Is Trying 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed The Dumbest Obama Idea Yet?
Friday, November 13th, 2009Trying the evil Sheikh in New York City under the American legal system is the dumbest idea ever in the history of dumb presidential legal ideas and that’s when compared to the biggest poop pile of dumb Obama ideas generally which are the worst in any American presidency ever.*
If you disagree, please share an example of a dumber Obama idea.
*I keep wondering if perhaps that I might be being hyperbolic here. Maybe I should rewrite that obnoxious run-on sentence and couch a little. Maybe I should say,”It seems most unwise to bring a mastermind terrorist to New York City, home of the injustice, try to seek a fair trial, give him the right to explore all evidence against him, fund his defense by the taxpayers, etc. Most, problematic, that.” But no. It’s just plain dumb. Or insane.
The Islamofascist Everyone Knew: “You would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole.”
Thursday, November 12th, 2009From NPR:
Starting in the spring of 2008, key officials from Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences held a series of meetings and conversations, in part about Maj. Nidal Hasan, the man accused of killing 13 people and wounding dozens of others last week during a shooting spree at Fort Hood. One of the questions they pondered: Was Hasan psychotic?
“Put it this way,” says one official familiar with the conversations that took place. “Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole.”
And:
Hasan had been a trouble spot on officials’ radar since he started training at Walter Reed, six years earlier. Several officials confirm that supervisors had repeatedly given him poor evaluations and warned him that he was doing substandard work.
Both fellow students and faculty were deeply troubled by Hasan’s behavior — which they variously called disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid. The officials say he antagonized some students and faculty by espousing what they perceived to be extremist Islamic views. His supervisors at Walter Reed had even reprimanded him for telling at least one patient that “Islam can save your soul.”
Participants in the spring meeting and in subsequent conversations about Hasan reportedly included John Bradley, chief of psychiatry at Walter Reed; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Psychiatry Department at USUHS; Charles Engel, assistant chair of the Psychiatry Department and director of Hasan’s psychiatry fellowship; Dr. David Benedek, another assistant chairman of psychiatry at USUHS; psychiatrist Carroll J. Diebold; and Scott Moran, director of the psychiatric residency program at Walter Reed, according to colleagues and other sources who monitor the meetings.
Yep, his brand of crazy was the worst-kept secret in the history of treasonous crazy. And yet, the shame that cannot be named, kept everyone from acting on the obvious: The Army had a psychopathic, Islamofascist nutjob in their midst.
President Obama And His Hasan Problem–UPDATED
Friday, November 6th, 2009How does a man weened on politically correct thought, race grievance, and collective versus individual responsibility deal with this:
American born
Muslim man
Soldier
Psychiatrist
Murderer
Terrorist
Here was the President’s response:
President Obama gave a shout out before his statements about the rampage at Ft. Hood. Does that seem dissonant to you? Bookworm calls it “frightening insensitivity“.
Robert George of NBC in Chicago writes:
But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a “shout-out” to “Dr. Joe Medicine Crow — that Congressional Medal of Honor winner.” Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?
Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in. That’s the least that should occur.
As more uncomfortable information comes out, information President Obama probably knew even yesterday, it will raise more questions. For example, the killer yelled “Allahu Akbar” while he shot his fellow soldiers. In addition, Hasan gave a weird presentation on the Koran during Grand Rounds. Jimmie Bise of Sundries Shack, said on Twitter:
It is this simple: 12 people were murdered yesterday by a man who holds political views the MSM has guaranteed us aren’t dangerous.
And when Jake Tapper just asked Robert Gibbs when an attack becomes a terrorist attack, the response, according to David Almacy also reporting on Twitter was this:
In an answer to @jaketapper, Robert Gibbs just said that he doesn’t have the theoretical background to define “terrorist attack.” Wow.
When faced with the uncomfortable facts, President Obama and his administration are having a collective psychic break. Reality is not conforming to the fantasy they’ve built.
So far, it seems that this killing spree, this terrorist attack, could have been prevented. This man’s radical Islamist views were widely known. He did not hide them. He did not hide that he didn’t want to go to Iraq. He did not hide that he disagreed with America’s wars. He did not hide his frustration about President Obama. He even praised evil–beheadings and terrorism.
Since it’s politically incorrect to “profile” for terrorists or look for threats proactively, how is one to prevent such events? President Obama’s answer has been to pretend. If he ignores threats, they will go away. But they’re not going away. Neither individual or group or State-sponsoring terrorists are going away. And pretending they don’t exist or aren’t serious and deadly is liable to get a man killed. Or many men.
