January 22, 2010
— Ace "Al Qaeda/AP" is my attempt at short-hand for this Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula cult. I know most just say "AQAP" or something, but I haven't written that yet, so... there's my transition to it.
We were of course sternly lectured that this was an isolated incident and was not "terrorism" because there was no connection to a foreign terror-sponsoring organization. Even if that were true, it's jackass, because the real model of true jihadism is millions of self-starting lone jihadist killers who don't need any organization to tell them to kill. They just need a bit of online proselytizing and to feel the call to serve the God of Murder.
So yes, that too is "terrorism." It is an attempt to terrorize in service of a political/criminal movement, if not at the behest of that movement.
No one in the GOP or conservative movement actually tells me what to write or what to cover. Does that mean I'm not acting in service of the GOP or conservative movement? Give me a break. No one would claim I have no connection to these groups. Obviously I am in their service. I'm just not in their organizational chart.
Funny how the One Abortion Clinic Bomber Everyone Loves to Talk About is a terrorist, despite not having some sort of organization directing his actions, but none of these guys pass muster.
But, even if one subscribes to that conveniently-cramped definition of terrorism, it appears now that initial assurances by our law enforcement/intelligence community were wrong.
In a letter to the judge presiding over his case, the accused killer, Abdulhakim Muhammad, calls himself a soldier in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and calls the shooting “a Jihadi Attack” in retribution for the killing of Muslims by American troops. ....It remains unclear whether Mr. Muhammad really has ties to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula .... But if evidence emerges that his claim is true, it will give the June 1, 2009, shooting in Little Rock new significance at a time when Yemen is being more closely scrutinized as a source of terrorist plots against the United States.
Mr. Muhammad, 24, a Muslim convert from Memphis, spent about 16 months in Yemen starting in the fall of 2007, ostensibly teaching English and learning Arabic. During that time, he married a woman from south Yemen. But he was also imprisoned for several months because he overstayed his visa and was holding a fraudulent Somali passport, the Yemen government said.
Under pressure from the United States government, Yemen deported Mr. Muhammad in late January 2009. But just four months after his return, Mr. Muhammad used a semiautomatic rifle to gun down two soldiers — Pvt. William A. Long and Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula — while they were standing outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, killing Private Long and wounding Private Ezeagwula.
Conservatives sometimes react too quickly to such stories, immediately branding them terrorism.
But there's a reason we (I) do this: It's because I know damn well my government is lying to me. I have seen this time and time again, where the first statement, provided mere hours after an incident, when people are still in triage and there has been not enough time to even begin an investigation, let alone conclude one, is the rote repetition of the claim that it's not terrorism, there is no foreign connection, etc.
And if they're saying that out of the box, then we know for a fact they are actively avoiding lines of questioning that would contradict that claim, because that is what human beings do. Once a person has committed himself to a position, he does not wish to disturb it or reverse himself, and will see only evidence that supports his first half-assed guess, and ignore evidence that contradicts it.
I am tired of this bullshit. No one knows in the initial hours after a jihadist assault whether it's a self-starter or whether the guy was under orders (or the middle case where he's not acting under orders per se, but got training and ideological reinforcement from jihadist groups), and yet the government always tells me, immediately, it wasn't terrorism.
I read, somewhere, the most brilliantly cynical analysis of this tendency, which I think is 100% accurate:
If a terrorist attack succeeds, it's not terrorism, because the government will not acknowledge successful terrorist attacks.
The government only likes acknowledging foiled terrorism attacks, because if they've foiled it, they've protected us against terrorism, and they want us all to know that.
Every FBI sting where jihadists get rounded up for planting fake bombs or buying crippled missile launchers is promoted as a terrorist-bust.
But when these guy actually murder people -- oh no, that wasn't terrorism at all, that was just some lone nut with a gun. (And a Koran.)
Enough of the bullshit. If we're to have genuine confidence in our government at all (is that still a goal they aspire to?), they need to be straight with us, stop giving us PR nonsense, and admit their failings alongside their trumpeting of their successes.
