StormWarning’s Counterterrorism

Its about time that someone actually speak the truth about the “financial crisis” and why it happened. So like it or not, this is a violently politically incorrect, but, IMO, accurate take on the greed and stupidity that has led to a near meltdown in our economy and the wiping out of any profit I might have seen from the sale of my home in the immediate future. Yes dammit, pass the bailout so the rest of the economy doesn’t go down the tubes and have the next President be blamed for the implosion. And I want someone to step up and pay my damn mortgage too! I’ve worked hard for that right!

NOT PC RANT: Now, you see…the basic question lies in how some people who haven’t got good (or possibly any) credit were able to buy houses that they simply couldn’t afford. I don’t know about you, but I’ve worked hard to maintain my excellent credit rating, despite years of paltry income. But no! People have nothing, went out and moved into the “keeping up with the Jones’ neighborhoods, only to find themselves in situations where they either couldn’t afford the increased mortgage payments as their adjustable sub-prime mortages went up, or maybe even, with the real estate market imploding on itself, largely because of their own greed (and of couse, the greed of the mortgage industry that decided to loan money to anyone), found themselves “upside down” on their homes (simply, they owed more than the market value of their house).

Well excuse me! and “go fluck a duck!” I worked hard to buy my house, a house that I could afford to buy. And I live in a nice neighborhood, but as I’ve watched homes in my neighborhood go on the market and sell, it has been obvious that some of these people actually couldn’t afford to actually be my neighbor…they got themselves one of those nice sub-prime mortgage, and bought a nice house in a nice neighborhood, where they really couldn’t afford to live (the tell tale sign was when the “repo-man” came to tow their shiney new BMW out of their driveway and cart it away).

Ladies and gentlemen, and those few who read this blog - America is a land of opportunity. However, that opportunity is not an entitlement. You, if you don’t work hard and have the money in savings, are not entitled to live in my neighborhood, just like I an not entitled to live in a nearby neighborhood where the home prices are 50% higher than mine. The real problem is that one of those upside down homeowners just sold a house down the street from me for a price lower than what I paid for mine.

So screw me! for being able to afford the house I live in, because Mr. and Mrs. “Keeping up with the Jones” couldn’t afford their house, and had to sell in a distressed sale.

There’s a post worth linking my rant to at Right Truth. Good people of all walks of life work hard to establish themselves and accomplish whatever it is that they accomplish. Tiday, people who far overstepped their boundaries are putting all of us in a position to get them out of their jams. I object strenuously.

5 Comments »

Never ever forget that we are dealing with cold blooded killers who have co-opted Islam. Even when they are found “not guilty” of writing bad poetry, “these” people are dangerous.

NEFA has released a new slide presentation about a woman known as the “Lyrical Terrorist” Samina Malik, who along with Sohail Qureshi was accused of planning terrorism in Afghanistan and other places against coalition. Malik was prosecuted for possessing the documents, and not for her poetry. See Kohlmann’s post at Counterterrorism Blog.

Excerpt from “How to Behead” by Samina Malik
It’s not as messy or as hard as some may think.
It’s all about the flow of the wrist.
Sharpen the knife to its maximum.
And before you begin to cut the flesh.
Tilt the fool’s head to its left.
Saw the knife back and forth.
No doubt that the punk will twitch and scream.
But ignore the donkey’s ass.
And continue to slice back and forth.
You’ll feel the knife hit the wind and food pipe.
But Don’t Stop.
Continue with all your might.
About now you should feel the knife vibrate.
You can feel the warm heat being given off.
But this is due to the friction being caused.

More of Malik’s poetry:
• In a poem titled “Raising Mujahideen Children,“ Malik suggested that indoctrination should begin at 7 years of age: “Show the children videos and pictures of mujahideen and tell them to become strong like them…Explain how the Mujahideen fear no man - they fear Allah alone, and for his sake they are able, willing and capable to do anything in defence of Islam.”
• In a poem titled “The Living Martyrs,” Malik wrote: “For the living martyrs are awakening and Kuffars [non-believers] world soon to be shaking.”
• She also wrote, “Let us make Jihad/ Move to the front line/ To chop chop head of kuffar swine,” as well as that “Kafirs your time will come soon, and no one will save you from your doom.
• Malik argued: “to partake in something and to write about something are two different things.” She continued, “this does not mean I wanted to convert my words into actions.” She even claimed she “did not realise there was such a thing as extremism.”
• Her defense team also drew parallels with the WWI poetry of Wilfred Owen: “Poetry can be described as disturbing, shocking, even repulsive. What is the intent? Is it to shock, to revolt? That in itself doesn’t make it criminal and it doesn’t help you to get into the mind of who has written it.”

And now for the “punch line.” While at first convicted, she was let go because the British courts rules that actions and not thoughts were illegal.

