Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    December 2025
    S M T W T F S
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘terrorism’

Surprised by al Qaeda’s determination

Posted by Richard on January 8, 2010

A couple of days after Abdul Farouk Umar Abdulmutallab almost managed to blow up Northwest Flight 253, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told CNN that "one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked." Which, if true, means the system is utterly dependent on courageous passengers with impeccable timing to thwart such attacks. 

Yesterday afternoon at a press briefing, Napolitano revealed the depth of her knowledge and understanding of the enemy that declared war on us, seeks to destroy us, and is responsible for the terrorist acts that it's her job to protect us from. Gateway Pundit has the video and transcript excerpt (emphasis added): 

Q What was the most shocking, stunning thing that you found out of the review? And, Secretary, to you, as well.

MR. BRENNAN: Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is an extension of al Qaeda core coming out of Pakistan. … The fact that they had moved forward to try to execute this attack against the homeland I think demonstrated to us — and this is what the review sort of uncovered — that we had a strategic sense of sort of where they were going, but we didn't know they had progressed to the point of actually launching individuals here. And we have taken that lesson, and so now we're full on top of it.

SECRETARY NAPOLITANO: I think, following up on that, not just the determination of al Qaeda and al Qaeda Arabian Peninsula, but the tactic of using an individual to foment an attack, as opposed to a large conspiracy or a multi-person conspiracy such as we saw in 9/11, that is something that affects intelligence.

Yeah, who know that al Qaeda was really determined? Or that they might use an individual suicide bomber? Who could have possibly known these things?

Heckuva job, Nappy! 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Airport security done right

Posted by Richard on January 3, 2010

In the comments to Sensible profiling, I pointed out that the Israelis use profiling and do it right. An excellent story in the Toronto Star details just how different Israel's airport security procedures are from those used in North America:

"It is mindboggling for us Israelis to look at what happens in North America, because we went through this 50 years ago," said Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy. He's worked with the RCMP, the U.S. Navy Seals and airports around the world.

"Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don't take s— from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for — not for hours — but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, 'We're not going to do this. You're going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport."

That, in a nutshell is "Israelification" – a system that protects life and limb without annoying you to death.

Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport employs a multi-layer security strategy. At multiple points — a checkpoint on the approach to the airport, the parking facility and terminal entrances, airline check-in desks, and the security checkpoint — trained  personnel watch passengers and ask simple, innocuous questions (How are you? Where are you coming from? Who packed your luggage?) while looking people directly in the eyes, alert for nervousness, stress, and other tell-tale signs. It's called behavioral profiling.

There are no long lines at the security checkpoint. Passengers don't have to take off their shoes and belts or go through full-body scans. They don't confiscate liquids or GI Joes, and they don't make people put their toiletries in Ziploc bags. The process is quick and convenient. And it's worked well for decades at one of the prime terrorist targets in the world. 

Today, there was a "security breach" at Newark Airport — a man walked into the secure "sterile" side of the terminal without being screened. In reaction, flights were halted and thousands of people evacuated from the terminal for re-screening. As I write this, it's been six hours, and they're still not back to normal. This happens all too often at U.S. airports, and it's usually just a dumb mistake by someone. But it always leads to a terrible mess — costly, inconvenient, frustrating, and stupid. 

At Ben Gurion, they don't even evacuate the terminal if they find a suspected bomb: 

First, the screening area is surrounded by contoured, blast-proof glass that can contain the detonation of up to 100 kilos of plastic explosive. Only the few dozen people within the screening area need be removed, and only to a point a few metres away.

Second, all the screening areas contain 'bomb boxes'. If a screener spots a suspect bag, he/she is trained to pick it up and place it in the box, which is blast proof. A bomb squad arrives shortly and wheels the box away for further investigation.

"This is a very small simple example of how we can simply stop a problem that would cripple one of your airports," Sela said.

So why hasn't TSA learned from the Israeli example? Why do they foist upon the American traveling public a brain-dead, inefficient, ineffective, and horribly frustrating system? Because they can. We have become sheep. Unlike the Israelis, we'll put up with almost anything to avoid trouble and gain a sense of security.

With one exception. Remember the "flying Imams" and similar incidents? The lawsuits and accusations of racism and Islamophobia? If TSA adopted the Israeli methodology, training security personnel to look people in the eye, ask questions, and make judgments about their behavior, the perpetually aggrieved (and those attempting to test or undermine the system) would be in the courts and in front of the microphones screaming about profiling and discrimination every other day.

So the path of least resistance for TSA personnel is to treat people like cattle and go through the motions, giving us the illusion of security by confiscating shampoo and examining shoes, and selecting people at random for additional screening. It keeps CAIR and the PC crowd off their backs, and the rest of us just suffer in silence. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sensible profiling

Posted by Richard on December 29, 2009

ABC's Nightline actually asked the question Monday night, "Should part of enhanced airport security include profiling passengers of certain countries, races and religions?" I dashed off the following comment: 

Today's terrorists don't all have a common ethnicity or national origin (consider the Taliban soldier John Walker Lindh, an American of European ancestry). But they all share the same religio-political ideology: Islamism.

Islamists embrace a barbaric 7th-century form of Islam and a commitment to the subjugation of the entire world to those beliefs. Not all Muslims are Islamists. But without question, all Islamists are Muslims. And virtually every terrorist is a radicalized young male Muslim.

It's insane and suicidal to ignore this fact and treat Lutheran grandmothers, Catholic schoolboys, atheist professors, and Buddhist businessmen as being just as big a risk.

The trick, of course, is to distinguish moderate, tolerant, peaceful Muslims from the radicalized Islamists, and it's not easy.

But moderate, tolerant, peaceful Muslims more than anyone have a stake in helping the authorities do so, and should welcome increased scrutiny and questioning. Their cooperation will help authorities develop psychological profiles that aid in distinguishing the crazies from those who are no threat.

To continue treating everyone as possessing the same threat potential is just willful blindness. When indulged in by public officials, it's malfeasance and dereliction of duty.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

His daddy tried to warn us

Posted by Richard on December 27, 2009

The initial reports of the attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 apparently got the perp's name wrong. It's not Abdul Mudallad, it's Abdul Farouk Umar Abdulmutallab, and there's some interesting information about him at Gateway Pundit. It seems that Abdulmutallab is the son of a prominent Nigerian banker, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab. Reportedly, he was a student at University College London and lived in a $2.5 million apartment there belonging to his family. 

Just another disadvantaged third-worlder driven to radical Islam by hopelessness and despair, right? 

But here's the real kicker — daddy tried to warn us that his son was dangerous: 

… According to the family members, Mutallab has been uncomfortable with the boy’s extreme religious views and had six months ago reported his activities to United States’ Embassy, Abuja and Nigerian security agencies.

The older Mutallab was said to be devastated on hearing the news of Abdul Farouk’s attempted bombing arrest. A source close to him said he was surprised that after his reports to the US authorities, the young man was allowed to travel to the United States.

Ah, but in this era of hopenchange, Mr. Mutallab, US authorities have no doubt been cautioned not to profile Muslims with "extreme religious views."

Airport security is being tightened, though. So I'm sure TSA will redouble its efforts to prevent the boarding of six-year-old kids with the same name as someone on the "no fly" list. 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

Ordinary people acting courageously

Posted by Richard on December 26, 2009

As I write this, reports are still sketchy about the attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit. Apparently, Nigerian Abdul Mudallad tried to detonate a bomb he said he got from al Qaeda in Yemen. Either the device was defective or he screwed up — instead of exploding, it just burst into flames.

But that doesn't detract from what struck me about the story. Without a moment's hesitation, the passengers around Mudallad sprang into action

An Ohio man who witnessed the attempted destruction of a Northwest Airlines flight to Metro Airport said he's proud of how passengers reacted.

Syed Jafry of Holland, Ohio, who had flown from the United Arab Emirates, said after emerging from the airport that people ran out of their seats to tackle the man.

Jafry was sitting in the 16th row — three rows behind the passenger — when he heard "a pop and saw some smoke and fire." Then, he said, “a young man behind me jumped on him.”

Jafry said there was a little bit of commotion for about 10 to 15 minutes. The incident occurred during the plane's descent, he said.

He said the way passengers responded made him proud to be an American.

Actually, the passenger who jumped on Mudallad reportedly is Dutch. But I understand what Jafry meant. He's proud to be part (by his own choice, I'm guessing) of a culture that embraces individual responsibility and that rejects barbaric 7th-century anti-human, anti-freedom, anti-life beliefs. 

Scott Beamer and the other passengers and crew on United Flight 93 were heroes — no question. But they weren't extraordinary or unique. They were simply the first to learn that the conventional wisdom of the day regarding hijackers and terrorists — remain calm, don't take any action, do as you're told, let the authorities handle things — was no longer an option. Now everyone knows it. 

It's no longer easy to hijack or blow up an airliner. The world is full of people able and willing to take responsibility for their own safety and that of those around them — people who, when the need arises, act with courage, decisiveness, and no hesitation. In any given planeload of two to three hundred people, there will be many of them. Apparently, there were several in the immediate vicinity of Abdul Mudallad on Flight 253. Bravo to them!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Typical workplace violence

Posted by Richard on November 12, 2009

As far as dangerously inane commentary on Hasan's Ft. Hood jihad goes, I thought it would be hard to top "pre-traumatic stress disorder" and "it's not illegal to call up al Qaeda, is it?" — but I was wrong.

Naturally, the even more unbelievable expression of naivete, stupidity, willful ignorance, and cowering before the specter of Islamist rage comes from academics — specifically, a pair of criminologists from Northeastern University in Boston, James Alan Fox and Jack Levin, writing in USA Today. They assured us that what Hasan did was just your ordinary workplace murder, not terrorism. And then they warned us that calling it terrorism might cause other Muslims to behave similarly — and it would be our fault. Unbe-frickin-lievable (emphasis added):

Appearances can be perilously deceiving, especially if Americans do not look any further than Nidal Malik Hasan's Palestinian descent, his Muslim affiliation, his Middle Eastern-style clothing, and reports of his having shouted out "Allahu Akbar," an expression of praise to God, before allegedly gunning down dozens of soldiers. Superficially, the Fort Hood rampage looks like terrorism.

Hasan's murder spree appears, however, to be much more about seeking vengeance for personal mistreatment than spreading terror to advance a political agenda. In many respects the Fort Hood massacre stands as a textbook case of workplace murder … and Hasan a disgruntled worker attempting to avenge perceived unfair treatment on the job. His rampage was selective, not indiscriminate. He chose the location — his workplace — and then apparently singled out certain co-workers for death.

No, he didn't. Every report I've seen said Hasan shot at anyone he could, and his victims were soldiers being processed for deployment overseas, not co-workers who had mistreated him. They just made that last part up.

And how about that explanation of "Allahu Akbar" as an innocuous "expression of praise to God"? Let's flesh that definition out a bit: "An expression of praise to God traditionally shouted by jihadists as they commence slaughtering infidels." There, that's better. 

In today's political climate, it is easy to understand why many observers would uncritically describe Hasan as a terrorist. …

But calling the Fort Hood ambush an act of terrorism would only compound the tragedy by reinforcing the kind of intolerance toward American Muslims that appears to have contributed to Hasan's despair. Unfortunately, according to FBI figures, there has been a precipitous increase in hate crimes against Arab Americans since the 9/11 attacks.

No, there hasn't. They just made that last part up (or compared only the numbers a few months before 9/11 and a few months after). Reports of anti-Muslim hate crimes have declined significantly since 9/11/01. The numbers are comparable to those for anti-Christian hate crimes and only a tenth of anti-Jewish hate crimes (many, if not most, of which are committed by Islamist Muslims). In an Oct. 20 fisking of an Eric Holder speech about hate crimes, Creeping Sharia provided these numbers:

Bias motivation Total victims
Year 2,006 2,007
Religion (total): 1,750 1,628
Anti-Jewish 1,144 1,127
Anti-Other Religion 147 148
Anti-Islamic 208 142
Anti-Christian 151 137
Anti-Multiple Religions, Group 92 66
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. 8 8

*Source: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics

And on Nov. 4, he added this update (emphasis added):

Related:

http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=3209

Investigation and research by this author into the documentation that comprises hate crime statistics for 2007 (the figures for 2008 will be available through the FBI on November 23, 2009) found that the parameters used for “hate crimes” against Muslims are exceptionally broad and artificially inflated as a result. These expanded parameters are, in many cases, the direct result of CAIR officials demanding certain dubious questionable events to be included in anti-Muslim hate crime statistics. Examples are plentiful, and include unverified reports of minimal, if not insignificant property damage at mosques and Islamic centers. A trampled flower bed at a mosque, as one example, was listed as an anti-Islamic “hate crime” statistic.

In 2007, crimes classified as having their motivation in anti-Muslim bias amounted to about 9 percent of all hate crimes. By contrast, crimes against Jews, or those having an anti-Semitic motive amounted to nearly 70% during that same period. Despite those figures and the obvious disparity, there has been a continual and vociferous demand for special considerations within law enforcement on behalf of Muslims due to the deceitful embellishment of post-9/11 anti-Islamic bias. Although the statistics for 2008 are not yet published, a review of available reports indicates that the anti-Islamic motivated crimes have dropped significantly. Nonetheless, claims of anti-Islamic bias have risen exponentially during that same period.

