When Are We Going To Get Serious? (July 30, 2005)

To profile or not – absurdities abound

The Israelis have refined profiling to such an extent as to successfully foil 95% of attempted suicide bombings. When the Germans or the Egyptians search passengers I assure you that Middle Eastern males get prime billing. It has not gone unnoticed by both Arabs and Europeans alike, that modern day suicide bombings and terrorism is the almost exclusive preserve of male Muslims of Middle Eastern extraction. This reality is not our wish or desire but a sad fact of our increasingly tenuous global world.

Yet in America, the Land of the Free, the Brave and the ACLU, we have recreated our own Alice in Wonderland smoke & mirrors. We would rather search, at our airports and trains, 10 children, old women and 6.5 foot blue-eyed Swedes to every 1 Middle Easterner. Yet the Russians and the Saudis, the Turks and the Lebanese, no strangers to terrorism, would do the reverse.

Why do we allow the ACLU to define our arithmetic? For what suicidal absurdity do we allow political correctness to prevail over practical necessity? What is the fantasy that addles our brain so much so that we imagine we can regain total security in the face of this implacable onslaught with no loss of freedom and no inconvenience? How come the delicate sensibilities of those who would be profiled (rationally, understandably) outweigh our desire for survival and the longevity of our freedoms?

I now note at our New York subways, selective searches can be refused, allowing would-be bombers to vacate those premises with sensitivities intact, only to try another station or location until luck or chance allows their entry. Are we merely play acting? Don’t we realize that it is only a matter of time until the first radioactive “dirty bomb” or other WMD is tested on the naïve majority?

The ACLU confuses itself with Abraham, imagining that by offering ourselves as a sacrificial lamb we could appease those believers and their God in their crusade against us, the infidels, the unbelievers. But they are not Abraham, but Chamberlain.

Ultimately, we will have to choose between the ACLU and their acolytes and our very survival, between our perceived freedom for the next ten minutes and our freedom for our children and our children’s children.

The choice is ours, not theirs.

Pussy-footing (July 16, 2005)

Re: July 15 interview by Ron Reagan & Monica Crowley of MSNBC with two American Muslim spokesmen

Best wishes.

I enjoyed your presentations, however, in this instance you “pussy-footed” around with deft but copious amounts of political correctness. You would not have been so delicate with Sharon or Barak. A great pity. Unless you treat all parties with the same skepticism you are merely going to be used as a propaganda platform.

a) Validly you questioned moderate Muslims’ fears to be “outed.” For your American guest to claim fearlessness and suggest the same goes in the Middle East is absurd as many political murders there attest.

b) For your guests to suggest that all the Arab governments decried London, New York, Madrid, etc. bombings is totally incorrect. Crowds in Gaza and elsewhere were celebrating after 9/11, all with full public visibility and support.

c) For your guests to claim that Jihad in the Arab world never supports killing the innocent is obnoxious considering the hundreds of old women and young children and babies and Arab Israelis alike blown apart in Israel by the suicide bombers. Why not call these lies for what they are?

I admire your general presentations. Please don’t pander to those who believe that deception of the infidel is a laudable goal in their Jihad of domination and destruction.

London Bombings: A simple solution, and very politically incorrect (July 7, 2005)

England as well as the USA and other western democracies are all open societies. It is impossible to defend these free societies against this and other forms of terrorism. We can never check every train, bus, plane, restaurant, or public facility, worldwide, all the time.

Perhaps Bush had it right in the particular instance of “taking the war to the enemy.” Perhaps the Israelis were ‘spot-on’ in preemptive assassinations of terrorist leaderships. The fervor for suicide bombings amongst the cadres of the initiators would be considerably dampened (even eliminated) if these puppeteers of death were convinced of the fact that they would be next in line for elimination after the next terrorist event, wherever they may be hiding (usually amongst family, schools, or hospitals – their locations of choice).

I earnestly suggest we stop wasting time and money at our airports. I recommend we take a fraction of the tens of billions spent on amorphous homeland security and initiate a new project – call it “realistic cost-effective preemption.” We invite to participate ex-Marines and survivors of terrorist activities worldwide. There are many thousands of Lebanese, Russian and Jordanian citizens, Indians, Kuwaitis, Iranians, Kurds – the list is long – who for many reasons may harbor hate for the terrorist groups, may have lost family or friends. Let us train them and pay them to be the most effective anti-terrorist killing machines possible, and the most well-paid. (A million dollars each would not dent the budget). Then let us send out 10,000 of these largely Arabic-speaking and Middle East-looking agents and focus them like a laser on the top leadership of Al Qaeda and their myriad associations around the world, to preemptively decimate the core of these groups that so intend to destroy our society as we know it.

We have really a simple choice: do we wait for the first nuclear catastrophe in one of our capitols, or do we preempt (in a relatively inexpensive, focused, practical and entirely politically incorrect manner) those committed to our annihilation. Perhaps the writing is finally on the wall.