By Don Klein
If a terrorist attack is inevitable in the United States, as so many experts predict, we should hope that it comes off in New York City. I know that doesn’t sound right, but the hope is it takes place where there is a first class police department.
Just imagine if the Times Square car bomber had decided to decimate Toledo, Ohio, or Biloxi, Mississippi instead? No one would have noticed the flames from the car and it would have exploded possibly killing a curious cat, two stray dogs and homeless man who curled up against the car’s fender.
The local cops would have eventually converged on the scene and scratched their heads for 15 minutes before calling for expert help which would have arrived hours later. The culprit by this time would be well on his way out of town heading for the next major airport and eventually getting on a Dubai flight unnoticed.
But not in New York. With all its problems, or maybe because of them, the NYPD is the most professional, most efficient and smartest collection of crime fighters in the country. They deserve a standing ovation. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said it took 53 hours and 20 minutes to make an arrest in the case. It takes longer than that for a small business to fill out an application for a bank loan.
The task was monumental as detectives fanned out after the discovery of the plot to interview thousands of guests at nearby hotels. They talked to tourists and vendors on the streets for evidence. They explored every nook and cranny along the route believed taken by the car owner. This could only be done by a large and experienced assortment of smart cops.
In many ways this may not be an indorsement of the city where the variety and complexity of crimes makes its gendarmes the most knowledgeable in handling wrongdoers. They prove time and again to be better than any other departments in the country because they have to in order to keep up with the multifariousness of lawbreaking in a large metropolis.
Who would have thought that the suspect in the West 45th Street bombing attempt would be in custody in 53 plus hours. I know some will say it was not all NYPD. There was the FBI and Homeland Security agents involved, but none could have been done their jobs if the grunt work was not performed first by the officers in blue on the streets.
The FBI blew the tailing of the suspect and lost him for three hours while he was awaiting his escape flight at JFK International and the jacks at Transportation Safety let him through the security check point, often a barrier for innocent travelers carrying "weapons" as large as miniature nail clippers.
The New York cops on the other hand, just did their jobs. They uncovered the suspect’s auto VIN number, a key to eventually tracking him down. They were the people who recognized the seriousness of the situation immediately and did the initial forensics.
Most importantly, they made sure the innocent bystanders –- tourists and residents alike -– on the nation’s busiest streets were kept safe.
They were the law enforcement representatives who where most in danger before anyone learned the bomb was faulty and would not fire. They were the ones poking around the vehicle looking for clues when it was still "hot." The FBI and others arrived when the scene was considered neutralized and out of danger.
A real tribute to the reputation of the New York police was the first words out of the suspect’s mouth once nabbed by the Border Patrol at the airport. He looked at the officers and asked,"Are you NYPD or FBI?" In the old days it would have been the NYPD, but now international airports are in the jurisdiction of the Customs and Border Protection agency.
Too often cops are badgered for the bad things they do, but when there is an emergency you can always count on the quick action of New York’s Finest. They rush towards danger while all others run in the opposite direction. Remember the indelible scene of cops and firemen racing into the mortally crippled World Trade Center while frightened occupants ran for their lives.
When they make mistakes it is usually a whooper, but when they do the right thing it is a classic.
And in these days when we are constantly the target of fanatical Muslims who believe the US is anti-Islamic, we can thank God for the NYPD. Be happy they are on our team. Too bad there aren’t more police departments like them.
As good as they are, though, the prediction is that there will be a successful attack on New York. If there is, the only solace the rest of us have is the police won't let the perps won’t get away with it.
So let’s take our hats off to the cops for doing their jobs in quick order and hope that their diligence never diminishes. They are our first line of defense. They may not be able to stop every fanatic determined to hurt innocent people, but they will make them all pay dearly if ever they try.
While cops in Arizona are learning that now they can harass innocent people on the streets and demand their papers like they used to do in Nazi Germany, the police in New York just do their job of protecting us all from the bad guys. The latter is nobler.
Showing posts with label May 5. Show all posts
Showing posts with label May 5. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
A memorable occasion or not?
