Posts Tagged ‘ terrorism ’

Imam assumes most Americans are blithering idiots

Yesterday Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf spoke to CBS’s geriatric news magazine, 60 Minutes and elaborated on his threat that not building his 9/11 Victory mosque was more dangerous than building it.  I know calling it a “victory mosque” is offensive to those of you trying so hard to pacify radical muslims in the vain hope that doing so will keep them from attacking you. Call it a community center if you like, that will not change what it is.

The fact is whenever you listen to someone with an agenda speak, you need to listen between the lines and consider those remarks in the context of previous comments, known positions and affiliations.  Recently some of Imam Rauf’s off-the-record comments were uncovered that illuminate Rauf and his over-arching agenda.  But first let’s cover the recent remarks. Continue reading


BP Rig Disaster Too Perfect

Last month in an effort to draw Conservatives and “moderate” Democrats to support (or at lease not vigorously oppose) his Cap & Trade Bill,  President Obama decided to permit limited oil drilling off the U.S. coast.  Almost instantly environmental groups were responding with outrage.

Environmentalists missed the point.  Being so focused upon the tree bark they can’t see the tree much less the forest.

President Obama never intended to allow significant oil drilling.  It was all a ploy to push through a huge energy tax that will eventually kill domestic oil drilling as well as what’s left of the American coal industry.

Nevertheless, left-wing nuts went crazy.  From where I sit it seems the President could have ignored them until enough back-room deals were cut to pass his so-called Cap & Trade bill, but the pressure mounted.  Then as if an answer to some environmentalist’s prayer; out of nowhere and perfectly timed, an oil rig explodes in the Gulf of Mexico. Continue reading

Conspiracies, Terrorists, and Nutjobs

Any good conspiracy should be plausible, but the same is not true of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories can be as off-the-wall as the Truthers or Birthers, meaning the motives and execution of the “conspiracy” doesn’t have to be plausible. However, any real conspiracy should have plausible motives, method, execution, and objectives. As a thinking person I have to weigh conspiracy theories on these factors and if they don’t add up I must examine the timing and the motives of those promoting such conspiracy theories as well as the group accused of hatching the conspiracy. Continue reading

What’s truth got to do with it

CBS' Bob Schieffer suggests clamping down on Freedom of Speech in an effort to control violenceTwo of my biggest pet-peeves have always been the hypocrisy of the Left and the fact that historically, governments are loath to yield power.  The two become linked when the Left runs the government and terror comes from frustrated crazies.  The government seems to use every excuse to exploit public fear and encourage public demand for ever greater government “protections” which are really just more restrictions on freedom.  All-the-while they pin as much blame as possible on their political enemies.

If you’re old enough to have travelled in the 1980s and even the 90s you can recall the thrill and exhilaration of travel.  If not, then you may not realize travelling hasn’t always been drudgery, fraught with inconvenience, and invasions of privacy.  But hey, you’re safer.  Yeah, it’s sooo worth it!

Yesterday, Bob Schieffer, of CBS News, scared the crap out of me.  Continue reading

Let Us NEVER Forget

There is no need to repeat the entire horrific event, yet these few images remind us that terrorism is real.

Today marks the first anniversary of the horrific events of September 11, 2001 since President G. W. Bush left office.  Say what you may, and I am no Bush fanboy, but America has been a safer place since that awful day.  I had planned to commemorate the anniversary by contrasting Obama’s speech today with his reaction in 2001.  However, a small bit of idiocy occurred today and, well, this blog is called An American Idiot.

In recent months we’ve seen more terror attacks from our own government than from hateful foreigners.  Recall the Air Force One-clone attack on New York?  Today, on the anniversary of the largest most dangerous terror attacks in world history, (yes – world,) you would think the government and the military would refrain from public exercises.

However, that was not the case.  In what the Washington Post called, “Keystone Kops on the Potomac,” the U.S. Coast Guard decided to hold exercises that involved simulated gunfire in the vicinity of the President.  This was truly a moment for one to wonder aloud, “what the heck were they thinking.”

Vice Admiral John Currier explains why there was nothing wrong with the decision to hold the training on 9/11

Of the all days to hold training exercises within sight of the public, September 11 is the worst possible day.  This is especially true when such training comes without a public announcement.  (I say this knowing that the Coast Guard holds training exercises on the Potomac about four times a week.)

Now in fairness to the Coast Guard, the furor was triggered by a reporter or other media staff.  Someone who apparently works for CNN overheard Coast Guard radio chatter related to the exercise.  Likely unfamiliar with military exercises and interpreting what they heard out of context, the listener concluded something “big” was going on – possibily another terror attack on the anniversary of the WTC attack.  CNN defends their decision to run with the story since there was visual corroboration in the form of rapidly moving Coast Guard vessels in the river.

CNN went on to state that not reporting the story would have been “irresponsible.”  I doubt irresponsible is the right word, however, we must remember that the news business is a very competitive business and not being first to report a breaking story is a cardinal sin.  So I don’t fault the news outlets for reporting the story.  The fault lies with the Coast Guard for not having the sense to remember what day is it.

I could fault the person who mistook the verbal words, “bang, bang, bang” for actual live gunfire.  However, Currier admitted someone could have said, “I’ve expended X number of rounds,” over the radio.  Certainly that would trigger the primal REPORT instinct of any reporter.

I know it would have triggered mine.  Think about it, you’re watching Coast Guard vessels dart about like something is going on – while the Presidential motorcade is crossing the river and you are hearing Coast Guard officers talking about a boat “breaching security” and describing rounds fired.  What else could you conclude?

White House Press Secretary Gibbs always finds a way to annoy me.  Today was no different.  In his snotty manner, he admonished the press, “before reporting things, checking would be good.” Like Gibbs would know even if there were a serious attack underway.  I seem to recall he knew nothing about the Air Force One-like plane flying over New York last spring.

My favorite quote from Vice Admiral Currier came when he said, “This is very instructive for us. We’re going to review our own protocols, our own procedures. . . . We may even ask some of you for advice on how we can preclude this type of thing from happening again.” I certainly hope so.  Oh, and you can start with this one, don’t plan exercises on September 11.


Have you ever accidentally hit REPLY ALL to an e-mail from the boss, your sarcastic or critical remarks embarrassing you or worse? That a serious error but what about accidentally posting national secrets to a public website?  No not on your blog – although that would be very bad.  It seems the Government Printing Office did just that.  They published a declaration detailing the location and even floor plans for nuclear facilities and U.S. nuclear missile sites.  Senator Chris Bond (R-MO) described the publication as “a virtual treasure map for terrorists.”

Technically the document was not “secret” but was classified as “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive.” In light of the dangerous world in which we live I am left wondering, did they downgrade the classification when they discovered the error or is it possible that such potentially dangerous information was really only considered sensitive.

The document was a May 5th letter from the President to the House of Representatives and included the sensitive information as attached documents.  The information was posted on May 6 and remained online with full public access until it was removed on June 2, 2009.  The GPO excused the error by noting that they process about 160 House documents each session.

There is no way to know if terrorists gained access to any of this information, at least the GPO hasn’t released that information.  However, there are several websites such as FAS Secrecy News, and Wikileaks that seek such secrets and publish them.  The GPO says the documents were received in a standard way and processed in a routine manner.  Clearly the GPO needs to review these “routine proceedures.”  This was no little mistake and we need to see some proceedural changes we can believe in.

America’s Stockholm Syndrome

The Norrmalmstorg robbery occurred in 1973, when two bank robbers took three women and one man hostage during a heist.  The incidence endured six days during which time the hostages were ensnared with a trap that would strangle them if they were gassed, they were under constant threat of death.  The hostages later reported that they felt more threatened by police than by their captors.  When police finally rescued them they resisted police rescue efforts.  Later at the trial the former hostages refused to testify against their tormentors.  The male hostage set up a legal defense fund for the kidnapping bank robbers. The case was headline news in Sweden and women watching the news became enamored by the handsome good looks of one of the robbers, in fact, he became engaged to one of the his admirers.  Odd behavior indeed, however such reactions by victims to their tormentors is fairly common and even has a name, it is called Stockholm Syndrome.

Today Stockholm Syndrome refers to a victim of kidnapping, (or other entrapment situation,) who is incapable of escaping a life-threatening situation.  The victim has no source of protection or escape and as a defense mechanism, creates an emotional bond to the captor.  By seeing the world through the abuser’s perspective, the victim discovers how to please the abuser, thus creating a bond, and achieving a greater degree of security. Patty Hearst is a classic American example of the syndrome.

But I see another example on a far grander scale and it has gone unnoticed.  Since terrorists struck the WTC and the Pentagon in 2001 and subsequently the war in Iraq, many Americans seem to be making great efforts to embrace Islam to prove America is not anti-Islamic.  Is this to convince ordinary Muslims or radicalized Muslims bent on the destruction of Western civilization?  I believe the latter.  In much the same way a hostage might try to bond with their tormentor, many Americans are trying to see the world through radical Islam’s perspective in an unconscious effort to gain security against radical Islam’s threat.

Look around at what is happening in America.  Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has said, “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury,” and more famously, “Israel must be wiped off the map,” was invited to speak at Columbia University.  This same evangelist of hate was invited to a softball chat with Larry King, where he was treated like any other political interviewee.  And of coarse a candidate with an Islamic name was swept into the presidency.  A coincidence?  Perhaps, or perhaps there was an unconscious reaction to his name. Certainly President Obama has been begging for Islamic love since inauguration day.  BTW, has anyone else noticed that Obama seems to have spent almost as much time in Muslim nations as he has here in the U.S.

But how deep does this psychology run?  I cannot answer that question definitively but one big hint comes when we examine the proposed memorial to United Flight 93 in Somerset, Pennsylvania.  We all know the heroic story of Flight 93, Islamic terrorists seized control of the plane, turned it back toward Washington, D.C. where they intended to crash to plane into a government building.  Passengers took the initiative and although they lost their own lives they saved the lives of those on the ground in D.C. as well as the U.S. Capitol Building.

Original DesignCongress tasked the National Park Service with creating an appropriate memorial to the victims of the Flight 93 hijacking.  When plans for the memorial were finally released in September 2005 it was called the “Crescent of Embrace” and bore a shocking resemblance to the crescent symbol of Islam.  Not only did it look like the Islamic Crescent but it was called a Crescent which certainly appears to be an Islamic reference. To deny this is to be insincere. Thus after years of intense opposition, mostly from flight 93 passenger Tom Burnett Jr.’s father, the designer, Paul Murdock, made changes to the design.

CresentComparisons copy

What changes were made were superficial.  The crescent was narrowed to make it more “circle-like” and the name waqs changed.  On the National Park Service website there is an interview with Paul Murdock.  In the interview Murdock dismisses the controversy, “These allegations are self-serving propaganda driven by a closed-minded ideology that is blind to new meaning and form. Our design is an original and distinctly American memorial that honors the 40 heroes of United Flight 93.”  I’m sorry but I must be blind to “new meaning and form.”  The form clearly references images of terror.  The violent acts of 9/11 were committed in the name of Islam.  Had these acts been committed in the name of Christ, there is no doubt in my mind that regardless of natural landforms, (Murdock defended the crescent shape as having been dictated by the natural landform,) there would not be any hint of a cross shape in the memorial design.

Murdock’s statement angered me on several levels.  He began by accusing the design’s opposition of having a “self-serving” agenda.  What might this agenda be?  We are offended that the memorial unintentionally or not celebrates the ideology that motivated those violent acts in 2001.  Next he made what I think is a very telling comment.  He accused opponents of the design of being driven by a “closed-minded ideology.”  This was the statement that led me to understand the design was not an unintentional nod to Islam.

He has consistently insisted on the crescent design and in calling Tom Burnett a close-minded idealogue, he revealed his own agenda.  You see, if Mr. Murdock had accidentally offended families of the victims and millions of Americans and he were not an idealogue himself, he would have removed the accidental symbolism.  However, not only did he not remove the crescent he insisted it remain the focal point in the memorial’s design.  So who is “driven by a closed-minded ideology?”  (Visit this website if this outrages you as much as it does me.) I say it is Paul Murdock and I contend he is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, just like millions of other Americans, likely including, even our President.

Washington Times Exclusive - Al Qaeda eyes bio attack from Mexico

Meanwhile our President is once again making the rounds trying to please the Islamic world.  No trip to Israel, no, that might erase some of the good-will President Obama has built among Muslims.  However, you cannot win over the radical hate-mongering Muslims no matter how hard you try.  Just like the aliens in the movie Independence Day they only want us to die.  Mr. President, did you miss the latest video from our misunderstood Islamic friends? You can try to make friends with your tormentors but in the end they will kill you just the same.

%d bloggers like this: