Friday, January 01, 2010

Hey Hey Ho Ho Napalitano Has To Go

While GWB was President, the left screamed and railed against what they perceived as the threat of a Christianity based theocracy being established, depsite the 1st Amendment provision prohibiting the establishment of any religion by the government.

They had squat to say about the threat of sharia law, except they were prepared to allow islam a foothold in America. Hypocrites? Mis-guided? Stupid? or traitors?

Elementary jihadism
Frank J Gaffney, Jr.
Homeland insecurity: More luck than confidence

More after the jump.

In truth, for a lot of Americans, Ms. Napolitano has not had much credibility since she tried to ban "terrorism" from the official lexicon of her department. But arguably the most serious indication that she is wholly ill-equipped to carry out her present responsibilities can be found in another - as yet uncorrected - statement she made Sunday. She told CNN's "State of the Union" that, "Right now, we have no indication [that Abdulmutallab's actions were] part of anything larger."

Not "part of anything larger"? Is she serious? Does she take us for fools?

Read my lips, Ms. Napolitano: Mr. Abdulmutallab's actions were absolutely, positively part of something larger. What they were part of is the comprehensive theo-political-legal program that authoritative Islam calls Shariah.

This supremacist program requires its adherents to engage in jihad, or holy war, to bring about the triumph of Islam under a global theocracy, one that will impose Shariah on Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Pursuant to Shariah, jihad should - wherever practicable - be pursued through the terrifying use of violence. Where violent jihad is impractical or would be counterproductive, Shariah directs faithful Muslims to use other means to advance the same goal. Koran expert Robert Spencer calls the latter "stealth jihad."

The question must be asked: Are we seeing a dramatic increase in violent jihadism in America - National Public Radio reported on Saturday that there had been 14 attempts in 2009 (compared with two or three in recent years) and that they had been increasingly "operational" in character, not just "aspirational" - because violence is now seen to be practicable here?

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Monday, December 28, 2009

What Exactly "Worked"?

Family Security Matters

What exactly “worked?”
An expert source close to FSM breaks down the AP article that describes Napolitano’s claim of success:

quote:

1. "Homeland security head: The security system worked"

Nothing we did prevented that plane from being blown up. This was a case of a bad guy fumbling the ball on the one yard line through the end zone for a touchback. If the security system worked, then the system STINKS. Either Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's detonator was bad or else it was a case of "you need to be smarter than the equipment you're using" and he screwed up. But if not for their screw-up, we'd have had a U.S. airliner blown up and crashing over a populated area on Christmas with hundreds killed.

quote:

2. "The father of the man accused of attempting to blow up the jetliner told U.S. officials in Nigeria he was concerned about his son's extreme religious views. However, Napolitano says there was no specific information to place Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on a no-fly list."

This is a byproduct of refusing to recognize the religious component integral to the enemies we face. The fact that the father informed us that his son was a Jihadi wasn't enough for our PC system to keep him out of the U.S. This is the modern-day equivalent to allowing members of the SS into America because their membership in the SS was not sufficient specific information to exclude them.

quote:

3. Napolitano says that within 60 to 90 minutes of the incident all 120 flights that were in the air at time were contacted to make sure the attempted bombing did not extend beyond the flight to Detroit.

How were those other air crews supposed to know? Did they announce over the intercom, "Any terrorists on board with an explosive device strapped to your crotch, please raise your hand"?

Ace of Spades wonders

… what the hell it's going to look like when the system doesn't work, by the Obama Administration's lights. If this is what they deem a "success," Good Lord in Heaven, I tremble for what will come that provokes them to concede "mistakes were made."

If Napolitano is going to make such idiotic claims as “the system worked” when it clearly failed, then no American should take to the skies until she has resigned. And the sooner the better.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

|

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

We Need Someone Else

Family Security Matters
Part 1 of 2

No one should doubt that one of the most important Cabinet posts is that of Secretary of Homeland Security. Terrorism is one of the defining issues of the 21st century. The U.S. faces a daunting array of threats to our domestic security. The occupant of that post must be up to the job. The stakes are too high. While Secretary of Commerce, Education, Agriculture and other Cabinet posts have merit, few Americans can name the posts – let alone their Secretaries. But nearly everyone who is at least occasionally paying attention to the real world can name the Secretary of Homeland Security.

And to prove her gravitas, last week Secretary Napolitano allowed a DHS report to paint veterans as possible converts from war heroes to terrorists. Not an inspiring performance.

Threats to the US: 2009
Let’s take inventory of the Homeland Security threats facing the United States: Numerous inadequately secured sources of hazardous materials (think weapons of convenience); a growing fifth column of radical Islamists in our midst developing paramilitary training camps containing increasingly powerful weapons including in all likelihood advanced armor piercing high caliber arms, our own home grown crazies (think Timothy McVeigh); ~11 million illegal aliens, some of which are violent criminals, members of gangs, drug cartels or engaged in the ‘human pipeline (jihadists and others), human trafficking, domestic gangs and drug cartels going international and teaming up with global criminal or terrorist groups.

From a health preparedness perspective, DHS has yet to provide the true leadership to connect all the preparedness regimes, NIMS notwithstanding. Overcrowded health care facilities incapable of dealing with a widespread epidemic, overburdened and undertrained public health departments are mostly unprepared how to spend DHS funds and clearly unfamiliar with security – in spite of being an ersatz performance culture of preparedness.

Then there’s the persistent vulnerability based upon government reports…our porous borders to the North and South, a Mexico problem that threatens the security of several US states.

Let’s not forget the political officials on the take or not paying their taxes. While we’re at it, we continue to face, even eight years post-9/11, inadequate safeguards on technology transfers, biological labs, cyber terrorism, protections against tainted imported products (intentional and accidental), inadequate screening of shipping, poorly protected railways carrying highly toxic chemicals, readily available radioactive materials, inconsistent security oversight of BSL 3 and BSL 4 labs (hold the most dangerous pathogens known) nationwide and the list goes on and on and on. The public remains woefully disengaged from the preparedness process as suggested by numerous security experts, the World At Risk Report Commission, and studies demonstrate first responder agencies – medical and law enforcement are inadequately prepared for asymmetric warfare using unconventional weapons.

Oh and let’s not forget those über dangerous folks – our veterans. Yes, the “go to” people our nation depended upon to protect the Republic have now been labeled potential targets as vulnerable to extremist recruitment and possibly a risk factor for extreme violence. Painting all veterans with the same brush is an indefensible and abominable treatment of people who served their country. Yet the veterans are described as dupes of right wing influence in a DHS report. Veterans as a group deserve better treatment and respect, and do not warrant being singled out as a threat to domestic security. The U.S. government’s track record on caring for returning veterans is in need of further scrutiny, NOT the folks who wore the uniform.

And the “go to” person President Obama tapped to handle these problems is none other than Janet Napolitano. You could almost hear the terrorists cheering and the career intelligence professionals groaning from day one. Is there anyone tracking morale or retirements at the key agencies under the DHS umbrella? Bringing disparately functioning performance cultures together – intelligence, law enforcement, disaster response – has its merits, but when the proverbial you-know-what hits the fan, that is not the time to exchange business cards. And clearly, the silo mentality within organizations historically has been a barrier to effective collaboration, especially when you add the layers of security classifications and the complexities of “courtesy clearances.” But putting these agencies under one roof isn’t the instant cure for these ills, proximity to teams notwithstanding. No one should doubt the dedication of the respective agencies in DHS or disrespect their noble efforts for a good cause, but DHS is still being pulled by multiple strings in different directions; net result…where is it going? And who ultimately is leading it?

Is Janet Napolitano up to the job? And if not, what can we do about it? There are many ways to examine the effectiveness of public policies and the people hired to create, enforce or repair them. Since the proof is in the tasting, ones record, resume or list of actions is evidence enough.

Let’s take a look at Secretary Napolitano’s first public efforts.
Secretary Napolitano gave us a great insight from day one into what she was all about. In fact, no sooner had her words faded from her initial roll out she was then called out to explain why the expurgation of terms such as “terrorist,”, “terrorism,” and “the war on terror” from the lexicon of preparedness and DHS after her first speech to Congress.

Napolitano replied to the criticism: “In my speech, although I did not use the word ‘terrorism,’ I referred to ‘man-caused disasters.’ That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.”

When I first heard the term “man-caused disasters” my first thought was the South Park episode where they spoof form VP Al Gore and his global warming hysteria, replacing it on the show with manic concerns over a dangerous creature – he was trying to warn the kids about “man-bear-pig.” (Check it out on YouTube…it is hysterically funny). Then I thought the biggest “man-caused disaster” was the election of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the total control of the White House and Congress by folks who don’t seem to grasp the reality of good versus evil. It may soundssquare and trite but both exist. The latter cannot be wished away or destroyed as easily as erasing words in a policy book.

“Man caused disasters.” Let’s be frank. How does sounding like an idiot enhance Secretary Napolitano’s capability “to prepare for all risks?” Buying into this, let alone being a mouthpiece for such nonsense, is beneath this intelligent woman. She is not an idiot. She should not be placed in or agree to a position where she has to sound like one. Actions always speak louder than words. Weak words betoken weak actions.

But let’s drink the Kool Aid® for a moment. If a change in definition could enhance capability, adopt the slightly more meaningful terms the Brits use: “Disruptive Threats” or “Disruptive Challenges” – even though those are inadequate to the task as well. Though not as comical as “man-caused disasters” or “man-bear-pig” they, too fail to underscore the intent, the context, the evil associated with the event. Terrorism is just that – an act – a willing, deliberate, planned, and executed act of murder and destruction. “Man-caused disasters” or “all risks” do a disservice to the special and specific category of threat we face – terrorism, the intentional use of violence directed consciously by people towards other specific human and physical targets for the sole purpose of killing and frightening and destroying to accomplish an agenda.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Monday, October 20, 2008

Security Theater

Security Theater. What a great name for what occurs in our nation's airports. I saw it in action when National Guardsmen were assigned to airports with M-16's. To do.....what? Shoot whom? Fire high powered armor piercing rounds in a crowded area against what target?
It was all a sham to "make the public feel safe."

While traveling on active duty, I was never pulled out for secondary attention while traveling alone, if I used my driver's license for ID. But every time I used my military ID, I was pulled out of line for more attention. Hmmmm....could it be that I was, then, a known law-abiding citizen that would not cause problems, yet I filled a quota of passengers that had to be checked? We'll never know.

Jeffery Goldberg broke the law. He broke the law many, many times. He admits it. And proved that the TSA is a failure:

Airport security in America is a sham—“security theater” designed to make travelers feel better and catch stupid terrorists. Smart ones can get through security with fake boarding passes and all manner of prohibited items—as our correspondent did with ease.

“Counter­terrorism in the airport is a show designed to make people feel better,” he said. “Only two things have made flying safer: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers.”

Read this and feel safe that the same people that designed THIS system now want to run the financial systems and take over the medical systems of the USA.

Don't you feel safer?

Labels: , , , ,

|

Sunday, August 31, 2008

National Security Experience

|