Archive for category Opinion

Using tragedy to create a political advantage.

Jared Lee Loughner in March 2010. This was someone's little boy - where and how did he go wrong? Photograph: Mamta Popat/AP/Arizona Daily Star

After the Fort Hood shooting, the liberal media went out of it’s way to avoid any mention of Islamic motivations for the shooting. The murderer Hasan was characterized as being troubled, mentally unstable, in an effort to downplay the clear Islamic motive behind the killings.

Anyone who made that connection was labeled as Islamophobic, xenophobic or bigoted. Americans had to dig to find out that Nidal Malik Hasan, as he was shooting, was shouting, “Allahu Akbar” a clear link to jihadist motivation for his attack. This was not fully investigated or reported by the liberal press.

Contrast that with the recent shooting in Arizona.

Immediately, the media began either implying that “The Tea Party” or “Conservatives” were to blame because they used language and graphic symbols that implied gun use, with many accusing their opponents of “inflaming the American public”. They used this tragedy to place blame on their political opponents and ironically contributed to the “political vitriol” that they claim to abhor.

Read the rest of this entry »

No Comments

Pistol comparison: Glock, M&P, XD

No Comments

Why the Glock? Lee Ermey “The Gunny” sounds off

No Comments

The Mohammed Cartoon Dust Has Not Settled

The Mohammed Cartoon Dust Has Not Settled is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By Scott Stewart

When one considers all of the people and places in the West targeted by transnational jihadists over the past few years, iconic targets such as New York’s Times Square, the London Metro and the Eiffel Tower come to mind. There are also certain target sets such as airlines and subways that jihadists focus on more than others. Upon careful reflection, however, it is hard to find any target set that has been more of a magnet for transnational jihadist ire over the past year than the small group of cartoonists and newspapers involved in the Mohammed cartoon controversy.

Every year STRATFOR publishes a forecast of the jihadist movement for the coming year. As we were working on that project for this year, we were struck by the number of plots in 2010 that involved the cartoon controversy — and by the number of those plots that had transnational dimensions, rather than plots that involved only local grassroots operatives. (The 2011 jihadist forecast will be available to STRATFOR members in the coming weeks.)

Groups such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) have gone to great lengths to keep the topic of the Mohammed cartoons burning in the consciousness of radical Islamists, whether they are lone wolves or part of an organized jihadist group, and those efforts are obviously bearing fruit. Because of this, we anticipate that plots against cartoon-related targets will continue into the foreseeable future. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Egypt and the Destruction of Churches: Strategic Implications

Egypt and the Destruction of Churches: Strategic Implications is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By George Friedman

Over the past few days, Christian churches have been attacked in at least two countries — Nigeria and Egypt — while small packages containing improvised explosive devices were placed on the doorsteps of Christian families in Iraq. Attacks against Christians are not uncommon in the Islamic world, driven by local issues and groups, and it is unclear whether these latest attacks were simply coincidental and do not raise the threat to a new level or whether they indicate the existence of a new, coordinated, international initiative. There is a strong case to be made for the idea that there is nothing new in all of this.

Yet I am struck by the close timing of events in three distant and dispersed countries. Certainly, Egyptian intelligence services are looking for any regional connections (e.g., whether Iraqi operatives recruited the Egyptian bomber). While there have been previous bombings in Egypt, they have focused on tourists, not churches. What is important is this: If the recent attacks are not coincidental, then a coordinated campaign is being conducted against Christian churches that spans at least these countries. And it is a network that has evaded detection by intelligence services.

Obviously, this is speculative. What is clear, however, is that the attack on a church in one country — Egypt — is far from common and was particularly destructive. Egypt has been relatively quiet in terms of terrorism, and there have been few recent attacks on the large Coptic Christian population. The Egyptian government has been effective in ruthlessly suppressing Islamist extremists and has been active in sharing intelligence on terrorism with American, Israeli and other Muslim governments. Its intelligence apparatus has been one of the mainstays of global efforts to limit terrorism as well as keep Egypt’s domestic opposition in check.