Meanwhile, statistics of crimes by Muslims against Muslims, specifically those involving domestic violence, from Sharia sanctioned spousal abuse to “honor killings” are not maintained. The omission of this statistical classification is not due to its rarity, but by deliberate omission. Although the raw statistics exist within the comprehensive CIUS report, they are not properly categorized within the UCR Program’s hate crime data collection. Therefore, they remain a statistic that does not officially exist, except for the victims of such crimes.

Gateway Pundit just yesterday posted even more extensive data refuting the myth that Muslims are especially subject to hate crimes.

Promoting the myth of Muslim victimhood and "despair," along with pressing relentlessly for special accommodations for Muslims and encouraging fear of "Muslim rage" in response to the slightest provocation — these are among the weapons that Islamists use to wage what's been called cultural or political jihad. It's been extremely successful in moving much of Europe toward dhimmitude. And in reaction to that, numerous neo-fascist groups are on the rise across the continent, exploiting the backlash and resentment among non-Muslims. 

Fox and Levin are no doubt too stupid to realize that their vacuous blather benefits two dangerous forces — intransigent Islamists bent on imposing shari'a across the globe and anti-immigrant, anti-Arab neo-fascist nativists. Neither of those groups would treat pompous liberal college professors well, if given the chance. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Pre-traumatic stress disorder

Posted by Richard on November 10, 2009

It's been fascinating (and disturbing) to watch the evolving story of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan in the media since the massacre at Ft. Hood last week. It began with the FBI, barely an hour after the shootings and with no evidence or investigation, declaring that this wasn't a terrorist act.

The mainstream media and leftist propagandists (but I repeat myself) quickly picked up that meme. Newsweek, in a contemptible piece, declared that Hasan's act was a symptom of "a Military on the Brink." The Huffington Post on Friday was awash with similarly vile posts about how the war, the "sick" military, American foreign policy, our cowboy insistence on defeating our enemies, and/or lack of sufficient mental health care funding were to blame for Hasan "snapping" (see here, here, and here for examples).

Then there was the ABC News story, picked up by many others, parroting the family's explanation that Hasan snapped because he was "constantly harassed," called a "camel jockey," and subjected to "bullying" for being a Muslim.

And there were countless suggestions that Hasan, who counseled post-traumatic stress disorder patients, had succumbed to PTSD himself.

Filling in for Rush on Friday, Mark Steyn joked that, since Hasan has never been deployed to a war zone (or even overseas), he must have suffered from "pre-post-traumatic stress disorder" — something akin to feeling pain in your leg because you're going to break it next week. But these days, it's not easy to parody the left. A while later, Steyn was informed that a commentator on NPR had in fact suggested Hasan was suffering from "pre-traumatic stress disorder" due to his pending deployment. It was Tom Gjelten on NPR's Morning Edition (emphasis added):

GJELTEN: That's right, Steve. You know, you referred to the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. There's – almost seems to be a phenomenon that you could maybe call a pre-traumatic stress disorder. There have been a lot suicides in the Army, many more as a result of these wars than in previous years. Interestingly enough, as many soldiers have killed themselves before they were due to be deployed as after. Thirty-five percent of the suicides are pre-deployment, 35 percent are post-deployment. So there seems to be an issue here of expectation of what you are getting into. And the fact that Major Hasan would've known better than others, even, about how traumatic combat experience would be, you know, raises the question of, you know, was he an example of these soldiers who are literally freaked out by what they are likely to face when they are deployed?

Freaked out — as if the psychiatrist Major would be going into battle with a rifle instead of sitting in an office holding counseling sessions. 

Even as such nonsense was being offered, a mountain of evidence was accumulating that Hasan was a radical Islamist and had been for years. He proselytized his co-workers and his patients (a gross violation of professional ethics), warning them of the deadly consequences of remaining infidels. He praised suicide bombers for killing the soldiers who waged war on Islam. He worshipped at the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, VA, maybe the most radical Wahabbi mosque in America, alongside two of the 9/11 hijackers. He remained in touch (into this year) with its former imam (now living in Yemen), Anwar al-Awlaki, who praised Hasan as a hero who did the right thing. He contacted or attempted to contact al Qaeda leaders.