Lyrical Terrorist, Samina Malik

4 Comments »

OK, so I’m late posting on this ridiculous Supreme Court ruling, so I will keep it short. Jeffrey Imm on Counterterrorism Blog writes, “Don’t You Know There’s A War On?” Until this ruling, it was never considered that the Constitution covered foreign enemy combatants.

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy ignores the reality that the U.S. Constitution was for American citizens, not foreign enemy combatants during wartime, by arrogantly demanding that “[t]he laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.”(Justice Kennedy Majority Opinion, page 70).

The reality is that when this ruling was first announced, I had recently returned from another grueling business trip. In my moments of time, I sought sources that would detail any indication that even non-resident immigrants (legal) had Constitutional rights. While I am fairly certain that a lawyer or two among the readers here may chime in, I came across this dialog, Immigration Law: The Constitutional Rights of Non-Citizens. I believe that this ruling is a sign of justice being blind. This time. however, blind to the realities that this War on Terrorism is a long war.

Jeff Imm’s post says it all…and makes the point better than any other writer I have seen on this subject. What I believe is that this ruling is likely to increase the battlefield deaths of enemy combatants. Kill of them! Kill them all!!! There are no rights on the battlefield…are there?  Check out the outrage here.

Constitutional rights, habeus corpus, Justice Kennedy, Supreme Court

No Comments »

When is a joke not funny?…when VP Cheney answers the question if he and Obama were going to have a family reunion, and then replies he would “have no objections” though he said he doubted Obama would want one - “certainly not before November.” And then said, he learned there were Cheneys on both his father’s and his mother’s side of the family…

West Virginia politicians aren’t laughing at Cheney’s little joke, including his fellow Republican, Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.).

“This is exactly the type of stereotyping that we don’t need from our elected officials,” Capito tells the Sleuth. “It’s disrespectful, and it’s certainly not funny. The Vice President should know better than to make a remark like this one. We all work hard to further West Virginia’s good name, only to have comments like this tarnish it. As a proud state, I can say we are disappointed.”

Mis-statements aren’t restricted to one person or another. Either way, incest isn’t funny.

DIck Cheney, incest, West Virginia

2 Comments »

EDITORIAL (Got Some Dissonance? Read it anyway)

For quite some time I have battled against the “blogospheric obsession” with Obama’s middle name. I’ve known that those who focused on his name and heritage did more harm than good, and that they were actually playing into the hands of the jihadists by amplifying the expected anti-Muslim sentiment. Yes, each and every one who insists on (falsely) highlighting Obama’s middle name, claiming that he is really a Muslim, or other shameless assertions, is helping the terrorist cause…(by the way, it is easy enough in my opinion to fight an Obama candidacy without resorting to racial and religious innuendo and falsehood).

In today’s Counterterrorism Blog entry by Evan Kohlmann (and yes “Virginia” he is an expert), makes it clear how much damage those people who insist on falsely accusing Barak Obama of being a Muslim or worse (as one blog post earlier today asserted - was the Manchurian Candidate) are actually doing (thank you Evan Kohlmann for your clarity).

Thus, the real terrorism-related problem here is how to deal with the long-term political fallout stemming from the ignorant and highly-polarized American portrayals of Islam unleashed during the context of the U.S. election, which are now inevitably being manipulated by Al-Qaida as propaganda fodder to recruit new sympathizers and terrorists. Even setting aside its obvious partisan bias, this form of reckless and irresponsible “scholarship” has no rightful place in the Christian Science Monitor nor, as Clark Hoyt rightly noted, on the New York Times Op-Ed page.

Kohlmann focuses his attention (actually ire if I may characterize his feelings) on two articles, President Apostate? from the NY Times Op-Ed page and Barack Obama – Muslim apostate? For Al Qaeda, the answer – and the implication – is clear. from the Christian Science Monitor

The problem, as Mr. Kohlmann points out, is that neither article is substantiated. A third articlecited by Kohlmann, also from the NY Times, makes it very clear that in referring to Obama (as President) as the “Apostate” is very, very wrong (headed). Clark Hoyt, the author of the third article (”Entitled to their Opinions, Yes. But Their Facts?”) spent the time to interview Muslim scholars (I am certain here, that those who have spent their blogging time making it clear that their opinion was that Obama was a Muslim, will now choose to dismiss these Muslim scholars)…and found that they all disagreed with Luttwak’s “opinion.”

So Hoyt’s conclusion is this: When writers purport to educate readers about complex matters, and they are arguably wrong, I think The Times cannot label it opinion and let it go at that.

