Sign in to comment!

The Five

President Obama's ISIS strategy

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," September 11, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GREG GUTFELD, THE FIVE HOST: I told the police I fell on it. Hello, everyone. I'm Greg Gutfeld along with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling and you should try her ladybug omelet, Dana Perino. This is "The Five."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Sustained counter terrorism strategy --

OBAMA: The strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us --

OBAMA: So this is our strategy. And each of these four parts of our strategy --

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

GUTFELD: Strategy, eh? Better late than ever.

So if you already hate the president, then you probably hate that speech. And then if you love Obama, you probably didn't watch it anyway, too busy with fashion week. But if this is war, then let's dispense with the team sport of politics and support our guy. He didn't say everything I wanted, but dare I say he sounded like us? Which leads me to this, if cross dressing as a righty gets the country behind you, then why not just get the sex change? Come to the right side, we're more fun and we're always armed. And let's stop insulting the right when acting like them actually saves your rear.

So I'm with you, Mr. President, on these conditions:

"Islam" -- say it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Let's make two things clear. ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents and the vast majority of ISIL's victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: We get it. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the "I" in ISIL doesn't stand for "igloo." Delinking ISIL from what drives it insults the moderates you seek to address.

And why this?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: Again, why tell the enemy what we won't do? Imagine if the Bulls did that in '96. Don't worry, Jordan's benched. Everything should be on the table including al-Baghdadi's bullet ridden corpse.

Finally, you the president must believe in this fight. No 18 holes after a head roles. Yeah, I know you're mad that the electorate put global terror before global warming. And you're right about climate change: Since you've been in charge it's gotten hotter… in Libya, the Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Detroit. You're worse for the environment than coal.

But if you didn't want to be the world's policeman, be the world's garbage man and take out the trash. You don't need another Nobel Prize -- that doorstop helped no one but you.

So Bob, I want to go to you first, because you predicted this. You said there was got to be a lot of the word strategy. What did you make of this?

BOB BECKEL, THE FIVE HOST: That it was a strategy. No, I think what he did here was, you know, you can say it's somewhat late coming to the table, but I've always thought strategy idea was nuts. I mean, the strategy is to get rid of these guys, right?

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BECKEL: The question I have is when he talks about a coalition, I wish he had had a couple people to name. That would have been helpful. But I think that there are already targets picked out in Syria and I think that they're going to go for them next week. And I think here is the problem for the republicans. You have to be very careful about criticizing the president at a time like this. If it works, his expectation is so low, that if it works, he's going to get very big marks out of it.

GUTFELD: Yeah. That's why I always say he's our guy. But I have some condition, Bob, I thought you liked that.

BECKEL: I did like it your conditions, Greg, was let them to join the Bush...

(LAUGHTER)

GUTFELD: Eric, it was good. Was it believable?

ERIC BOLLING, THE FIVE HOST: Yeah, because it didn't go far enough. By the way, the reason why there he says if you threaten America, you won't find a safe haven, because he created all the safe havens for them to find and that's where they're hiding. Remember when he said, we will pull out December 31st, 2011. So January 1st, 2012 was when al Qaeda and Iraq started to grow and grow and grow, become bigger and then turn into what is now Isis. So, again, as you point out, you're benching Jordan next week, and so, you know, guess what, he have -- he shouldn't have ever gotten to this, the $500 million, so what. I'm very concerned that the $500 million to train FSA vetted fighters, really? Because we were about to hand over a lot of money to them one time before, and they end up being Isis. I don't know. I didn't hear anything that was really crazy other than we're going to continue to air strike in Syria, by the way, we better step it up and we better do it fast.

GUTFELD: Kimberly, what -- did President Obama say anything to you that was surprising? Was it enough? Should we do more? How did you feel?

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, THE FIVE HOST: I thought he looked pretty good.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: But he didn't move me.

GUTFELD: He didn't move you?

GUILFOYLE: He didn't. But, I mean, he looked good today, too. I think this was a smart strategy for him actually. The political strategy is the one that I saw. Of course he said what he needed to say. He did it on the eve of 9/11. The president speaking in a prime time address suggests that it is more serious, that this is something different, significant makes people sort of sit up and pay attention. That was a good move on his part. So I think in terms of, you know, that layout, it went well for him. I would have liked to of course see him go further, but at least now he can't back down from what he has said.

GUTFELD: All right. Dana, what did you make of the speech? I saw you on a number of shows last night where you performed admirably. Did you find it pay a patriotic speech or a political speech?

