Man, that boy sure knows how to have fun.

Posted by: Vinnie at 07:58 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

What is it with Hollywood and their incessant hatred of America?

US News & World Report—David Koepp, who wrote the screenplay for War of the Worlds, says the Martian attackers in the film represent the American military, while the Americans being slaughtered at random represent Iraqi civilians. I see it differently. I think the Martians symbolize normal Americans, while those being attacked are the numbskulls who run Hollywood. Perhaps the normals went a bit too far in this easy-to-understand allegory, but think of the provocation. [. . .].

American's are making this guy rich and he slams our guys like this? I like what John Leo said, "numbskulls..."

Cross-posted at OpinionBug.com

Posted by: OpinionBug at 01:38 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

this just in.

You're receiving this email either because you have contributed to the Carnival of Liberty or supported it in some fashion in the past four weeks.

The Carnival is going very well, lots of articles, good readership (about 1200 folks this week alone) and lots of links from other blogs. Thank you for all of your support and contributions.

Carnival of Liberty #4 is coming soon. We'd love to have your contributions and support. The link announcing the Carnival is available here:

Thanks,

Eric

http://grumbles.mu.nu/

http://liberty.quincysblog.com/

Posted by: Howie at 01:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.

Building on Suzanne's post below and Michelle's observations here, let me tell you what happened on our trip coming to sunny California. My entire family was singled out for security pat down. Twice.

The geniuses at the TSA decided that they had to search my six year old daughter, my three year old son, and my one year old infant. You know, cause terrorists could be anybody.

Just before we boarded plane number 3 (yeah, it took 4 planes to get here) they pulled us off the boarding line to pat us down again. I'm talking the full search on us all, including tearing apart our diaper bag, swabbing our little portable DVD player and Barbie Princess and the Pauper video for bomb residue, and running the metal detector over our one-year old.

I'm thinking it was the flip-flops I was wearing. Or maybe the In-'n-Out Burger tee-shirt. Nothing says terrorist more than that.

Alright, I'm off to the beach. Let's hope the Baywatch lifeguards don't take my pasty-white skin as a tell-tale sign of potential terrorist. And, no, that bulge in my bathing suit is not bomb. I'm just happy to see you.

Posted by: Rusty at 01:14 PM | Comments (36) | Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.

What does random mean, anyway?

NEW YORK -- Alarmed by a new round of mass transit attacks in London, police in New York began random searches of bags and packages brought into the city's vast subway system.

The inspections started on a small scale Thursday in Manhattan and were expanded during Friday morning's rush hour _ a development welcomed by some commuters.

"I'm not against it," Ian Compton, 35, a computer consultant, said at Grand Central Terminal in midtown Manhattan. "I think any measures for safety that aren't terribly intrusive are worth doing."

Officers, some with bomb-sniffing dogs, were stopping people carrying bags as they entered subways, commuter trains, buses and ferries at various points in the city, police said. Anyone who refuses a search will be turned away, and those caught carrying drugs or other contraband could be arrested.

One man was arrested during Thursday evening rush hour at the Brentwood Long Island Rail Road station after police became suspicious, stopped his van and allegedly found a machete and other weapons. Gilbert Hernandez, 34, had been convicted of possessing a pipe bomb in 1996, police said.

Good for them...now do you think they'll start getting the guys who are really a threat to our society?

Michelle Malkin thinks the measures are laughable:

WHAT'S the point? In the wake of the latest terrorist attacks in London, Mayor Bloomberg and the NYPD announced plans to conduct random searches of packages and backpacks carried by subway riders.

"Random," of course, is a synonym for blind. And we all know what it means when you put blind bureaucrats in charge of homeland security: Grannies and toddlers, prepare to be on heightened grope alert.

