Today is the first anniversary of the Fort Hood Massacre.
Thirteen people were killed. Thirty more were wounded. By a lunatic crackpot who took advantage of everything this country had to offer him, and then had the unmitigated gall to turn on it, murdering his fellow soldiers and citizens in the process.
Nidal Hasan, their killer, is still alive. He has government-funded attorneys defending him, and the government is picking up the tab for his medical care.
The "cleric" who inspired Hasan to commit mass murder, Anwar Al 'Awlaki, who also inspired the Jock Strap Jihadist (i.e. The Underwear Bomber, also still alive), the would-be Times Square Bomber (also still breathing), and three of the 9/11 Hijackers, is still alive.
Why? Why aren't these men dead, and the culture that spawned them reduced to a very bad, and smouldering, memory? When are we going to demand that a War on Terror actually means WAR and not judges and juries?
When we will finally discover that Political Correctness, of the sort that protected Nidal Hasan and advanced his career, can actually kill? When will we finally get the cojones to kick this Fifth Column in Dirty Laundry out of the country?
Showing posts with label Undi-bomber. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Undi-bomber. Show all posts
Friday, November 05, 2010
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Muslims Ask: Will We Ever Belong?
Short answer: No.
Reason; you're a bunch of inbred violent retards who are apparently allergic to soap.
The NYT tries to spin Americans demanding some consideration for their feelings and sensibilities into a modern-day Krystalnacht, the days of "No Irish Need Apply", and Japanese Internment all rolled into one. Nice try, douchebags.
If there was ever a group of people on Planet Earth less deserving of sympathy, it's Muslims.
Naturally, according to the Times, this "Uncertain, Frightened Muslim" meme is all the fault of "red state" people, i.e republicans and conservatives, typically white, most likely Christian. In fact, the Times goes to great lengths to imply this, without coming out and directly saying it; the term "Red State People" appears multiple times. Funny, but it's usually Libtards who accuse republicans of "speaking in racial code".
Notice that nowhere in the article does the fourth-grader who wrote it ever ask the question why Americans might have cause to be suspicious, even fearful, of Muslims. Naturally, the question is never asked, because then it would be answered, and the whole "we're a poor, oppressed, misunderstood people" theme would fly right the fuck out the window.
So, I'll answer the question for all those Muslims who haven't been paying attention for the last 50+ years. If your American neighbors hate your fucking guts, it's because you've forgotten the following:
The Munich Olympics, The Achille Lauro, Carlos the Jackal, The Intifada, Pan Am 103, Robert Steatham, the Marine Barracks in Beirut, Fort Hood Shooting, the African Embassy bombings, the Entebbe Raid, Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, the Rome and Vienna airport attacks, Saddam Hussein and Two Gulf Wars, The Iranian Hostage Crisis, the London Tube bombings, Underwear Bombers, Shoe Bombers, Time Square Bombers, numerous (it must be in the thousands, by now) plane hijackings, car-bombings, rockets and mortar shells lobbed into residential neighborhoods, the Internet beheadings, Al'Qada, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, The Taliban, Ayotollah Khomeini, and September 11th.
I could go on and on, but I'd only be beating dead horses.
Not only have you forgotten (conveniently) the events, but you still seem unable to remember just who the players in these little dramas are/were; they're your uncles, brothers, fathers, cousins and sons.
When you insist that a) you're not responsible, and, b) that it isn't your fault these things happen, despite the evidence, don't be surprised if your American neighbors distrust you --- and perhaps, even hate you. From their point of view, Islam's top exports aren't peaceful people just seeking a better life; it's violent morons laboring under the misapprehension that they're justified in what they do, and even that it's somehow God's will that they commit violent acts of murder. They often do so safe in the knowledge that their brethren will support and protect them because you are incapable of making the choice between what is right, and your phony-baloney religion.
Start turning in your more violent assholes on a regular basis, and perhaps we'll start talking. You know who they are.
You can't belong until you tell yourselves the truth about what you are, the culture from whence you come, and the murderous lunatics that it creates.
In other religious news, Christopher Hitchens aims his guns at all religions, but has this tasty little tidbit for the Bedouin Blowhards:
"What is needed from the supporters of this very confident faith is more self-criticism and less self-pity and self-righteousness."
Reason; you're a bunch of inbred violent retards who are apparently allergic to soap.
The NYT tries to spin Americans demanding some consideration for their feelings and sensibilities into a modern-day Krystalnacht, the days of "No Irish Need Apply", and Japanese Internment all rolled into one. Nice try, douchebags.
If there was ever a group of people on Planet Earth less deserving of sympathy, it's Muslims.
Naturally, according to the Times, this "Uncertain, Frightened Muslim" meme is all the fault of "red state" people, i.e republicans and conservatives, typically white, most likely Christian. In fact, the Times goes to great lengths to imply this, without coming out and directly saying it; the term "Red State People" appears multiple times. Funny, but it's usually Libtards who accuse republicans of "speaking in racial code".
Notice that nowhere in the article does the fourth-grader who wrote it ever ask the question why Americans might have cause to be suspicious, even fearful, of Muslims. Naturally, the question is never asked, because then it would be answered, and the whole "we're a poor, oppressed, misunderstood people" theme would fly right the fuck out the window.
So, I'll answer the question for all those Muslims who haven't been paying attention for the last 50+ years. If your American neighbors hate your fucking guts, it's because you've forgotten the following:
The Munich Olympics, The Achille Lauro, Carlos the Jackal, The Intifada, Pan Am 103, Robert Steatham, the Marine Barracks in Beirut, Fort Hood Shooting, the African Embassy bombings, the Entebbe Raid, Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, the Rome and Vienna airport attacks, Saddam Hussein and Two Gulf Wars, The Iranian Hostage Crisis, the London Tube bombings, Underwear Bombers, Shoe Bombers, Time Square Bombers, numerous (it must be in the thousands, by now) plane hijackings, car-bombings, rockets and mortar shells lobbed into residential neighborhoods, the Internet beheadings, Al'Qada, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, The Taliban, Ayotollah Khomeini, and September 11th.
I could go on and on, but I'd only be beating dead horses.
Not only have you forgotten (conveniently) the events, but you still seem unable to remember just who the players in these little dramas are/were; they're your uncles, brothers, fathers, cousins and sons.
When you insist that a) you're not responsible, and, b) that it isn't your fault these things happen, despite the evidence, don't be surprised if your American neighbors distrust you --- and perhaps, even hate you. From their point of view, Islam's top exports aren't peaceful people just seeking a better life; it's violent morons laboring under the misapprehension that they're justified in what they do, and even that it's somehow God's will that they commit violent acts of murder. They often do so safe in the knowledge that their brethren will support and protect them because you are incapable of making the choice between what is right, and your phony-baloney religion.
Start turning in your more violent assholes on a regular basis, and perhaps we'll start talking. You know who they are.
You can't belong until you tell yourselves the truth about what you are, the culture from whence you come, and the murderous lunatics that it creates.
In other religious news, Christopher Hitchens aims his guns at all religions, but has this tasty little tidbit for the Bedouin Blowhards:
"What is needed from the supporters of this very confident faith is more self-criticism and less self-pity and self-righteousness."
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Eric and Janet; Not of This Earth...
I'm rather puzzled by the attitudes of Attorney General Eric Holder, and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano about the federal role in the capture of the Times Square bomber. They seem to think they have achieved some major victory in the War Against Man-Made Disasters because agents of the Border Patrol and Immigration services caught up to the alleged-bomber while his plane was sitting at the gate at John F. Kennedy Airport.
We have a man who has been identified -- probably within 24 hours of the event -- as a "person of interest" in a supposed terror bombing plot. His identity is known, and we might presume that the cops had his picture and some vital information on him by that time, too. Every law enforcement officer in America is looking for this guy, but he still manages to:
*Drive into JFK Airport
* Get past the layers and layers of supposed "Security" within the Airport
* Buy a ticket with cash (I thought that was a Red Flag?)
* Get past the TSA at the gate (I wonder if he had to at least take his shoes off for them?).
* Get past the Customs and Immigration folks at he gate since he's boarding an international flight
* Board the aircraft.
Two days after the event, the Federal Authorities are only aware they guy is not supposed to be on a plane as he's leaving.
Even the fact that the suspect was on a no-fly list two days ago wasn't even known until the plane was -- literally -- about to leave. How did this guy get into an airport with every Federal Agent on the Eastern Seaboard looking for him?
Yes, Homeland Security managed to get their man (allegedly), but it was a by-the-skin-of-their-teeth sort of thing. Holder and Napolitano would have you think, however, the system worked flawlessly. Mind you, they want you to think the system worked flawlessly with the recent Gulf Oil Spill, the Hutaree Militia Trial (which appears to be a bust based on bad evidence and political factors), and the Pantybomber fiasco. I notice that Holder made a fetish of maintaining that this suspect wasn't read his Miranda Rights immediately, unlike the Underwear Bomber.
Yeah, that makes me feel better.
Even more, this episode gives some awful insights into how Homeland Security works.
In her speech, Napolitano thanked:
* Immigration and Border Patrol
* Transportation Security Agency
* Federal Bureau of Investigation
* The Department of Homeland Security
...and probably at least two more fed agencies I didn't catch. And with all this Federal Expertise, Technology and Manpower available, just HOW was anyone put onto this guy in the first place?
Two street vendors saw a car on fire and told the cops. Two civilians and three city cops probably saved hundreds of lives acting upon their own initiative, while all those federal agencies and the shitload of money spent on Homeland Security almost saw the suspect winging his way back to the Middle East.
I sure hope this guy had the audacity to use the toilet and ask for a blanket before he was arrested, just so he can be charged with the "crimes" the government invented to cover it's ass after the last terrorist-on-a-plane fiasco.
Eric and Janet shouldn't be so quick to congratulate themselves. In the last two major incidents of terrorism, the suspects were quickly captured and the plots "foiled" because a) private citizens got involved -- at risk to their own lives -- and did the right thing, and b) the terrorists were fuck ups who couldn't detonate their explosives properly.
Neither of these cases (Pantybomber, or the Times Square Bomber) is an indicator of Federal efficiency on the terrorism front. It just so happened that in these two cases, we had the right combiantion of non-Federal factors fall into place to make them slam-dunks. And for all that, this time the guy still almost got away because the Feds almost let him.
We have a man who has been identified -- probably within 24 hours of the event -- as a "person of interest" in a supposed terror bombing plot. His identity is known, and we might presume that the cops had his picture and some vital information on him by that time, too. Every law enforcement officer in America is looking for this guy, but he still manages to:
*Drive into JFK Airport
* Get past the layers and layers of supposed "Security" within the Airport
* Buy a ticket with cash (I thought that was a Red Flag?)
* Get past the TSA at the gate (I wonder if he had to at least take his shoes off for them?).
* Get past the Customs and Immigration folks at he gate since he's boarding an international flight
* Board the aircraft.
Two days after the event, the Federal Authorities are only aware they guy is not supposed to be on a plane as he's leaving.