DANA PERINO, THE FIVE HOST: Well, I think any prime time address at some any president is going to be a patriotic speech and it's a moment and he tries to focus the mind, and here comes the president and the announce and it's kind of a bid deal. So I always think about it, president on his (ph) though that -- how is the after effect. Does it hold up? And there's four basic things, looking back about almost 24 hours now, did the tone match the seriousness of the moment? I say yes. Does the policy hold up to scrutiny, the strategy that he announced? I say arguably no. In particular the two examples he gave were that this was going to be like fighting in Yemen and Somalia. Today, the State Department says don't travel to Yemen. And it's also, I think, it's not holding up because they're so different. You have al-Shabaab and Somalia say, they are not a military like ISIS. That is actually now a military, not just a terrorist group. The third thing is, on the morning after a speech like that, does your coalition start to form. First of all, I think it should have been lined up beforehand. He should have locked those things down, that's why I think the speech was about a week too early. I think spending another week to try to lock down those allies, to try to make sure that we had it, would have been hard politically for them to stomach another week, but would have been the right thing to do to have that. The fourth thing is a really big one. It's not just a congressional issue, it's a question about the authorization to use military force. About a month ago, the White House sent a letter to John Boehner, speaker of the house, asking for the congress to withdraw the authorization to use military force. That they didn't anymore. They never liked it in the first place. And just last week, they were asked do you still believe that, you still want repeal this. They said yes, it was the right thing to do. Now today, they're actually trying to base their decision, the president's decision, to strike in Syria on authorization to use military force which they actually just said that they don't want. So on several grounds, I think it's very shaky and I think it was about a week too early for them to give the speech.

GUTFELD: Let me ask you this, Bob. President Bush had done the same thing that President Obama did which was make a distinction between radical Islam and Islam, saying that these, and I think even Eric, you mentioned that he was going to do this before, do you think that is helpful?

BECKEL: Sure, I think (inaudible), the question is really going to step up to the plate or not. And he made a point I think pretty directly than he expected the Muslim countries would join in, the coalition, they got the most to lose of anybody else. And if you don't have one, if you don't have -- you probably could get Jordan. We could get Saudi Arabia of all groups.

PERINO: Well, then, train these guys in Saudi Arabia, I mean, there is participation...

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: Yeah, there is participation, but I think there's -- they got a pretty good military, and I think that there is a way to -- even in some ways to get Iran to be participating in this because they're all frightened of these guys, and they're 100 miles from the capital, and so I think he needs to do it. If he doesn't come up with one of them, I don't know what you do at that point.

BOLLING: He mentioned a, quote, broad coalition and today we heard the Brits say we're not part of that, we were not going to do any air strikes.

PERINO: And then an hour later, they said, oh wait, maybe we will. I mean, there is not solid.

BOLLING: But here's the point, if I'm going to the American people and say I have a broad coalition, have a name. Give my one name. He didn't have...

GUILFOYLE: I know, but this is what I'm saying.

BOLLING: Not one country that says...

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Look what was happening in this country. Everything (ph) is right, so far so good, we're all in. Deal is, it was 9/11 and he addressed the country on the eve of 9/11. That was purposeful. And, yes, he probably could have benefited from having a stronger coalition putting a name on it, having something a little bit more solid, OK, to lay hands on if he waited a week. But they didn't see it that way politically.

GUTFELD: John Kerry says we're not at war, that's a bizarre comment.

BOLLING: He calls it a counter terror effort.

GUTFELD: Right.

BOLLING: Really? Don't we do that anyway?

PERINO: We actually don't have prime time addresses to announce counter terror efforts. This is actually...

BOLLING: Was it because he doesn't want to have to go to...

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: This is the other reason I think that they gave the speech a week too early, because they're not all on the same page. They're rushing it. And I think that it would be even a better effort if it they had just waited, but so now you have the question is the secretary of state and the president, not on the same page? Are we at war with ISIS, are we at war more broadly in the global warn terror or are we just going to do pinprick strikes against every group that pops up, because after ISIS, then what? They will try to reconstitute themselves.

BOLLING: Well, can I just play a little semantics here? I don't think President Obama said we're at war. So he avoided the word war, because the way I see it, if he does, if they do declare a war, you got to do go to congress and everyone knows with 53 days left before an election, there is no democrat that wants to put his name down that he voted for war when they basically run out of...

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: It is an interesting thing because now once again the president will rely on republicans to give him national security authorization which I think that they will give.

GUTFELD: Where is the left by the way, Bob?

BECKEL: Well, I mean, first of all, if you look at the endangered species called democrats in red states in the senate, I don't think any one of them would vote against that. I mean, I think their...

GUILFOYLE: In those particular state, sure.

BOLLING: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: It just depends on there like core constituency and dynamic.

BECKEL: But I would think that that's probably the case in most places. Look, it was probably they didn't make the sever change out of nothing and (inaudible) it was because they saw something that was a gross and some of them will remember and I think you'd be crazy to be against it or let the republicans...