UPDATES:
NYT has second thoughts about “Sharia smear” on Obama

“The Times Op-Ed page, quite properly, is home to a lot of provocative opinions,” Hoyt wrote. “But all are supposed to be grounded on the bedrock of fact. Op-Ed writers are entitled to emphasize facts that support their arguments and minimize others that don’t. But they are not entitled to get the facts wrong or to so mangle them that they present a false picture.”

Where Facts are Made-Up

As a blogger, I’m hardly in a position to dispute Luttwak’s right to opine on matters about which he knows nothing. But if I were the editor of an op-ed page and I were interested in publishing a provocative opinion piece grounded in an interpretation of Islamic law, I would try to get a scholar of Islamic jurisprudence to write it.

Dear readers…if some of you have consistently harped on the unsubstantiated rumor that Barak Obama is a Muslim in hiding, and that he is somehow the “Manchurian Candidate,” I urge you to re-think your views (if that is within your capability and mental capacity). As far as I am concerned, Evan Kohlmann is an acknowledged expert in things relating to counterterrorism and the jihad. I read his material, and the material of others, as often as my time permits. Kohlmann has written in words far better and more pointed than I have been able to muster til now: “…the ignorant and highly-polarized American portrayals of Islam unleashed during the context of the U.S. election, which are now inevitably being manipulated by Al-Qaida as propaganda fodder to recruit new sympathizers and terrorists.” Yes, ignorant.

You are all, and have been, playing into the hands of the jihadists who want to prove just how anti-Muslim the United States is…so, all of you have been aiding and abetting the enemy. Expecting that Obama will declare himself the presumptive winner of the Democratic nomination for the Presidency (confirming my long held conviction that Hillary would not be the nominee - unless something major occurs to change the Obama-Clinton nomination race), it is now time to focus on defeating Obama on the policies and on the capabilities of leadership. Can you do that? Frankly, I doubt it very much.

apostasy, Clark Hoyt, Evan Kohlmann, Manchurian Candidate, Obama

4 Comments »

Its been subrosa for a while, but now revealed, that a group of Catholics named Grupo Romo is working to address what thet call “the increasingly toxic anti-immigrant atmosphere” by turning the Alamo City into a sanctuary for unauthorized immigrants. These are “faith-driven” activists providing shelter, food and medical care for what this article refers to as “unauthorized immigrants” (this is political correctness carried to a ludicrous extreme!)…call these people what they are! They are “illegal aliens” who enter this country illegally by surreptitiously sneaking across holes in our border with Mexico (along with G-d knows whoever else).

The encouragement offered by this “well meaning” Grupo Romo is contrary to anything that any law-abiding citizen of the United States should countenance…residents of Texas where the population is 36% Hispanic (counting only the legal residents) and in San Antonio, where the legal Hispanic population is nearly 58% is astounding. Grupo Romo, despite their “faith base” and religious cloak, are aiding and abetting law breakers.

“We are the new Sanctuary Movement in San Antonio,” said group member Víctor Ruiz, 63, who works for the immigration division of Catholic Charities and previously was with the Defense Department in Corpus Christi. “If immigrants need help, we will do all we can to help them out.”

The original “Sanctuary Movement” was a religious effort in the 1980s that created an underground railroad for Central Americans fleeing the region’s bloody civil wars, whose trail crossed South Texas…

…Offering sanctuary to the undocumented is controversial even within immigrant-heavy congregations…

Despite their religious basis, Grupo Romo and other like them are breaking the law! This whole “New Sanctuary” movement is contrary to the Law of the Land!

● Jim “Hoot” Gibson, a San Antonio teacher and member of U.S. Border Watch, a Houston-based immigration-restriction group, said he and others stand ready to protest the Romo group. The law is unequivocal, Gibson said: They’ll be aiding and harboring undocumented immigrants.

● local ICE Director, Jerry Robinette says that “He’s all for people acting on political and religious convictions, and he’s got nothing against helping needy folks, but he can’t look the other way if they break immigration laws.” and “I’d caution them that good intentions could make them criminally liable,” Robinette said. “They have to make the decision whether they want to violate the law or not.”

Movements like the New Sanctuary Movement work against our National Security in the name of “faith.” Groups like these must be stopped. While their ideals a correct, the fact that they encourage law breaking is something I cannot support.

FYI, check out Right Truth’s Memorial Day Weekend Reading Assignment.

Grupo Romo, New Sanctuary Movement, San Antonio

No Comments »

Aside from having been wrong (for a number of reasons revealed below), I was unwilling to believe that the U.S. would cave to the likes of CAIR and Muslim Public Affairs Committee and ban the use of “Islamic Fundamentalist Jihad” (and other variants) from the GWOT Thesauraus. In reality, however, the DHS, the State Dept. and others have mandated the elimination of words describing the callous and cowardly barbarous al Qaeda mujahadeen who appropriated Islam for their inhumanity, to quell the concern of moderate Muslims that using such language confused the true meaning of those terms as used in secular Islam.