And so, President Obama’s decision to make light of the Ft. Hood killings by burying the story into a pre-planned press-conference makes sense. This act of terrorism revealed all the lies liberals tell themselves and tell others. There are two choices in this situation, then: One, admit the lie and speak the truth. Or two, continue the delusion.
President Obama has chosen to continue the delusion. If he can, and the mainstream media continues to aid and abet him, he’ll reframe this “unfortunate incident” as the actions of one “troubled individual” who should have “received help sooner.” And it looks like he’ll get help in that regard.
But for normal people, this attack was a terrorist attack by a Muslim man schooled in hate-filled ideology. Hasan would have rather killed his fellow soldiers rather than go to an Islamic nation and help his own country find justice there. That is, Hasan was a Muslim first, and a radical one at that, and a countryman second. And because no one can name Islamism evil, because that might make someone uncomfortable, what is there to say?
So the President and his press people fumble around, trying to find some politically correct verbiage to describe evil. And they can’t. What this man did was wrong and heinous. There are no excuses. He was an individual and he’s responsible. He was an educated doctor, a psychiatrist, and enlightenment did not prevent the taint of radical ideology. And he was also a murderer who intended not just to kill, but terrorize.
He is everything President Obama wants to pretend doesn’t exist. Well. America can’t afford to indulge President Obama and his liberal minions their p.c. fantasies. It gets citizens killed. The Ft. Hood massacre was a reality-check.
Updated:
Michelle Malkin reports that Hasan had “extra weapons training”.
Michael Goldfarb on Obama searching for the “real cause” of the massacre.
Updated:
Shrinkwrapped discusses the psychology:
When the immediate reaction of Islamic spokesmen is to warn everyone of Islamophobia, they too are supporting the projection and externalization that is the hallmark of radical Islam and the “lone, psychiatrically deranged” paranoid.
Every effort should be made to resolutely maintain a posture that specifically and emphatically denies the use of projection and externalization to the radical Islamists. Groups like CAIR should be confronted by our MSM and government on a regular basis to expose their use of such psychological processes for all to see. Whenever a “lone, psychiatrically deranged” individual commits an atrocity, we must be alert to attempts to shift the psychological impetus for the attack from the attacker to the surround. It is an unhappy reality that confronting a paranoid’s projection and externalization does not work in a therapeutic context. It either convinces the paranoid that you are part of the persecutory conspiracy or, if accepted and internalized, leads to significant depression. However, we cannot treat terror as a therapeutic situation. When Muslims support, in their speech and writing, convictions that reflect the use of projection and externalization, they must be considered potential dangers to the community. This requires a form of “racial profiling” but the alternative is to wait for an atrocity of such significant proportions that “lone, psychiatrically deranged” non-Muslims begin to take things into their own hands.
In Memorium: Angela Susan Perez, 9/11 Victim
Thursday, September 10th, 2009
Eight years have passed since Al Qaeda terrorists used airplanes as weapons of mass destruction. Nearly 3,000 people died at the Twin Towers in New York City. Angela Susan Perez was one of those people.
Angela was the “cool aunt and baby sister.” She was a mother of three. Last year, her son wrote this:
Mom, I miss you so much. My graduation is just around the corner, and it’s going to be tough to walk down that aisle without you in the crowd, but I know you’ll be watching me. You will always be in my heart. Love u an’ miss u.
*** Posted by your little boy all grown up on 2008-02-28 ***
Angela was a best friend:
6 years later … the tears still flow … missing you never gets easier … cherished friend forever … few friends leave such an impression … you are truly one of the best friends I ever had! You will never be one of many victims to me … that day was one of the worst days for our country, a tragedy for New York, but it was the day that my best friend’s passing left a pain in my heart that will never go away…. Susan, I will always miss you and love you…. Keep laughing, my friend…. It’s smiles like yours that make the world go around…. May god walk beside you for eternity….
Love ya lots, girl,
Anna
She was 35. She was living her life, doing her job, raising her children, being a friend. Her life mattered. She deserves to be remembered and honored.
Angela Perez worked for Cantor Fitzgerald. Here is what Wikipedia says about the fate of those in the towers on that day:
Cantor Fitzgerald’s New York City office, on the 101st-105th floors of One World Trade Center (2-6 floors above the impact zone of a hijacked airliner), was destroyed during the September 11, 2001 attacks. Cantor Fitzgerald lost 658 employees (all of the employees in the office that day), or about two-thirds of its workforce, considerably more than any other of the World Trade Center tenants or the New York City Police Department and New York City Fire Department. The company was able to bring its trading markets back online within a week, and CEO and chairman Howard Lutnick, whose brother was among those killed, vowed to keep the company alive.
