Where he’s coming from

When Eric Holder testified before the House Judiciary Committee last month, Rep. Lamar Smith asked Eric Holder whether “radical Islam” might have had something to do with the three notable terrorist attempts in the United States within the past year. Holder came off as a clown. Radical Islam? Don’t say it, man!
Was Holder following orders? The higher wisdom that prevails within the Obama administration instructs us that jihad is a beautiful thing. The apparent relationship between Islam and terrorism is a sign of poor understanding on the part of the perpetrators. Thus “a variety of factors” must account for the likes of Faisal Shahzad.
Andrew McCarthy rolled the tape and commented:

Mr. Holder would obviously rather get a root-canal than utter the words “radical Islam” (despite the fact that his description of the American people as “a nation of cowards” on race and of Bush officials as war criminals seemed to roll of the tongue without much difficulty).
You’ll be pleased to discover, via the AG, that there is an infinite variety of reasons why Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Those reasons, of course, have nothing to do with Islamic doctrine, which is why, even as we speak, agents are struggling to understand what might possibly have driven Faisal Shahzad to try to blow up Times Square. (I guess Mayor Bloomberg will be pleased to know that opposition to the healthcare bill hasn’t necessarily been ruled out yet.)

Below is the relevant clip of Holder testifying to the House Judiciary Committee last month.

After Holder’s testimony, Michelle Malkin declared a Code Red Elmo on the Homeland Insecurity Scale (below).
Yesterday Shahzad entered a guilty plea and explicated the roots of his attempt to blow up Times Square on a beautiful spring Saturday night. The AP reports:

Calling himself a Muslim soldier, a defiant Pakistan-born U.S. citizen pleaded guilty Monday to carrying out the failed Times Square car bombing and left a sinister warning that unless the U.S. leaves Muslim lands alone, “we will be attacking U.S.”
Wearing a white skull cap, prison smocks and a dark beard, Faisal Shahzad entered the plea in U.S. District Court in Manhattan just days after a federal grand jury indicted him on 10 terrorism and weapons counts, some of which carried mandatory life prison sentences. He pleaded guilty to them all.
U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum challenged Shahzad repeatedly with questions such as whether he had worried about killing children in Times Square.
“One has to understand where I’m coming from,” Shahzad calmly replied. “I consider myself … a Muslim soldier.”

Now that may not be clear enough for Attorney General Holder. It probably isn’t. Holder would probably take issue with Shahzad concerning the basis of his actions. But it should do for the citizen of average intelligence.
And Obama administration counterterror adviser John Brennan will undoubtedly want to instruct Shahzad in the correct understanding of Islamic doctrine. But in the meantime Shahzad has given anyone who is paying attention an important clue.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.