This evidence was only spottily reported in the U.S. mainstream media (for thorough coverage, check the British press, especially the Telegraph). And then, usually accompanied by demurring that we don't know what motivated him or why he "snapped." The President cautioned us not to "jump to conclusions," and that blathering idiot, Chris Matthews wondered aloud on national TV, "it's not illegal to call up al Qaeda, is it?"

Dorothy Rabinowitz outlined a lot of this insane, delusional denial in an excellent Wall Street Journal column this morning. And growing numbers of people — even some in the media — are now questioning why the FBI, CIA, Justice Dept., and Army all failed to "connect the dots" regarding Hasan.

They failed because even now, eight years after 9/11, our government institutions and their media lapdogs refuse as a matter of policy to acknowledge the dangers of radical Islam and its many adherents. They practice as a matter of policy a suicidal political correctness that makes a question like "it's not illegal to call up al Qaeda, is it?" something other than absurd. For fear of offending the easily offended and violent, they embrace dhimmitude, and they're going to get a lot more of us killed. 

Maj. Hasan isn't an isolated phenomenon. He's one of many examples in the U.S. (and many, many more in other countries) of what Rusty Shackleford called "individual jihad" and Daniel Pipes dubbed "sudden jihad syndrome." Three years ago, an Islamist website even published a "Guide for Individual Jihad."

Pipes argued that this phenomenon means that all Muslims must be considered potentially dangerous. I disagree. People like Dr. Zudhi Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, are decidedly not potentially dangerous. In fact, they're critically important — and immensely brave — warriors in the fight against radical Islamism.

But Pipes is partly correct. The mosques funded by the Saudis, distributing radical Islamist literature, and preaching Wahabbi doctrine, the mosques controlled by Hezbollah, and all the men who worship at these mosques and have been or are being radicalized by them are potentially dangerous. No, we don't lock people up or strip them of their rights for having a dangerous potential. But we shouldn't turn a blind eye, either.

When such a person is in the military, and provides plenty of warning signs of extreme radicalization, we sure as hell shouldn't ignore those signs and promote him! When we're that willfully ignorant, people die.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 14 Comments »

Never forget

Posted by Richard on September 11, 2009

Never forget that there is a large, powerful, well-financed international movement dedicated to destroying Western Civilization.

Eight years ago today, barbarians with box cutters — primitive 7th-century savages who could never build a World Trade Center or a 747, but whose insane ideology is dedicated to making the building of such things impossible — murdered 2,996 innocent people and changed Lower Manhattan from this: 

Lady Liberty watching over the twin towers before 9/11

to this:

1st tower falls

Fleeing as the tower falls

Fleeing through the choking dust

Falling to his death

 

Some people have forgotten now
It was many years ago
And peaceful here at home since then
So just let the memory go
But I close my eyes and see it still
Like it was yesterday — Oh no!
People jumping from a hundred-story building!
I can still see those Americans
Jumping from a hundred-story building …

© 2009 Richard G. Combs. All rights reserved.


 

As I have on previous September 11ths, I offer you passage from Gerard Van der Leun's Of a Fire in a Field — a passage that moves me beyond words every time I read it — in which he recalled 9/11 and its aftermath, when he lived in New York:

Inside the wire under the hole in the sky was, in time, a growing hole in the ground as the rubble was cleared away and, after many months, the last fire was put out. Often at first, but with slowly diminishing frequency, all the work to clear out the rubble and the wreckage would come to a halt.

The machinery would be shut down and it would become quiet. Across the site, tools would be laid down and the workers would straighten up and stand still. Then, from somewhere in the pile or the pit, a group of men would emerge carrying a stretcher covered with an American flag and holding, if they were fortunate, a body. If they were not so fortunate the flag covering over the stretcher would be lumpy, holding only portions of a body from which, across the river on the Jersey shore, a forensic lab would try to make an identification and then pass on to the victim's survivors something that they could bury.

I'm not sure anymore about the final count, but I am pretty sure that most families, in the end, got nothing. Their loved ones had all gone into the smoke and the dust that covered the end of the island and blew, mostly, across the river into Brooklyn where I lived. What happened to most of the three thousand killed by the animals on that day? It is simple and ghastly. We breathed them until the rains came and washed clean what would never be clean again.

. . .

Read the whole thing — and think about the question he asks you at the end. 

And never forget.

Flag still stands

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fly the flag September 11

Posted by Richard on September 11, 2009

September 11 is the eighth anniversary of the worst attack ever on U.S. soil, when many of us finally realized that a dangerous and implacable enemy had declared war on us years earlier and wasn't kidding.