Even the fact that the suspect was on a no-fly list two days ago wasn't even known until the plane was -- literally -- about to leave. How did this guy get into an airport with every Federal Agent on the Eastern Seaboard looking for him?
Yes, Homeland Security managed to get their man (allegedly), but it was a by-the-skin-of-their-teeth sort of thing. Holder and Napolitano would have you think, however, the system worked flawlessly. Mind you, they want you to think the system worked flawlessly with the recent Gulf Oil Spill, the Hutaree Militia Trial (which appears to be a bust based on bad evidence and political factors), and the Pantybomber fiasco. I notice that Holder made a fetish of maintaining that this suspect wasn't read his Miranda Rights immediately, unlike the Underwear Bomber.
Yeah, that makes me feel better.
Even more, this episode gives some awful insights into how Homeland Security works.
In her speech, Napolitano thanked:
* Immigration and Border Patrol
* Transportation Security Agency
* Federal Bureau of Investigation
* The Department of Homeland Security
...and probably at least two more fed agencies I didn't catch. And with all this Federal Expertise, Technology and Manpower available, just HOW was anyone put onto this guy in the first place?
Two street vendors saw a car on fire and told the cops. Two civilians and three city cops probably saved hundreds of lives acting upon their own initiative, while all those federal agencies and the shitload of money spent on Homeland Security almost saw the suspect winging his way back to the Middle East.
I sure hope this guy had the audacity to use the toilet and ask for a blanket before he was arrested, just so he can be charged with the "crimes" the government invented to cover it's ass after the last terrorist-on-a-plane fiasco.
Eric and Janet shouldn't be so quick to congratulate themselves. In the last two major incidents of terrorism, the suspects were quickly captured and the plots "foiled" because a) private citizens got involved -- at risk to their own lives -- and did the right thing, and b) the terrorists were fuck ups who couldn't detonate their explosives properly.
Neither of these cases (Pantybomber, or the Times Square Bomber) is an indicator of Federal efficiency on the terrorism front. It just so happened that in these two cases, we had the right combiantion of non-Federal factors fall into place to make them slam-dunks. And for all that, this time the guy still almost got away because the Feds almost let him.
Friday, February 05, 2010
Barrel Bombs?
The "militants" who are a constant threat to the security of Israel have been reduced to this:
Filling barrels with explosives and floating them off Israeli beaches, hoping the will float ashore to be detonated... by cell phone. Doesn't that mean someone has to watch the barrel? What kind of a job is that for any self-respecting child-murdering, terrorist scumbag? What is this world coming to?
Some see it as a desperation move; the old methods of explosive vests, blowing up public transport, sending the mentally-ill into crowded markets with bombs attached, indiscriminately launching unguided rockets into schoolyards and public parks, no longer work. The Israelis haven't packed up and left, the West still exists. All that's been accomplished is that the Israelis simply respond by maintaining an ever-tighter blockade of the Palestinian 'Authority' that makes it difficult for the sand-niggers to smuggle weapons and explosives into the country for use against Jews.
Others see it as a means of distraction and misinforming the Israelis and Western nations, making it look as if the Palestinians are reduced to such pitiful attempts to kill Jews and Christians, which will be taken as a sign that Hamas and Hezbollah are on their last legs. Straightway, certain self-destructive segments of Western society will leap headlong to their defense on "humanitarian grounds" and give it a shitoad of money. If the embargo and blockade are severe enough to deprive the terrorists of explosives, it must, certainly, be depriving them of milk and bread, too. This is the regular modus operandi of the Palestinian Authority; it takes desperate action against Israel, highlights the self-inflicted "suffering of the Palestinian People", and Europeans who hope Hamas finishes the job Hitler started, shower them with cash.
Let them starve, I say. That's fewer we'll have to waste bullets on later.
There's another school of thought that paints such laughable (I'm not laughing; it's an explosive barrel, you moron!) attempts as a sign that maybe The Terrorists aren't exactly the brightest people on the planet, and that perhaps the tone of those who espouse the War on Terror is a bit too shrill, designed mainly to frighten people into the voting booths, or that terrorism is used as an excuse to denude our citizens of their Civil Rights unjustly for sinister ends. After all, the people who invented the barrel bomb are the same folks who invented the shoe bomb, and the great technical leap forward in that design was the Underwear Bomb; we're not dealing with the smartest, most-insidious people here, you see?
The point, in case you've missed it, is not to refine the technical sophistication of either their bombs or their plans. Their aim is to destroy airliners full of innocent people. The idea that a bomb went from someone's shoe to someone's jockstrap may seem ridiculously simplistic in a 6th-grade-giggling sort of way, but the idea that someone is out to kill hundreds simultaneously with as little effort or expense as possible is still a frightening one. The continual march towards that ultimate goal is what is important, not the technical means.
We're not fighting people who are out to razzle-dazzle us with their expertise and skill; they just want us dead, and in that battle, any weapon they manage to cobble together, no matter how seemingly laughable, is still a deadly threat.
Filling barrels with explosives and floating them off Israeli beaches, hoping the will float ashore to be detonated... by cell phone. Doesn't that mean someone has to watch the barrel? What kind of a job is that for any self-respecting child-murdering, terrorist scumbag? What is this world coming to?
Some see it as a desperation move; the old methods of explosive vests, blowing up public transport, sending the mentally-ill into crowded markets with bombs attached, indiscriminately launching unguided rockets into schoolyards and public parks, no longer work. The Israelis haven't packed up and left, the West still exists. All that's been accomplished is that the Israelis simply respond by maintaining an ever-tighter blockade of the Palestinian 'Authority' that makes it difficult for the sand-niggers to smuggle weapons and explosives into the country for use against Jews.
Others see it as a means of distraction and misinforming the Israelis and Western nations, making it look as if the Palestinians are reduced to such pitiful attempts to kill Jews and Christians, which will be taken as a sign that Hamas and Hezbollah are on their last legs. Straightway, certain self-destructive segments of Western society will leap headlong to their defense on "humanitarian grounds" and give it a shitoad of money. If the embargo and blockade are severe enough to deprive the terrorists of explosives, it must, certainly, be depriving them of milk and bread, too. This is the regular modus operandi of the Palestinian Authority; it takes desperate action against Israel, highlights the self-inflicted "suffering of the Palestinian People", and Europeans who hope Hamas finishes the job Hitler started, shower them with cash.
Let them starve, I say. That's fewer we'll have to waste bullets on later.
There's another school of thought that paints such laughable (I'm not laughing; it's an explosive barrel, you moron!) attempts as a sign that maybe The Terrorists aren't exactly the brightest people on the planet, and that perhaps the tone of those who espouse the War on Terror is a bit too shrill, designed mainly to frighten people into the voting booths, or that terrorism is used as an excuse to denude our citizens of their Civil Rights unjustly for sinister ends. After all, the people who invented the barrel bomb are the same folks who invented the shoe bomb, and the great technical leap forward in that design was the Underwear Bomb; we're not dealing with the smartest, most-insidious people here, you see?
The point, in case you've missed it, is not to refine the technical sophistication of either their bombs or their plans. Their aim is to destroy airliners full of innocent people. The idea that a bomb went from someone's shoe to someone's jockstrap may seem ridiculously simplistic in a 6th-grade-giggling sort of way, but the idea that someone is out to kill hundreds simultaneously with as little effort or expense as possible is still a frightening one. The continual march towards that ultimate goal is what is important, not the technical means.
We're not fighting people who are out to razzle-dazzle us with their expertise and skill; they just want us dead, and in that battle, any weapon they manage to cobble together, no matter how seemingly laughable, is still a deadly threat.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
The System Worked, Part V...
Unless, you're called before Congress to explain why it didn't.
You know, I'm so glad we have these idiots in control of the TSA, the FBI and CIA. I'm glad that we have things like the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (that doesn't get used), and crappy software designed by those who bid the lowest but had the best political connections. I'm so happy I could drop a log at the fact that after 9 years we're not only forgetting the lessons of 9/11, but we're ignoring the ones we've learned since, while pouring billions of increasingly-scarce taxpayer dollars into a federal sinkhole that doesn't do what it's designed to do: catch terrorists.
But then again, it's representative of what has been done in much of this so-called War on Terror.
The DHS and it's affiliates don't capture terrorists, and the soldiers we sent overseas don't capture them either. No one is actually fighting a war "over there". If they were, millions of Muslims (may of them potential terrorists) would be dead, and those that survived would be sufficiently cowed so as to never even think of taking up arms against the United States ever again. Instead, we're spending billions to rebuild Iraq (a country we largely destroyed in the first place), and billions more to nudge Afghanistan forward... into the Mud Age, probably so that IBM, Mary Kay and Dodge can sell them laptops, lipstick and overpriced pick-ups when the conflict is over. These are people who don't understand the basic concepts of personal hygiene, yet someone has decided they'll make a wonderful consumer class one day. A few Muslims terrorists get a drone-fired missile up the Nether regions, but many more roam the landscape freely planting IED's which kill and cripple our troops...who aren't allowed to fight back except under increasingly stringent and legalistic rules of engagement.
And when it's all said and done, what do we have to show for it?
Democracy in the Middle East? Don't be stupid. An end to terrorism? It only ends when terrorists and the people who support them are dead, and not enough people are dead yet to make terrorism an unattractive option. Right now, terrorism pays -- just ask Hamas. Myriad opportunities for Congress to engage in graft with taxpayer money in the name of 'defending' the American people?
BINGO!
Because if there wasn't graft or politics involved in the process of both war and airport security, a) the war would have been won, with the Middle Eastern nations bowing before America, falling all over themselves to pay us tribute, and keeping their violent retards under wraps, b) you'd be able to take a flight from Birmingham to Albuquerque without having to spend an extra four hours at the airport getting undressed, x-rayed, interrogated, herded like cattle, drinking your own breast milk, while having to pack even less luggage in see-through bags for your little adventure than Bear Grylls or Les Stroud does.
It wouldn't cost twice as much, be such a headache, and you'd even be able to get a meal and use the toilet on the flight. It might actually even be a reasonably-bearable experience without all the extra-normal bullshit demanded by a security system furnished at the expense in time, money and sanity of the law-abiding, but which gives those with ill intent with a distinct advantage: no one wishes to offend the would-be murderers amongst us. The System is full of built-in loopholes, and administrated by mouth-breathing government types with little-to-no motivation to actually succeed at anything, let alone their primary mission.
We could be dead, but they'll still have their jobs in the aftermath.
This kind of thing ought to scare the fertilizer out of you.
You know, I'm so glad we have these idiots in control of the TSA, the FBI and CIA. I'm glad that we have things like the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (that doesn't get used), and crappy software designed by those who bid the lowest but had the best political connections. I'm so happy I could drop a log at the fact that after 9 years we're not only forgetting the lessons of 9/11, but we're ignoring the ones we've learned since, while pouring billions of increasingly-scarce taxpayer dollars into a federal sinkhole that doesn't do what it's designed to do: catch terrorists.