By Don Klein
Abortion is an combustible topic. Adherents on both sides of this issue are often too passionate to really illuminate the subject. Few really stop and examine what is really at stake.
When the 1973 landmark Roe vs. Wade ruling of the Supreme Court was issued it did not outlaw anything. It did not force anyone to do anything. Unlike most laws, it is not restrictive. It liberated pregnant women to do what they felt was right in early pregnancy. It left the decision of abortion in the hands of women.
Most significantly it took abortion off the criminal docket. No patient or health provider would be prosecuted for participating in an abortion. It legalized the right to choose. At the same time it did not prohibit those who opposed this right from not seeking abortions. No one was required to have an abortion.
It could, in a most extreme of example, be compared to the right of legal representation when accused of a crime. All citizens have a right to a lawyer even if they cannot afford one, but not all defendants exercise that option. They are free to appear in court without an attorney, although that might not be very wise.
We have many rights that we don’t use and no one gets worked into a frenzy over them. We have the right to travel freely all over the country but many never use it. We have a right to send our children to public schools, but some parents find alternatives. We have a right to vote and don’t always go to the polls. Those are just a few rights we don’t use.
Yet no one goes into a tantrum when others exercise the very rights we might ignore. Not so with abortions. Why is that? Because in the case of abortion we run into religious principle. That brings up the next question. Why should religious belief matter in a country which prides itself in separation of church and state and which in all other matters of religion is extremely tolerant?
That’s a hard question to answer when talking about abortion, but it is based on the fact that opponents of Roe vs. Wade hope to repeal the law by consistent and virulent confrontation at every level possible.
The current Notre Dame controversy over whether to have invited the president of the United States to address university graduates this spring and to offer him an honorary law degree is a case in point. Opponents are taking a misguided political stance to promote their resistance to abortion rights.
Barack Obama believes that the federal government has no place in dictating to women whether to have an abortion or not. That is a personal matter out of reach of government and therefore he leaves the subject to the conscience of individuals to deal with. He would agree to counseling against having abortions, but would not try to ban the procedure.
There are many people who think that stance is balanced and a pretty fair approach to the subject of abortion. Advise against the practice, but avoid prohibition. That to me covers both sides of the extremely volatile issue. However, to those who have an emotional attachment to banning abortions or have religious objections, it does not seem to be enough.
So based on Obama’s stand on abortion, an element of the university’s students, faculty and alumni are audibly opposed to even inviting him to the South Bend commencement ceremony.
In putting this into perspective, we must recall that every president from Dwight D. Eisenhower on has been invited to speak at Notre Dame. Actually, it is a distinct honor to have the president come to any school to deliver an address. Most institutions of higher learning never get such a lofty visitor.
Obama is doing the correct thing. He is holding his peace while others deliberate over the wisdom of the invitation. Notre Dame, a Catholic institution, follows the dictums of the Vatican which is flatly and unambiguously opposed to abortions. It claims it violates church law and is immoral.
It is a single issue objection. There is no other reason given by those in resistance to the president’s visit. It is foolish to think that not receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame would matter much to Obama, a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School and the one time editor of the distinguished Harvard Law Review – and now US president and the most powerful man in the world.
Actually, there are many who think fighting legal abortions is beating a dead horse. During the eight years of the Bush administration, when the president was an outspoken adherent of the so-called right to life movement, there was no attempt to reverse Roe vs. Wade even when the majority of Supreme Court justices were Catholic. It seems most politicians are not willing to move on this issue for fear of voter recriminations on election day. All they are willing to do is offer lip service to appease the anti-abortion activists.
It will be interesting to see the outcome at Notre Dame. Will the university stand up for academic independence and free expression in a temple of learning or will it succumb to the wishes of those embittered zealots who feel that a president who has a different opinion on this subject should be denied the honor a university of stature has to bestow?
Of course as Americans they are free to disagree with any opinion, including the president’s, but instead of being discordant wouldn’t it be more useful to greet and listen to a honorable man of great personal achievement, of historic accomplishment and perhaps the most eloquent orator of these times. His speech might well be a memorable moment in the lives of those in attendance.