If they keep claiming that every successful terrorist attack is not terrorism, we have every right to suspect they are not taking this seriously, and that they are covering up their failures, and that they are, of course, not dealing with the lapses that caused the failures, and that more of us will be killed just so they can go up in front of the microphones and make pissing-on-our-backs claims like "There is no evidence this was a terrorist attack."
What scares the hell out of me isn't that terrorism is being treated as a law enforcement issue. If only. That may not be the best possible response to terrorism, but at least it would be barely-adequate response.
What scares me more than that is that terrorism is being treated solely as a public relations issue. The only thing that seems to matter is spin and "winning the media cycle."
Guys? Allow yourselves to lose the media cycle once in a while so you can win the terrorism cycle, okay?
Posted by: Ace at
06:37 AM
| Comments (69)
Post contains 1046 words, total size 6 kb.
/come on, like they're ever going to abandon the media cycle for the good of the country....
Posted by: shibumi at January 22, 2010 06:42 AM (OKZrE)
Posted by: Chainsaw Chimp at January 22, 2010 06:42 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: dagny at January 22, 2010 06:42 AM (OEfd6)
I thought it was supposed to be a disgruntled African Ameerican gentlemen mad at 8 years of Bush and those racist Nazi tea-baggers ?
Posted by: Blazer at January 22, 2010 06:43 AM (t72+4)
Ace, you make an excellent point.
The democrats demonize anything that can be tied to the GOP using the "seven degrees of Kevin Bacon" method, but they can't seem to connect any dots ever WRT AQ and domestic terror.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 22, 2010 06:46 AM (Mhn4l)
No. They (and sadly I mean most D's and R's) don't give a shit about the public's confidence as long as they have the power)
Posted by: alexthechick at January 22, 2010 06:47 AM (8WZWv)
Domestic terror?-yeah I've heard of that you mean national right to life correct?
Posted by: Charles Clouseau Gibson at January 22, 2010 06:47 AM (Mhn4l)
I was saying to my wife (a few days after Christmas) that if Flight 253 had actually been brought down, the Left would have had "experts" spending weeks telling us that it was most likely a mechanical failure. With both the Obama Administration and the mainstream media acting as press agents for Islamic terrorists, our chances of getting at the truth in a timely manner are nearly nil.
Posted by: lincolntf at January 22, 2010 06:48 AM (Ab8Sw)
7 Alex,
Indeed, I suspect we will have to have a twenty year plan to make targeted contributions to purge the baby boomer influence on our government once and for all and put govt. back in the customer service, rather than aucratic me$$iah business.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 22, 2010 06:49 AM (Mhn4l)
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at January 22, 2010 06:49 AM (zgZzy)
We were of course sternly lectured that this was an isolated incident and was not "terrorism" because there was no connection to a foreign terror-sponsoring organization.
Absolutely true. And there was never any such thing as 'The Mafia' either.
Posted by: J. Edgar at January 22, 2010 06:49 AM (fx8sm)
Why didn't you come to me like a f'cking man and tell me a Skittles and Unicorns policy wouldnt work against these guys ?
Posted by: Barack Obama at January 22, 2010 06:50 AM (t72+4)
11 Wyatt,
The President is more concerned about the "evil insurgency on Wall $treet" than he is about a culure trying desperately to get nuclear weapons into the hands of "nonattributable asserts".....
"change"
Posted by: sven10077 at January 22, 2010 06:51 AM (Mhn4l)
My proof. One of them has already been executed. They wouldn't have done that to declared Al Queda / Islamic terrorists.
Posted by: polynikes at January 22, 2010 10:51 AM (m2CN7)
Excellent point.
Posted by: Blazer at January 22, 2010 06:52 AM (t72+4)
Does anyone else see a problem here? American dude hanging out in rural Yemen somehow ends up with a fake Somali passport. Huh, who would have given him a Somali passport? I know who the Yemeni government assumed it was.
Our government's response? Pressure Yemen to free him here. What, are we now in the business of paying potential terrorists' ways to the US?
Posted by: notropis at January 22, 2010 06:52 AM (lfQrB)
13,
Rahm, why didn't you come to me like a fucking man and tell me people were eventually goiung to wonder whether a President with three Muslim names might have a soft spot for their antics?
Posted by: Barack T. Ogabe esq. at January 22, 2010 06:53 AM (Mhn4l)
Posted by: TheQuietman at January 22, 2010 06:54 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Rocks at January 22, 2010 06:54 AM (Q1lie)
Initially I was of the Islam is not at fault/a radical wing is the ones doing this.
After years of Muslim Terrorists and Cair aplogists with largely silence from the rest of the Islam crowd I have changed my mind. Especially after doing a little research an actually reading their religious material.
I would brand Islam as a subversive religion and close all the Mosques in the U.S. I would also brand CAIR as a subversive organization.
I would classify them the same as the communists were classified in the 50s and 60s. (You folks who went into the military back in the old days remember that long list of organizations you had to indicate if you were a member of?)
We need to get rid of the PC and return to common sense.
Posted by: Vic at January 22, 2010 06:54 AM (QrA9E)
Posted by: Vic at January 22, 2010 06:55 AM (QrA9E)
Here is how the left will quote the post: "Funny how the One Abortion Clinic Bomber Everyone Loves to Talk About is a terrorist...if one subscribes to that conveniently-cramped definition of terrorism"
Posted by: Joshua at January 22, 2010 06:55 AM (Fbe3F)
Barack Obama is going to pay the mortgage on my terrorist training camp and put gas in my bomb laden Peugeot.
Posted by: Muhammad The Moocher at January 22, 2010 06:56 AM (t72+4)
Posted by: tommylotto at January 22, 2010 06:59 AM (yh6fK)
My proof. One of them has already been executed. They wouldn't have done that to declared Al Queda / Islamic terrorists.
I agree. However, the states got ahold of him not the feds. Virginia is only 2nd to Texas in using its death penalty. Had they tried to save this guy McDonnell, then Va Attorney General would have made a HUGE stink. Maryland convicted him too but didn't have the death penalty. I believe other states wanted to execute him too but Va had the best record.
Posted by: dagny at January 22, 2010 07:00 AM (OEfd6)
Posted by: Mikey Steele, Author and all around great guy. at January 22, 2010 07:00 AM (GwPRU)
See, I never used the "T" word once. Just like Barry. And Janet. Therefore "No Terrorism Attacks have occurred in the US."
Posted by: GarandFan at January 22, 2010 07:00 AM (ZQBnQ)
Posted by: Abdul, French yute at January 22, 2010 07:01 AM (4Kl5M)
Terrorism largely is a public relations issue; hence derivative of the word "terror".
Your point about that not being the only aspect of managing terrorism is a good one, but a big component of dealing with terrorism is managing the PR and psychological aspects of it.
Posted by: looking closely at January 22, 2010 07:04 AM (YpVHs)
So fine, the hack bastard idjits we have running our government and in the MSM at the moment go go right ahead with their lies and muddy language and pretend-games. And then we'll have another mass-casualty event that's just a one-off "tragedy" not connected to anything at all. Great.
Posted by: Chainsaw Chimp at January 22, 2010 07:05 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at January 22, 2010 07:06 AM (zgZzy)
Yes! I agree with every word, except for this
Once a person has committed himself to a position, he does not wish to disturb it or reverse himself
which I agree with twice as much.
Posted by: FireHorse at January 22, 2010 07:07 AM (Vl5GH)
I have this nagging feeling that something else changed in late January 2009. It was something really significant, but what it was escapes me at the moment.
Posted by: MikeO at January 22, 2010 07:12 AM (Ce+tv)
That's because they hate the GOP and make common cause with other enemies of old-fashioned western civilization.
Posted by: Hatchet Five at January 22, 2010 07:16 AM (Q/hy1)
Re the Tiller Killer: yes, the dude was a terrorist in the strict sense of the word. Funny, though, how he's painted as representative of the Pro-Life Movement (ergo, Republicans) even though he's a truly rare example of nutism. Like Timothy McVey must be representative of anger at the government. Like the Tea Party movement is dangerous, so Nancy says.