But then again, it's representative of what has been done in much of this so-called War on Terror.
The DHS and it's affiliates don't capture terrorists, and the soldiers we sent overseas don't capture them either. No one is actually fighting a war "over there". If they were, millions of Muslims (may of them potential terrorists) would be dead, and those that survived would be sufficiently cowed so as to never even think of taking up arms against the United States ever again. Instead, we're spending billions to rebuild Iraq (a country we largely destroyed in the first place), and billions more to nudge Afghanistan forward... into the Mud Age, probably so that IBM, Mary Kay and Dodge can sell them laptops, lipstick and overpriced pick-ups when the conflict is over. These are people who don't understand the basic concepts of personal hygiene, yet someone has decided they'll make a wonderful consumer class one day. A few Muslims terrorists get a drone-fired missile up the Nether regions, but many more roam the landscape freely planting IED's which kill and cripple our troops...who aren't allowed to fight back except under increasingly stringent and legalistic rules of engagement.
And when it's all said and done, what do we have to show for it?
Democracy in the Middle East? Don't be stupid. An end to terrorism? It only ends when terrorists and the people who support them are dead, and not enough people are dead yet to make terrorism an unattractive option. Right now, terrorism pays -- just ask Hamas. Myriad opportunities for Congress to engage in graft with taxpayer money in the name of 'defending' the American people?
BINGO!
Because if there wasn't graft or politics involved in the process of both war and airport security, a) the war would have been won, with the Middle Eastern nations bowing before America, falling all over themselves to pay us tribute, and keeping their violent retards under wraps, b) you'd be able to take a flight from Birmingham to Albuquerque without having to spend an extra four hours at the airport getting undressed, x-rayed, interrogated, herded like cattle, drinking your own breast milk, while having to pack even less luggage in see-through bags for your little adventure than Bear Grylls or Les Stroud does.
It wouldn't cost twice as much, be such a headache, and you'd even be able to get a meal and use the toilet on the flight. It might actually even be a reasonably-bearable experience without all the extra-normal bullshit demanded by a security system furnished at the expense in time, money and sanity of the law-abiding, but which gives those with ill intent with a distinct advantage: no one wishes to offend the would-be murderers amongst us. The System is full of built-in loopholes, and administrated by mouth-breathing government types with little-to-no motivation to actually succeed at anything, let alone their primary mission.
We could be dead, but they'll still have their jobs in the aftermath.
This kind of thing ought to scare the fertilizer out of you.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
This Is Why Newsweek is Going Out of Business..
Because it employs dickheads like Fareed Zakaria, and pays him a buttload of money to write absolute shyte, like this:
Don't Panic - How our frenzied response to terrorism only feeds it.
Zakaria's argument runs something like this:
1) Muslim fanatics like to yank our chains; it's why they hide bombs in their underwear, behead folks on the internet, and take intercontinental flights in an attempt to commit murder-suicide over an American city. It's all a big joke to them; they get off on making people believe they're crazy. It gives them a hard-on.
2) Every time we react to one of these attempts in the typical fashion, i.e. we expect the government to do...something...usually some measure so totally asinine, intrusive and expensive -- and which avoids inconveniencing Muslims, the most-likely source of terrorism -- we look foolish. The Muzzies then get bigger boners and giggle ever-more girlishly.
3) As we advance to the extremely foolish stage, like when we search 90-year olds in wheelchairs, take bathroom privileges away from paying customers, make breast-feeding mothers drink their own milk, or put nose-picking, knuckle-dragging union slobs in charge of full-body scanners and chemical sniffers, Al Qaeda sits around in their their guano-filled caves laughing until they wet themselves. Then they stroke each other's massive erections. It's all great fun for them, you see.
Their only aim, according to Zakaria, is to throw the "American system into turmoil". This is their sole aim, he says.
Nah, these guys aren't out to kill us...no,no,no. They don't wish to destroy our civilization and the system of freedoms which we enjoy. Oh, hell no! They're just practical jokers... like a bunch of drunken frat boys, except that they sometimes go a little too far (you know, like when the blew up the USS Cole, or knocked down the World Trade Center). The solution, according to this fucking moron is to relax...don't sweat the psycho bombers so much. Pay no heed to that guy screaming his head off about jihad, enslaving the West, and beheading innocent contractors who came to his country simply to bring him indoor plumbing...they're just fucking with us. It's all a joke!
Sorry, but I can't put Osama Bin Laden on the same level as "Bluto" Blutarski. For one thing, Bluto had better table manners.
I will agree with Mr. Zakaria to this extent: he's absolutely correct in his assessment that the current system of responding to Islamofascist terrorism is not working, and is perhaps, counterproductive.
Which is why we should be killing these goat-fucking cocksuckers by the millions! Unleash the U.S. Military! Drop a few Big Ones, and let these practical jokers know it ain't fucking funny anymore! That'll wipe the smiles off their faces, for sure.
Then we can send Fareed Zakaria back to whatever sandy shithole it was that he crawled out of.
Problem solved.
Don't Panic - How our frenzied response to terrorism only feeds it.
Zakaria's argument runs something like this:
1) Muslim fanatics like to yank our chains; it's why they hide bombs in their underwear, behead folks on the internet, and take intercontinental flights in an attempt to commit murder-suicide over an American city. It's all a big joke to them; they get off on making people believe they're crazy. It gives them a hard-on.
2) Every time we react to one of these attempts in the typical fashion, i.e. we expect the government to do...something...usually some measure so totally asinine, intrusive and expensive -- and which avoids inconveniencing Muslims, the most-likely source of terrorism -- we look foolish. The Muzzies then get bigger boners and giggle ever-more girlishly.
3) As we advance to the extremely foolish stage, like when we search 90-year olds in wheelchairs, take bathroom privileges away from paying customers, make breast-feeding mothers drink their own milk, or put nose-picking, knuckle-dragging union slobs in charge of full-body scanners and chemical sniffers, Al Qaeda sits around in their their guano-filled caves laughing until they wet themselves. Then they stroke each other's massive erections. It's all great fun for them, you see.
Their only aim, according to Zakaria, is to throw the "American system into turmoil". This is their sole aim, he says.
Nah, these guys aren't out to kill us...no,no,no. They don't wish to destroy our civilization and the system of freedoms which we enjoy. Oh, hell no! They're just practical jokers... like a bunch of drunken frat boys, except that they sometimes go a little too far (you know, like when the blew up the USS Cole, or knocked down the World Trade Center). The solution, according to this fucking moron is to relax...don't sweat the psycho bombers so much. Pay no heed to that guy screaming his head off about jihad, enslaving the West, and beheading innocent contractors who came to his country simply to bring him indoor plumbing...they're just fucking with us. It's all a joke!
Sorry, but I can't put Osama Bin Laden on the same level as "Bluto" Blutarski. For one thing, Bluto had better table manners.
I will agree with Mr. Zakaria to this extent: he's absolutely correct in his assessment that the current system of responding to Islamofascist terrorism is not working, and is perhaps, counterproductive.
Which is why we should be killing these goat-fucking cocksuckers by the millions! Unleash the U.S. Military! Drop a few Big Ones, and let these practical jokers know it ain't fucking funny anymore! That'll wipe the smiles off their faces, for sure.
Then we can send Fareed Zakaria back to whatever sandy shithole it was that he crawled out of.
Problem solved.
The System Worked, Part IV...
This bunch at Homeland Security couldn't catch a cold, let alone a terrorist. And no wonder; they're looking for for the wrong people.
Now, I understand that Homeland Security is a huge, multi-departmental mega-behemoth, and that administrative errors are abound to occur in great quantities. You just hope that when they do, your personnel are smart enough to be able to improvise adequately. But this takes the cake.
It points out two glaring failures of the government when it comes to security; the first is the (often) lack of good information. This causes people to make guesses, and worse, these are often guesses which bear no relation to the information the government does have. In this case, having no good information on OBL, the government makes a guess at what he might look like. Being lazy and unaccustomed to actual work, the government employee who created those portraits then does what every 10 year old with a book report due does...and gets his picture off the Internet, probably with a Google search. This smells of "make-work" project, and the result shows.
The only thing that makes this half-way funny is that the dude who's picture finally gets lifted happens to be a dyed-in-the-wool communist. I'll bet he's working on the lucrative lawsuit as we speak -- to strike a blow against the bourgeois, fascist Amerikkka, of course, never for his personal enrichment. Thought never crossed his mind...
The second failure is the reliance upon technology. The government is depending upon the power of the Internet and media to alert people that we're looking for a terrorist who may now be disguised as a Spanish Communist. All well-and-fine; that approach often works in many a criminal case. But is there anyone on the ground actually looking for OBL? Naturally, no one will tell us if there is or isn't (for obvious reasons), but I would hazard to guess that there isn't a solitary soul tasked to scouring the Tribal Regions of Pakistan looking for OBL, because that would violate Pakistani sovereignty.
And if we're about anything in this Public-Relations-Campaign-With-Guns-Against-Terror, it's all about the legal niceties.
Nothing beats a standard-issue pair of Mark I Eyeballs, attached to a properly-calibrated M1 Braincase. You can have all the drones, full-body-scanners, and Google in the world, and it still doesn't stop anyone from boarding an aircraft with TNT Boxer shorts. The technology is merely a tool; the solution is people smart enough not to fight terrorists with Google searches and Photoshop, but with their faculties.
But then there's no opportunity for graft; government contracts can't be given out in return for campaign contributions, there's no federal unions to squeeze for money and votes. Congress would have no say and be made irrelevant to the process. No...it's much better to have the current system, which doesn't work and puts lives at risk, but which provides the opportunity for Congress to put it's grubby fingers into many pies and pinch a few plums for itself and it's friends, right?
Somebody had better be walking the unemployment line today if this is the kind of work billions of taxpayer dollars buys. If he were working in the private sector, he would be; because he belongs to a protected class (civil servant) that's umbillically attached to Congress by a thread of easily-stolen and mismanaged taxpayer funds, he's probably due for a promotion instead.
Get the government out of the "security" business and put it in the hands of private contractors who know what the fuck they're doing...
Now, I understand that Homeland Security is a huge, multi-departmental mega-behemoth, and that administrative errors are abound to occur in great quantities. You just hope that when they do, your personnel are smart enough to be able to improvise adequately. But this takes the cake.
It points out two glaring failures of the government when it comes to security; the first is the (often) lack of good information. This causes people to make guesses, and worse, these are often guesses which bear no relation to the information the government does have. In this case, having no good information on OBL, the government makes a guess at what he might look like. Being lazy and unaccustomed to actual work, the government employee who created those portraits then does what every 10 year old with a book report due does...and gets his picture off the Internet, probably with a Google search. This smells of "make-work" project, and the result shows.
The only thing that makes this half-way funny is that the dude who's picture finally gets lifted happens to be a dyed-in-the-wool communist. I'll bet he's working on the lucrative lawsuit as we speak -- to strike a blow against the bourgeois, fascist Amerikkka, of course, never for his personal enrichment. Thought never crossed his mind...