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Then why not do it the right way and go to a vote.

BECKEL: If -- the question is...

BOLLING: Why not -- why wouldn't President Obama say I'm going to bring it to you, congress?

GUILFOYLE: Tell us why are or why not.

BECKEL: Well, if you -- the question is you have too have to have a separate piece of legislation. It wouldn't on the work (inaudible).

BOLLING: Bob, they can do it tomorrow.

PERINO: I think, look, you have even people like Senator Marco Rubio who is saying the president has all the authority he needs and we back him on that. Then he has said one thing on public opinion, because I think the analysis is a little bit wrong on this question of how quickly public opinion turned. Ii wasn't only, just because of the beheadings. I think this has been building for about four months in particular over the summer. When you have the president of the United States constantly under criticism and scrutiny and some would say attack for fundraisers, golf, not paying attention to these things as they were building. And then I think that it's almost like when the beheadings happened that was one, I was like, oh, my gosh, what have you been doing, and that's when they rushed and that's why I think they kind of missed the moment. They still don't get support from me, from other republicans, from the American people to do what they need to do. It's just that, we have to remember, it's because of his inaction, the decisions to not act, that we're in this position, we're in a crisis position, and every single answer is much more complicated and much more complex because of the things we haven't done before.

BOLLING: Right.

GUILFOYLE: But that was a repetitive theme, I mean, we have seen this consistently with this presidency in this administration of failure to act decisively, in a prescribe amount of time, but then later, we end up having to clean up there.

BECKEL: But let's keep it mind now that the -- although ISIS has a lot of American military equipment, they would have a lot more if we decided that on the moderate as recall in Syria. Obama is taking rather heat on that but it wasn't quite that clear. They were there then. They could have picked an equipment quite easily.

PERINO: It is bizarre too that the president just two weeks ago absolutely dismissed the people that are actually making up the free Syrian army, this was...

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Pharmacist.

PERINO: Pharmacist and you know, community organizers. And now he's actually -- we're baiting America's future and national security on this rag tag bunch. You know, what those guys want?

GUILFOYLE: Bad news there.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: They want freedom, that's what they're fighting, that's why they left their job as pharmacist because they got kicked out by the dictator Assad. There are like 200,000 fellow citizens murder by the government, that's why their fighting and I'm all for helping them.

GUTFLED: Let's go, my analysis of the president's address to the nation on ISIS, when The Five returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLLING: Continue now with our special coverage of President Obama's speech announcing further action against the terror group ISIS, so did president take us to the brink of war because he believes it will keep us safe or because he thought it was a good political decision. Here are Ron Fournier and Brit Hume.

(CROSSTALK)

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

RON FOURNIER, NATIONAL JOURNAL COLUMNIST: The president knows how to read polls. He's trying to channel the public. Majority of the public is both hawkish and dovish. They don't think the president has been leading, but they don't want ground troops. It might not be the best way to handle things, but it's what the American public right now in its conflicted mind set wants and apparently, it's what the president is going to give them rhetorically tonight.

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: If he's going to see this thing through no matter what or it's something going to -- to start this limited campaign with limited means and see how far it goes and let it go if it doesn't.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

BOLLING: Again, we're going to start with you, Bob, because you can make a case that President Obama a year ago on Syria his policy, he flipped on what to do there basically following the polls on that one, too. The American public say that we're not comfortable with this...

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: I'm a little -- when you said the guy follows the polls. A lot of presidents follow polls, but do you remember Franklin Roosevelt who refused to get into World War II because he was up for re-election. And the country World War I, it was something called the America First Movement. The polls were running decidedly against it and Roosevelt refused to get in. That's World War II we're talking about. I mean, go down the list. Wars have changed politics and generally, the politics change when the country changes, Vietnam has good case in point.

BOLLING: Dana made a point yesterday, I think you said President Bush didn't really care about the polls, he went when he needed to go.

PERINO: Well, of course we were certainly very aware of them. My point last night in particular was about the surge which was a tasseled admission by President Bush that the strategy there up to then had not been good enough and that the war effort that -- it was losing and that if we did not turn it things around, that he -- you saw the core on Megyn Kelly Show last night, she was showing such -- 38 million views on Foxnews.com of President Bush predicting everything that was now if we pulled out too early. But as a communications -- in the communications office at the time, I just remember going up to it, every poll said what we knew President Bush wanted to do was the most unpopular thing he could possibly imagine. You take every unpopular item and that's exactly what we're going to do. However, through persuasion, persistence, constant vigilance, listening to the advisers, it wasn't until about six or seventh months later that you started to see the surge have effect, but then it did have an effect, and that's one of the things I want to encourage everybody about it. Yes, we got to this point, there are reasons look at how we got to this point, I think that that is worth examining, but we have shown that with a good strategy, and enough people, that we actually we can turn a situation around.

