Political Blog
For many years, I wrote political and cultural pieces for The Huffington Post, RealClearPolitics, National Review and many others. Here are a few of those pieces.

After my article "Why I Left The Left" came out, I got an invitation to The White House.

To follow my every-day, goings-on go to my Facebook page

More articles

Bin Laden's Elusiveness is Par for the Course
A prime example Democrats cite to depict President Bush as inept in keeping America safe is that, after five years, "we haven't gotten Osama bin Laden."
It's one of Nancy Pelosi's "go to" themes, as if the Democrats - if elected to a majority - would immediately "get" the world's number one fugitive.
How conveniently she and her minions forget that Bill Clinton failed to snag bin Laden during his entire presidency, when the mass murderer was much more out in the open.

But as history tells us, not finding fugitives - even in the most highly publicized cases and with the full force of government investigative agencies on their trail - should be expected.

In 1934, Adolf Eichmann was appointed to the Jewish section of the SS, the security and military organization of Germany's Nazi party, quickly becoming a chief architect of "the final solution," and ultimately taking great pride in the death of six-million, mainly European Jews. He escaped the Nuremberg trials and the "Avengers," a group that tracked down and brought over a thousand Nazis to justice. By 1945, with former Nazis helping him to move to Argentina, all trace of Eichmann had vanished. It was not until May 11, 1960, that Israeli authorities, led by the Mossad, captured Eichmann, and it was not until 1961 that a court in Israel condemned the war criminal to death by hanging. It took fifteen years to capture and bring to justice one of the most heinous criminals in human history.

In 1986, Sweden's Prime Minister, Olof Palme, was walking home from a Stockholm movie theater with his wife - in the middle of a bustling western city, not in a mountainous region in the remotest part of the world - when a lone gunmen shot and killed him. Twenty years have passed and no one has been charged with the crime.

In 1995, Bosnian Serb nationalist Radovan Karadzic was indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague for war crimes and genocide. In spite of a $5 million reward offered for information leading to his capture, he has still roamed free for the last almost-12 years.

During the 1996 Olympics, Eric Rudolph detonated a bomb that killed one person and injured 111. Two years later, "the Olympic park bomber" made the FBI's Most Wanted List, with a million-dollar bounty on his head. Again, it took the "best and the brightest" crime fighters seven years to find Rudolph, hiding in an American mountain range - and not the caves and hills of South Waziristan.

In 1916, the Mexican revolutionary, Pancho Villa attacked the 13th U.S. Cavalry in Columbus, New Mexico, killing 18 people. In response, President Woodrow Wilson dispatched General John J. Pershing, with 6,000 men under his command (plus several divisions of Army and national Guard troops), to capture Villa. Pershing never found the fugitive and the search was eventually called off. Villa was assassinated seven years later.

In 1978, the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, sent through the mail the first of several deadly bombs. For the next 20 years, he continued his rampage of terror and murder. Although the target of the most expensive manhunt in the FBI's history, the former academic eluded capture for two decades before being apprehended in Lincoln, Montana.

Surely Democrats know these stories - that apprehending the worst villains of our times is often impossibly difficult and almost always a lengthy, complicated process. Yet they ignore these facts in favor of politicizing America's inability, as yet, to "get" bin Laden, thus - indefensibly - weakening America's Commander-in-Chief in a time of war.

The difficulty in apprehending Osama bin Laden is not unusual. As the above examples attest to, capturing killers is difficult enough when they're on our soil. When they're ten thousand miles away, hiding in dank caves and surrounded by hundreds, if not thousands of armed, hard-core Taliban militia forming concentric defensive rings protecting them, in the toughest terrain on earth -- it's that much harder.

Comments | Post a Comment

I just read your thoughtful essay on Huff Post and as good as it is and well written etc...--I'm afraid --with all due respect --that your missing the point. Recently I have come to the sad conclusion that perception is reality for most people - but what happens when the filter that you see the world through undergoes a radical shift? I know what that feels like too -- and I can't make you see what your choose not to. But have you seen the sheer number of investigations stopped pre 9/11 that would of stopped the attacks? Have you seen the recent disbanding of the one CIA unit that had been dedicated to Osama's capture? Yes, we now have seen all that. And don't get me started on Tora Bora -- or his entire family being allowed to leave on sep.13 without being questioned. Granted, none of that "proves" much except glaring incompetence -- but when did that become an acceptable excuse? Listen, I'm not trying to dismiss your essay, it was really good and historically accu!

rate. I applaud you for standing up for a POV you believe in-- but you should peel back the onion a little more and dive in to Greg Pallast's new book Armed Madhouse...it traces the real end game -- osama's quest for an oil pipeline in afghanistan and the real facts behind our present "war"...again, this is not fiction or coincidences -- Pallast was the first journalist on Enron and is a respected BBC reporter and mainly a satirist,...check it out...take care, Jeff

Posted by: Jeff

I read your recent post on Huffington and I only wish to say that I'm
personally more concerned about our lack of effort in Afghanistan
than I am about the success of the results. I also think the lack of
effort in Afghanistan and our inability to capture Bin-Laden is
directly related to Bush's decision to invade and occupy Iraq. You're
position may reflect the views of some but not all of the
opposition's ranks.


Posted by: Jeff

Yeah! You're absolutely right!

Those crazy Dems keep forgetting that there are many fugitives that remain uncaught. JonBenet Ramsey's killer. The psycho who killed Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. They're all still on the loose, and all as dangerous as Osama bin Laden!

Oh, wait. They're not as dangerous?

Well, then why are the Republicans using their names (along with some of the ones that you named... Pancho Villa, Eric Rudolph) to scare American citizens?

Wait, they're not? Oh, they're just using Osama bin Laden's name? Then why did you bring those other names into the argument? Are they somehow related to bin Laden? No. And I don't recall any President ever saying that we want to get Eric Rudolph "dead or alive." I don't recall any President ever saying that terrorist Ted Kaczynski needs to be caught "dead or alive." But hey, that doesn't matter, right? Nobody ever caught Jack the Ripper, so we shouldn't get our panties in a bunch because we can't catch Osama, right?


Besides. If you disagree with the president, then you're a Nazi appeaser. And we wouldn't want that.

Posted by: mikey

Um, yeah, except that when we were in position to capture bin Laden, we outsourced the task to Afghani warlords, and pulled our Special Forces out to send them to Iraq (source of no terrorist activity). And (as mentioned already) we disbanded the CIA unit devoted to capturing OBL. So, yeah, we stopped looking for him, and we'll never find him, but that's okay since no one ever found Jack the Ripper. Nice logic! E

Posted by: Eric

Post a comment


(you may use HTML tags for style)

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Get updates from seth.com