Ken Nelson

I’d kill them, their family, and their tribe.

I originally titled this post “Global War on Terror”, but changed it because that name is a STUPID Bushism that confuses the real issue.  Terrorism, while used by many with issues, from the IRA to Israelis during their independence struggles, is really only a concern when the parties involved are so crazed they will use any conceivable weapon.

I’m hard pressed to believe, for instance, that the IRA would have nuked London.  It is quite believable, even an assumption, that Islamic fascists would gladly use nukes on anybody that bugged them.

So the real problem with terrorism is how to keep the world safe from Islam.

I’ll simplify it… and the question I’ll ask myself will be “How do we keep America safe?”.

First… some assumptions:

• Islamic Fascists will eventually get nukes or mass biological weapons
• They will be willing to use them
• So the question really is, how to we delay that day, and how do we deal with it once it happens.

Prevention

Nuclear and advanced biological weapons require state sponsorship and lots of money. I would have a very simple rule:

If you help Islamic fascists get weapons or engage in terrorism, we will kill you. Destroy you. Preemptively. Without warning. And not particularly caring how many of your “innocent” family goes with you.

As an example,  Iran’s mullahs and Hezbollah… cut them loose or die.  All of  you.
Quaddafi and Pan Am flight 103… dead.
Taliban… hosting Bin Laden…. dead.
Saudi princes funding Bin Laden…. dead.

The next step to keep America safe is to keep Islamic people out by banning immigration from Islamic nations, severely limiting (as in next to none) Islamic student visas, and doggedly pursuing Islamic illegal aliens.

Will this be controversial?  To some, mainly liberals who like to be nice using the currency of other peoples deaths. They want to feel good, open, tolerant, but some things you just can’t put up with – and the risk of a community hiding a nuclear bomb is one of them.

We have the pick of the world when it comes to immigrants. Why choose those who might hide terrorists? Or actually be terrorists.

Deterrence

What do we do once Al Queda gets a bomb, or a bio-weapon?  Deterrence.

My policy is simple. If Islamic fascists use a mass destruction weapon, I glaze Mecca  and Medina with nuclear glass.  If the attack stems from a host country, say Saudi Arabia, or Iran,  they get the same treatment.  When we identify the perpetrators, their family and tribes will be killed mercilessly.

Brutal? Yes it is.  On purpose.

Those indoctrinating these terrorists. And feeding them. And idolizing them. They need to know they will feel the pain too.

Will it work?  Over the long term, probably not.  But these steps will lengthen our safety and give us time to work out another approach, or ultimately, for Islam to leave the 6th century and join modernity.

I’m not holding out a lot of hope, but we need to try.

Update:  Islam not on track to join modernity.

Next… Israeli sniper kittens…

Israel is getting grief from Palestinian loving journalists about the use of dogs in the DMZ between the West Bank and Israel.

They shouted at us to stop, then the dogs attacked, injuring some of us while others managed to get away," he told AFP, saying he was bitten on the hand and on other parts of his body.

Boo hoo. Good dog. Give him a pet and a ScoobySnack!

Apparently because they are mostly illegal workers crossing over to try and get a job, and only a few are actual terrorists, then the dog use is over the top.

Argh…. wrong.

Good dog!  And when can we get kennel full of these on our border?

A Yemeni man tried to enter a cockpit door on American flight 1561 this Sunday:

Andrew Wai, another passenger, told KGO-TV on Monday that the wife of one of the men who took Almurisi down later said Almurisi was yelling "Allahu Akbar."

This is disturbing, but I’m glad that some intrepid passengers took action.

What is also disturbing, alas, is how lame other passengers responded:

The Boeing 737 carrying 162 people landed safely at 9:10 p.m. Almurisi was placed into police custody, as some passengers cried.

"Flight attendants were trying to soothe different passengers," Wai said. "We were all looking at our lives flash before our eyes."

Crying?  What a bunch of softies. I’d only be crying if I hadn’t got a chance to get a lick in on the dude before they cuffed him.

Nothing happened on my American Airlines flight to and from NYC.  I did keep an eye on the Pakistani man near the front of the coach cabin.  Not that he’d know it. No need to be rude. But… as this event shows, they are still out there, and we need to be vigilant.

BTW: We should greatly limit Yemen, Saudi, Jordanian, Syrian, and Indonesian passport entries.  And they should be tracked while here.

Clearly he was a man that needed to be killed.  I don’t feel bad about it.  I’d like to see us do similar raids on various nefarious characters around the world (Hamas, Khadaffi, Iran, so forth).   Bad actors that know the costs can be high don’t act bad.

He needed a bullet well before 9/11, but our government couldn’t be bothered to actually “protect” us.  So, 3,000 people die, and 2 wars start. All because Clinton was worried about the “rule of law”, which of course, he wasn’t. He was just worried about what the New York Times would write about him.

So that he is finally dead, 18 years after his first attack on New York City, hardly “inspires” confidence in our government, or fear from bad actors around the globe. Even our slow penal death sentence system can act faster than that.