On September 19, Cantor Fitzgerald made a pledge to distribute 25 percent of the firm’s profits for the next five years, and committed to paying for ten years of health care, for the benefit of the families of its 658 former Cantor Fitzgerald, eSpeed, and TradeSpark employees (profits which would otherwise have been distributed to the Cantor Fitzgerald partners).[citation needed] In 2006 the company completed its promise, having paid a total of $180 million (and an additional $17 million from a relief fund run by Lutnick’s sister, Edie).[citation needed]
Time goes by, memories, especially bad memories, get shelved and put away. But for some people, they cannot forget their loss. Nor do they want to. For families and friends of those lost on 9/11, forgetting is more awful than remembering. And so they look at the picture, they see the holes where the buildings were and they remember. They get married and their mother cannot see the day of joy. They have children who have no grandma. They need a shoulder to cry on, but mom is gone.
Angela Susan Perez, like the hundreds with her in the top of that Tower, were innocent. They were walking, not fully realized, potential. They had a future that was taken away through no fault of their own.
On this day, it’s a privilege to honor Angela Perez. Her life mattered. It still matters. She leaves a legacy of family and friends who love and miss her. Thank you for honoring the lost by remembering. It’s the least we can do.
More.
Dale Challener Roe: The 2996 Project
Surprise! New York Time’s Kidnapped Journalist A Moron Who Cost A Soldier And Friend Their Lives–UPDATED
Thursday, September 10th, 2009The paper of record will probably not report the flaming ignorance of their own reporter, Stephen Farrell, but the British press is less inclined to cover for him. Remember the NYT reporter who got abducted and subsequently rescued? Remember how good the NYT was with keeping that secret, you know a secret that mattered when lives were at stake?
A soldier lost his life to save this, what’s the Van Jones word?, that’s right, a**hole. Here’s what happened:
Afghan police and intelligence officers repeatedly warned journalists including Mr Farrell that it was too dangerous to go to the site. Kunduz is a notorious Taliban northern stronghold and was one of the last holdouts of the regime when it was toppled in 2001.
While Mr Farrell, who was kidnapped in iraq five years ago, and Mr Munadi were interviewing Afghans near the site of the bombing an elderly man warned them to leave as the Taliban were on their way.
But they stayed and shortly afterwards gunshots rang out and they were taken into captivity. Mr Munadi was working as a freelance during a break from his university studies in Germany.
The dramatic rescue operation came in the early hours of Wednesday when a troop of Special Boat Service commandos supported by a company from the Special Forces Support Group left an American base in US helicopters. But the young British soldier died in the battle to the distress of his commanders.One senior Army source said: “When you look at the number of warnings this person had it makes you really wonder whether he was worth rescuing, whether it was worth the cost of a soldier’s life. In the future special forces might think twice in a similar situation.”
Another military source said: “This reporter went to this area against the advice of the Afghan police. So thanks very much Stephen Farrell, your irresponsible act has led to the death of one of our boys.”
Was his life saving? No. He knew the risks in his job. No doubt, his friends and family members are relieved to have him back in one piece. But there are other people, a British soldier, his interpreter, a woman and a child now dead because he ignored the advice of those who knew better.
And the New York Times? The paper couldn’t be bother with Van Jones or John Edwards, or, most of all, their own idiot reporter.
UPDATED:
The reporter a Brit, tells his story. He concludes:
It was over. Sultan was dead. He had died trying to help me, right up to the very last seconds of his life.
There were some celebrations among the mainly British soldiers on the aircraft home, which soon fell silent. It later emerged that one of the rescue party was also dead, mortally wounded during the raid. His blood-soaked helmet was in front of me throughout the flight. I thanked everyone who was still alive to thank. It wasn’t, and never will be, enough.
The soldier’s name. What is his name? At this point, the reporter’s “ordeal” means little. The man who died for him does.