We-don't-like-their-politcs = round up every rare nutjob to prove the point. We-embrace-their-religion (for whatever reason) = ignore the huge base of nutjobs that prove the alternate point.
My mind is a-spin.
Posted by: Agnostica at January 22, 2010 07:22 AM (gbCNS)
Smoked weed in college
Had campaign managers with Che Guevara flags in their offices but they just can't connect the dots with AQ and Islam?
wow
Posted by: MelodicMetal in MA at January 22, 2010 07:22 AM (x4S2a)
By the way, this is nothing new. About a third of the casualties the good guys suffered during Desert Storm was a Scud attack on the hotel where soldiers were being housed. The reaction was "cheap shot" and "lucky shot" and outrage that our enemies could fathom and succeed at killing their enemies. The appropriate response is "score one for the bad guys."
Then came that book-length press release titled The 9/11 Commission Report. Spoiler alert: They concluded that there was enough blame to go around, so the burden of culpability for each person is light enough to be unnoticeable. Again: Score one for the bad guys.
There are bad guys out there, and they brought war to us. My minimum expectation is that our government brings war back to them. The rest are minutiae.
Posted by: FireHorse at January 22, 2010 07:23 AM (Vl5GH)
38 Hatchet Five,
I suspect this is because American marxists have always lacked the courage and will to do their own dirty work so they engage in vicarious worship of the misguided savages who will in fact attack the cradles of the civilizations which are the only way they the marxists are suffered in the first place.
Posted by: Barack T. Ogabe esq. at January 22, 2010 07:23 AM (Mhn4l)
Ace, two thumbs up. There's times we don't agree totally but, I gotta tell ya, your view on this is dead on imo and should be forwarded to major newspapers (minus some of the language which doesn't really bother me but would bother some of the "straights") after a little minor editing. It's one of your best pieces.
When you're done for the day, you may have a drink.
Posted by: teej at January 22, 2010 07:28 AM (QdUKm)
Ace said bomber. I think he's talking about Eric Rudolph.
Posted by: MikeO at January 22, 2010 07:30 AM (Ce+tv)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 22, 2010 07:36 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 22, 2010 07:47 AM (gbCNS)
There's been a complete breakdown in the handling of that one "simple" question. And it doesn't mean he personally has to have actually done a damn thing other than belong to a group (AQ) that is itself at war with us. (Or vv.)
If the suspect says "Hell yes" - treat them that way - revocation of citizenship, unlawful combatant, military tribunals. If, somewhere along the way, the process itself decides "that's just nuts" - fine.
If they lie and say "No", then you start adding up the payroll stubs, itinerary, etc. and prove that to be a lie in a quick -but-formal- hearing.
If physical evidence is lacking, just running through the Constitution and listening to the answers should really do it:
"Do you believe in free speech?"
"Do you believe in freedom of religion?"
Before you get very far at all, you'll have accomplished one of two things from a true AQ guy, either:
1) He's AQ and says hell no.
2) He's AQ but lies - and wipes out half of his propaganda value by publically supporting American values under oath.
The most amusing thing about this entire fiasco is: Handling POWs (and the Left insists all combatants should be treated as POWs) in civilian courts is a war crime.
Posted by: Al at January 22, 2010 07:54 AM (0lyUI)
I would brand Islam as a subversive religion and close all the Mosques in the U.S. I would also brand CAIR as a subversive organization.
Posted by: Vic at January 22, 2010 10:54 AM (QrA9E)
Amen, and amen. Preach on, brother Vic. That should be step one, coinciding with a vigorous deportation program. Resistance to the resettlement program should be deemed insurrectionism and punished with swift death via 5.56 to the head.