The second failure is the reliance upon technology. The government is depending upon the power of the Internet and media to alert people that we're looking for a terrorist who may now be disguised as a Spanish Communist. All well-and-fine; that approach often works in many a criminal case. But is there anyone on the ground actually looking for OBL? Naturally, no one will tell us if there is or isn't (for obvious reasons), but I would hazard to guess that there isn't a solitary soul tasked to scouring the Tribal Regions of Pakistan looking for OBL, because that would violate Pakistani sovereignty.
And if we're about anything in this Public-Relations-Campaign-With-Guns-Against-Terror, it's all about the legal niceties.
Nothing beats a standard-issue pair of Mark I Eyeballs, attached to a properly-calibrated M1 Braincase. You can have all the drones, full-body-scanners, and Google in the world, and it still doesn't stop anyone from boarding an aircraft with TNT Boxer shorts. The technology is merely a tool; the solution is people smart enough not to fight terrorists with Google searches and Photoshop, but with their faculties.
But then there's no opportunity for graft; government contracts can't be given out in return for campaign contributions, there's no federal unions to squeeze for money and votes. Congress would have no say and be made irrelevant to the process. No...it's much better to have the current system, which doesn't work and puts lives at risk, but which provides the opportunity for Congress to put it's grubby fingers into many pies and pinch a few plums for itself and it's friends, right?
Somebody had better be walking the unemployment line today if this is the kind of work billions of taxpayer dollars buys. If he were working in the private sector, he would be; because he belongs to a protected class (civil servant) that's umbillically attached to Congress by a thread of easily-stolen and mismanaged taxpayer funds, he's probably due for a promotion instead.
Get the government out of the "security" business and put it in the hands of private contractors who know what the fuck they're doing...
Monday, January 18, 2010
The System Worked, Part III...
Another of those "model employees" the TSA must be recruiting in large numbers. It's bad enough that the TSA can't detect explosives in someone's underwear, or put their cell phones away while on duty, now they're leaving loaded weapons all over the place.
If you're a terrorist or criminal of any kind, not only will TSA not stop you if you happen to be an obvious member of a certain race or religion, but some thoughtful government-employee- security soul (three words which are mutually-exclusive) will leave weapons conveniently laying around for your use.
Someone ought to be fired... and then shot with her own gun. I vote that we start with Janet.
If you're a terrorist or criminal of any kind, not only will TSA not stop you if you happen to be an obvious member of a certain race or religion, but some thoughtful government-employee- security soul (three words which are mutually-exclusive) will leave weapons conveniently laying around for your use.
Someone ought to be fired... and then shot with her own gun. I vote that we start with Janet.
Friday, January 08, 2010
The Butt Bomb...
Brought to you by the Makers of PantyBomb and BriefBomb. You don't think these people are serious? You have to be deadly serious to carry a pound of TNT in your asshole (no, they didn't pack John Edwards with a pound of TNT -- I meant the rectal cavity, you ninny!), knowing it's going to go off.
What's even more surprising, is that this was published on the New Republic website. But then again, pulling things out their collective ass is old hat over at TNR. Inserting and removing all sorts of objects from the Hershey Highway is a popular sport over there, I'm told.
Be that as it may...
Seriously. Full-body x-ray scans didn't find it, and the universal convention that one dude doesn't look up another's jacksey without being a) gay, or b) a prison guard, apparently holds true in Saudi Arabia, too. Civil libertarians will have a field day the first time Homeland Security mentions the words "cavity search", but we're apparently headed that way, slowly, inexorably.
The words "Butt Bomb" evoke all sorts of concepts, some funny, some not so much, but if you extended the logic that began with suitcase bombs, morphed into shoe bombs, and then evolved into underwear bombs, we're headed for something that no one has yet mentioned: the demise of commercial air travel.
Eventually, the terrorists will have honed the craft of bombmaking to include Fingernail Bomber, Back Filling Bomber, False-Teeth bomber, Breast Implant Bomber, and the reaction of Homeland Security will be to demand ever-more intrusive searches and ever-more time-consuming procedures, that will make travel by air an absolute hell (as if it weren't already?). The September 11 attacks further weakened an-already overloaded, overworked, under-capitalized airline industry, technology is cutting into the business traveler market, the lack of service and amenities aboard the plane itself turns customers off. And now this: you'll have to have a pre-flight proctological exam before you board, Because TSA won't limit that sort of intrusive process to those who truly warrant it (Muslims, people who fit a particular profile) because no one wants to be accused of racism or sued for a violation of Civil Rights, you'll need to be at the airport 12-16 hours before your flight actually boards, and pay three times as much for your ticket.
That's the death knell of commercial air travel. Soon, any air travel at all will only be available to the very rich, the very stupid, or people who are able to take advantage of private means of flight...and then the terrorists will figure out how to interfere with that, too. Give them time, and they'll destroy travel by rail, road and horseback, if they see any advantage in it.
When you think of it that way, the words "Butt Bomb" aren't so funny, after all.
But then again, that's why the response to "Butt Bomb" has to be more than "let's get some more x-ray scanners", and has to be more focused on the who rather that the what.
What's even more surprising, is that this was published on the New Republic website. But then again, pulling things out their collective ass is old hat over at TNR. Inserting and removing all sorts of objects from the Hershey Highway is a popular sport over there, I'm told.
Be that as it may...
Seriously. Full-body x-ray scans didn't find it, and the universal convention that one dude doesn't look up another's jacksey without being a) gay, or b) a prison guard, apparently holds true in Saudi Arabia, too. Civil libertarians will have a field day the first time Homeland Security mentions the words "cavity search", but we're apparently headed that way, slowly, inexorably.
The words "Butt Bomb" evoke all sorts of concepts, some funny, some not so much, but if you extended the logic that began with suitcase bombs, morphed into shoe bombs, and then evolved into underwear bombs, we're headed for something that no one has yet mentioned: the demise of commercial air travel.
Eventually, the terrorists will have honed the craft of bombmaking to include Fingernail Bomber, Back Filling Bomber, False-Teeth bomber, Breast Implant Bomber, and the reaction of Homeland Security will be to demand ever-more intrusive searches and ever-more time-consuming procedures, that will make travel by air an absolute hell (as if it weren't already?). The September 11 attacks further weakened an-already overloaded, overworked, under-capitalized airline industry, technology is cutting into the business traveler market, the lack of service and amenities aboard the plane itself turns customers off. And now this: you'll have to have a pre-flight proctological exam before you board, Because TSA won't limit that sort of intrusive process to those who truly warrant it (Muslims, people who fit a particular profile) because no one wants to be accused of racism or sued for a violation of Civil Rights, you'll need to be at the airport 12-16 hours before your flight actually boards, and pay three times as much for your ticket.
That's the death knell of commercial air travel. Soon, any air travel at all will only be available to the very rich, the very stupid, or people who are able to take advantage of private means of flight...and then the terrorists will figure out how to interfere with that, too. Give them time, and they'll destroy travel by rail, road and horseback, if they see any advantage in it.
When you think of it that way, the words "Butt Bomb" aren't so funny, after all.
But then again, that's why the response to "Butt Bomb" has to be more than "let's get some more x-ray scanners", and has to be more focused on the who rather that the what.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Terrorist Whack-A-Mole...
You know that carnival game, Whack-A-Mole, where mechanical furry creatures poke their heads out of a few cutouts in a tabletop and you try to whack them with a plush mallet? Listening to all the talk about terrorism nowadays, I get the impression that our so-called leaders are playing that game right now...and they don't realize it.
First, Bill Clinton bombed some aspirin factories in Sudan, in an attempt to get Osama Bin Hidin'. All he accomplished was to chase Osama to Afghanistan, where Al'Qeada hit us again with the September 11th attacks. G.W.B sent troops to Afghanistan to get OBL, and chased him into Pakistan, and now Obambi is using drones to pop terrorist scum in Pakistan and chasing them to Yemen.
And now all the talk in terrorism is about Yemen being the new front in the Overseas-Contingency-Operations-on-Man-Caused-Disasters. But it shouldn't be; if you chase Al'Qeada into Yemen, it'll fight for a while, then melt away to reform someplace else with a weak government and enough head-cases to adopt Islam, like Somalia or Algeria or something. We'll spend forever chasing them from country to country, and we won't be getting any closer to the source of the problem.
The problem is Radical Islam. It's an ideology that has grafted the political to the religious. The problem began in Iran with Khomeini, it has spread across the world -- thanks to the Saudis and their link with Wahabbism -- and it is firmly established in Europe... and American Prisons.
The Undibomber and Richard Reid were not radicalized in Yemen; they were recruited in London. Most of the 9/11 bombers were not radicalized in the Middle East, but in the capitols of Europe. Jose Padilla was not converted in Mecca, he was converted in an American prison. They learned the ideology of jihad outside of their native lands, for the most part. This is what we're fighting; an idea, and when you are fighting ideas, you have to fight twice as hard so as to make that idea mighty unattractive to future generations.
Fuck Yemen. It's an insignificant shitstain on the world map. The only good things to come from Yemen are syphilis and flies. Hardly worth the time or energy to 'save', let alone conquer. "Defeating" Al'Qaeda in Yemen will not bring us one step closer to destroying Islamofacism, it will not bring 'stability' to the Middle East, and it won't shut down a 'recruiting ground' for Al'Qaeda; it'll just waste a lot of bullets.
Concentrate on where the real problem is; there are millions of disaffected, young Muslim men walking the streets of the U.S. and Europe. They become disaffected (and angry) because they are encouraged a not to assimilate, and b) because they don't assimilate they never feel a part of their host society....and begin to resent it. They begin to become easy targets for the Imams. In Europe, outright racism is often to blame -- the French don't mind Algerians when they're out of sight, paying the taxes that let a Frenchie retire at 40 with free medical insurance, driving taxis and cleaning sewers, but they don't want to rub elbows with them in the local cafe. In the U.S. the association of Islam with the Civil Rights movement (a battle that is already won, but is continually re-fought nonetheless by the Poverty Pimps, because they get rich in the process) continues to foster an "Us vs. Them" mentality that is attractive to those who believe they haven't gotten a fair shake from America.
They find Islam an attractive ideology because it appeals to their sense of deprivation. They believe it offers the answer to their feelings of isolation and persecution. That it very often fosters those feelings in order to recruit disciples in the first place is another argument altogether.
Fix those problems (either by encouraging assimilation, or a program of massive deportation)before you decide invading another worthless country is the answer. Don't just hunt-and-annoy terrorists -- fucking kill them and make sure the world sees what it means to screw with Uncle Sam. Don't negotiate with Iran -- fucking flatten it, and do it in Prime Time so the world sees that we're serious about the security of Israel and our Allies. Don't let the Saudi's off scott-free because we want to buy their oil -- make them clean up their own mess, and then let's drill for our own oil right here and put them out of business. Don't let the same conditions that allowed the rise of radical Islam in Europe to establish themselves here; we should be out in the streets protesting Islam, we should be making life very uncomfortable for Muslims, we should be encouraging a program of "Assimilation or Deportation", and telling the truth about what Islamofascism really stands for.