I was, as usual, struck by the competence of our military when contrasted to the lack of competence of the rest of our government. What a bunch of fools. They even pose for a picture “looking at action” when there was none to be seen.  Did National interest go through their pea brains at all, or was this just the ultimate PR opp that might forestall bad job news for a few hours?

They hardly inspire. And the “tale” of the awesome decision making seems pressed.  How hard was it?  He is in the building. Do we take him out?  Hmmm… let me sleep on that. Meanwhile, Team 6, you just stay awake and wait for me to decide something. Lame.

I’d take any random member of Seal Team 6 as President over any of the buffoons in that “situation” room. And that includes the Brigadiers bringing them coffee.

So, yes, I’m glad bin Laden is dead.  But I don’t view it as an epoch achievement. I view it as a 20 years late, and many thousands of lives and trillions of dollars short.

My view isn’t meant to take away from Seal Team 6, or any of the intelligence apparatus that lead us to bin Laden’s resort.  They do an amazing job, considering who they work for.

Drudge…

If General Petraeus tells me that publicly stating my view that Islam is a dangerous religion hurts our war effort, should I refrain?  I can tell you I would strongly consider it. Out of respect for him and what he has done.   But after some consideration, I’d probably tell him to pound sand and pull his head out of his bottom.

Drudge has him warning that the Reverend in Florida burning a Koran (Quran?) was endangering the war effort.   Thus the Reverend was not patriotic.  Was he less patriotic, for instance, than a Senate Majority Leader publically saying our war was lost?   Probably not.  But hey… Petraeus only answers the questions asked and no liberal reporter is going to ask that question.

I’m not of the persuasion that believes if a liberal does it then I should do it. Far from it.  But, unlike most liberals,  I definitely want to help our soldiers beat this enemy.   My bigger question would be what is the best way to do that?

The core question, raised by the Reverend, and ignored by Petraeus, is who exactly are we fighting?   Radical Islam is the answer most American’s would give.

And I don’t think Petraeus would give that answer. Nor would many in our political leadership.

So my question to Petraeus, and to his bosses, is that if you don’t even know who you are fighting, what are we doing fighting at all?

I want to fight Radical Islam – in a number of ways. Overseas, certainly. But I also want to keep them from living here.  I’d end Islamic immigration immediately so that we don’t have areas like England, France, and Holland where radicals can act with impunity.

I want a war effort that can work. And what we have now, frankly, probably can’t.

A SeaTac airport restaurant will not serve TSA employees.

Social shunning is a powerful tool. Who else should we shun?

How about the cops that skip crime and instead rip off citizens just trying to drive to work?

How about IRS agents?  They may not make the silly tax code, but they do seem to revel wallowing in it.

How about politicians?  Shun them. Don’t shake their hands when they bug you at restaurants, and don’t laud them with praise for spending other people’s money.

How about landscapers, eateries, and hotels that hire illegals aliens?

People that walk slow

Or maybe bloggers that advocate social shunning (-:

Who would you shun? And why?

H/T Instapundit

They appear to have shut it down by keeping DNS from resolving:

The government ordered ISPs to stop resolving addresses ending in .eg, Egypt’s domain name system, in addition to sealing off outside access.

So if they knew your IP # before, they could still communicate, for now.

As seen in NYC

This article, on Muslims and Christians is interesting for two reasons. The first is that the Washington Post didn’t publish it, even though it was submitted by a regular correspondent of the paper.  The second is because it is… interesting.

Readers of KenNelson.com know that I’m a public advocate of limiting the inroads Islam makes into the United States via legal immigration.  I don’t think we should let them in.

I found this to be the most provocative, and interesting, part of the article:

3. Because Jesus was a failure and Muhammad a success, Christians from the start learned how to be a minority religion and survived Jesus’ failure only by the fact that he didn’t stay dead. Christians don’t know how to behave when they are in power (and, of course, have sometimes abused their power). But Islam was, from its start, majority-minded; and Muslims don’t know how to behave when they are not in power: it enrages them, makes them thin-skinned to “blasphemy,” drives them to achieve power and impose sharia, even motivates some of them to martyr-suicide in killing any they consider enemies of Allah.

I don’t come to this belief out of support pro or con as to the merits of any particular faith’s tenets.  I’m more practical than that. Where ever Muslims are permitted to congregate, trouble follows if they aren’t in charge. End of story.

I say… don’t let that happen here.   This doesn’t mean trampling the  rights of Muslims that live here, or of citizens who happen to choose that faith. But no religion has a RIGHT to immigrate here, and we have the RIGHT to deny entry into this country for any reason. I suggest we exercise that right vigorously and with an eye towards our country’s stability and safety.

I’m reading Angelo Codevilla’s Advice to Wartime Presidents.  I got it after seeing him on CSPAN Book Notes.

This excerpt sums up his premise:

Losing wars while winning battles is hard and rare. Yet American presidents and their advisers have managed to do just that for nearly a century.

and the books goal is to basically explain statecraft to the people purporting to practice it.

The introduction thrashes every President of the last 90 years. And treats every Secretary of State even harsher.