Thanks to Steve Emerson’s IPT, the government documents detailing this change are offered here and here. Maybe even more to the point, the Muslim proponents of this change, also reject the use of the word “moderate” to describe themselves, and instead wish to be referred to as “mainstream” or “traditional.”

Various Muslim groups including the MPAC praised these changes.  But MPAC accepts, not isolates terrorists.  In fact, MPAC differentiates between such groups as Hezbollah and Hamas, and the more dastardly al Qaeda by saying that “Hezbollah and Hamas are distinct in methods, motivations and goals from Al Qaeda.” Hamas and Hezbollah work to the elimination of Israel. And their use of suicide attacks and other indiscriminant killing tools of terrorism are not unlike those used by al Qaeda.

Arab states question Washington’s list of designated pro-Palestinian groups and humanitarian organizations. It is clear that the current terrorist threat to the US emanates from Al-Qaeda and not Palestinian groups. There is no evidence that Palestinian groups designated as terrorist organizations have any connections to Al-Qaeda. Yet the preoccupation with these groups raises the question as to whether targeting Palestinian groups serves true national security interests or is based on political considerations.

Certainly expressed better than I by IPT, the issue is clear…in an effort to satisfy the still fearful and quiet “mainstream” or moderate Muslim community in the U.S., where Islam remains a minority, the U.S. agrees to blur the distinction between the politically correct, and the literally obvious. In quoting M. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, IPT raises the spectre that the suggested changes could diminish American understanding of the ideological motivations behind those who threaten our security…and also ignores that in Muslim majority nations the radicals call themselves Muslims, Islamists, and Jihadists in Arabic and every other language with little time spent admonishing society not to call them what they call themselves.

Of course, it is interesting that in Europe, we have such articles as Today’s Islamist radicalization in Spain. Just the subhead says it all: “The protecting the safety of Spanish citizens should override the fear of sacrificing human rights, writes Carlos Echeverría Jesús for Strategic Studies Group.”

The Spanish jail population with ties to Salafist jihadism continues to grow. Because of this, it is even more urgent to prevent radicalization among the relatives and friends of terrorists. With their friends and family imprisoned, it is likely they will feel victimized and attempt to carry on the terrorist work. It is necessary to assume that the Muslim population as a whole, especially its youth, will feel besieged or marginalized as a community by Christians. It is imperative that the public powers try to change this.

The establishment of the Salafist jihadist ideology or any other variety of radical Islamism must be prevented. The way to do so is to filter the access to these messages by both young and old.

It is also interesting that in this article from Bloomberg, Al-Qaeda’s Recruitment Efforts Intensify in Europe, the word “Islamist” is used to refer to the U.S. and coalition efforts in Afghanistan.

A further, direct quote from IPT’s dialog with Jasser:

Certainly pious loyal American Muslims will be frustrated with the inappropriate use of the name of Islam and ‘jihad’ in the militant causes by these radicals around the world. But that frustration should be directed toward frontal Muslim anti-Islamist and anti-militant causes and movements. Denying that considerable movements of radical Muslims exist around the world which exploit our religion and truly believe that their barbarism is ‘jihad’ will only empower them more and delay the inevitable conflict within our faith community over “whose Islam, which Islam”. For the USG to paternally dismiss the self-described nomenclature of ‘jihadists’ and “Islamists” is to in fact embark into a realm which really is an internal struggle within the consciousness of the Muslim community. We should call the terrorists what they call themselves. Once any Muslim, let alone non-Muslims, begins to determine who is and who is not qualified to define ‘jihad’, ‘Muslim’, or ‘Islam’ they are creating a clergy and a ‘church’ with a communication and excommunication process. That is exactly what the likes of Bin Laden and other radical Islamists want.

To parrot the phrase, yes, “words matter.” But in its fear to offend the “mainstream American Muslim” by using such words as “mujahadeen,” “jihadist,” “Islamic fundamentalist,” or simply, “Islamist,” the government removed a tool, words to describe, the very blight that bin Laden and al Qaeda has perpetrated on World society.

On Why I Denied
1- my unwillingness to believe such political correctness could win out
2- the rush to scoop inherent in the Internet and the quoting of an undisclosed “reliable source.”
3- the spreading like wildfire of Internet scoops that take on their own lives, even if/when proven false.
4- no excuse, but I’m very busy (busier than I could have ever imagined) and my tolerance for unsupported claims is thin.

I am not the USG, nor do I work for it. Thus, those who follow bin Laden and his offshoots are forever Islamic Fundamentalist Jihadis. How about towel-headed animals.

al Qaeda, CAIR, Islamist, jihadist, mujahadeen, Muslim Public Affairs Committee, words matter

7 Comments »