Posted by: Reactionary at January 22, 2010 07:58 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: runningrn at January 22, 2010 08:01 AM (CfmlF)
I posted this in the top headlines comments, but it's worth repeating:
80 Holy crap, the apocalypse is now! Jack Cafferty rips the Pentagon's after report on the Fort Hood shootings and the fact they neglected to cite the real cause, radical Islam. Here's the link:
Posted by: runningrn at January 22, 2010 08:03 AM (CfmlF)
What scares me more than that is that terrorism is being treated solely as a public relations issue. The only thing that seems to matter is spin and "winning the media cycle."
I think this is a key observation. The Left will continue to see successful terrorist attacks as nothing more than annoying pin pricks (so long as someone else is the victim). Perhaps they are, in a sense - it would be hard for small-time bombers/shooters to really do measureably large damage to the US in physical terms. The US is a big country. But the idea of letting a bunch of ragged, cousin-humping savages devoid of redeeming human characterstics roam around and randomly murder at will should be deeply, intolerably offensive to any rational human being. If it continues to get worse, eventually people will get sick of it and start taking matters in hand. There has been amazing restraint in this nation so far - but the muzzies would do well to quit pushing their luck.
Posted by: Reactionary at January 22, 2010 08:07 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: unknown jane at January 22, 2010 08:13 AM (5/yRG)
Posted by: runningrn at January 22, 2010 08:14 AM (CfmlF)
But when these guy actually murder people -- oh no, that wasn't terrorism at all, that was just some lone nut with a gun. (And a Koran.)
I say, old chap, mustn't mention the Koran they were carrying... that's just no kosher.
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 22, 2010 08:25 AM (pZEar)
Bwhahahaha! Suck it bitches! From Hotair:
"A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.
The task forceÂ’s findings represent the first time that the administration has clarified how many detainees it considers too dangerous to release but unprosecutable because officials fear trials could compromise intelligence-gathering and because detainees could challenge evidence obtained through coercion."
Posted by: runningrn at January 22, 2010 08:27 AM (CfmlF)
Posted by: JA at January 22, 2010 08:49 AM (QnZBg)
Posted by: unknown jane at January 22, 2010 08:53 AM (5/yRG)
Posted by: slade at January 22, 2010 09:07 AM (XsHAM)
Posted by: runningrn at January 22, 2010 12:14 PM (CfmlF)
True. Well said. All the more reason that every effort must be made to strip the Left of power, and to render it permanently impotent.
Posted by: Reactionary at January 22, 2010 09:18 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: gus at January 22, 2010 09:33 AM (Vqruj)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 22, 2010 09:39 AM (zs6dJ)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 22, 2010 09:45 AM (zs6dJ)
"they were never able to PROVE that it was a spark in the vapor-filled tank - but that was their best guess"
Based on how good these guys are at their job, it was a very good 'guess'. And Boeing - who helped in the investigation - made a lot of changes to the wiring in fuel tanks, which they would not have done based on a 'guess.'
Posted by: JEA at January 22, 2010 10:08 AM (ZO0u/)
Posted by: tonynoboloney at January 22, 2010 10:50 AM (csfp/)
Reporter #1: "But...the guy wrote a letter to the Times last week saying he'd been trained and equipped by Al Qaida."
DDHS: "That was just a lot of hot air. He was just blowing smoke."
Reporter #2: "But how do you explain the fact that the head of Al Qaida in Yemen was interviewed by the BBC last week and boasted that the guy was one of theirs, and that they planned a dozen more?"
DDHS: "C'mon, you know those A-Q leaders are always claiming credit for everything. It helps their end-of-year bonus."
Reporter #3: "Al-Jazeera has reported that Osama bin Laden wrote to the guy's family, congratulating them on their son's mission and enclosing a check. What about that?"
DDHS: "We're absolutely certain this incident is unrelated to Al Qaida."
Posted by: sf at January 23, 2010 07:59 AM (xz5dP)
Posted by: bruce at January 24, 2010 08:50 AM (newlD)
yes,you are all right.
chi hair iron are precious possession for not only women but men also. you may have a try make
everyone in your family fashionable.
Posted by: Chi Hair Straightener on sale at January 31, 2010 04:49 PM (/NRfc)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2773 seconds, 197 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: A.G. at January 22, 2010 06:39 AM (jBPzC)