Abortion is an combustible topic. Adherents on both sides of this issue are often too passionate to really illuminate the subject. Few really stop and examine what is really at stake.
When the 1973 landmark Roe vs. Wade ruling of the Supreme Court was issued it did not outlaw anything. It did not force anyone to do anything. Unlike most laws, it is not restrictive. It liberated pregnant women to do what they felt was right in early pregnancy. It left the decision of abortion in the hands of women.
Most significantly it took abortion off the criminal docket. No patient or health provider would be prosecuted for participating in an abortion. It legalized the right to choose. At the same time it did not prohibit those who opposed this right from not seeking abortions. No one was required to have an abortion.
It could, in a most extreme of example, be compared to the right of legal representation when accused of a crime. All citizens have a right to a lawyer even if they cannot afford one, but not all defendants exercise that option. They are free to appear in court without an attorney, although that might not be very wise.
We have many rights that we don’t use and no one gets worked into a frenzy over them. We have the right to travel freely all over the country but many never use it. We have a right to send our children to public schools, but some parents find alternatives. We have a right to vote and don’t always go to the polls. Those are just a few rights we don’t use.
Yet no one goes into a tantrum when others exercise the very rights we might ignore. Not so with abortions. Why is that? Because in the case of abortion we run into religious principle. That brings up the next question. Why should religious belief matter in a country which prides itself in separation of church and state and which in all other matters of religion is extremely tolerant?
That’s a hard question to answer when talking about abortion, but it is based on the fact that opponents of Roe vs. Wade hope to repeal the law by consistent and virulent confrontation at every level possible.
The current Notre Dame controversy over whether to have invited the president of the United States to address university graduates this spring and to offer him an honorary law degree is a case in point. Opponents are taking a misguided political stance to promote their resistance to abortion rights.
Barack Obama believes that the federal government has no place in dictating to women whether to have an abortion or not. That is a personal matter out of reach of government and therefore he leaves the subject to the conscience of individuals to deal with. He would agree to counseling against having abortions, but would not try to ban the procedure.
There are many people who think that stance is balanced and a pretty fair approach to the subject of abortion. Advise against the practice, but avoid prohibition. That to me covers both sides of the extremely volatile issue. However, to those who have an emotional attachment to banning abortions or have religious objections, it does not seem to be enough.
So based on Obama’s stand on abortion, an element of the university’s students, faculty and alumni are audibly opposed to even inviting him to the South Bend commencement ceremony.
In putting this into perspective, we must recall that every president from Dwight D. Eisenhower on has been invited to speak at Notre Dame. Actually, it is a distinct honor to have the president come to any school to deliver an address. Most institutions of higher learning never get such a lofty visitor.
Obama is doing the correct thing. He is holding his peace while others deliberate over the wisdom of the invitation. Notre Dame, a Catholic institution, follows the dictums of the Vatican which is flatly and unambiguously opposed to abortions. It claims it violates church law and is immoral.
It is a single issue objection. There is no other reason given by those in resistance to the president’s visit. It is foolish to think that not receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame would matter much to Obama, a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School and the one time editor of the distinguished Harvard Law Review – and now US president and the most powerful man in the world.
Actually, there are many who think fighting legal abortions is beating a dead horse. During the eight years of the Bush administration, when the president was an outspoken adherent of the so-called right to life movement, there was no attempt to reverse Roe vs. Wade even when the majority of Supreme Court justices were Catholic. It seems most politicians are not willing to move on this issue for fear of voter recriminations on election day. All they are willing to do is offer lip service to appease the anti-abortion activists.
It will be interesting to see the outcome at Notre Dame. Will the university stand up for academic independence and free expression in a temple of learning or will it succumb to the wishes of those embittered zealots who feel that a president who has a different opinion on this subject should be denied the honor a university of stature has to bestow?
Of course as Americans they are free to disagree with any opinion, including the president’s, but instead of being discordant wouldn’t it be more useful to greet and listen to a honorable man of great personal achievement, of historic accomplishment and perhaps the most eloquent orator of these times. His speech might well be a memorable moment in the lives of those in attendance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