Islam has never solved any one's problems, it has merely made them worse. If the West is not determined to fight for it's very survival by the same tactics that it used to defeat the Nazis, then we will be doomed to a continuous future that resembles the present: there will be more Undibombers, or future-Colonbombers, or Minature Toy Chihuahua Bombers, we'll still be sending soldiers around the world to be shot at and maimed in gun battles with no tangible results, and we'll spend enormous amounts of treasure while we're at at it. Islamofascism will still stand, and it'll still be drawing people to it's banner.
Make the effort to destroy the ideology by showing that it is, ultimately, a hopeless path; it must be shown to be bankrupt -- morally, spiritually, materially, politically, militarily -- before people begin to loose faith in it. Once they've lost that faith, they will no longer support it. The only way to encourage that loss of faith is to do some very mean and disgusting things that send a message that cannot be misread -- this is what we are willing to do in our defense, and to bring about your your defeat. You dare not screw with us.
Stop playing games. Start whacking people. In very large numbers.
More: The BBC agrees. Also, Islam one step closer to classification as Mental Disorder.
(H/T JammieWearingFool)
First, Bill Clinton bombed some aspirin factories in Sudan, in an attempt to get Osama Bin Hidin'. All he accomplished was to chase Osama to Afghanistan, where Al'Qeada hit us again with the September 11th attacks. G.W.B sent troops to Afghanistan to get OBL, and chased him into Pakistan, and now Obambi is using drones to pop terrorist scum in Pakistan and chasing them to Yemen.
And now all the talk in terrorism is about Yemen being the new front in the Overseas-Contingency-Operations-on-Man-Caused-Disasters. But it shouldn't be; if you chase Al'Qeada into Yemen, it'll fight for a while, then melt away to reform someplace else with a weak government and enough head-cases to adopt Islam, like Somalia or Algeria or something. We'll spend forever chasing them from country to country, and we won't be getting any closer to the source of the problem.
The problem is Radical Islam. It's an ideology that has grafted the political to the religious. The problem began in Iran with Khomeini, it has spread across the world -- thanks to the Saudis and their link with Wahabbism -- and it is firmly established in Europe... and American Prisons.
The Undibomber and Richard Reid were not radicalized in Yemen; they were recruited in London. Most of the 9/11 bombers were not radicalized in the Middle East, but in the capitols of Europe. Jose Padilla was not converted in Mecca, he was converted in an American prison. They learned the ideology of jihad outside of their native lands, for the most part. This is what we're fighting; an idea, and when you are fighting ideas, you have to fight twice as hard so as to make that idea mighty unattractive to future generations.
Fuck Yemen. It's an insignificant shitstain on the world map. The only good things to come from Yemen are syphilis and flies. Hardly worth the time or energy to 'save', let alone conquer. "Defeating" Al'Qaeda in Yemen will not bring us one step closer to destroying Islamofacism, it will not bring 'stability' to the Middle East, and it won't shut down a 'recruiting ground' for Al'Qaeda; it'll just waste a lot of bullets.
Concentrate on where the real problem is; there are millions of disaffected, young Muslim men walking the streets of the U.S. and Europe. They become disaffected (and angry) because they are encouraged a not to assimilate, and b) because they don't assimilate they never feel a part of their host society....and begin to resent it. They begin to become easy targets for the Imams. In Europe, outright racism is often to blame -- the French don't mind Algerians when they're out of sight, paying the taxes that let a Frenchie retire at 40 with free medical insurance, driving taxis and cleaning sewers, but they don't want to rub elbows with them in the local cafe. In the U.S. the association of Islam with the Civil Rights movement (a battle that is already won, but is continually re-fought nonetheless by the Poverty Pimps, because they get rich in the process) continues to foster an "Us vs. Them" mentality that is attractive to those who believe they haven't gotten a fair shake from America.
They find Islam an attractive ideology because it appeals to their sense of deprivation. They believe it offers the answer to their feelings of isolation and persecution. That it very often fosters those feelings in order to recruit disciples in the first place is another argument altogether.
Fix those problems (either by encouraging assimilation, or a program of massive deportation)before you decide invading another worthless country is the answer. Don't just hunt-and-annoy terrorists -- fucking kill them and make sure the world sees what it means to screw with Uncle Sam. Don't negotiate with Iran -- fucking flatten it, and do it in Prime Time so the world sees that we're serious about the security of Israel and our Allies. Don't let the Saudi's off scott-free because we want to buy their oil -- make them clean up their own mess, and then let's drill for our own oil right here and put them out of business. Don't let the same conditions that allowed the rise of radical Islam in Europe to establish themselves here; we should be out in the streets protesting Islam, we should be making life very uncomfortable for Muslims, we should be encouraging a program of "Assimilation or Deportation", and telling the truth about what Islamofascism really stands for.
Islam has never solved any one's problems, it has merely made them worse. If the West is not determined to fight for it's very survival by the same tactics that it used to defeat the Nazis, then we will be doomed to a continuous future that resembles the present: there will be more Undibombers, or future-Colonbombers, or Minature Toy Chihuahua Bombers, we'll still be sending soldiers around the world to be shot at and maimed in gun battles with no tangible results, and we'll spend enormous amounts of treasure while we're at at it. Islamofascism will still stand, and it'll still be drawing people to it's banner.
Make the effort to destroy the ideology by showing that it is, ultimately, a hopeless path; it must be shown to be bankrupt -- morally, spiritually, materially, politically, militarily -- before people begin to loose faith in it. Once they've lost that faith, they will no longer support it. The only way to encourage that loss of faith is to do some very mean and disgusting things that send a message that cannot be misread -- this is what we are willing to do in our defense, and to bring about your your defeat. You dare not screw with us.
Stop playing games. Start whacking people. In very large numbers.
More: The BBC agrees. Also, Islam one step closer to classification as Mental Disorder.
(H/T JammieWearingFool)
Sunday, January 03, 2010
They Just Don't Get IT...
According to Barack Obama, Dick Cheney loves terrorists. This is the response of an Administration stung by Cheney's repeated attempts to get Obama more active, involved and truthful about the War on Terror. That Cheney criticizes the President and his Administration in the wake of another attempted bombing of an airliner somehow equates to Cheney giving aid and comfort to the enemy in Obama's eyes.
That's the same Obama that wants to close Gitmo, read terrorists their rights, give them the full panoply of rights afforded an American citizen, a government-provided lawyer, try them in civilian courts rather than by military tribunals, who holds out an "open hand" to Iran, and dithers for months over a "surge" in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban.
An idiot who can't get laid (the Pantybomber) decides the answer to his dilemma is to strap a bomb to his John Thomas and take 300 people with him, and when his plot is foiled, he's not a terrorist at all according to the Obama Administration, he's an "alleged" terrorist and an "isolated extremist". He is treated not as a war criminal, but as a criminal defendant, no different than your common car thief or shoplifter by the Obama National Security apparatus.
First off: the people on that plane saw him ignite his underwear, subdued him, and put the flames out. I'm not a lawyer, but if 50 people spot someone do something, then "alleged" is not the adjective I would apply to the wrong-doer, neither is the guy a "suspect" under those conditions. Fifty people can identify him as a) a bomber, and b) the asshole who tried to set it off.
Good luck to any defense attorney who can magically call the eyewitness testimony of 50 people into question. This guy isn't entitled to a trial by jury; he's entitled to a trial by waterboarding.
He's a goddamned terrorist, not a jaywalker.
Secondly: Dick Cheney is one of the guys who Obama says "tortured" the very guys he wants to give Miranda warnings to with waterboarding, rendition, sleep-deprivation, cold cells and loud noises (and Lord knows what else). Cheney has defended his support for such policies on a near-daily basis for nearly a decade. In fact, he's quite unashamed to admit that his only regret was that more of the same wasn't done, all to keep the country safer. He makes no bones about what was done, why it was done, and how it was done. The only thing he won't talk about is what the interrogators actually discovered and what was done with the information (except that one time about KSM, and the time he defended himself by daring Obama to release the files) .
Obama and his cohorts have attacked Cheney and former-President GW Bush for their actions in the War on Terrorism, vehemently, and in some of the most disgusting language you can think of, accusing them of being this-close to the Gestapo. Suddenly the men who Barack Hussein Obama claimed are the worst examples of human degeneracy, so totally out-of-touch with "our values", are now clasping terrorists to their bosom and babying them?
Get real. You can't have it both ways, Mr. President.
President Obama and his crowd of morons, like Napolitano, are going to get people killed. And no amount of spin is going to change or prevent that, and no attack on a prescient-Dick Cheney is going to save them from the legitimate criticism they deserve in the wake of this disaster.
I can only wonder how they'll blame Bush and Cheney when the body bags start filling up?
For a guy who is supposed to be so sharp, one wonders how Barack Hussein Obama misses the obvious. And then you remember that he's a politician and his whole world revolves around ignoring the obvious for that which is politically expedient.
Barack Obama doesn't get it because his politics don't account for a world full of evil men who want to kill Americans in large numbers. He compounds this error by surrounding himself with like-minded people who simply parrot whatever he wants to hear. Unfortunately, this self-constructed bubble won't get popped until there's a mushroom cloud over an American city. It usually takes something that difficult to miss to get a liberal's attention.
Dumbass.
Mark Steyn in National Review talks on this very subject.
This New York Post Editorial sums it up nicely.
According to Rassmussen, a majority of Americans now believes we are losing the War on Terror....for the first time ever... Nice going, Mr. President.
That's the same Obama that wants to close Gitmo, read terrorists their rights, give them the full panoply of rights afforded an American citizen, a government-provided lawyer, try them in civilian courts rather than by military tribunals, who holds out an "open hand" to Iran, and dithers for months over a "surge" in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban.
An idiot who can't get laid (the Pantybomber) decides the answer to his dilemma is to strap a bomb to his John Thomas and take 300 people with him, and when his plot is foiled, he's not a terrorist at all according to the Obama Administration, he's an "alleged" terrorist and an "isolated extremist". He is treated not as a war criminal, but as a criminal defendant, no different than your common car thief or shoplifter by the Obama National Security apparatus.
First off: the people on that plane saw him ignite his underwear, subdued him, and put the flames out. I'm not a lawyer, but if 50 people spot someone do something, then "alleged" is not the adjective I would apply to the wrong-doer, neither is the guy a "suspect" under those conditions. Fifty people can identify him as a) a bomber, and b) the asshole who tried to set it off.
Good luck to any defense attorney who can magically call the eyewitness testimony of 50 people into question. This guy isn't entitled to a trial by jury; he's entitled to a trial by waterboarding.
He's a goddamned terrorist, not a jaywalker.