GUILFOYLE: Agree.

PERINO: We can something around. We can actually have an effect on ISIS. I don't know if what the president strategy as it was announced last night is enough. But I think it will evolve so -- that it will be.

GUILFOYLE: I think she's 100 percent right. I mean, have faith, have confidence in our military operation (ph), the people that know what's going on. Be able to wait for that freedom, for the right choices, for decisions to be made. They're going to have a positive impact. At the time people were naysayers about the surge, it ended up working, it was smart policy and it took a leader to put himself out on the fringe to take heat and criticism because it was the right thing to do. And that's what you do when you're president of the Unites States. And that's all we're asking and expecting from President Obama.

BECKEL: Well, that's what he did it. Always keep in mind, his strategy of talking about air campaign -- sustained air campaign has worked, it worked in the Balkans. We wage a war there without putting troops on the ground. And so, there is a precedent for it, and I think it's a good precedent.

BOLLING: All right. Greg, on this, the policy or politics first and we move on (ph)?

GUTFELD: Well, I think -- I mean, he -- this is somebody who is addicted to politics. That's his drug. He enjoys -- I think he enjoys winning a partisan battle. He's not that interest the in winning a war. So, that's how you see politics influence policy. And you get the sense that even though the strong tongue was there with the speech, you felt that he had -- he felt that he had to do it. He didn't want to do it. He was like a student being forced to do his homework.

BOLLING: All right. Can we roll the sound bite? Probably the only moment where I actually stood up and said, well, about time. Take a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I've made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency. If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: That's big talk. Is he going to walk the walk?

GUTFELD: I -- you know, I hope so. I think so. That's why -- I go back to what I said in the A block. I like it when liberals -- when liberals do the right thing, it's always they act conservative.

PERINO: And then try to claim that it's theirs.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

PERINO: It was -- this is -- the core of his presidency. It's actually -- it's the core of the American foreign policy and set by the previous president.

BOLLING: Right. That sounds more like a Bush doctrine.

GUILFOYLE: You know what, great.

GUTFELD: Yeah. It's persuasive.

GUILFOYLE: And by the way, we're willing to share. Just do the right thing. Make the decision. And I like that part. But there is no more border now between Iraq and Syria. So, let's deal with the reality of situation. Pursue them wherever terror is. We shall follow and destroy.

BECKEL: We're also learning a lot about these guys. With no opposition, they can take a lot of win. Now they've got opposition, and they're not taking land. I think they're vastly overrated. They're horrible people. But I just -- I think their vastly overrated. As a military force, they will be taken down.

GUTFELD: But, Bob, you can't hope -- I hope that, but you can't operate a country on hope. We found that out.

BOLLING: They're so vastly overrated that the president takes a 9:00 prime time, stops everything, hold the presses...

GUILFOYLE: And says they're striking Syria too. (CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: I thought they're vastly overrated. I was talking to my kid yesterday, the chances of them having an impact as a military force in the United States, for example, is just vastly over.

PERINO: Well, but that's a different image. OK? As a military force coming over, remember, they have trained up to 20,000 foreign fighters that have western passports. That -- so --- and that's what we're going to get to talk about next.

BOLLING: Let me do this very quickly. Quick sound by Josh Earnest being very snarky, quick thoughts after. Go.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What does victory look like here? I mean, you talk about destroying ISIL. I honestly don't know what that means. What does it mean?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I didn't bring my Webster's dictionary with me up here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, don't do that. Come on.

EARNEST: Well, you know, it's only -- talking about that I understood...

(CROSSTALK)

EARNEST: I think that's a pretty illustrative phrase you use to describe the situation that we envision

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: Dana.

PERINO: His second part of that answer, he should have gone with the first (ph). Sometimes you're, like, at the podium being like, take a little...

GUILFOYLE: Fine time.

PERINO: But that's just not funny. It's not the right moment, and that probably was one of them.

BOLLING: Greg.

GUTFELD: I'm just enamored by his hair. I wasn't listening.

GUILFOYLE: I can tell. I can tell.

BOLLING: Do you like this guy?

GUILFOYLE: No.

BOLLING: No?

GUILFOYLE: No. Why?

BECKEL: God knows he's far better than the last guy.

GUILFOYLE: Really? You think so?

BECKEL: Yeah. Just in terms of what he looks like.

GUILFOYLE: So, we're now going on looks? That's perfect.

PERINO: Yes, Kimberly. We are.

GUTFELD: We would never do that here on The Five. Never.

BECKEL: A little bit of a stretch. You know what I mean?

BOLLING: I got to get some stylist.

GUTFELD: How do you think Bob got this job? On looks.