Therefore, the attack in Egypt is significant for no other reason than that it happened and represents a failure of Egyptian security. While such failures are inevitable, what made this failure significant was that it occurred in tight sequence with attacks on multiple Christian targets in Iraq and Nigeria and after a threat al Qaeda made last month against Egyptian Copts. This was a warning, which in my mind increases the possibility of coordinated action, but the Egyptians failed to block it. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , ,

No Comments

Separating Terror from Terrorism

Separating Terror from Terrorism is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By Scott Stewart

On Dec. 15, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sent a joint bulletin to state and local law enforcement agencies expressing their concern that terrorists may attack a large public gathering in a major U.S. metropolitan area during the 2010 holiday season. That concern was echoed by contacts at the FBI and elsewhere who told STRATFOR they were almost certain there was going to be a terrorist attack launched against the United States over Christmas.

Certainly, attacks during the December holiday season are not unusual. There is a history of such attacks, from the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 on Dec. 21, 1988, and the thwarted millennium attacks in December 1999 and January 2000 to the post-9/11 airliner attacks by shoe bomber Richard Reid on Dec. 22, 2001, and by underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on Dec. 25, 2009. Some of these plots have even stemmed from the grassroots. In December 2006, Derrick Shareef was arrested while planning an attack he hoped to launch against an Illinois shopping mall on Dec. 22.

Mass gatherings in large metropolitan areas have also been repeatedly targeted by jihadist groups and lone wolves. In addition to past attacks and plots directed against the subway systems in major cities such as Madrid, London, New York and Washington, 2010 saw failed attacks against the crowds in New York’s Times Square on May 1 and in Pioneer Courthouse Square in downtown Portland, Ore., on Nov. 26. Read the rest of this entry »

, ,

No Comments

Banning Guns, Crossbows and Knives is not enough: Big Sticks must also be Banned!

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/31/gentleman-wielding-t.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29

There is nothing funny about this video. The point is that banning weapons does not solve the problem of crime, it only takes away powerful tools for self-defense from law-abiding citizens.

No Comments

At least half a dozen states say they will propose bills to fight illegal immigration.

By JULIA PRESTON
“Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.

Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish employers who hire them.

Next week, at least five states plan to begin an unusual coordinated effort to cancel automatic United States citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/01/us/01immig.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

No Comments

Preparedness or Paranoia?

No Comments

Making Sense of the START Debate

Making Sense of the START Debate is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By George Friedman

Last week, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which had been signed in April. The Russian legislature still has to provide final approval of the treaty, but it is likely to do so, and therefore a New START is set to go into force. That leaves two questions to discuss. First, what exactly have the two sides agreed to and, second, what does it mean? Let’s begin with the first.

The original START was signed July 31, 1991, and reductions were completed in 2001. The treaty put a cap on the number of nuclear warheads that could be deployed. In addition to limiting the number of land- and submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and strategic bombers, it capped the number of warheads that were available to launch at 6,000. The fact that this is a staggering number of nuclear weapons should give you some idea of the staggering number in existence prior to START. START I lapsed in 2009, and the new treaty is essentially designed to reinstate it.

It is important to remember that Ronald Reagan first proposed START. His initial proposal focused on reducing the number of ICBMs. Given that the Soviets did not have an effective intercontinental bomber force and the United States had a massive B-52 force and follow-on bombers in the works, the treaty he proposed would have decreased the Soviet quantitative advantage in missile-based systems without meaningfully reducing the U.S. advantage in bombers. The Soviets, of course, objected, and a more balanced treaty emerged.

What is striking is that START was signed just before the Soviet Union collapsed and implemented long after it was gone. It derived from the political realities that existed during the early 1980s. One of the things the signers of both the original START and the New START have ignored is that nuclear weapons by themselves are not the issue. The issue is the geopolitical relationship between the two powers. The number of weapons may affect budgetary considerations and theoretical targeting metrics, but the danger of nuclear war does not derive from the number of weapons but from the political relationship between nations. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , ,

1 Comment

The Final Weapon

The purpose of fighting is to win.

There is no possible victory in defense.

The sword is more important than the shield,

and skill is more important than either.

The final weapon is the brain.

All else is supplemental.

-source unknown

No Comments

The Swiss vote to deport Criminal Foreigners.

“GENEVA — After heated debate and a campaign utilizing controversial “black sheep” posters, Switzerland’s far-right party won voters’ support in a referendum Sunday that calls for the automatic deportation of foreigners who are convicted of serious crimes.”

What resonated with voters were contentions that foreigners accounted for a disproportionate share of Swiss crime. Christian Blocher, the People’s Party leader, asserted at a debate at Geneva University during the campaign that foreigners make up 22 percent of the resident population but account for 54 percent of convictions for grievous bodily harm and 62 percent of robbery convictions. “Prisons do not stop crimes,” he said. “The only way to go about it is to force them to leave the country.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/europe/29iht-swiss.html?_r=1

The question I have is, why would this cause heated debate? If you come to our country, then commit a serious crime, you’re out of here.

What’s complicated about that?

No Comments

Could missile launched off the southern California coast be Chinese?

This below is pure conjecture but not beyond the realm of the possible.

From: Wayne Madsen: China Fired Missile Seen In Southern California

Experts agree that this was a ballistic missile being fired off of Los Angeles. Pentagon insists it was a jet aircraft or model rocket.

“China flexed its military muscle Monday evening in the skies west of Los Angeles when a Chinese Navy Jin class ballistic missile nuclear submarine, deployed secretly from its underground home base on the south coast of Hainan island, launched an intercontinental ballistic missile from international waters off the southern California coast.

The Pentagon spin machine … is now spinning various conspiracy theories, including describing the missile plume …. as the condensation trail from a jet aircraft. Other Pentagon-inspired cover stories are that the missile was actually an amateur rocket or an optical illusion.

Experts agree that this was a ballistic missile being fired off of Los Angeles. Pentagon insists it was a jet aircraft or model rocket.

Missile experts, including those from Jane’s in London, say the plume was definitely from a missile, possibly launched from a submarine. WMR has learned that the missile was likely a JL-2 ICBM, which has a range of 7,000 miles, and was fired in a northwesterly direction over the Pacific and away from U.S. territory from a Jin class submarine. The Jin class can carry up to twelve such missiles.

The Pentagon, which has spent billions on ballistic missile defense systems, a pet project of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, is clearly embarrassed over the Chinese show of strength.”


http://www.infowars.com/wayne-madsen-china-fired-missile-seen-in-southern-california/

No Comments

Evil preys on the weak – guns protect them.

The system cannot protect your family from twisted, evil men.
It is your responsibility to protect your family.
Being a respected doctor will not stop a bad guy. A bullet will.

Dr. William Petit pictured with daughters, Michaela and Hayley, and wife, Jennifer Hawke-Petit, in an undated family photo (Fox News).

“After four days of deliberations, jurors in New Haven Superior Court recommended death for Hayes who, along with co-defendant Joshua Komisarjevsky, broke into the Petit home and tormented the family for seven hours before Hawke-Petit and her daughters were killed. The judge will impose the sentence December 2.

Authorities said Hayes and Komisarjevsky forced their way into the house on July 23, 2007, beat Petit, and forced his wife to withdraw money from a bank while the rest of her family was held hostage at home. Hayes then sexually assaulted and strangled her, authorities said. Komisarjevsky, who will be tried next year, is charged with sexually assaulting 11-year-old Michaela.

Michaela and her 17-year-old sister, Hayley, were tied to their beds and doused in gasoline before the men set the house on fire, according to testimony. The girls died of smoke inhalation.”

This undated inmate file photo released in February 2010 by the Connecticut Department of Correction shows Steven Hayes, accused of severely beating Dr. William Petit, Jr. , and killing his wife and two daughters during a home invasion in Cheshire, Conn.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/08/jury-mulls-death-penalty-th-day-connecticut-home-invasion-trial/

, ,

1 Comment

Arizona governor vs. Phoenix Suns owner:

“The owner of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, Robert Sarver, opposes AZ’s new immigration laws.

Arizona’s Governor, Jan Brewer, released the following statement in response to Sarver’s criticism of the new law:

“What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying?

What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are, but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn’t be ejected.

Furthermore, what if Suns’ ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink?

And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?”

-Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer

, , ,

No Comments