Secondly: Dick Cheney is one of the guys who Obama says "tortured" the very guys he wants to give Miranda warnings to with waterboarding, rendition, sleep-deprivation, cold cells and loud noises (and Lord knows what else). Cheney has defended his support for such policies on a near-daily basis for nearly a decade. In fact, he's quite unashamed to admit that his only regret was that more of the same wasn't done, all to keep the country safer. He makes no bones about what was done, why it was done, and how it was done. The only thing he won't talk about is what the interrogators actually discovered and what was done with the information (except that one time about KSM, and the time he defended himself by daring Obama to release the files) .
Obama and his cohorts have attacked Cheney and former-President GW Bush for their actions in the War on Terrorism, vehemently, and in some of the most disgusting language you can think of, accusing them of being this-close to the Gestapo. Suddenly the men who Barack Hussein Obama claimed are the worst examples of human degeneracy, so totally out-of-touch with "our values", are now clasping terrorists to their bosom and babying them?
Get real. You can't have it both ways, Mr. President.
President Obama and his crowd of morons, like Napolitano, are going to get people killed. And no amount of spin is going to change or prevent that, and no attack on a prescient-Dick Cheney is going to save them from the legitimate criticism they deserve in the wake of this disaster.
I can only wonder how they'll blame Bush and Cheney when the body bags start filling up?
For a guy who is supposed to be so sharp, one wonders how Barack Hussein Obama misses the obvious. And then you remember that he's a politician and his whole world revolves around ignoring the obvious for that which is politically expedient.
Barack Obama doesn't get it because his politics don't account for a world full of evil men who want to kill Americans in large numbers. He compounds this error by surrounding himself with like-minded people who simply parrot whatever he wants to hear. Unfortunately, this self-constructed bubble won't get popped until there's a mushroom cloud over an American city. It usually takes something that difficult to miss to get a liberal's attention.
Dumbass.
Mark Steyn in National Review talks on this very subject.
This New York Post Editorial sums it up nicely.
According to Rassmussen, a majority of Americans now believes we are losing the War on Terror....for the first time ever... Nice going, Mr. President.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
CIA Outpost Bombed, 7 Killed...
The bomber was apparently not searched...at all. This is in Afghanistan, no less. The CIA let a complete stranger walk into a 'secret base' and blow himself up. As JammieWearingFool points out in his post, though, at least one Administration official finally used the word terrorism. I guess that's some kind of progress.
But where have we heard of this sort of thing before? Starting to see a pattern develop vis-a-vis Muslim bombers and the Government's security mindset? If someone had searched Pantybomber, he would have been caught. If someone had searched this guy, he would have been caught.
Lesson: search Muslims, find bombs. But apparently our government hasn't figured this out yet. It probably needs another 18-month-long-and-horrednously-expensive "study" to confirm this.
But where have we heard of this sort of thing before? Starting to see a pattern develop vis-a-vis Muslim bombers and the Government's security mindset? If someone had searched Pantybomber, he would have been caught. If someone had searched this guy, he would have been caught.
Lesson: search Muslims, find bombs. But apparently our government hasn't figured this out yet. It probably needs another 18-month-long-and-horrednously-expensive "study" to confirm this.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Undi-bomber Flotsam and Jetsom...
Just some odds and ends:
Maureen Dowd reaches for a cigarette, her Obama Orgasm has ended.
Obama finds out what I could have told him: The 9/10 mentality is alive and well in the Fed'ral Bureaucracy. This quick-and-dirty evaluation probably cost millions of (borrowed) dollars, when they could have gotten that evaluation here for a fraction of the cost. And they want ot Unionize these people?
But They'll get Health Care Right. Government can always be trusted to get the really important things right, can't they?
Maureen Dowd reaches for a cigarette, her Obama Orgasm has ended.
Obama finds out what I could have told him: The 9/10 mentality is alive and well in the Fed'ral Bureaucracy. This quick-and-dirty evaluation probably cost millions of (borrowed) dollars, when they could have gotten that evaluation here for a fraction of the cost. And they want ot Unionize these people?
But They'll get Health Care Right. Government can always be trusted to get the really important things right, can't they?
The REAL War...And Why No One Will Fight it...
It's not being waged on the battlefields of Ashcanistan or I-wreck. It is being fought in the minds of the political elite, and both parties being slightly smarter than a slime mold (but better dressed!), they have arrived at this fight completely unarmed.
The central point in the War on Terror is the mindset of the people who will formulate and enact The Policy by which that war will be fought. In order to make the proper decisions that will become The Policy, and ultimately The Strategy, the people making them will have to recognize certain facts:
a. The Enemy is unrelenting.
b. The Enemy is part of an identifiable group.
c. The Enemy operates on a different wavelength and by different rules than we do.
d. The Enemy is not interested in making a deal, he's not interested in anything we can offer him.
e. The Enemy considers negotiation and conciliation as forms of weakness, unless it helps him to achieve his goal, then the good-feeling this engenders in his opponent is simply another weapon at his disposal.
f. The Enemy's Goal is World Domination, defined as the ultimate ascendancy of his religion and culture, culminating in the reduction to all those outside this scope to a position of semi-slavery with few, if any, legal or natural rights.
g. The Enemy is willing to do almost anything to achieve these goals, his philosophy having elevated those goals from mere political aims to the route towards personal salvation.
h. The Enemy has been in a state of Undeclared War with the United States since 1979.
i. The Enemy believes it's victory is pre-ordained and inevitable.
j. The Enemy is merciless and pitiless, and has no regard for the humanity of his opponents.
That is the reality of Militant Islam, and the Islamonazi political regime that comes with it. That is the kind of foe we're supposed to be fighting; implacable, pitiless, single-minded, undistracted by abstract thoughts of justice, fairness or decency. He is armed to the teeth, and has a billion potential soldiers at his command. He lives by a strict code of religious discipline, and routinely clears his ranks of shirkers and traitors by means of murder. He holds his host culture hostage with a climate of fear, religious orthodoxy and systematic violence, which he claims is his ancestral right either handed down from God, or magically bestowed upon his as a legacy of (pick one or more) racism, religious discrimination, colonialism, economic exploitation, etc, etc, etc.
The response and policies of both major political opponents, viewed against these realities, leave much to be desired, and in fact, seem woefully inadequate to meet the challenge of people willing to ran airliners into office buildings, tape high explosives to their groin, or indiscriminately launch unguided rockets into residential neighborhoods.
And the reason is because the political leadership of this country, Repub or Dem, is too frightened or stupid, to tell itself the Truth about The Enemy. Because they fail to see what's so obviously plain, their policies and pronouncements, their actions and rhetoric, are divorced from reality. In the meantime, American troops pay the price with their limbs and lives. Americans pay more for their energy, more in taxes, and make ever-more personal sacrifices in order to support the War/NotWar, and have to deal with a government who's response to terrorism is to prevent blankets from being handed out, keep nail clippers off aircraft, and restrict the use of rest rooms.
Liberals (and I'm using the term loosely, because they really aren't) see the problem of terrorism in terms of law enforcement and social welfare. They do not see The Enemy as some sort of robotic, inhuman force driven by a rabid ideology, it views him through the same lens it applies to all problems. All problems, in the liberal world, can be solved by talking and symbolism, because ultimately, all issues arise from a lack of tolerance and a dearth of 'resources' -- it would rather perform 'social outreach' (Obama's "Open hand/Clenched fist"), and get to the "root causes" of the problem (Obama's Apologies to Islam for Western Civilizations very existence and intolerance), then open a "dialogue" with them (Negotiate with Admini-doo-dad without pre-conditions), and then negotiate "terms" (Discuss the size of the bribe required for "peace"). Liberalism would rather talk, and then attach a symbolic value to that talk which is of no real value, presuming that if Obama (for example) met face-to-face with Ama-dada-doo-dad that somehow gives the Iranians a feeling that we respect them as equals, and that having been satisfied with the illusion of equality, they'll be ready to cave to our other demands, they being reasonable chaps and all that. It absolves them of the Guilt they feel when they recognize that other people are making sacrifices they don't have the courage or intelligence to make themselves.
It's an extension of the "There are no truly Bad Boys..." argument; if you talk to the Islamic Radicals, show them some respect, get down on their level, and perhaps provide them with Midnight Basketball, they won't turn into cold-blooded killers. It's like watching your middle-aged dad try to relate to your teenaged friends; he starts calling everyone "Dog", pretends an interest in rap music, tries to fit in and "be hip", high-fives everyone, and he doesn't realize how ridiculous he looks, or how embarrassing it is for you.
When that strategy fails, they always fall back on the police. Liberals, despite their protests to the contrary, actually love the power of the police...when it's used in ways they want it to be. The greatest danger to American Society in the last 20 years was not, as Libs would have you believe, John Ashcroft armed with the Patriot Act --it would have been Hillary Clinton similarly equipped.
So, when talk fails, law enforcement suddenly becomes the only answer. To everything; Can't control handguns because of the pesky Second Amendment? Law enforcement is the answer! Can't fix the social problems created by bastardy, drug abuse and rampant street crime that were a result of Liberal policies in the first place? Law enforcement is the answer! Even when law enforcement isn't the answer, it's the answer -- as when Obama went to Columbus (I think) to pose in front of 25 new police officers whose jobs were "saved" by the Stimulus Bill...But I digress.
Law Enforcement must now protect us after the magical powers of talk and symbolism have failed. However, law enforcement must do it's job handcuffed by conditions the Liberal insist upon; you can't profile (that's racist), you can't treat terrorists like terrorists and prosecute them as such (lawyers solve all problems), you can't make mention of a certain religion or ethnicity (because that might make them feel persecuted), you aren't allowed to kill the enemy on the battlefield until you can prove with (incontrovertible evidence) that he is about to kill you.
This is why Obama (and before him Clinton and Carter, to be fair) cannot come to grips with the problem of terrorism. It's why the Liberal Elite have railed against the War on Terror since it's inception (even while cynically voting for the money to prosecute the War, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, voting for the Patriot Act and all the rest -- they were all symbolic, and politically-necessary, votes). Libs would rather talk than fight, and then when talking fails, pass the buck. They ultimately end up punishing the innocent while putting up yet one obstacle to bringing the guilty to heel.
On the other side, Republicans are laboring under the mistaken impression that "everyone is basically the same, underneath it all" which is kinda strange, since it's Liberals who insist on the truthfulness of that statement -- while they accuse Republicans of being racists, elitists and exclusionary.
In this case, they don't actually believe everyone is "the same" in terms of people having equal talents, capacities, needs, etc. Instead, they believe that all people have a fundamental yearning that makes them "the same", and that yearning is for "Freedom"(always defined in strictly-American terms) and that all one must to do is to "give people Freedom" and there is some human instinct that automatically 'knows' what that means -- and then it automatically follows that people unversed in the 4,000 year-old philosophies of democracy, free-market economics and political/religious pluralism will quickly accept them, and adapt their culture to accommodate them.