GUILFOYLE: On looks. Let me just...

(LAUGHTER)

BECKEL: ...you for a foot short (inaudible)

GUILFOYLE: It would be here. If these legs weren't so long, I wouldn't have to stick them out over there. These nice and delicately were Dana is.

BOLLING: We should go right about now. All right, ahead, ISIS says its goal is to kill Americans. The administration officials say the threat isn't amid, but John McCain disagrees. We're going to hear from both of them. We will come right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: The government is sending conflicting signals to the American people on the terror threat we face here at home. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EARNEST: There is no evidence to indicate that ISIL right now is actively plotting to hit the homeland.

JEH JOHNSON, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: We know of no credible information that ISIL is planning to attack the homeland at present

OBAMA: Our intelligence community believes that thousands of foreigners including Europeans and some Americans have joined them in Syria and Iraq. Trained and battle hardened, these fighters could try to return to their home countries and carry out deadly attacks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: But Former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell says the ISIS threat is real.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE MORELL, FORMER CIA DEPUTY DIRECTOR: The fact that they have the capability to send fighters here and that they want to send fighters here, is what should worry us. So I think the threat of a foreign fighter coming here and doing something is real.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: OK, Greg. That was the former CIA director. What do you make of that?

GUTFELD: I don't -- I don't -- you don't need ISIL. It's already here. It doesn't matter. You have Ft. Hood. You've got this young fellow, Brendan Tevlin, young man murdered by a jihadist in New Jersey, by a proclaimed radical Islamist. You don't need to call it ISIL or ISIS. It already has a name. It's called radical Islam. It's present in Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey. You may call ketchup "catsup." Two different spellings, but it's the same red stuff.

PERINO: I agree. But Kimberly, the FBI's most recent national threat assessment for domestic terrorism makes no reference to Islamic terror threats despite the Boston Marathon bombing and also the Ft. Hood shooting. Those were both carried out by radical Muslim Americans. And why do you think the FBI does not include that in this threat assessment?

GUILFOYLE: Well, they should. It's because they have consistently mislabeled it over the past how many years. They call it workplace violence. Nobody wants to wrap their arms around exactly what it is. Is it too frightening for them?

I mean, they need to kind of man up, figure it out, understand that this threat is real, that it is pervasive and that we have to take it seriously.

I hope, Bob, that you know, you're right about some of this stuff. I don't think you are. And I have no problem with overreacting a bit to make sure that we are covering all our bases and protecting American citizens.

No, but I mean, we don't have secure borders. There are many means and ways and opportunities for terror to go. They will take the path of least resistance. They will come into our wide-open borders. They will utilize the $2.8 billion in assets to have arms or weapons, whatever they need to extend to other countries, to get into the United States, whatever it takes to get the job done. They are not war weary. They are jihadists.

BECKEL: The jihadists, we have a lot of -- we have a lot of people, veterans of this kind of intelligence -- and we have enough intelligence. I mean, in order to come her and put something together, command and control that can do something like they did on 9/11, which by the way, the intelligence community knew about. If the two of them sat down, it would not have happened. Simple as that.

GUILFOYLE: OK.

PERINO: Let's move on to Eric on that, please.

GUTFELD: Wait, but Bob, you're the one that keeps talking about the threat of radical Islam all the time and that now it's no big deal.

BECKEL: I said -- no, listen...

GUILFOYLE: It doesn't work for his politics.

BECKEL: I talked to them about the radical Islam. My -- the threat to Christianity has been my major focus on this thing. I do not believe that -- and by the way, I do think that there are people in this country who are Muslims who are contributing money and manpower to some of these people, but I don't think that you're going to see -- what are you talking about?

PERINO: Let me -- can I get Eric in here? Because Eric, you witnessed the World Trade Center attacks.

BOLLING: Twice.

PERINO: You have never -- I would assume that you've probably never quite relaxed after that. You trust your government, but how do you think of the terror threat?

BOLLING: Being in a building when it blows up in 1993, which I was, and then watching it a second time, yes, you never relax. Anniversaries. These radical Islamists love anniversaries. So every September 13 -- 11, 12, 13, I'm...

GUILFOYLE: On edge.

BOLLING: Edgy, vigilant, et cetera.

Bob, listen to me. They're here. They're not coming here. They're here. We find a terror cell in Minneapolis, Minnesota, with three kids now dead who went overseas to fight for ISIS. When are they going to start blowing themselves up here? It's only a matter of time.

And by the way, Kimberly is 100 percent right. The undersecretary of homeland security testified in front of the Senate, answered John McCain and said, "You know what? You're right, there is terror cells. They are accumulating along the -- along the Mexican/U.S. Border."