September 11 is the eighth anniversary of the day that we watched in horror as people fell a hundred stories to the pavement and the skyline of Manhattan changed in a matter of hours.

September 11 is the eighth anniversary of the day that 2,996 innocent people were murdered by a small band of fanatical Islamofascists, and the world changed forever.

Remember September 11. Fly the flag.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Celebrating the death of a murderer

Posted by Richard on July 25, 2009

At our breakfast gathering this morning, I told my compatriots about a joke Jimmy Fallon told regarding the probable killing of one of Osama bin Laden's sons. One person in the audience cheered, and a couple of people applauded. The rest sat in stony silence. A friend suggested that maybe they thought it wasn't appropriate to joke about the death of anyone.

I consider that explanation unlikely. I suspect that a significant percentage of the typical Jimmy Fallon audience considers slasher movies and Grand Theft Auto to be high entertainment. But it got me thinking. 

It's a common belief among Christians that all human life is sacred/valuable (many other religions/cultures share that belief, and some extend it to other creatures as well), and that therefore the death of even the vilest murderer or brutal tyrant should be mourned — or at least not celebrated.

I completely disagree. That belief shows a callous disregard for the murderer's future victims. When an al Qaeda leader is killed, how many people will not be blown up or shot, how many women and children will not be brutalized and subjugated, how many men will not be beheaded as a consequence of his death?

If you've studied free-market economics, you may be familiar with Frédéric Bastiat's essay, “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen.” In it, he argued that we tend to focus on the immediate, intended consequences of an action (what is seen) and fail to recognize the later, unintended consequences (what is not seen). For instance, when the government allocates a few hundred billion dollars for "shovel-ready" infrastructure projects, we see the jobs created (they put up big signs at the project sites to make sure we do). But we don't see the goods that would have been purchased, the investments that would have been made, and the jobs that would have been created if the government had left that money in private hands instead of taxing or borrowing it away. 

I contend that the death of a murderer represents a moral issue analogous to Bastiat's principle of economics. You can see the lifeless body of a terrorist or serial killer (or at least the news reports) and recognize that a human life has been taken. But too often, you fail to see the lives that have been spared in the future as a consequence of his death.

Not me. I celebrate the deaths of barbarians like Saad bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — because I'm gladdened by the thought of the innocent victims, the honest and peaceful people, who will be spared because of their demise. And I unashamedly value the lives of the latter more than the lives of the former. Ridding the world of such evil men and preventing their future acts of violence is the noble, decent, civilized thing to do. It is virtuous and it is just.

If you still insist that all killing is always wrong, here's a thought experiment. You see a man with his knife raised, about to stab the chest of a helpless, bound woman. There is a gun at hand. What would you do? Would you shoot him, trading his life for hers?

Would you do nothing, because taking any life is wrong? Then she dies, and he can move on to the next victim.

If all human life is equally valuable, and pain and suffering are bad, maybe you should shoot her! Either way, someone dies, and (since you don't care who) you can at least spare her a more painful death. 

I would shoot him without hesitation, and if I succeeded, I'd be relieved and happy for her and for his future victims. The lives of honest, peaceful, innocent people are infinitely more valuable than the lives of murderous predators.

Likewise, I hope that Predator drone did take out Saad bin Laden, and I'm gladdened by the thought of the lives that will be spared as a result of his death. Making a joke or two at the scumbag's expense is not out of order.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Jailhouse converts to jihad

Posted by Richard on May 23, 2009

The homegrown terrorists arrested in New York on Wednesday, who tried to bomb two synagogues and planned to shoot down planes, became radical Islamists in prison. Michelle Malkin reminds us that this is far from unusual:

In 2005, Bush officials busted a terrorist plot to attack infidels at military and Jewish sites in Los Angeles on the fourth anniversary of 9/11 or the Jewish holy days. It was devised by militant Muslim converts of Jam'iyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh (Arabic for "Assembly of Authentic Islam") who had sworn allegiance to violent jihad at California's New Folsom State Prison.

Convicted terror conspirator Jose Padilla converted to Islam during a stint at a Broward County, Fla., jail and reportedly fell in with terrorist recruiters after his release. Convicted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid converted to Islam with the help of an extremist imam in a British prison.

Aqil Collins, a self-confessed jihadist turned FBI informant, converted to Islam while doing time in a California juvenile detention center. At a terrorist camp in Afghanistan, he went on to train with one of the men accused of kidnapping and beheading Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.