Reassuring al Qaeda operatives everywhere, Police Commissioner Ray Kelly pledged that his officers would not engage in "racial profiling." He also emphasized that passengers would be free to "turn around and leave" instead of consenting to a search.
Combined with New York City's inane sanctuary policy, which provides safe haven for illegal aliens, these new security-in-name-only measures prove that political correctness still trumps public safety.

A few weeks ago, I noted the vapidity of the trite phrase "heightened alert." New York's response yesterday underscores the point. It is madness to pretend that no profile exists of possible Islamist bomb plotters. It is reckless to prevent law-enforcement authorities from taking obvious national-security profiling factors (racial, ethnic, religious, nationality, behavioral or otherwise) into account. And it is deadly to refuse to enforce immigration laws in a manner that results in, yes, profiling.

"Look for things that are unusual," Commissioner Kelly implored. "Look at things through the prism of 9/11." Uh-huh. But don't dare note the obvious...

Further proof that The right people aren't getting screened:

Last October, Ann Coulter was pied by two idiots who weren't bold enough or smart enough to combat her verbally. I'm sure you've all heard about them. However, their inanity is not my reason for bringing up Coulter---rather, that she was 2.5 hours late for her speech because of airport security gone awry:

Coulter arrived two and a half hours late due to airplane delays and incorporated her experience into the speech. She said she thinks airport security needs to make changes in who they search and not be afraid to racially profile.

She said she was in a special line to be further searched for explosives and weapons.

"I realized the only people that need to be searched were the people doing the searching," Coulter said.

She said all of the people being searched were blonde women.

As a blonde woman, I can attest to this fact. When I flew back to college after Thanksgiving break in 2001, I was thoroughly patted down by a 50 year old man who could barely speak English. And yet, while on my layover in Chicago, four Middle Eastern men in full Muslim garb checked into my flight right ahead of me without any additional questioning. This was a little over two months after 9/11, kids.

Let me also say that there were many people working at the TSA counters looked really suspicious... and I think that given the recent firing of someone sympathetic to the Taliban, I think Coulter's onto something. I'd be interested to see what kind of screening process the screeners are subjected to before we put our safety in their hands.

Good luck, NYC...I just hope this will make a difference.

As Malkin says:

"Political correctness is the handmaiden of terrorism."

Posted by: Suzanne at 12:28 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 763 words, total size 5 kb.

Most people read only a couple of paragraphs deep into news stories; some only read the lead before moving on. That's why journalists tend to pack so much information into the first paragraph of a breaking story. For example, this is the lead for the tube shooting story at MSNBC: "Hours after chasing down and shooting to death one man on the subway..."

So how does al-Jazeera serve their Arab audience? Like this [emphasis added]:

Police have confirmed that they shot dead a man in an underground train station in south London.

The man was shot apparently while trying to board a train on Friday morning at Stockwell station in south London.

This isn't just a matter of style, this is how propaganda is done.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:09 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

Get out the duct tape, kids...

And this guy lives in London?!

LONDON (Reuters) - Militant Islamists will continue to attack Britain until the government pulls its troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the country's most outspoken Islamic clerics said on Friday.

Speaking 15 days after bombers killed over 50 people in London and a day after a series of failed attacks on the city's transport network, Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed said the British capital should expect more violence.

"What happened yesterday confirmed that as long as the cause and the root problem is still there ... we will see the same effect we saw on July 7," Bakri said.

I love how he takes adavantage of a FAILED bombing to threaten that similiar incidents will occur until the Brits pull out of Iraq.

Bakri, a Syrian-born cleric who has been vilified in Britain since 2001 when he praised the September 11 hijackers, said he did not believe the bombings and attempted attacks on London were carried out by British Muslims.

He condemned the killing of all innocent civilians but described attacks on British and U.S. troops in Muslim countries as "pro-life" and justified.

He's been vilified? Awww. I feel so sorry for him. I mean, he only justified mass murder while living in the place where the mass murder occured. It's kind of like walking into a black church and justifying the KKK.

In an interview with Reuters, Bakri described Osama bin Laden, leader of the radical Islamist network al Qaeda, as "a sincere man who fights against evil forces."

Bakri said he would like Britain to become an Islamic state but feared he would be deported before his dream was realized.

"I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world," he said.

That is a dare, my friends. Deportation? You'd better believe it. If Tony Blair has an ounce of courage, he'll deport this guy for treason. Let him put his money where his mouth is right alongside his terrorist homies in the Middle East.

Posted by: Suzanne at 11:50 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

From the Dayton Daily News:

City officials want the 250-pound, 6 1/2-foot, American flag-toting beaver back. They are offering a $500 reward for information leading to its recovery.

Hansley said tracking devices will be put in at least some of the remaining beavers, which includes Vincent Van Beaver, To Be or Not to Be Beaver, Golfing Beaver, Beaver Beaver, Disco Beaver and Pop Goes the Beaver.

My only thoughts are that $500 is a pricey beaver and probably worthy of a tracking device.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 10:20 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

Fox News just showed newly released pictures of the 4 perpetrators of yesterday's isolated incident in London. I'll link, or post when they get it up on the website.

***Update: CNN has them already, for you lazy bums out there I'll post them here in a minute.

***Update 2: Here ya go:

***Update 3: Fox has fuzzy close ups.

***Update 4: Fox is reporting via Sky News that the man shot this morning was NOT affiliated with yesterday's bombers.

Posted by: Vinnie at 10:05 AM | Comments (31) | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

From the Courier-Mail:

OOZING rucksacks, harmless puffs of smoke and the failure of the latest apparent attempted bombings in London suggest a link between this week's attacks and the July 7 atrocities, experts said today.

The four bombs that apparently failed to explode on Underground subway trains and a double-decker bus yesterday bore similarities to the type of Al-Qaeda-style devices used in the suicide attacks earlier this month, which killed 56 people, explosives specialists said.

Witnesses spoke of seeing a lard-like substance oozing from one of the would-be bombers' backpacks after it failed to go off, suggesting the presence of an explosive mixture such as acetone peroxide which was used on July 7, the experts said.

That substance - made from household items such as sulphuric acid, hydrogen peroxide and acetone - deteriorates over time and becomes harmless if it passes its use-by date.

"If the bombers from July 7 and yesterday all loaded their rucksacks together two and a half weeks ago, you might expect a substantial amount of the explosive to have disappeared by this week," chemist Andrea Sella of University College London said.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 08:10 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.

Police have shot a suicide bomber at the Stockwell Tube station in south London:

BBC—A man has been shot at Stockwell Tube station by armed police officers.

Passenger Mark Whitby told BBC News he had seen an Asian man shot five times by “plain-clothes police officers” with a handgun. [. . .].

The Brits have taken off their gloves folksÂ…

Cross-posted at OpinionBug.com

Update (7/22/2005 6:51am):

BBC: Scotland Yard confirms the man was shot dead

Update (7/23/2005 9:02pm):

The BBC says Scotland Yard has identified the man as Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian electrician:

BBC—A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was a Brazilian electrician unconnected to the incidents.

The man, who died at Stockwell Tube on Friday, has been named by police as Jean Charles de Menezes, 27. [. . .].

Posted by: OpinionBug at 06:43 AM | Comments (43) | Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.

I was going to respond to Rob's response to Rusty's response, but that was before I went below the fold on Rusty's post. He addressed the same things I was going to there.

So, instead, and just for the sake of argument, I'll answer Rusty's challenge to come up with a logical reason not to retaliate against Mecca in the event of a nuclear attack on the U.S. Mind you, I have no problem with it.

The Nuke Mecca, Kiss Israel Goodbye Scenario:

Al-Qaeda, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, lights off a smuggled nuke or two in a major American city.

We nuke Mecca.

Pakistan nukes Israel. Out of existence. Would India care if the missiles were headed the opposite way?

Oh, I forgot, Pakistan is our ally. How much of an ally would they be if Mecca were a smoldering crater?

The Nuke Mecca, Kiss Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan Goodbye Theory

Pretty much the same as above, except replace Pakistan with Iran. Let's face something here. We think we know how far along Iran is with their nuke program, but we sure as hell don't really know for sure. What we do know for sure is that they don't have missiles capable of reaching the U.S. yet, but they can damn sure put a hurting on our military, and wipe out Israel, with the ones they have. And I doubt they'd care, with Mecca gone, about their fellow Muslims in Baghdad and Kabul getting vaporized along with America's finest. Hell, they're sending them in now to kill their fellow Muslims.

The Why Nuke Anyway? Theory

If the U.S. is the recipient of a nuclear terrorist attack, it would be fairly pointless to nuke Mecca. The heart of Mecca is a rock. One that a couple of 2,000 lb. conventional bunker busters would vaporize with no problem.

But I would advocate unleashing nuclear Hell on the Tehran and Damascus.

Finally, I will seriously take issue with Rusty's use of the term MAD:

Everyone is approaching this as a tit for tat. They nuke this, we nuke that.

No, that's not what MAD is. Mutual Assured Destruction is just that. While Islamofascist scum may get off a nuke in one, two, or even ten American cities, they don't have anything even remotely resembling the nuclear power of the Soviet Union.

So the word "mutual" doesn't even apply here. The term should be IHOP. Islam's Holiest Obliterated Permanently.

I personally think that we should threaten to lay waste to it all. If even one American city suffers a nuclear attack, we waste Mecca, Medina, Qom, we hit Najaf (only because we worked so hard there) and the Al-Aqsa Mosque (nuking that would hurt Israel) with conventional weapons. And the aforementioned capitals.

Oh, and we nuke France too.

Yes I thought of that. First we pretend to cut and run, pulling our troops out of every single Islamic nation beforehand.

Wait...we need a place for the pulled out troops to go. So we don't nuke France, we invade France, and liberate it for the third time!

Posted by: Vinnie at 12:43 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 533 words, total size 3 kb.

Started reading Blowback by Brad Thor. Thanks to the good folks over at Atria books for sending it to me here at the Shackleford summer home on the beautiful banks of the Rio de Los Angeles gratis.

Read a chapter on the treadmill. Yeah, I know, freakin pathetic.

Argued with Hugh Hewitt. He e-mailed me saying to call him back and we'll duke it out again. Nice try Hugh, there's a reason I write. He'd clean my clock in a verbal debate. Hands. Down.

You know that the college town that I live in doesn't have talk radio? Seriously. The first day in town I asked a local where I could tune into Rush Limbaugh. He said, Rush Lim-who? And I'm not even a big Rush fan, but every podunck town gets Rush, right? Hell, I spent half of me drive through Missouri trying to find an AM station that wasn't Rush Limbaugh. Much of the day found me blubbering like a baby, so overjoyed by the fact that Dennis Prager was on.

High point of the day: Fox 11 in Los Angeles plays the Simpsons twice a night. Twice! With King of the Hill wedged between the two episodes!! Lawdy, how I do miss LA.

Posted by: Rusty at 12:33 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.

I understand that Rep. Tom Tancredo recently said that in the case of a WMD attack against the US by al Qaeda forces we should respond by nuking mecca. Since I have not been watching much TV or reading any blogs on my vacation, let me just respond to a couple of things Hugh Hewitt said on his show today and which I just did not have time to tell him on the air. He points us to this screed by one of my heroes, Lileks, on his blog today.

He also mentioned this post by DafyDD over at Captain's Quarters. It's really a silly post. Seriously. What his post really comes down to is he thinks the case for nuking Mecca is based on hatred of Muslims, what he calls "Moslem Derangement Syndrome."

I guess those that called for nuking Moscow in case they nuked us were really victims of "Russian Derangement Syndrome"??

He makes a good point that there are many who want to see Muslims dead. This is sick, just as he suggests. But trying to argue against the MAD strategy by trying to associate it with a bunch of racists is a straw man--something I see was noticed by Pierre LeGrand. It's like arguing that the war in Iraq is wrong because it is motivated by racism. Sure, there are some racists cheering for us in Iraq, but so what? Do not ascribe others sick motives to those wishing to deter the unthinkable from happening on our soil.

The second part of his post is equally silly. Nuking Mecca would not kill 1 billion Muslims. Last time I checked Mecca was little more than a medium sized tourist town. It would kill a lot of people. But so would taking out Moscow. Yes, very vary bad thing.

Nobody advocating the MAD strategy wishes to see any one dead. That's kinda the whole point of Mutual Assured Destruction. It deters.

The case for nuking Mecca, then, is very similar to the case for nuking Moscow. It is based on the notion that rational people would not dare start a nuclear Armageddon.

The only potential flaw in the case for nuking Mecca is the underlying premise of rationality. If Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are rational, threatening to nuke Mecca would deter them from using WMD against the United States. If Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are not rational, then the threat would have no deterrent effect.

That is a very debatable point, and one on which honest discussions are made.

As I pointed out in my original post on nuking mecca:

Let me make a couple of points first. One: I do not advocate using nuclear weapons. Two: I do not advocate killing Muslims or any other follower of any religion. Three: I do not imagine in any way possible the US government actually doing this--or even thinking it. Four: These are rudimentary thoughts. This post is used as a sounding board only. Much of what I say may be wrong and all is subject to revision. The purpose of this post is to start a conversation.

First point: Bill's major argument about deterring terrorists is well taken and mostly on the money. I think he's right, for the most part: you cannot deter these guys, only defeat them. And if incinerating Damascus were the only threat we could use to deter terrorists then certainly a MAD scheme would not work in this new Cold War we find ourselves in.

However, Mecca is not Damascus. It plays a central role in Muslim worship. Five times a day Muslims pray toward it. All Muslims who have the means are expected to make the Hajj--a pilgrimage to Mecca which revolves around the Kaaba stone. The Kaaba stone is really the reason Mecca is considered holy. Muslims believe the site was used for worship as far back as Adam and that the shrine around the stone was first placed there by Abraham (Ibrahim). There is a 12 mile zone around the stone that infidels are restricted from entering. It's that holy. No non-Muslims near it. In fact, without Mecca and the Kaaba stone, Islam would be very different.

Mecca, then, is quite unlike any other place in the world for Muslims. It is an entire city dedicated to Muslim worship. A place set apart. A holy place. It is an entire city that is thought to be the Temple of God.

Islamist terrorists also consider Mecca the holiest place in the world. It is central to their mode of worship. They face it when they pray. They too believe they must make the hajj. If we take them at their word, then the reason they commit terrorist acts is because they take their religious convictions so seriously. When they kill us, it is because they believe that this is what their God wants them to do.

So, ask yourself the question again: Can terrorists be deterred from using WMD against American targets?

Maybe they can. If Islamic extremists really love their religious institutions in the way that they claim they do, then pointing an ICBM at Mecca may not be the most irrational thing to do. They may not care if the rest of the world goes up in a nuclear mushroom cloud, as Bill points out, but Mecca is not the rest of the world. Would they really risk blowing up New York City if they believed the consequences of such an action would be a 30 kiloton nuclear explosion over the Kaaba stone? After all, the nuclear destruction of Mecca would end Islamic forms of worship as they presently exist.

If I might misquote Sting for a moment, "Is it such a crazy thing to do, if the Terrorists love their Mecca too?"

have numerous problems with the specifics of Atkins proposal--starting with the inhumanity of killing millions of innocent people because a handful of states support Islamic terrorists--but agree that MAD could be used to deter Islamic terrorism. It seems to me that a much more reasonable form of MAD would be to limit the target list to one city, Mecca. The terrorists really don't care if we nuke the capitals of Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Syria.

UPDATE: Rob at Say Anything responds here. Let me just make a couple of observations.

Is al Qaeda full of a bunch of madmen? No. No more than, say, the Kremlin was. The ideology of the Kremlin was mad, and the worldview shaped by that ideology was mad, but it was not irrational. It had a coherent internal logic. The MAD logic does not need sanity to work, what it needs is rationality. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 08:37 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 1857 words, total size 11 kb.

1 >>>"I guess those that called for nuking Moscow in case they nuked us were really victims of "Russian Derangement Syndrome"??" Exactly. Tancredo is right. Targeting Mecca for destruction isn't about killing muslims-- it's about saving New York. We don't want to nuke Mecca anymore than we wanted to nuke Moscow, but MADD kept both parties from doing anything stupid. There's only one thing islamic terrorists really care about and that's their holy sites. Targeting Mecca will guarantee New York's safety. This whole "moslem derangement syndrome" just shows how stupid and illogical these wannabe intellectual Libs are. We did the exact same thing to the Soviets, but these braniac Libs have already forgotten. They're OBSESSED with race.

Posted by: Carlos at July 21, 2005 08:44 PM (8e/V4)

2 Ok, back to lounging around the pool. If you're at the pool with either a double-double or a carnitas burrito at hand, I will nuke the nine-oh-nine.

Posted by: Leopold Stotch at July 21, 2005 09:10 PM (l9XSL)

3 Got news for you, an ICBM contains 10 warheads and each one is 300 Megatons a far cry from a single warhead of 30 Kilotons. And that information is all that is de-classified. For example, no one really knows how much of a punch a Trident missile fired from a US Boomer submarine can carry. I think we should put together some tests and film the thing, then broadcast it all over the Muslim world in their own language. They simply have no idea just how destructive a single warhead can be and we have thousands upon thousands of these warheads and if need be can produce as many as we want. Basically, there would a crater many miles across and perhaps as deep as 500 feet. There would be nothing left. When we stopped testing atomic weapons above ground, we continued testing for decades underground and I am sure the explosions were increased in size and magnitude. Apparently, we learned all we really needed to learn from those tests and super computers can now be effectively used to simulate atomic explosions. BTW, I heard that the US has either just started up warhead production or is planning to do so very soon. Smaller tactical nukes could prove to be rather useful to avoid killing millions in a single strike. But I don't see the point, every single time the enemy is amassed in a large enough force to be confronted by the Army or Marines, they swiftly get their butts kicked and they end up scurrying away like cockroaches. We still need to maintain MAD (mutually assured destruction) because of the Chinese and soon the North Koreans and perhaps the Iranians. Russia still has nukes and what happens if there is another collapse of government and a psychopath takes over Russia? It happened in Germany, Hitler rose up politically and simply eliminated the competition and took over.

Posted by: JBrickley at July 21, 2005 09:16 PM (OyXzs)

4 You do realise that Mecca has been destroyed before right? did it stop them then? The Koran contains a prophecy that identifies the destruction of Mecca in the final days, the days when they believe all will be converted or die. Yeah, radical Muslims believing America just started the prophecy, to kill all the none believers -- let's do that.

Posted by: dave at July 21, 2005 09:22 PM (DO6vD)

5 In his recent sequels to Enders Game (The Shadow of... Series) Orson Scott Card has as part of the background that in response to nuclear terrorism Mecca has been nuked. It seems that this did have the effect of mostly eliminating Islamic terrorism, but did not eliminate Islam - instead it was said that the blasts had vaporized the Kaaba, sending it's atoms into the atmosphere where they dispersed across the entire earth, spreading a blessing. Interestingly, he posits that in order for Islam to reform, the central tenet that must be challenged is that apostasy is punishable by death - that until there can be ex-muslims, all other changes are cosmetic.

Posted by: Eric J at July 21, 2005 09:42 PM (5PRM2)

6 Rusty: I have two commentaries on the issue of Mecca and nukes on my site as well as on Moonbat Central. I would not make Mecca's Grand Mosque the target per se, but there are a host of targets in Mecca that should be taken down with conventional weapons in the aftermath of an Islamist WMD strike on the USA. What we're witnessing here is a meltdown among pretend "conservatives" that are in reality moderates who yearn for MSM acceptance, salaries, and access to the "cool" crowd in Dc and NYC.

Posted by: Michael Calderon at July 21, 2005 10:03 PM (x6TjU)

7 You don't have to necessarily nuke Mecca to deface it. Just air-dropping a bunch of infidels, oh say a few thousand heavily armed infidels, should get the same effect. They would see it as poisoning the hallowed ground. That would sure get them in a snit. And Lileks certainly has a point here: But do we really want to incinerate Tehran? You'll probably find more people in Tehran who dearly love America than you'll find in Berkeley. How true!

Posted by: Oyster at July 22, 2005 06:49 AM (YudAC)

8 I think that the target of a MAD strategy is NOT Al Qeada. I may not work on them as planed, i.e. thay may actually welcome it. The target of a MAD strategy should be the root cause of the Islamofacist philosophy, namely The Magic Kingdom. A clear announcement that Saudi Arabia (including Meccah) would suffer the response would cause the Saudis to rethink that whole "incitment to terror" policy they have been following for many years.

Posted by: Sinner at July 22, 2005 08:17 AM (f3h4P)

9 Hmm. Here's an alternate retaliation strategy: Bomb the hell out of every military installation in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran and maybe Egypt. At the same time, explode a nuclear device somewhere in the middle of the Sahara. Message: We can do more damage with conventional weapons than you can do with nukes. And this is what we could do if we decided to use nukes.

Posted by: Eric J at July 22, 2005 08:28 AM (hrQvk)

10 MAD won't work because they aren't rational from a normal point of view. They probably think Mecca is untouchouble, magically protected by the holy mudmaster Alluhah himself. If they got over nukes no doubt they'd used them, but that time everybody in the US would be so pissed that nuking mecca and invading Saudi Arabia would make very much sence. Nobody would care what the Muslims would think, in fact they'd be persecuted indiscriminately. War would be proclaimed on Islam.

Posted by: Cognito at July 22, 2005 08:52 AM (a9tRx)

11 Thank you very much for the links Rusty and thanks for showing some much needed sense after all the hysterics. Pierre Legrand

Posted by: Pierre Legrand at July 22, 2005 12:57 PM (znRfy)

12 Islam is in the heart, it is preserved in the heart. It will stay there till the day a muslim dies. The day America or anyone else bombs Mecca is the day muslims go to war against them. You can't even handle one Bin Laden, how can you handle billions of muslims...

Posted by: Khan at August 05, 2005 06:59 PM (lujqP)

13 The argument is basically flawed. If you notice Muslims pray facing the Qibla, they dont actually see it! IF its nuked they'll still face the same qibla (its not like geographically the qibla location will change!). So nuking mecca will basically turn lots of muslims in america turn against america, and lots of moderate americans against the government. Oh not to mention, the communists chinese and other smaller countries. So lets see.. you dont get any oil, everyone's against everyone else. The entire economic system breaks down! There is a global war.. and well it'll be fought on ur streets.. one day ur kid goes out playing and someone kills him (coz ur army killed his kid!)... and the war will be in ur living room. I do not think its a geat idea to think what you are thinking. In fact it's based upon your own biased facts... did u go to college btw? to have any idea about world cultures, religions etc doesn't sound like it at all..

Posted by: MR E at October 20, 2005 07:12 AM (7YwPP)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Just in case you were listening, yes, that was me on Hugh Hewitt this afternoon. And, yes, I think their is a strong case to be made that pointing nuclear weapons at Mecca would be a rational deterrent to the forces of Islam using WMD against the United States. I made that point last year here and here.

Posted by: Rusty at 07:55 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.

***UPDATED***

After staying plugged into the news coming out of London so far, and especially after reading Richard's post about the splodeydope's weapon of choice, I think I have a clear picture of who is the mastermind behind today's isolated incident.

UPDATED WITH EXTREMELY SENSITIVE ANONOMOUSLY SOURCED INFORMATION.

The British Gov't has identified the above as one Abu Saheed Spesh al-Ed. They have also released a recorded cell phone conversation between him and one of the perpetrators of today's isolated incident:

Perp: Hello?
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have TATP?
Perp: Yes, we do.
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I like TATP!
Perp:
Spesh al-Ed: Hey lady,
Perp: I am not a la
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have TATP?
Perp: I tell you this, we do.
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I like TATP!
Spesh al-Ed: Hey lady
Perp: Sheik al-Ed! I am not a lady, you know this!
Spesh al-Ed: Do you have Semtex?
Perp: NO! We have the TATP! I tell you this already!
Spesh al-Ed: YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! I hate Semtex!
Perp: Goodbye Sheik
Spesh al-Ed: Lady? YAAAAAAAAAY! He's going to die for Allah! YAAAAAAAAY! I like dying for Allah!

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:15 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

If you would like to get away from real news for a moment, TacJammer has a lovely piece devoted to poop.

Posted by: Vinnie at 05:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

I know this sounds like a skit from Saturday Night Live, but apparently, it's true. From the Associated Press:

NEW YORK -- Andrea Mitchell said she felt angry and humiliated after Sudanese bodyguards dragged her out of a room Thursday for questioning President Omar el-Bashir about his involvement in the country's violence.

Large, gun-toting guards painfully wrenched the 5-foot-3 Mitchell's arm behind her. She was freed after U.S. officials accompanying Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice complained.

"Can you tell us why the violence is continuing?" Mitchell asked, as a Sudanese official said "no, no, no, please."

"Can you tell us why the government is supporting the militias?" she asked.

After getting no reply from el-Bashir, she asked, "Why should Americans believe your promises?"

It was then that she was forcibly removed.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 04:49 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

Ussneverdock has some really good stuff on the investigation into the 7/7 London bombings.

Haroon Rashid Aswat has emerged as the figure that Scotland Yard have been hunting since he flew out of Britain just hours before the attacks which killed 56 people.

Aswat, 30, who is believed to come from the same West Yorkshire town as one of the bombers, arrived in Britain a fortnight before the attacks to orchestrate final planning for the atrocity. He spoke to the suicide team on his mobile phone a few hours before the four men blew themselves up and killed fifty-two other people

Good stuff man. Some of the information is circumstantial but that would not stop Greg would it.

Also dont forget to check out Michelle's posts today. She has in depth coverage of today's bombings as well as a good link to a greenpeace video that is well you just have to see it. Plus she's easy on the eyes.

Posted by: Howie at 01:09 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

Purely speculation, but as long as my wife is down for a nap with the baby on this sultry summer day, let me go ahead and speculate.

This could be a botched terror bombing, but it seems more likely that this was either an amateur copy-cat bombing by more of your friendly neighborhood ROPers....

or, maybe.....

The fact that only one person is injured. Again, pure speculation, but doesn't this seem more like the work of the IRA or one of its offshoots like The Real IRA? When the ROP strikes they are going for casualties, but when the IRA strikes it is political theater. Most of the time, the IRA is looking to do plenty of property damage with as few injuries as possible.

Plus, militant Irish Republicans aren't looking to meet 72 virgins in the afterlife. The bombers, from what I am hearing on TV, ran away.

Just a thought. I'm probably wrong. Ok, back to vacation.

UPDATE: Like I said, I'm probably wrong. This is a blog, remember?

Posted by: Rusty at 12:47 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.