Archive for the ‘Military’ Category
TSA: It’s Called Profiling, Do It–UPDATED
Saturday, December 26th, 2009
So, the TSA’s brilliant plan is to torture (in the liberal use of the word) all passengers to give us more of an illusion of safety. We weren’t safe before. Any moron would know that. And most people flying get that which is why they think about their own safety when boarding a plane. People take mental note now, of passengers, and go on with life–ready to act if necessary.
The solution to the terrorist problem is profiling. And then, actually use the profile.*
That’s right. Profiling. If a psychotic band of Christian, blond, blue-eyed teenage girls joined a death cult intent on killing people with laser beams blasting from their bras, guess what? I’d say search every blond teenage girl and leave the rest of the passengers stuck with airline travel alone.
As it is, this terror candidate was fairly obvious profile-wise. The UK Telegraph notes:
How can a Muslim student, whose name appears on a US law enforcement database, be granted a visa to travel to America, allegedly acquire an explosive device from Yemen, a country awash with al-Qaeda terrorists, and avoid detection from the world’s most sophisticated spy agencies?
Gee, why didn’t he make it easier and plaster a sign on his chest? But the thing is, TSA agents can’t be politically incorrect. Oh no! That might offend the sensibilities of middle eastern, Muslim garbed students everywhere. So granny gets X-rayed and searched and Abdullah, wearing Yemeni suicide bomber underwear makes it through he screening process unscathed.
After the Ft. Hood Muslim terrorist shooter basically trumpeted his intentions and was ignored by the military, I’d say it’s time to reevaluate our assessment of threat assessments.
It’s not enough to be on a watch list if no one is watching. It’s not enough to understand the terrorist profile if no one uses the profiling for fear of being called a bigot.
The enemy will get more subtle. Michael Haltman says:
Abdul Mutallab was charged today with trying to blow up an aircraft, and with willfully putting a destructive device onboard. The chemical that he had taped to his lower exteemities is PETN, also know as pentaerythritol. This chemical is reported to be one of the most powerful explosives, typically used in such devices as land mines.
In a test for future airport screening, the chemical was not picked up by magnetometers, and he was not forced to undergo a full body scan. The liquid that was used to attempt and ignite the chemical was below the ounce limit that would have prohibited it from be carried onboard.
I wonder how many old ladies or mothers were forced to do a full body scan. Why? Why the charade? We all know who is perpetrating these attacks. We cannot be blind to other possibilities. Still, for now, young Muslim, educated men seem to be the weapon of choice.
It’s called profiling. Do it.
*Please note that I get that this is an international flight. Still, shouldn’t America bear some responsibility for who we let fly into our country. We cannot rely on foreigners to value our lives like we value our lives. Also, this guy was a posterboy for terrorism. Obvious.
UPDATED:
And Donald Douglas skewers the left for their predictable, mindless response to this attack:
But even in the absence of evidence of al Qaeda’s ties to the Abdul Mutallab, we know the nature of al Qaeda’s threat has been transformed significantly since September 11, 2001. Audrey Kurth Cronin, an expert on international terrorism, and the author of “How al-Qaida Ends: The Decline and Demise of Terrorist Groups,” has noted recently that al Qaeda today is a fractured organization with a decentralized leadership. The group is more of an idea than an actual entity. As such, there’s little doubt of the seriousness of the threat, since follow-on organizations will likely take up the initative where Osama bin Laden left off. Indeed, Kurth Cronin suggests that while al Qaeda’s capabilities have been significantly weakened, and Western leaders have indeed suffered from an over-emphasis on leadership decapitation, “Even in its diminished state, al Qaeda and its franchises remain armed and dangerous.”
Read the whole thing.
UPDATED AGAIN:
Kathleen has a new site KathleenMcKinley.com and also a link to the CNN interview with one of the people who subdued the terrorist. But really, I can’t help but noticing Fredrika Whitfield’s belt. Really, Fredrika? I mean if the First Lady jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you jump, too?
Podcast: Griffith & Blue Dogs, Liberals, And President Obama Selling Out American Security–UPDATED
Wednesday, December 23rd, 2009Ray McKinney of the PAC That Dog Won’t Hunt talked about Rep. Parker Griffith who switched from Democrat to Republican yesterday. What about the rest of the other Blue Dogs?