If NYT … WSJ, CNN, Fox, assorted freelancers, the lot of them … stopped taking risks, we would have very little information about what happens in bad places. I don’t believe that most of them do it lightly, though I’ve known a few who do it irresponsibly and have been lucky they didn’t end up in this situation. A lot of them now have considerable time incountry, experience with these issues, and receive professional training and advice. A lot of them have also died, been injured, or spent time in captivity. It often comes down to judgment calls about what level of risk to take. Here’s an easy call to make in the aftermath: It looks like Farrell made a bad one. Harder to say about the military, which also had the option of standing off and exercised its own judgment in the moment.
I guess what makes me so angry is the way the newspapers so easily trash the very same who would save their sorry hides. The military is treated with contempt by the Western media. As a citizen (recognizing that all parties involved were British), I don’t feel inclined using vast resources and potentially putting solider in harms way for a risk-taking fool who works for an organization working in opposition to their own country’s interests.
The newspapers have no trouble putting soldiers in harms way with irresponsible reporting–remember the flushed Koran? How many false stories have put American and allied soldiers at risk? And now, a soldier’s family must live with the idea that their son, brother, father died for an agent who often indirectly colluded with the enemy.
I’m upset at the gross injustice in this. Over at Jawa, the reporter is described as a “self-indulgent asshole”. That’s being kind.
He Bombed A Hotel Because He Wasn’t Loved As A Child
Thursday, July 30th, 2009Ah, the psychology of evil and the press…. explained by Dudley Dooright:
Via Bookworm
Understanding The Lone Gunman
Saturday, June 13th, 2009There’s lots of blaming going on for the Holocaust Museum shooting. Just look at my comment section. So nice to see the freaks come out of the shadows.
Here’s been my experience with the haters: they might have different political bents but the genesis of their rage is the same. It begins with discontent–a discontent we all feel by the way. We see some wrong and injustice and want to do something, but the size and scope of the problem seems overwhelming. At this point, there are two choices: Do what we can do or nurse our helpless rage.
Killers end up in the latter category. They nurse an injustice and plot revenge. That is, they don’t exactly channel their anger constructively. They decide to take matters in their own hands.
It’s the same whether it’s the guy who kills the woman who leaves him. It’s the same for the white supremacist killing Holocaust Museum guards. It’s the same for home-grown Jihadists bent on bringing down America. It’s the same for the psychopathic murderer. It’s the same for the gang banger taking revenge over a turf violation.
A murderer completely justifies his hate. He nurses it.
A murderer also dehumanizes his opposition. He has to. The enemy deserves the death because he’s earned it. The murderer is justified because the victim had it coming. Always.
Fundamentally, the reasoning goes like this, “that person, group, association, idea doesn’t care about me, why should I care about him or it?” So the Virginia Tech killer can murder the world because the world abandoned him. Ditto the guys who were bullied. Ditto the white supremacist. Ditto the Jihadis.
Nursed grievances and the bitterness that results + Dehumanizing the “enemy” = Murderous Rage Resulting in Murder
When the murderers survive their ordeal and they’re interviewed, there’s a reason why they have no remorse: they believe they are completely justified in their action. Often, they’ve spent a lot of mind time building up their reasons why a certain person or group of people deserve to die. They keep lists.
Noticeably absent from their hate lists is a list of wrongs they themselves have committed that hurt others. That is, they completely lack self-awareness.
Anyone who has spent time on this earth has either purposely or accidentally hurt another person. Most of us, in our hearts, know this. We recognize our own cruelty and feel guilty and ashamed for our pettiness, meanness and smallness of spirit. This is good. This self-awareness serves as inhibition for taking justice into our own hands. Heaven forbid all the people we’ve neglected or overtly harmed put us on a list, right?
When the Pharisees brought the woman caught in adultery to Jesus, they wanted to stone her. He wrote in the dirt and said, “Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.” This is part of the underpinning of American justice. We don’t just drag people we feel have wronged us, or society, out and stone them. We have a system of justice that tries them based on evidence and we all live with the decision of that justice. This is the rule of law.
Murderers invariably view themselves as tools of justice, no matter how sick and demented. The world is cruel to children anyway, they’re better off dead–any molester, murderer or mother who drowns her children goes down this warped thinking path.
It takes a long rationalizing road to finally murder. That’s why rehabilitation rarely works. Nothing short of a lightning strike on the road to Damascus and the resulting blindness seems to get the attention of people bent on imposing their form of justice. Since that sort of jolt of awareness is only in God’s capability, prison and the death sentence for these people seem the best decision for a society that needs to be free of this malignancy.
The finger pointing about the recent murders is silly. The root cause is the same and the cover for the killings is ideology, The truth is that the murderers would find some way to nurse their grievances–that is, they were inclined to be angry, they just needed to find a group that could reflect and feed their hate. And there are no shortage of groups to do just that.
