorism, is that he has crippled much of the vital intelligence apparatus for battling terrorism.  The corresponding political problem is how Obama will avoid offending his fanatical leftwing voter-base without continuing to at least appear to be the non-Bush.

Obama's crippling of US intelligence gathering is a catastrophe.

Terrorism cannot be effectively countered without vigilant, aggressive intelligence gathering and analysis.  The agency that led the US intelligence effort against terrorism during the eight years of the Bush administration, and helped protect America from other homeland attacks after 9/11 was the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency); yet under Obama, the CIA has virtually been put out of business.

After the political efforts encouraged and allowed by Obama to investigate the CIA and former Bush administration personnel,  and to make public their involvement in enhanced interrogation techniques, it is doubtful than any CIA agent in their right mind would trust Obama and his appointees enough to put themselves at risk to gain vital information needed to stop an anticipated, but ill-defined, terrorist attack. 

The political duplicity of Obama has seriously damaged, perhaps destroyed, the basic trust necessary for CIA-type risk taking.

The questions that would have to linger in the mind of any CIA agent who was asked to take some action that might be legally questionable (no legal precedent or laws for or against) would be: Could I be brought-up on charges for this action at some future date?  Should I lawyer-up and get advice before I accept this assignment?  Should I demand, in writing, legal exculpation for any seen or unforeseen consequences of my actions before I accept this assignment? 

In conjunction with the crippling of the CIA, Obama has operationally replaced them with the FBI as the lead interrogative agency in dealing with terrorism – reality denial.  Obama reverted to the already discredited notion that Islamic terrorism could be dealt with as a criminal matter (the Bill Clinton era approach), hence he has given interrogative priority to the FBI.  Obama and Holder have insisted that terrorists be tried in civilian courts rather than in military courts, again, reality denial of the collective-warfare nature of Islamic terrorism.

Can Obama pivot and abruptly shift his policy thereby reversing his previous denials of reality?  Time will tell.  If he truly pivots on policy, can he re-instigate, in time, practical measures necessary to prevent future 9/11 type attacks?  Time will tell.  Don't be distracted by what Obama says, watch what he does, and what he doesn't do.

“To be fair, the administration probably doesn't want to give us more details because of intelligence concerns (and embarrassment that it's been asleep at the wheel). It also doesn't want to generate panic. Or drive down the stock market yet again.

And the weekend full-court press in the media -- speaking bluntly about terror networks, possible intervention in Pakistan and modifying Miranda rights -- sends the encouraging signal that this White House may be capable of learning, after all.” 
– Reference (1) at bottom.

Many of us will certainly be watching for any evidence to indicate positive steps by Obama to ensure solid preventative measures against terrorism attacks, and not just political CYA measures.  

FOOTNOTES:

(1)  Obama wakes up