That this "bringing Freedom to those who yearn for it" must be accomplished at gunpoint, under the conditions and mentality of War, doesn't seem to occur to those who believe that "Inside every Afghan/Iraqi/Iranian/Radical Muslim is an American just dying to get out..." is telling. It means that they don't fundamentally understand the historical, philosophical and social conditions and processes which have resulted in their own "Freedom", and almost reduces the whole concept to the process to that by which you install software on your PC -- you simply put the disk in and the host system (in this case, culture) simply "knows" what to do with it once it's introduced. It allows them to frame the whole War on Terror as some Noble Crusade that is, ultimately, for everyone's benefit. It makes them feel better about risking (other people's) lives and cash.
Both, in their own ways, see Man as some sort of reasonable creature who knows where his bread is buttered, and which actually believes in concepts such as equality and peace.
It's why one side will insist on open-ended commitments of American blood and treasure trying to redeem the seemingly irredeemable, and the other will seek to delay the inevitable bloodshed by the process of holistic politics. Because the alternatives, being wrong (for Conservatives) and all-out War (for Liberals) are unthinkable to either, and so are the consequences.
If anyone in power today actually knew anything about history (something which is hardly studied honestly anymore) they would recognize that the Radical Islamists are no better, and in some cases infinitely worse, than the Nazis, the Soviet Communists or the Japanese Militarists.
Defeating those enemies required realism, it required great violence, and the expenditure of much blood, iron and treasure with the goal of laying them utterly low. This Islamic Enemy will only be defeated by the same means. They cannot be "reformed" until they have been defeated in unmistakable terms, which means the destruction of their culture by overwhelming force and great suffering, wherein it will become apparent to The Enemy that whatever he hopes to achieve is impossible, and that whatever he believes is a false system that cannot achieve his goals.
Nazi Germany had to be bombed flat and defeated militarily on two continents before Germans finally lost faith in National Socialism and surrendered. Japan had to be starved, terrorized and threatened with nuclear holocaust before the Japanese began to see that they weren't a divine people imbued with a natural right to conquest and Empire. Soviet Communism had to be bankrupted before it was seen as being unable to provide the standard of living that it promised to it's people, and which Capitalism did. The same needs to be done to Islamonazis.
They need to be reduced to the level of drinking out of mud puddles and picking the undigested thistles from camel dung before they begin to realize that, perhaps, all this stuff they're busily committing suicide for is not exactly the best way of life. It is only through abject misery that people begin to question their fundamental beliefs. One side won't inflict that misery, and the other will only inflict it up to a certain point, beyond that, neither is willing to go.
And that's why any War on Terror, any regime of Airport Security, no number of Patriot Acts and Guantanamo Bays, no negotiations, bribes or concessions, will ever solve the problem of Islamic Terrorism. Doing so requires great violence of the "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" type that both find barbaric. In the meantime, one will fight a public-relations campaign with guns to no definite end, and the other will be talking it's ass off and offering your virgin daughters up to the barbarians in order to avoid violence, and achieving even less.
Discuss.
The central point in the War on Terror is the mindset of the people who will formulate and enact The Policy by which that war will be fought. In order to make the proper decisions that will become The Policy, and ultimately The Strategy, the people making them will have to recognize certain facts:
a. The Enemy is unrelenting.
b. The Enemy is part of an identifiable group.
c. The Enemy operates on a different wavelength and by different rules than we do.
d. The Enemy is not interested in making a deal, he's not interested in anything we can offer him.
e. The Enemy considers negotiation and conciliation as forms of weakness, unless it helps him to achieve his goal, then the good-feeling this engenders in his opponent is simply another weapon at his disposal.
f. The Enemy's Goal is World Domination, defined as the ultimate ascendancy of his religion and culture, culminating in the reduction to all those outside this scope to a position of semi-slavery with few, if any, legal or natural rights.
g. The Enemy is willing to do almost anything to achieve these goals, his philosophy having elevated those goals from mere political aims to the route towards personal salvation.
h. The Enemy has been in a state of Undeclared War with the United States since 1979.
i. The Enemy believes it's victory is pre-ordained and inevitable.
j. The Enemy is merciless and pitiless, and has no regard for the humanity of his opponents.
That is the reality of Militant Islam, and the Islamonazi political regime that comes with it. That is the kind of foe we're supposed to be fighting; implacable, pitiless, single-minded, undistracted by abstract thoughts of justice, fairness or decency. He is armed to the teeth, and has a billion potential soldiers at his command. He lives by a strict code of religious discipline, and routinely clears his ranks of shirkers and traitors by means of murder. He holds his host culture hostage with a climate of fear, religious orthodoxy and systematic violence, which he claims is his ancestral right either handed down from God, or magically bestowed upon his as a legacy of (pick one or more) racism, religious discrimination, colonialism, economic exploitation, etc, etc, etc.
The response and policies of both major political opponents, viewed against these realities, leave much to be desired, and in fact, seem woefully inadequate to meet the challenge of people willing to ran airliners into office buildings, tape high explosives to their groin, or indiscriminately launch unguided rockets into residential neighborhoods.
And the reason is because the political leadership of this country, Repub or Dem, is too frightened or stupid, to tell itself the Truth about The Enemy. Because they fail to see what's so obviously plain, their policies and pronouncements, their actions and rhetoric, are divorced from reality. In the meantime, American troops pay the price with their limbs and lives. Americans pay more for their energy, more in taxes, and make ever-more personal sacrifices in order to support the War/NotWar, and have to deal with a government who's response to terrorism is to prevent blankets from being handed out, keep nail clippers off aircraft, and restrict the use of rest rooms.
Liberals (and I'm using the term loosely, because they really aren't) see the problem of terrorism in terms of law enforcement and social welfare. They do not see The Enemy as some sort of robotic, inhuman force driven by a rabid ideology, it views him through the same lens it applies to all problems. All problems, in the liberal world, can be solved by talking and symbolism, because ultimately, all issues arise from a lack of tolerance and a dearth of 'resources' -- it would rather perform 'social outreach' (Obama's "Open hand/Clenched fist"), and get to the "root causes" of the problem (Obama's Apologies to Islam for Western Civilizations very existence and intolerance), then open a "dialogue" with them (Negotiate with Admini-doo-dad without pre-conditions), and then negotiate "terms" (Discuss the size of the bribe required for "peace"). Liberalism would rather talk, and then attach a symbolic value to that talk which is of no real value, presuming that if Obama (for example) met face-to-face with Ama-dada-doo-dad that somehow gives the Iranians a feeling that we respect them as equals, and that having been satisfied with the illusion of equality, they'll be ready to cave to our other demands, they being reasonable chaps and all that. It absolves them of the Guilt they feel when they recognize that other people are making sacrifices they don't have the courage or intelligence to make themselves.
It's an extension of the "There are no truly Bad Boys..." argument; if you talk to the Islamic Radicals, show them some respect, get down on their level, and perhaps provide them with Midnight Basketball, they won't turn into cold-blooded killers. It's like watching your middle-aged dad try to relate to your teenaged friends; he starts calling everyone "Dog", pretends an interest in rap music, tries to fit in and "be hip", high-fives everyone, and he doesn't realize how ridiculous he looks, or how embarrassing it is for you.
When that strategy fails, they always fall back on the police. Liberals, despite their protests to the contrary, actually love the power of the police...when it's used in ways they want it to be. The greatest danger to American Society in the last 20 years was not, as Libs would have you believe, John Ashcroft armed with the Patriot Act --it would have been Hillary Clinton similarly equipped.
So, when talk fails, law enforcement suddenly becomes the only answer. To everything; Can't control handguns because of the pesky Second Amendment? Law enforcement is the answer! Can't fix the social problems created by bastardy, drug abuse and rampant street crime that were a result of Liberal policies in the first place? Law enforcement is the answer! Even when law enforcement isn't the answer, it's the answer -- as when Obama went to Columbus (I think) to pose in front of 25 new police officers whose jobs were "saved" by the Stimulus Bill...But I digress.
Law Enforcement must now protect us after the magical powers of talk and symbolism have failed. However, law enforcement must do it's job handcuffed by conditions the Liberal insist upon; you can't profile (that's racist), you can't treat terrorists like terrorists and prosecute them as such (lawyers solve all problems), you can't make mention of a certain religion or ethnicity (because that might make them feel persecuted), you aren't allowed to kill the enemy on the battlefield until you can prove with (incontrovertible evidence) that he is about to kill you.
This is why Obama (and before him Clinton and Carter, to be fair) cannot come to grips with the problem of terrorism. It's why the Liberal Elite have railed against the War on Terror since it's inception (even while cynically voting for the money to prosecute the War, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, voting for the Patriot Act and all the rest -- they were all symbolic, and politically-necessary, votes). Libs would rather talk than fight, and then when talking fails, pass the buck. They ultimately end up punishing the innocent while putting up yet one obstacle to bringing the guilty to heel.
On the other side, Republicans are laboring under the mistaken impression that "everyone is basically the same, underneath it all" which is kinda strange, since it's Liberals who insist on the truthfulness of that statement -- while they accuse Republicans of being racists, elitists and exclusionary.
In this case, they don't actually believe everyone is "the same" in terms of people having equal talents, capacities, needs, etc. Instead, they believe that all people have a fundamental yearning that makes them "the same", and that yearning is for "Freedom"(always defined in strictly-American terms) and that all one must to do is to "give people Freedom" and there is some human instinct that automatically 'knows' what that means -- and then it automatically follows that people unversed in the 4,000 year-old philosophies of democracy, free-market economics and political/religious pluralism will quickly accept them, and adapt their culture to accommodate them.
That this "bringing Freedom to those who yearn for it" must be accomplished at gunpoint, under the conditions and mentality of War, doesn't seem to occur to those who believe that "Inside every Afghan/Iraqi/Iranian/Radical Muslim is an American just dying to get out..." is telling. It means that they don't fundamentally understand the historical, philosophical and social conditions and processes which have resulted in their own "Freedom", and almost reduces the whole concept to the process to that by which you install software on your PC -- you simply put the disk in and the host system (in this case, culture) simply "knows" what to do with it once it's introduced. It allows them to frame the whole War on Terror as some Noble Crusade that is, ultimately, for everyone's benefit. It makes them feel better about risking (other people's) lives and cash.
Both, in their own ways, see Man as some sort of reasonable creature who knows where his bread is buttered, and which actually believes in concepts such as equality and peace.
It's why one side will insist on open-ended commitments of American blood and treasure trying to redeem the seemingly irredeemable, and the other will seek to delay the inevitable bloodshed by the process of holistic politics. Because the alternatives, being wrong (for Conservatives) and all-out War (for Liberals) are unthinkable to either, and so are the consequences.
If anyone in power today actually knew anything about history (something which is hardly studied honestly anymore) they would recognize that the Radical Islamists are no better, and in some cases infinitely worse, than the Nazis, the Soviet Communists or the Japanese Militarists.