Did The White House Call Off Investigations Into Black Muslim Convert Extremists?
Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009According to ABC News, Stratfor, and Doug Ross, yes. From Doug Ross:
A disturbing aspect of the attack is that Muhammad had been brought to the FBI’s attention months ago, according to ABC News.
But U.S. counterterror teams may have been intentionally prevented from investigating radicalized converts to Islam:
Several weeks ago, STRATFOR heard from sources that the FBI and other law enforcement organizations had been ordered to “back off” of counterterrorism investigations into the activities of Black Muslim converts. At this point, it is unclear to us if that guidance was given by the White House or the Department of Justice, or if it was promulgated by the agencies themselves, anticipating the wishes of President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.
Stratfor implies, however, that the investigations were canceled for purely political reasons.
…politics have proved obstructive to all facets of counterterrorism policy. And politics may have been at play in the Muhammad case as well as in other cases involving Black Muslim converts…
Is it possible that the White House or Eric Holder’s Justice Department “turned off” counterterror investigations that could have saved the targeted soldiers?
This paragraph would appear to make clear that such an order was given:
Many FBI supervisors are reluctant to authorize investigations that they believe may have negative blow-back on their career advancement. In light of this institutional culture, and the order to be careful in investigations relating to Black Muslim converts, it would not be at all surprising to us if a supervisor refused to authorize a full-field investigation of Muhammad that would have included surveillance of his activities… Had the FBI opened a full-field investigation on Muhammad, and had it conducted surveillance on him, it would have been able to watch him participate in preoperational activities such as conducting surveillance of potential targets and obtaining weapons.
Congress must demand the release of this order and a complete explanation of its issuance.
There is much more at the links, please go read it all.
No wonder there hasn’t been a word from the Obama Administration about the murder of these soldiers. Their actions could have interfered with the prevention of this sort of thing.
What other attacks will have to happen because this administration adheres to politically correct ideology that refuses to acknowledge real threats.
Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has a watch list for those ca-razy Christians and returning soldiers. Yeah, because those people are scary.
UPDATED:
More here.
9/11 And The Seige Mentality In The Economy
Tuesday, May 12th, 2009My latest American Issues Project column delves into the American psyche. I think the overspending spree that both individual Americans and then the banks and ultimately the Fed partook in the last few years can be traced back to the 9/11 attacks.
I’m interested in what you guys think about my theorizing. Here’s a bit of the article:
I’ve heard and have said myself, that there is a character flaw, typically American now, where people expect to live at a kingly level on a pauper’s wage. And that might be partly true. When my housekeeper has thousands of dollars in video games and equipment and seems mystified that I wouldn’t have those things because “I can’t afford them,” something is off in the psychology. Need and want are all mixed up.
Still, I don’t think this character flaw completely explains the problem. And even more importantly, many people don’t have this problem and the people who have lived within their means, or below, are now being asked by banks and corporations and fellow citizens to foot the bill for the collective. It’s not going over so well, thus the Tea Party movement is born.
….
President Bush was criticized for not asking Americans to sacrifice, but people have short memories. I remember the parking lots around the Doctor’s Office building and it was empty. People were paralyzed. Afraid. The Twin Towers stood out like two beacons (or eye-sores depending on your aesthetics) in the heart of Manhattan’s financial district. Osama bin Laden knew exactly what he was doing when the Twin Towers were targeted. Capitalism and freedom were being attacked and every American knew it.
So General Motors, to shore up the economy, offered, for the first time in my living memory (I’m a GM brat and grew up around cars and the car companies) 0 percent financing. We all sat around discussing this anomaly. Someone is paying that interest. How long can this last? Well, it lasted, alright, a lot longer than anyone imagined. Americans got accustomed to cheap credit and due to the competitive nature of things companies would lose money in order to gain or keep, or in GM’s case, lose market share.
I believe 9/11 shifted the American mentality and that there’s a shift back, a correction, now. It has less to do with a changed external threat reality, and more to do with the fact that a person and a people cannot maintain that level of high alert indefinitely.
And, by the way, I don’t think any of this has anything to do with Barack Obama. He just happens to be the President. He is, however, creating a situation where he is perpetuating, inadvertently, the problem.
How Does Closing Gitmo Make Us Safe?
Friday, May 8th, 2009Best 1 minute you’ll spend today. Pass it along:
Via ThreatsWatch