In East Texas, inmates were recruited with a half-hour videotape featuring the anti-Semitic rants of California-based Imam Muhammad Abdullah, who claims that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were actually carried out by the Israeli and U.S. governments.

Federal corrections officials told congressional investigators during the Bush years "that convicted terrorists from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing were put into their prisons' general population, where they radicalized inmates and told them that terrorism was part of Islam."

So what should we do with the remaining Gitmo inmates? Hundreds of those considered less dangerous have already been released (and reportedly, at least one in seven of those returned to jihad). Those remaining are the most radical, violent, and dangerous, the ones implacably committed to waging jihad against all infidels. The Obama administration is committed to shutting down Gitmo, but admits that these men can't be released. So where should they go? 

<snark>Here's an idea: let's send them to various high-security prisons around the country, where they can rub elbows and share their ideas with a bunch of mean, nasty, violent, disaffected bad-asses. What could possibly go wrong?</snark>

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The normalization of evil

Posted by Richard on February 3, 2009

I've watched the video of the brutal beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. It's a very disturbing thing to see, and I won't provide a link. You can find it if you really want to see it. But I will link to his father's Wall Street Journal op-ed piece about the seventh anniversary of his death: 

This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?

The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.

Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.

No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.

But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.

Read. The. Whole. Thing. Mourn for Danny Pearl. And ask yourself what's going to happen to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed when Guantanamo is closed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Pro-Israel rally a success

Posted by Richard on January 12, 2009

I added an after-rally update to my earlier post about Sunday's rally against terrorism and in support of Israel, but I've decided it really deserves a new post. Who looks for updates on posts they read days ago, right?

Americans Against Terrorism (AAT) deserves big kudos for putting together, in just one week, a great rally! According to the state police estimate, about 3000 attended the pro-Israel rally, while 1000 pro-Palestinians counter-demonstrated across the street (I had estimated 3000 for our side, too, but I guessed the pro-Palestinian number at closer to the same).

One thing about the counter-demonstration really ticked me off. According to a Denver police sergeant with whom I spoke, the Palestinians got a permit from the state for their counter-demonstration and were authorized to use sound equipment — which drowned out our speakers if you were at the perimeter of our crowd. It's a free country, and I have no problem with them counter-demonstrating. But they were trying to drown our side out (and would have if they'd had more sound output) — they wanted to silence their opponents, just like radical Islamists always do — and the state apparently abetted them.

Since AAT got the Capitol permit first, there was simply no excuse for effectively giving the Palestinians permission to interfere with and disrupt our rally. No excuse, but I can think of two reasons: (1) anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian sentiments by the decision-maker, or (2) the usual moderate/liberal craven cowardice in the face of radical Muslim's angry demands. I suppose the odds favor reason 2.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Rally in support of Israel

Posted by Richard on January 10, 2009

It's unbelievable to me that anyone other than radical Islamists would even question the Israelis' right to defend themselves against the relentless rocket attacks by Hamas. But we live in a Bizarro World where news reporters say with a straight face that the "cease-fire" was broken when Israel struck back against the rocket attacks. It's essential that those of us who side with the civilized against the barbarians, who draw a moral distinction between naked aggression and self-defense, stand up and speak out.

At 2 PM this Sunday, January 11th, American Against Terrorism is holding an anti-terror, pro-Israel rally at the Colorado State Capitol in Denver (Colfax & Lincoln). If you're anywhere near Denver, please join me there.

Many rallies are planned around the country over the next few days. Check this list for one near you that you can attend.

AAT's Neil Dobro:

“If you would fight an enemy who launched rockets loaded with shrapnel into your home and at your children, you should join us on Sunday. It is amazing to see people in the streets of Europe, and even the U.S., supporting a terror group that has vowed to destroy Israel simply because it is populated by Jews. We hope that our rally will serve as a wake up call to Americans: terror must be fought and destroyed. The Palestinian people have suffered hardships, and now a devastating war as a result of the hateful actions of Hamas. Some Gazans didn’t vote or back their rise to power; but now they too are paying for the choices made by Hamas leaders. Israelis live with the constant effort of these Iranian trained terror fighters who have taken vows to kill them. Hamas won’t stop, so they must be stopped. “

 UPDATE: I've posted info about the rally at denverpost.com, dailycamera.com, denver.yourhub.com, and myfoxcolorado.com. If you can think of other places to post info about the Denver rally or any of the other nationwide rallies (or if you want to post your own messages to those sites to reinforce the message), please do so. Feel free to copy or adapt what I've posted here.