John McCain asked specifically -- and I can't remember the person's name -- but said, yes, that's actually happening.

So can you imagine terror cells, without porous borders, terror cells forming?

GUILFOYLE: Why wouldn't they? Why wouldn't they take an open door like that, an open window, any opportunity they can? They're not confused about their objective, their mission.

BECKEL: To do what? To do what?

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: To commit terror acts against the United States.

BECKEL: The idea -- I think the United States...

GUILFOYLE: We are their sweet spot. Do you not get that?

BECKEL: I mean, the terrorists -- no, it's -- I get it. Of course I get it. I think what you don't get is that you've got this notion that somehow since 9/11 happened, it was a horrible, terrible thing, but I'm going to say it again and get beat up on this. The time has come for this country to move on.

BOLLING: No. Absolutely not. The time has come for this country to step up...

GUILFOYLE: Move on and get hit again. Never forget.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: All those lives lost? It shouldn't be for naught. We should learn a lesson from it. Never let it happen again.

BOLLING: ... 3,000 innocent people being -- Americans being killed? No. Don't move on. Be more vigilant.

PERINO: It is strange, Bob, to hear you say that the morning after -- or the day after President Obama gives a primetime address to the nation saying that we actually need to take further actions to protect our interests.

BECKEL: What I'm talking about is, as a society, we are so -- these guys are winning, because they've got us talking about it. And we've sent trillions of dollars trying to make our intelligence community better and our borders more secure. And I think...

PERINO: I don't think that's -- we're winning.

GUTFELD: You would be -- Bob, I would agree with you about, you know -- about toning down the rhetoric if I did feel that safe, if I did feel that the borders were secure and that we were doing enough with intel and that we were doing enough killing of these insaniacs (ph).

GUILFOYLE: But we're not.

GUTFELD: That's what -- then I would say you're right. But I have moved on. But moving on does not mean not being willing to destroy and kill these people.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

BECKEL: No, of course not. Of course not. Of course he has to do that. I'm just saying that -- anyway...

PERINO: Next on "The Five," new developments tonight in the Ray Rice scandal, plus Oscar Pistorius not guilty of premeditated murder. How did that happen? Kimberly's going to explain it all when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUILFOYLE: Tonight more controversy swirling around Ray Rice. The NFL announced today it hired former FBI director Robert Mueller to lead an independent investigation into the scandal.

Sources close to Rice now tell TMZ he allegedly blames heavy drinking for the violent attack on his then-fiancee, Janay. They claim since that night, Rice has laid off hard liquor and become more religious -- Bob.

BECKEL: First of all, whenever I hear "laid off hard liquor," which means he's continuing to drink liquor. I mean, alcohol. Whether it's wine or beer.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

BECKEL: And everybody seems to find religion right after they do something as outrageous as this. I'm very suspect about it.

And I think the more I listen to it, I more I think the NFL is conspiring to keep its logo worth what it's worth. The idea that they somehow said -- they sent a note to the casino saying, "Who asked for the tape?" Somebody asked for the tape in the NFL, right? Somebody was in a position to do that. It got to the NFL and it got buried, because they don't want to look at it.

GUILFOYLE: OK. Eric.

BOLLING: And I'll take the other side.

GUILFOYLE: You're very passionate about this.

BOLLING:  I am. And again, let's not forget the No. 1 -- the one we should be blaming right now is Ray Rice.

The second, if you want to look further, law enforcement. They dropped the wall. Ball. If they did their job, then the NFL, it was a no brainer for them.

And the third one, important, is the Ravens organization. They could have done their own investigation, cut him, got rid of him.

The NFL is fourth in line, but for some reason Roger Goodell's name has been mentioned 10,000 times, and the other three have been mentioned, like 10 times total.

GUILFOYLE: You think it's unfair that there's a focus on him, between -- publicly castigating him?

BOLLING: It's a gut instinct. It's a gut instinct. I've met Roger Goodell. I'm not a shill for him. I'm simply saying it just doesn't add up. And when it doesn't add up, I think in the end the NFL is going to be exonerated.

BECKEL: It's not just Ray Loose (ph).

BOLLING: Ray Rice.

BECKEL: Ray Rice. They've been doing this. There were complaints about this to the NFL from their other players for years now. They've done nothing. Absolutely nothing.

GUILFOYLE: But Dana, how do you think the NFL is handling this?

PERINO: Remember, I said that I thought that they should hire somebody, like an investigator...

GUILFOYLE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

PERINO: ... no, actually somebody who's done investigations so they can look across the board and be very transparent to them. And then the NFL announced, not because I said it, but this is a smart strategy for them to hire Bob Mueller, the former FBI director, to look at it, and hopefully, that will help give everybody the answers that they're looking for.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Greg.

GUTFELD: Well, I go back to the question that I asked yesterday. Why isn't Janay's family leading the outrage? Is it because he is their golden goose?

The lesson from Rice and perhaps with Pistorius, is that we have protected classes. And everyone is invested in them, because they're wealthy and famous. And oftentimes including the victim's family with -- with Rice.

BOLLING: Can I just -- a quick analogy. Very fast.

GUILFOYLE: Please.

BOLLING: When Chris Brown punches Rihanna or any of these hip-hop stars do this to their girlfriends, or in television when -- some of the movies, in Hollywood, when something like this happens, they don't go after the movie house or the record company. They go after the media -- the public goes after the perpetrators of this. Why are we...

GUILFOYLE: I understand. Because people are a little tired of the repetitive problem of domestic violence and abuses in the NFL, so people are saying, "Let's do something about it. There's a problem. They're a culture there that's not properly addressing this with the players." That's why I think the distinction is.

But I want to give you another legal update. Because Oscar Pistorius -- you've probably seen this on the channel today -- but he was found not guilty of premeditated murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.

Now, the hearing has postponed a ruling and adjourned proceedings with respect to a lesser charge as to whether or not he is responsible for culpable homicide. But she said the facts did not support that this was a premeditated murder with intent to kill his girlfriend.

So more on that later in the week as this develops. Hopefully later tomorrow. That's it.

When we return, 13 years later, we are still fighting a war against Islamic terror. Has anything changed since 9/11? We remember September 11 when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECKEL: Have things changed over the last 13 years since the 9/11 attack? Here was the cover of the "Washington Post" on September 12, 2001. Today's lead story on "The Post" still shows us at war with Islamic terror. This year is 9/11 different? Here's a look back at that day in 2001.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A very tragic alert for you right now. An incredible plane crash into the World Trade Center here at the lower tip of Manhattan.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The second plane flew into the second tower.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wow. Another explosion has taken place at the Pentagon.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: United 93, do you still hear Cleveland? United 93, United 93, do you hear Cleveland?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECKEL: All right. Well, in the break my good friends here at "The Five," as always, do try to cover for me and said, "Bob, you ought to try to dig yourself out of a hole." I will explain what I believe the hole that I am in and feel very comfortable in. Eric, go ahead.

BOLLING: Do you want to do it now?

GUILFOYLE: You're not explaining it?

BECKEL: I'm explaining it, yes, but...

BOLLING: Oh, at the end?

BECKEL: Yes, I thought I'd do that.

BOLLING: OK. So I looked back. I lost a lot of good friends that day: Tommy McGuinness, Mugsy (ph), Mike Miller and Mark Matrone (ph). We had some very close friends who were in the building when it came down. They were in a meeting.

Again, I don't think we're any safer than we were that day, the day before it, the day after it. We were safer for a while, and I think what this new lack of vision on the war on terror or the inability of the administration to actually call it a war on terror and use all methods I think is a mistake. And I hope we don't have another one.

BECKEL: Dana.

PERINO: This morning one of the things I was thinking about, and it kind of just makes me catch my breath often, is the -- those passengers on Flight 93. They were delayed from takeoff for about 40 minutes. Some of them had some news about something that was going on. And it was while they were in the air that they realized that they would have been the fourth plane, and they take such courageous and brave action. And you know, a lot of them -- there's memorials here, and I think that's why we have them, but that Flight 93, if you ever have a chance to go and visit that site, they've done an amazing thing, and the bravery of those people still shocks me.

BECKEL: Eric.

GUTFELD: I partly agree with Bob in the fact that...

GUILFOYLE: You mean Greg?

GUTFELD: What'd he call me?

GUILFOYLE: Eric.

GUTFELD: That's cool.

We don't -- not to obsess over it, but we must educate. There's so much crap being taught in school. Just pointless stuff you forget. There has to be a terror class in which a smart instructor tells people how pernicious ideology is and why it attracts hopeless people and how you fight such pernicious thinking.

And you should also at the same time teach kids what's at stake. What you stand to lose in a country when you do not fight these battles.

BECKEL: Kim.

GUILFOYLE: I think we just can never to get. I think with every life that was lost, not just on 9/11, Pearl Harbor, all the battles that have been fought by brave American, take a breath and remember, and never forget so that this this nation can be safe and strong. Because we face an enemy that is very adaptive and vigilant. And we have been -- they've been at war with western civilization over religion, et cetera, for 1,700 years. They are not going away, and we must not become complacent.

BECKEL: It's -- it's -- let's try to draw a distinction between complaisance and moving on, as I had said.

Of course we -- we remember Pearl Harbor. We remember December 7. And it was a tragic incident. This was a tragic incident. The question is how much do you have your country change?

I remember when I was a kid, they played Duck and Cover, because they thought nukes were going to be coming over from Russia, so we got underneath our chairs in the classroom. Scared the hell out of me. I think we're scary a whole lot of kids about the threat of this.

And I think that the threat is real; there's no question about it. But how -- we've revamped our entire intelligence system and now, internally, we're in much better shape to intercept terrorists than we were before.

So I think what we ought to do is say, you know, we're doing a good job here. And I think we've put together as much as we possibly can. And we should maybe do a little more, but we're in better shape today, taken -- And we've already proved that. There's already been some that have been caught. So that's what I'm talking about.

Don't move on from 9/11 as a symbol of a terrible situation but move on from a state of mind that's got us trapped, and these punks are just -- got us all scared.

"One More Thing" is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: Time now for "One More Thing" -- Bob.

BECKEL: America is once again going to war to try to eradicate as much as possible radical Islamists. And we've asked for the help of Muslim countries, and so far you've refused to stand up. You've refused to be counted, and yet your people are getting slaughtered, and we're in there trying to save their lives.

So it's time for you to step up. And I'm talking about Saudi Arabia. I'm talking about Turkey. I'm talking about Jordan. I'm talking about Iran. You people are the ones from whence these people came. And it's time for you -- if you're really worried about it, it's time for you to join this fight, because we're tired of doing it ourselves. We're not cowards, but I'm afraid a lot of you are.

GUTFELD: All right. Dana, you got somebody you want to yell at?

PERINO: Alex Trebek.

GUTFELD: Oh, yes. He deserves it.

PERINO: I'm not yelling at him; I'm yelling for him. He's about to enter his 30th season. And check this out. This is a promo picture. He's bringing back the mustache.

GUTFELD: Oh, wow.

PERINO: For the 30th season.  And it starts on September 15. I love "Jeopardy," so congratulations to Alex.

GUTFELD: Fun fact: That mustache was actually vacationing in Italy the whole time.

BOLLING: With Hemmer?

GUTFELD: Yes, with Hemmer.

GUILFOYLE: Ay, yi, yi.

GUTFELD: OK. So some shows will do anything for ratings. And this morning show, I think it's called "Good Morning Something" -- "Good Morning Tennessee," this is what they did. They allowed a wild beast into their -- are we going to show it or am I just going to talk?

There you go. See what's happened there? There's a bat in there flying around. Look at the guy in the middle. He's terrified. He's looking, dancing like a freak. Doesn't know what is going on.

Oh, look at her. She almost lost it.

The good news is they caught the bat. The bad news is he's now doing the weather. So good news for everybody.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my gosh.

GUTFELD: I think we've seen enough. Back to reality -- Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: That was more ridiculous than our show.

GUTFELD: Not by much.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. OK. There was a time there was a cockroach in the green room.

GUTFELD: That wasn't a cockroach.

GUILFOYLE:  All right. OK. I hit it with my shoe.

Jimmy Kimmel. How funny is Jimmy Kimmel? I love Jimmy Kimmel. So -- and Fashion Week in New York -- yes, I'm guilty; raise your hand if you were there. These people were there. Not sure they saw any of the real shows. Take a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let me ask you about some of the lesser known designers. Chandler Bing, have you heard?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Chandler Bing I have heard of. You know what? I do follow.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Teddy Ruxpin? Have you...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know Teddy Ruxpin?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about Antonin Scalia?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you seen that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did you think of that collection?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I liked his collection.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about Phil Robertson?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Phil Robertson, you know what? Is beyond one of my favorites.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's really a dynasty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I love it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GUTFELD: So cool.

GUILFOYLE: Do they have seats for those shoes? It's pretty funny, actually. I like it. Good job.

BECKEL: Are those people really designers?

GUILFOYLE: No, sweetie. That's why they showed the pictures up on the screen. But I did see Len Coy, who was my favorite.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Eric. We've got Eric.

BOLLING: Can I do this quick? Every day about 5:45, Greg starts singing, "What am I going to have for dinner? I'm hungry."

GUTFELD: It's true.

BECKEL: And he starts right now.

BOLLING: Would you eat this? Burger King in Japan is bringing back the Kuro Pearl burger. It's a black burger. Got an actual. There you go. Black burger, black cheese, black pepper. And the way they do it is they use bamboo charcoal. Add it to the cheese to give it color. And squid ink added to the sauce.

PERINO: Looks delicious. Delicious.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my gosh.

GUTFELD: It looks -- it looks horrifying.

If you don't like that, you're a bigot.

PERINO: And it's Greg's birthday tomorrow, in case you want to wish him a happy birthday.

GUILFOYLE: Happy birthday, Greg.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: All right. We've got to go. "Special Report's" up.

Content and Programming Copyright 2014 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.