Then, my childhood friend Glynn Washington joins me from Oakland, California to discuss liberal politics from a liberal perspective and also his new project with public radio: Snap Judgment.
Finally, constitutional scholar Clyde Middleton of the Patriot Room talks about President Obama’s executive order reversing a policy in place since Ronald Reagan and what it means. For more, read the joint piece he and Steve Schippert wrote at Threatswatch.org. More here and here. UPDATED: Andy McCarthy asks:
Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies? Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law-enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize?
Jay McKinney of ThatDogWontHunt.org talks Blue Dogs, Glynn Washington of Snap Judgment! on Public Radio explains liberalism and Clyde Middleton of the Patriot Room talks about President Obama’s Executive Order and the implications for Americans being accused of international crimes.
Download MP3
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
Don’t Get Pregnant While In Iraq
Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009You know what? I have no patience for a female soldier who gets pregnant while on active-duty. You are a soldier. It is your job. You chose this job. It’s called birth control. It’s called make him glove up even if you’re on birth control.
More here.
Podcast: Why Are Milblogs Going Silent? What Is Going On With Healthcare? Hope For Dateless Men
Wednesday, December 16th, 2009John Hawkins of Right Wing News and Blake Powers, aka Laughing Wolf of Black Five and Laughing Wolf join me to discuss the plight of bloggers in the military, PTSD, the health care debacle and why Democrats are in big trouble with it and ….hope for men who want a woman.
Download MP3
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
Gitmo To Chicago
Tuesday, December 15th, 2009For your consideration:
Alexander Statement on Proposal to Relocate Gitmo Detainees to American Soil
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, today issued the following statement on the administration’s proposal to move detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the United States:
“Congress made it very clear to the administration that bringing dangerous terrorists onto American soil is not only the wrong thing to do, but goes against the wishes of the American people. I have yet to hear one good reason why moving these terrorists from off our shores right into the heart of our country makes us safer.”
Safer isn’t the point. Political appeasement is the point.
UPDATED:
Mike Pence’s thoughts:
“By moving known terrorists to American soil, the Obama Administration is putting international public relations ahead of public safety. How does closing Guantanamo Bay make us safer? How does moving over seventy known terrorists, to a facility in my beloved heartland of this country, make our families more safe? And how does it even make sense? Mr. President: rescind this order; reconsider your decision, put the safety and security of the American people ahead of international public opinion.” –Mike Pence
An Actual Hitler Story: Seriously, Not A Politician Like Hitler, Actual Hitler
Monday, December 7th, 2009Hitler’s body was burned by the KGB:
Adolf Hitler’s remains were burned and dumped into an East German river by Soviet agents 25 years after the end of World War II, Interfax reported, citing Vasily Khristoforov, the Federal Security Service’s chief archivist.
The remains of Hitler, his companion Eva Braun and the family of Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels were destroyed in April 1970 on the secret orders of then-KGB chief Yuri Andropov, the Russian news agency said today. Andropov went on to become Soviet leader from 1982 until his death in 1984.
The Soviets were concerned that graves of Third Reich leaders might one day attract Nazi sympathizers, Interfax said. The remains were burned and dumped into the Biederitz River, outside the eastern city of Magdeburg, according to the news service.
So, Hitler got torched. I’m glad he’s dust. The thought of his remains remaining is disturbing. Some souls shouldn’t exist.
President Obama Reaches Out To Code Pink After His Afghanistan Speech?
Monday, December 7th, 2009Big government has a very concerning story regarding anti-war activists Code Pink and their relationship with the administration:
In a move by the Obama administration that is gallingly cynical and would be considered treasonous in a less progressive era, a message sent by Code Pink and an article published by the left wing online publication AlertNet indicates the White House is working with the left wing terrorist support group Code Pink to agitate the public and undermine President Barack Obama’s newly announced Afghanistan war policy.
Top Obama funder, Code Pink co-founder and terrorist supporter Jodie Evans wrote at AlterNet of a White House initiated phone call she received last week, two days after Obama’s Afghan war speech at West Point. The Obama official said the administration wanted to “consult” with Code Pink in response to the group’s e-mail campaign targeting the White House with opposition to the president’s surge strategy.