Defeating those enemies required realism, it required great violence, and the expenditure of much blood, iron and treasure with the goal of laying them utterly low. This Islamic Enemy will only be defeated by the same means. They cannot be "reformed" until they have been defeated in unmistakable terms, which means the destruction of their culture by overwhelming force and great suffering, wherein it will become apparent to The Enemy that whatever he hopes to achieve is impossible, and that whatever he believes is a false system that cannot achieve his goals.
Nazi Germany had to be bombed flat and defeated militarily on two continents before Germans finally lost faith in National Socialism and surrendered. Japan had to be starved, terrorized and threatened with nuclear holocaust before the Japanese began to see that they weren't a divine people imbued with a natural right to conquest and Empire. Soviet Communism had to be bankrupted before it was seen as being unable to provide the standard of living that it promised to it's people, and which Capitalism did. The same needs to be done to Islamonazis.
They need to be reduced to the level of drinking out of mud puddles and picking the undigested thistles from camel dung before they begin to realize that, perhaps, all this stuff they're busily committing suicide for is not exactly the best way of life. It is only through abject misery that people begin to question their fundamental beliefs. One side won't inflict that misery, and the other will only inflict it up to a certain point, beyond that, neither is willing to go.
And that's why any War on Terror, any regime of Airport Security, no number of Patriot Acts and Guantanamo Bays, no negotiations, bribes or concessions, will ever solve the problem of Islamic Terrorism. Doing so requires great violence of the "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" type that both find barbaric. In the meantime, one will fight a public-relations campaign with guns to no definite end, and the other will be talking it's ass off and offering your virgin daughters up to the barbarians in order to avoid violence, and achieving even less.
Discuss.
Day-Late, Meet Dollar-Short...
Continued fallout from the Undi-bomber: Barack Obama emerges from seclusion to, finally, admit what everyone with the same sense God gave a retarded Irish Setter already knew.
The System Failed -- despite Janet Napolitano's insistence to the contrary, and it needs to be fixed.
The man who famously attacked George W. Bush as being too stubborn to admit mistakes, and too slow to do the right thing has, four days after a near-major disaster, decided to admit a mistake and, indeed, pledge that he will take corrective action. But only because he had to; Apparent inaction and a seemingly-lackadaisical attitude on terrorism made him look bad on TV.
Now, in this instance, I can't (completely) kick the crap out of Barack Obama for anything except poor leadership. He didn't create the Department of Homeland (In-)Security, and he doesn't personally maintain the Watch Lists, nor does he screen luggage and passengers. Be fair. His sin was to not interrupt his vacation to let the public know he was on the job with this thing, and that he was going to get to the bottom of it all, while the Keystone Kops (Gibbs and Napolitano) made the whole Administration look more stupid and rudderless than it usually is. He delivered a terse press-release-disguised-as-a-serious-Presidential-moment, and then left...only to have to correct himself, his people, and his position, all within three days, and then he had to try to spin this cluster-fuck as a victory for the good guys, somehow, with a straight face. All without making reference to terror, terrorism, terrorists, War on Terrorism, Islam, Radical Islam or them Al'Qeada people, because that would undermine his whole rationale for the non-War on non-Terror.
That's a really hard juggling act, and he couldn't do it -- and it showed. If Barack Obama deserves a swift kick for anything, it's for his stubborn refusal to face reality. In the meantime, we find out that TSA and another Border agency don't have people in charge. The TSA top job is open because the person nominated has not been voted on by the Senate. The Democrats claim that Sen. DeMint (R) is holding the nomination process up, all by himself, despite the fact there's 60 democratic senators who could vote for this guy in a heartbeat, because DeMint is concerned the guy would unionize all TSA employees. Must look to the safety of the unions before the safety of the citizenry, right?
In light of what we've just seen, that would be a singularly bad idea. We need efficiency, professionalism and dedication from the TSA... not more coffee breaks and shorter working hours. So, even after the security of an airliner has been compromised, the democrats are still playing politics with the security of other airliners, and blaming a republican for it. Go figure.
The truth is that passing a National Eyedrops and Band aids plan was considered such a priority that it has apparently brought all other business before the Senate to a screeching halt. Not that having a head at TSA would have stopped this particular douchebag, but it's kind of stupid that a year after Obama takes office, he can't fill cabinet posts with a democrat-controlled Congress because of Healthcare.
Now, the truth about Homeland Security.
I've said it before, and I must say it again; this is an amalgamation of several government agencies under one roof. If you thought the mayhem and stupidity of a single government organization could be bad, wait until you see what happens when you merge several into a Super Agency -- and make it a cabinet-level post.
The DHS was never designed to do the things we expect it to do. It's not designed to protect the homeland (what is this, Soviet Russia?), it's not designed to deliver disaster relief, it's not designed to screen luggage, it's not designed to share information. It is the creation of bureaucrats and politicians in panic mode, and as such, it's main purpose is to give people the impression that someone is doing something.
This is why FEMA failed during Katrina. It's why TSA failed to catch Undibomber. It's why the State Department and CIA each had a file on the dude that one else ever saw. DHS is very good at taking knitting needles, nail clippers, shampoo and cigarette lighters from people who offer grudging co-operation. It absolutely sucks at finding terrorists. It has, instead, decided that American servicemen returning from overseas are more of a threat than Islamic Fundamentalsts. Identifying and catching terrorists is like... hard... and like any good organization drawn up the Senate Men's Room and lavishly-funded, it does so badly -- when it even bothers to. Doing that might mean an application of common sense, which would lead to profiling, which pisses Je$$e Jackass off.
DHS's response in the aftermath of Pantybomber was classic Washington nonsense: first it claimed a victory that it had not earned ("The System Worked...an Alert and Courageous Citizenry..."), and then it overreacted after the metaphorical horse had defecated and bolted the barn (No Blankets, No Bathrooms, No Breathing for the last hour of a flight). That's how politicians and bureaucrats behave -- and DHS is the brainchild of politicians and bureaucrats, so no surprise there.
Which means that, ultimately, the safety of the American Public rests with...the American Public. As always. You have been ill-served by your government, and will continue to be, until there is a hue and cry and heads roll, starting with Janet Napolitano, and then with Obama -- if his nominee for TSA has been held up for 11 months, then nominate another. If 60 democrats in the Senate can't find the time to vote for him (basically just going through the motions), then you don't have the time to go to Hawaii. I guess Barack is finding out, the hard way, that this President thing is a 24/7 job.
Make sure you take out travel insurance every time you fly so long as the government is in charge of airline and airport security. I wish you luck.
The System Failed -- despite Janet Napolitano's insistence to the contrary, and it needs to be fixed.
The man who famously attacked George W. Bush as being too stubborn to admit mistakes, and too slow to do the right thing has, four days after a near-major disaster, decided to admit a mistake and, indeed, pledge that he will take corrective action. But only because he had to; Apparent inaction and a seemingly-lackadaisical attitude on terrorism made him look bad on TV.
Now, in this instance, I can't (completely) kick the crap out of Barack Obama for anything except poor leadership. He didn't create the Department of Homeland (In-)Security, and he doesn't personally maintain the Watch Lists, nor does he screen luggage and passengers. Be fair. His sin was to not interrupt his vacation to let the public know he was on the job with this thing, and that he was going to get to the bottom of it all, while the Keystone Kops (Gibbs and Napolitano) made the whole Administration look more stupid and rudderless than it usually is. He delivered a terse press-release-disguised-as-a-serious-Presidential-moment, and then left...only to have to correct himself, his people, and his position, all within three days, and then he had to try to spin this cluster-fuck as a victory for the good guys, somehow, with a straight face. All without making reference to terror, terrorism, terrorists, War on Terrorism, Islam, Radical Islam or them Al'Qeada people, because that would undermine his whole rationale for the non-War on non-Terror.
That's a really hard juggling act, and he couldn't do it -- and it showed. If Barack Obama deserves a swift kick for anything, it's for his stubborn refusal to face reality. In the meantime, we find out that TSA and another Border agency don't have people in charge. The TSA top job is open because the person nominated has not been voted on by the Senate. The Democrats claim that Sen. DeMint (R) is holding the nomination process up, all by himself, despite the fact there's 60 democratic senators who could vote for this guy in a heartbeat, because DeMint is concerned the guy would unionize all TSA employees. Must look to the safety of the unions before the safety of the citizenry, right?
In light of what we've just seen, that would be a singularly bad idea. We need efficiency, professionalism and dedication from the TSA... not more coffee breaks and shorter working hours. So, even after the security of an airliner has been compromised, the democrats are still playing politics with the security of other airliners, and blaming a republican for it. Go figure.
The truth is that passing a National Eyedrops and Band aids plan was considered such a priority that it has apparently brought all other business before the Senate to a screeching halt. Not that having a head at TSA would have stopped this particular douchebag, but it's kind of stupid that a year after Obama takes office, he can't fill cabinet posts with a democrat-controlled Congress because of Healthcare.
Now, the truth about Homeland Security.
I've said it before, and I must say it again; this is an amalgamation of several government agencies under one roof. If you thought the mayhem and stupidity of a single government organization could be bad, wait until you see what happens when you merge several into a Super Agency -- and make it a cabinet-level post.
The DHS was never designed to do the things we expect it to do. It's not designed to protect the homeland (what is this, Soviet Russia?), it's not designed to deliver disaster relief, it's not designed to screen luggage, it's not designed to share information. It is the creation of bureaucrats and politicians in panic mode, and as such, it's main purpose is to give people the impression that someone is doing something.
This is why FEMA failed during Katrina. It's why TSA failed to catch Undibomber. It's why the State Department and CIA each had a file on the dude that one else ever saw. DHS is very good at taking knitting needles, nail clippers, shampoo and cigarette lighters from people who offer grudging co-operation. It absolutely sucks at finding terrorists. It has, instead, decided that American servicemen returning from overseas are more of a threat than Islamic Fundamentalsts. Identifying and catching terrorists is like... hard... and like any good organization drawn up the Senate Men's Room and lavishly-funded, it does so badly -- when it even bothers to. Doing that might mean an application of common sense, which would lead to profiling, which pisses Je$$e Jackass off.
DHS's response in the aftermath of Pantybomber was classic Washington nonsense: first it claimed a victory that it had not earned ("The System Worked...an Alert and Courageous Citizenry..."), and then it overreacted after the metaphorical horse had defecated and bolted the barn (No Blankets, No Bathrooms, No Breathing for the last hour of a flight). That's how politicians and bureaucrats behave -- and DHS is the brainchild of politicians and bureaucrats, so no surprise there.
Which means that, ultimately, the safety of the American Public rests with...the American Public. As always. You have been ill-served by your government, and will continue to be, until there is a hue and cry and heads roll, starting with Janet Napolitano, and then with Obama -- if his nominee for TSA has been held up for 11 months, then nominate another. If 60 democrats in the Senate can't find the time to vote for him (basically just going through the motions), then you don't have the time to go to Hawaii. I guess Barack is finding out, the hard way, that this President thing is a 24/7 job.
Make sure you take out travel insurance every time you fly so long as the government is in charge of airline and airport security. I wish you luck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)