If you don’t want to read the book, you still may find the CSPAN Book Notes segment informational:

http://www.c-spanclassroom.org/Teachable/867/Advice+to+War+Presidents.aspx

Brave. But they have a union for this sort of thing, don’t they?

Today is December 21st, 2010.  Nine years have passed since 9/11/2001.  Democrats have controlled the Congress for much that the intervening 9 years.

Yet now, 9 years later, they MUST pass a bill costing billions, with who knows what pork or other nonsense buried in it in the dying days of a lame duck senate.  Waiting a couple more weeks, or even a couple more months WILL COST LIVES… they claim.

Democrats, after 9 years, are in an all fired hurry.  I don’t trust them, and my mistrust is WELL EARNED.

I suspect, if you scratch slightly, you will find this bill helps unions avoid costs to their members.  Pushing union obligations onto the public is a major goal of the Democrats.

Halt this bill. Reconsider, with level heads, in the New Year.

The video above is from last year, but it was the only I could find of it actually impacting targets.  The Army has deployed it to Afghanistan in select Special Forces units to get real combat feedback.  Each unit costs $25K, and each round, $25 bucks.

It looks cool, but the soldiers did seem slow to fire it. Not sure if that was just for demonstration, or if it has some inherent complexity that slows them down.

Read more here.

First with Iraq and Afghanistan war dumps, and now with State Department cable traffic, WikiLeaks keeps agitating. For what purpose? It seems clear they want to harm America. I don’t know why a guy from Sweden would hate America so, but he does.

If WikiLeaks would do more to expose world secrets – like its coverage of Keyna massacres in 2008 – then it would be a better tool. But its diversion into American derangement syndrome basically makes it a weapon of the socialist / progressive left.

What should we do about WikiLeaks?  Well… we should kill it. They aren’t terrorists, but like terrorists, they have declared a one sided war against us.  We should respond as in war.  Destroy it and its operators. War is war, after all.

Not pleasant?  A strike against free speech?  Well, WikiLeaks is free to be a pox on everybody’s house, but in choosing to focus on harming the US, it gives us no choice but to act in our national interest.

Is Obama capable of doing this?  Yes, but only if WikiLeaks goes specifically after him.  Hurting the US won’t prompt him to act, after all, that is his main purpose as well.  Should WikiLeaks dump something bad about him, thus harming his narcissistic self-love, well…watch out.

It is a shame, WikiLeaks had such potential.   Their move away from user provided content, towards published, editor chosen, material makes it biased and dangerous to America.

If we kill it, will others arise?  Maybe. And if they aim at America, we should aim right back. Eventually, they will get the message.

The “good” kind of car bomb.

Somebody, probably the Israelis, just blew up two Iranian nuclear scientists in Tehran this morning.

Some have been calling it terrorism, but it isn’t. Terrorism is aimed at the general population. This was aimed directly at those helping Iran make nuclear bombs.

Does this mean that I’d be cool with Iranians killing computer scientists that built the viruses that took down their atomic research computers?  I wouldn’t be happy, but I wouldn’t call it terrorism. I’d call it “black ops”, or “cold war”.

Who ever is doing this, and I’m pretty sure Obama and our CIA ain’t, should do more of it.

The fancy scanners that show you naked… even their manufacturer admits they wouldn’t have caught the underwear bomber.

And those pictures they delete right after you clear security… they don’t delete them.

Do you think a dedicated Muslim terrorist would mind cutting his “junk off” and replacing it with a bomb shaped to look eerily similar?   Or would a dedicated Jihadist  that got a job in ground systems at a major airport, gradually, day by day, smuggle in small amounts of a bomb or other weapon in quantities too small to notice?   Or how about this idea… they spend 10 years and have a mole go through flight school, and eventually end up in the side-seat of a jet, and then chloroform the other pilot and do as he or she wants. Or maybe just by-pass the TSA… steal a private jumbo-jet, perhaps from Travolta’s house.

Whatever security you do, if you let people on planes, or let people work at the airport, the jihadists will figure out a way to do something nasty.

And I could sit down and in the next 1/2 hour  think of DOZENS of ideas that the TSA could never stop. Assuming I had a terrorist that was willing to die.

The KEY is to keep them from having comfortable bases here. That means limiting Muslim immigrations to virtually nil.

The next KEY is to keep killing them, and especially their leaders, abroad. With Predators, smart bombs, and troops.

The final KEY is to NOT LET THEM WIN by ruining our travel sector in foolish, CYA, security measures and approaches that only a mindless idiotic bureaucrat could love.

Fortunately, Bush started doing the 2nd key, and Obama hasn’t stopped that yet.  Neither have done a good job keeping Muslims out.  And both failed the last key – the terrorists win every time somebody is patted down, or when security lines stretch to Disneylandesque distances.

One for three… not bad in baseball – terrible for anti-terrorism.

Update… something is going to have to change.

 
Someday, the TSA will bloat up like mike cheeks right now.

I’d just like to remind everybody swooning over George W. Bush in recent days that the TSA was created by him.   The massive TSA is one of the many large government turds W. left with us.

Just a reminder… you know…. so you REMEMBER that he sucked too, just not as bad as the current Fool-in-Chief.