However, it appears that the Obama administration was already in consultation with Code Pink before this reported phone call. In its message to supporters, Code Pink guaranteed their e-mails would be read by someone in the White House.
“It’s time to turn our outrage into sustained action. Use our quick and easy tool to send your response to Obama’s announcement to the Executive Office of the President–where it will be read by a member of Obama’s team! Let them know that you are mad as hell and will push back on the escalation. It is our job to continue to press them as we move forward.”
In the article at AlterNet, Jodie Evans gloats about Code Pink’s success, noting the Obama official called “three minutes” after the e-mail campaign was launched.
In an email exchange with a friend who defended the president, I said this:
I think that Obama’s decision could have gone either way. He was waiting for support to diminish as the economy got worse. It didn’t. The American people are very uncomfortable leaving people ala Vietnam. So. He waited. Well, he fiddled around with an agreement with the Taleeban. That didn’t work either. And word came out about it…people were upset.
So, Obama made the decision he didn’t want to make.
Now. He wants this thing over in the worst possible way. The only way for it to happen is to look like he tried while turning the will of the people against it. That’s it.
He can have the best generals, and does. He figures, well, if I’m in this stupid war, might as well have good guys doing it. Maybe I’ll be surprised and we’ll win or something. Meanwhile, I’ll foment discontent just in case so I can get the guys out before re-election.
It has been suggested that I’m far too cynical. President Obama acted as though he gave the speech against his better judgment. It wasn’t a call to victory. It was a bone thrown until the political climate changed.
And if the Code Pinkers can accelerate the political climate change…well, all to the good. It would help the President.
President Obama’s Afghanistan Speech: Incoherence Wrapped In A Conundrum
Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009A couple thoughts:
The New York Times got it right: It was two speeches.
The first, to appease the Left included tasty tidbits:
No torture, Gitmo, successful conclusion, pull-out.
The second, to placate anyone who loves freedom and protecting the innocent:
Troop increase, generals, brave, Iraq.
The speech inspired vitriol from the left because their take-home message was:
Escalation
The speech irritated the right because their take-home message was:
This will be over in 18 months no matter the mess it leaves.
Often, presidents are criticized for taking the center way and that making people unhappy is the natural course of politics. President Obama certainly looked like he knew this speech would be ill-received by all who heard it–except for the uncomfortable pauses before ovation lines. (Some didn’t happen at all.) But his speech didn’t articulate a center way. It articulate a nebulous way.
The speech was an ideological mess. It wasn’t even pragmatic. It was a political swing. This way will make these people feel better. Whoosh! This way will make these people feel better. Whoosh! Except, no one feels better and many feel frustrated.
Steve Schippert in the Washington Times says:
The prescribed influx of much-needed American warriors onto the battlefield is clearly and rightly the good. And the good can withstand the bad, a Taliban enemy in the absence of reliable partners in the Afghan and Pakistani governments.
But the glimmering light of the good will surely be eclipsed by the ugly, an incoherence of strategy beneath the surface sheen of a surge. The devil is always in the details.
Sending additional troops, whether decided upon from intellectual deliberation or from political calculation, is the right call. The details of their usage, the never-ending questions of “exit strategy” and the general unwillingness to commit to victory is wholly unacceptable.
As the commander in chief, the president must act with a clarity of mind and mission. In doing so, he sends a message that the American people will do what is necessary, for as long as necessary, to defeat those who would oppress others or hide while plotting additional attacks on innocents in Afghanistan, Pakistan or here in the United States. The necessity in doing so should be clear, as the Afghan people are resistant to American aid due to the questionable commitment we’ve made to them. In this vital aspect, the commander in chief has failed.
The Left likes to imagine the President’s inexact language and circumlocution as some form of rarefied, nuanced language. He’s intelligent. He doesn’t speak in absolutes. He uses big words like “successful conclusion” [whatever that means] rather than victory [self-evident: we win, you lose].
The problem is that words communicate intent. And in this case, the intent is muddied. One can’t help but leave the speech thinking that President Obama is putting troops in Afghanistan as a short term stop gap until something becomes politically obvious–public will turns entirely against the war effort, for example.