UPDATE 2 (1/11): Great rally! According to the state police estimate, about 3000 attended the pro-Israel rally, while 1000 pro-Palestinians rallied across the street (I had estimated 3000 for our side, too, but I guessed the pro-Palestinian number at closer to the same).

One thing about the counter-demonstration really ticked me off. According to a Denver police sergeant with whom I spoke the Palestinians got a permit from the state for their counter-demonstration and were authorized to use sound equipment — which drowned out our speakers if you were at the perimeter of our crowd. It's a free country, and I have no problem with them counter-demonstrating. But they were trying to drown our side out (and would have if they'd had more sound output) — silence their opponents, just like radical Islamists always do — and the state apparently abetted them.

Since AAT got the Capitol permit first, there was simply no excuse for effectively giving the Palestinians permission to interfere with and disrupt our rally. No excuse, but I can think of two reasons: (1) anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian sentiments by the decision-maker, or (2) the usual moderate/liberal craven cowardice in the face of radical Muslim's angry demands. I suppose the odds favor reason 2.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Unarmed and helpless

Posted by Richard on December 2, 2008

As news of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, unfolded, it seemed unbelievable that just 10-15 attackers could cause that much death and destruction. An excellent detailed account of the attacks in Monday's Wall Street Journal helped shed some light.

For some time, John Lott and others have been pointing out that gun-free zones are the preferred hunting grounds of those bent on wholesale killing because they're full of unarmed and helpless victims. "Multiple-victim public shootings keep on occurring in places where guns are banned."

It's clear from the WSJ account that Mumbai (and apparently the whole of India) is a virtually gun-free zone, and this permitted the ten terrorists to roam across the city, slaying people with impunity. In fact, they didn't even have to fear the police! Two of them moved through Mumbai's railroad station, tossing grenades and mowing down travelers with gunfire. Several dozen police officers were on duty at the station, but that made no difference (emphasis added):

B.S. Sidhu, head of the Railway Protection Force for the Mumbai region, says that while some officers tried to fight back, there was little his force could do. Most police officers at the station — as they are throughout India — were unarmed or carried only bamboo sticks known as lathis. More than 40 people, including three police officers, were killed in just a few minutes, authorities said. The wounded survivors screamed for help amid acrid smoke, piles of slumped, bloodied bodies and spilling suitcases.

The same problem allowed the terrorists to march into the Oberoi and Trident hotels and kill with impunity: 

At about 9:45 p.m., two gunmen, slender and in their mid-20s, ran up the circular driveway at the entrance to the Trident. They shot the security guard and two bellhops. The hotel had metal detectors, but none of its security personnel carried weapons because of the difficulties in obtaining gun permits from the Indian government, according to the hotel company's chairman, P.R.S. Oberoi. The gunmen raced through the marble-floored lobby, past the grand piano into the adjoining Verandah restaurant, firing at the guests and shattering the windows.

Later, two of the terrorists ran out of luck at a police roadblock, and the lathis finally served a useful purpose — enabling one of them to be captured alive for later interrogation: 

The three policemen armed with guns drew them. The nine others waved their bamboo sticks. Revving the engine, the car tried to U-turn but got stuck on the median. The man in the passenger seat rolled out and started shooting, killing one officer and wounding another. The surviving baton-wielding officers jumped on him, knocking him unconscious. Policemen with guns shot the driver dead.

In America, the anti-gun crowd is always saying we shouldn't try to defend ourselves, we should dial 911 and let the police protect us. Given that the average response time is 15 minutes, that's not such a good option. But at least if they get there in time, the cops are armed!

In Mumbai, most of the cops were unarmed and helpless victims, just like the civilians they were pretending to protect. In fact, properly trained and equipped forces weren't on hand until they were flown into Mumbai the next morning:

At 6.30 a.m. Thursday, commandos from India's National Security Guard finally arrived — after they first waited for hours while authorities located a plane to pick them up at New Delhi, then waited for transportation from Mumbai's airport to the hotels under attack. The NSG commandos had proper equipment and training. They surrounded both the Taj and the Oberoi complex and a prolonged siege began.

Read the whole thing. It's gripping.

And remember, gun-free zones are helpless-victim zones.

UPDATE: See also this Fox Forum post by John Lott.

UPDATE2 (12/4): Big thanks to Strike the Root for the link, and thanks to everyone who followed it!

Welcome also to Freedom News Daily readers!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »