Category Archives: War on Terror

'Culture', Politics, War on Terror

Page 136

2 Comments

Yes, I’m reading Deathly Hallows. It’s goofy but there’s something to be said for reading a book and knowing that ten million other people are reading the same thing. It’s the closest my generation will get to a shared cultural experience this side of Janet Jackson’s nipple.

One of themes in the last couple of books which continues in Hallows is the ruthless and often illegal methods being used by the Ministry of Magic to battle Voldy. Secrecy, kangaroo courts, secret witness, alliance with bad people, etc. And I feel that there’s more to come.

How long will it be before some Right Wing reactionary decides she’s criticizing George W. Bush? I mean, these guys lost it because they thought Revenge of the Sith had an anti-Bush message.

I predict that by Wednesday, J. K. Rowling is denounced as a left-wing lunatic who wants the terrorists to win.

Politics, War on Terror

Balko on Terror

He rocks.

By definition, the aim of “terrorism” is not to topple the U.S. government, or even to rack up a massive body count. The aim of terrorism is to cause terror. It’s to scare us. Frighten us. Alter our way of life.

In this sense, the very people who are supposed to be protecting us from terrorists are playing right into the terrorists’ hands. Despite the absence of any specific information, and despite the fact that his saying as much would do little if anything to actually thwart a pending attack, Chertoff still feels he has to go public with his “gut feeling” that something awful might happen this summer. And so the newspapers and Drudge and the blogs run with it. And now we get to go about our summer business with the foreboding cloud of a possible terror attack looming on the horizon.

I’ve been thinking this for quite some time. Every time I hear Neal Boortz, especially, rant about how terrorist are going to kill us, I think he’s just surrendered in the War on Terror.

Except that, with most of these guys, I’m through the looking glass. I know they don’t really think a massive terrorist attack is any more likely today than it will be six months from now. They just want the American people to panic so that they will surrender more of their freedom.

Sorry, I’m not French.

Politics, War on Terror

Kids

I’m sure the Right will go on and on about how the kids that gave the President a letter on torture are “young know-it-all twerps”. Boortz in particular likes to go on about how young people think they know everything. And he’s not wrong in that regard.

But just because college-age kids spout a lot of stupid crap does not mean they aren’t occasionally right. And it’s amazing to see these kids show more courage than the entire Congress combined.

'Culture', Politics, Science and Edumacation, Socialism, Taxes and Spending, War on Terror

Thursday Linkorama

An analysis of just how much seniors are going to rip us off with Medicare and Social Security. Nice to know that the debate in Washington is over who can make this situation worse.

Center for New American Security has, what seems to me, a reasonable plan for getting out of Iraq. Money quote:

Some may suggest the United States should withdraw only when victory is achieved but “there will no American victory in Iraq in the terms defined by the Bush administration,” the report concluded.

I discovered this because Neal Boortz endorsed it. I think this is what the Right is looking for right now. A way to get out while still declaring victory. This report suggests phased withdrawal, timetables, etc. — everything the Right has railed against for years.

Sand may be a greater menace than sharks. Raise your hand if you’re surprised.

Scott Adams gets to the heart of environmental hypocrisy and panic-mongering.

Virginia school has a zero tolerance policy . . . on touching. Ugh.

Politics, War on Terror

Scalia Out

Via Sullivan, we find Antonin Scalia citing Jack Bauer in arguments about torture.

I used to like Scalia, back before I was a Commie Fag Junkie Liberal Bedwetter (that being the moniker currently applied to people who believe in the Constitution, balance of powers, small government, free trade and rule of law). But he’s been going further and further off the deep end. In the past few years I’ve heard him:

  • Argue that “cruel and unusual” punishment can only be applied to something considered cruel and unusual in 1783
  • Overturn the exclusion rule because “new professionalism” means we can just trust cops not to violate our rights.
  • Side with the government in the Raich decision, arguing that marijuana is “inextricably linked” with interstate commerce.

    • He still occasionally does things right. But it’s becoming clearer to me that Scalia is, like most judges, looking at issues backward. He decides his views, then wrestles the law and the Constitution into compliance. And increasing, his views are getting bizarre.

    Civil Liberties, Politics, War on Terror

    Quote of the Day

    Right now, I’m reading, somewhat belatedly, Team of Rivals. A lot of Bush’s supporters — his few remaining supporters — like to make the comparison of Bush to Lincoln. But apart from both being Republicans, both facing a difficult conflict and both having opposition from peace-seeking Democrats, there is no comparison.

    In the face of the greatest crisis in our nation’s history, Lincoln held together a new Republican coalition, got rid of an incompetent Secretary of War and numerous blundering generals and was masterful on foreign relations. Facing a handful of extremists who can’t seem to figure out which end of the bomb to point at the enemy, Bush has fractured the Republican party, stuck with incompetent twerps beyond all reason and alienated the entire world.

    But moreover, Lincoln’s use of military tribunals and suspension of certain liberties has been used to justify Bush’s. But again, Lincoln was facing open rebellion, for which exemptions are specifically granted in the Consititution. Bush is not, unless you’re going to go the Algore route and proclaim any opposition to be a fifth column.

    And Lincoln himself said and, I’m finding out, lived, the following:

    I fear you do not fully comprehend the danger of abridging the liberties of the people. Nothing but the very sternest necessity can ever justify it. A government had better go to the very extreme of toleration, than to do aught that could be construed into an interference with, or to jeopardize in any degree, the common rights of its citizens.

    “Aught that could be construed” — i.e, we shouldn’t be finding little legal loopholes to justify violating liberties. We should not even give the apperance of violating the spirit of the law while obeying its letter. In contrast, this Administation has lawyers figuring out rationaliziations for wiretaps, opened mail, torture and indefinite detention.

    “A government had better go to the very extreme of toleration” – in other words, this is the last desparate step. In contrast, the Right’s first inclination is to suspend civil liberties, break the law and violate our treaty obligations.

    Night and day, people. Night and day.

    Law and Order, Politics, War on Terror

    The Courts Come Through

    The US Circuit Court restores habeas and a Georgia Court brings sanity to an out-of-control prosecution.

    I am sure both will be bashed by “conservatives” as judicial activism. But, dammit, we need some judicial activism when the President is determined to shit all over the Constitution, the law and our treaty obligations. That’s what they are there for. If they are just going to jump every time the President says “frog”, what’s the point in having a judiciiary.

    It’s called checks and balances, you totalitarian twerps. Read up on it.

    One other point to make regarding habeas: it shouldn’t have gotten to this point. Too often we think that the constitutionality of a law can only be decided by the courts. But the Congress and the President take an oath:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter

    Both the President and the Congress are obligated to oppose any law or statute which they believes violates the Constitution. But the attitude of both became obvious early on — when they supported a McCain-Feingold law they knew restrained free speech because it was popular. That was an early warning sign that the GOP saw the Constitution as an impediment, not a pact.

    We should rarely have to fall back on the courts to defend liberty. And shame on this Administration that we had to on such a fundamental liberty.

    Politics, War on Terror

    Powell

    Well, I guess Colin Powell is now a Commie Fag Junkie for calling to close Gitmo, give terror suspects fair trials and restore Habeas Corpus.

    Here’s the thing. Before the Iraq War, Powell was pushing for more troops and a coherent occupation plan. No matter what people might say about him, he has been right far more often than George Bush.

    Or Don Rumsfeld.

    Or Rush Limbaugh.

    Or Sean Hannity.

    Or Ann Coulter.

    Or…

    Politics, War on Terror

    Now We See That Good Will Always Triumph, Because Evil is Dumb

    Seriously, folks, every day the terrorists remind me more and more of the keystone cops:

    Homeland Security sources said there is no current threat at the airport and the attack as planned was “not technically feasible.

    …

    But if incidents like this are going to be used to bolster Bush’s image as a steely-eyed terrorist killer with his six-guns slung low on his hips, I think it’s only fair to point out that the terrorist he just gunned down in the town square was half retarded and trying to stab a woman with a banana.

    Like Lee, I’m more attacking the “this proves Bush is amazing” people than the hard-working people who cracked this cell. They seem to be doing a good job here. And I’d rather have them crack a plot that won’t work than not crack one that will.

    But again, notice how the plot was busted. No one was tortured. No civil rights were violated. These guys will be given criminal trials. Obeying the law, respecting the Constitution and treating our enemies better than they treat us can work, no matter what Rudy says.

    Politics, War on Terror

    Boortz Pops a Rivet

    Neal Boortz:

    How long was it going to take before a Defeatocrat came up with this one? John Murtha—our favorite moonbat from Pennsylvania—says that the terrorists arrested in the JFK plot were a product of the war in Iraq. Basically, if we had not gone into Iraq, this terrorist plot would never have come about. He is the boat with 9/11 conspiracy theorists and all those who sympathize with “freedom fighters” and the “peaceful” religion of Islam.

    What has this man been smoking? If this was the excuse for the JFK plot, than who does he blame the 9/11 attacks on? He does not understand that the fundamental hatred of terrorists is not based on our presence in Iraq.

    This is a complete non-sequitur. Murtha may be right or wrong. But the concept of “blowback” does not in any way support 9/11 conspiracy theories or provide comfort to terrorists. It’s a simple fucking fact. (And you thought fatherhood would make me lighten up.)

    Have conservatives even read the 9/11 report? Being aware of blowback doesn’t automatically mean you’re even against the War in Iraq, least of all against the War on Terror. Blowback can be worth it — blowback can be a cost of war, just like dead American soldiers is a cost of war.

    But to sit around and pretend that blowback doesn’t exist? To be frank, Boortz, that’s First Rank Moonbatism.

    Civil Liberties, Politics, Science and Edumacation, Taxes and Spending, War on Terror

    Friday Linkorama

    Taxes destroy an old amusement park. I hope the city thinks its worth their art subsidies and other waste.

    The internet weights about the same as a grain of sand.

    Cato on why we should be leery of Rudy:

    Here’s why: Throughout his career, Giuliani has displayed an authoritarian streak that would be all the more problematic in a man who would assume executive powers vastly expanded by President Bush.

    His support of water-borading is another reason. If Kerry were president right now, I’d support Rudy. But we need someone to repair our government’s adherence to constitutional principles.

    Finally, Congress is pushing back against the CIA gul-, er, prisons. Four of seven Republicans. Let’s hope this is just the beginning.

    The border agent decided the TB man didn’t seem sick so he just let him in.

    Yeah, we’re going to stop terrorism by closing the borders.