Will the Left denounce President Obama and start marching in the streets? We’ll see how righteous they really are. Do they believe the President when he says that in 18 months, this is over? This speech, ultimately, seemed like President Obama buying time–for himself.
Thomas Freidman Admits There’s An Anti-American Narrative, He Just Let’s Himself Off The Hook
Sunday, November 29th, 2009Wow. After you get past the shock that a liberal admits there is an anti-American narrative, chew on the fact that the liberal Thomas Friedman still can’t admit how his own ideology feeds and nourishes the anti-American narrative:
Have no doubt: we punched a fist into the Arab/Muslim world after 9/11, partly to send a message of deterrence, but primarily to destroy two tyrannical regimes — the Taliban and the Baathists — and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics. In the process, we did some stupid and bad things. But for every Abu Ghraib, our soldiers and diplomats perpetrated a million acts of kindness aimed at giving Arabs and Muslims a better chance to succeed with modernity and to elect their own leaders.
The Narrative was concocted by jihadists to obscure that.
It’s working. As a Jordanian-born counterterrorism expert, who asked to remain anonymous, said to me: “This narrative is now omnipresent in Arab and Muslim communities in the region and in migrant communities around the world. These communities are bombarded with this narrative in huge doses and on a daily basis. [It says] the West, and right now mostly the U.S. and Israel, is single-handedly and completely responsible for all the grievances of the Arab and the Muslim worlds. Ironically, the vast majority of the media outlets targeting these communities are Arab-government owned — mostly from the Gulf.”
This narrative suits Arab governments. It allows them to deflect onto America all of their people’s grievances over why their countries are falling behind. And it suits Al Qaeda, which doesn’t need much organization anymore — just push out The Narrative over the Web and satellite TV, let it heat up humiliated, frustrated or socially alienated Muslim males, and one or two will open fire on their own. See: Major Hasan.
Let’s see, Bush is evil. The elevation of Abu Grahib. Newsweek publishing the flushed Koran accounts and Friedman is putting the blame on the Arab press?
You have got to be kidding me.
I’m not as inclined to let Friedman off the hook as Don Surber. This back pedaling looks a lot like a subtle defense of President Obama the day before he pushes the surge in Afghanistan. Asking for more troops on the backdrop of losing more troops, seems a lot like justification to me.
And it’s charity Friedman and the liberal elites would never have extended to George Bush. And, by the way, it doesn’t take a freaking genius to know that Hasan is a terrorist. It’s rather self-evident.
The KSM Show Trial
Wednesday, November 18th, 2009I keep thinking that the Obama Administration is smarter. It’s painful thinking that they’re this stupid:
Of all the infuriating aspects of the decision to transfer five 9/11 war criminals to civilian federal court, the one that grates most is the contention that the Obama administration is finally moving forward after “eight years of delay” — as Attorney General Eric Holder put it at his Friday press conference — during which the Bush administration managed to complete only three military-commission trials.
This is chutzpah writ large. The principal reason there were so few military trials is the tireless campaign conducted by leftist lawyers to derail military tribunals by challenging them in the courts. Many of those lawyers are now working for the Obama Justice Department. That includes Holder, whose firm, Covington & Burling, volunteered its services to at least 18 of America’s enemies in lawsuits they brought against the American people. (During 2007 alone, Covington contributed more than 3,000 hours of free, top-flight legal assistance to our enemy detainees.)
Read everything from Andy McCarthy about this. And listen to this podcast to get all the background from McCarthy.
There is no defense for moving the trial to federal, civilian court in NYC. Jim Geraghty pulls some testimony from Eric Holder’s testimony today:
Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa): “I don’t think you can say that failure to convict is not an option, when we have juries in this country.”
Attorney General Eric Holder: I have thought about that possibility. Congress has passed legislation that would not allow the release of these individuals in this country. If there is not a successful conclusion to this trial, that would not mean that this person would be released into this country . . .
So, no matter what, KSM is going to be convicted and/or held? And how much money is going to be spent on the show trial?
Instapundit puts forth the theory that this is all a diversion to distract from the stealth care bill–Harry Reid is trying to bring the bill up for debate.
A distraction? An attempt to “regain moral stature”. A bone thrown to leftists?
