Breivik vs. Hasan and Abdo, Patriotic vs. Treasonous Terrorism

Breivik vs. Hasan and Abdo, Patriotic vs. Treasonous Terrorism

Anders Behring Breivik, the accused murderer of 76 people in Oslo and on the island of Utoya, will have unique advantages if and when he ever comes to trial. He will not be subject to American law or our penal system but instead to far less punitive Norwegian law and a maximum sentence of 21 years in a prison which more closely resembles a Club Med resort.

As an article in PajamasMedia.com observed, the Norwegian mass murderer faces a “Gentle Justice,” the Nordic belief being, “If you treat people badly, they will behave badly. Anyone can be a citizen if we treat them well, respect them, and give them challenges and demands.” (http://bit.ly/nYi1Vc)

Norway’s is an operable philosophy only if the citizenry and inmate population adhere to civilized principles and only when predicated on extended experience with immigrant influxes, which homogeneous Norway is not. Their system of “gentle justice” presupposes civil criminals and has yet to be tested on a wide scale.

Norway considers itself very progressive when it comes to punishment and in many other ways, including not permitting most of its police force to carry lethal weapons since Nordic countries don’t want people to get hurt.

In a very real sense, Breivik deserves better treatment than America’s homegrown lowlives.

As reprehensible as his murderous spree was, Breivik committed his atrocities out of a love for his country, albeit a distorted love but love nevertheless. He detested his exceedingly benevolent, socialistic Labor government for its immigration policies and, more specifically, for undermining Norway’s national integrity and culture by welcoming and indulging hordes of Muslim immigrants.

In America, we have a similar approach. We welcome and indulge large scale multiculturalism and diversity–and we’re reaping the whirlwind as a result.

In custody are Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army major who allegedly slaughtered 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, and Naser Jason Abdo, who apparently was plotting to become a Hasan wannabe. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5131)

Al Franken Finds His Sick Niche

Al Franken Finds His Sick Niche

You can dress a clown up as a senator but he would still be a clown, and not necessarily a very funny clown. Alan Stuart Franken, aka the dopey, simpering, effeminate Stuart Smalley, was canned because he wasn’t funny on “Saturday Night Live,” failed with talk radio’s leftist Air America, and had little else to do but stage a run for the United States Senate.

Inexplicably, Minnesotans elected him–by 312 votes and with more than a little help from ineligible Twin Cities convicted felons, creative re-counting of ballots, and empathetic Minnesota courts. Coincidentally, Minnesota’s state bird is the common loon.

And so Mr. Franken went to Washington in 2009 toting all his baggage and a tainted plurality.

He was thrilled according to CNN and is finally on a comic roll in D.C., such as it is.

Freshmen senators don’t usually accomplish much early on in their senatorial tenures but Franken recently hit his stride by taking positions on two controversial issues now being debated in congress: the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, and the debt ceiling.

He was wrong on both.

Defying the odds and never letting facts cloud his judgment, Franken ripped into the Bill Clinton initiative, DOMA, passed by an overwhelming 84% of congress fifteen years ago and subsequently reinforced by 31 of 31 states which concurred that a marriage consists of one man, one woman, no variations allowed.

A number of prominant Democrats including Sens. Harry Reid and Pat Leahy supported DOMA in 1996 but, with the rise of gay social and political power, have switched sides and abandoned whatever principles they once had.

Sen. Franken is equally-unprincipled even if he is hardly prominent but he blows in the political winds with the best of them.

In pushing for support of the Respect for [Homosexual] Marriage Act to replace DOMA, Franken attacked an anti-gay marriage advocate, Tom Minnery, for citing a 2007 HHS study. That study unequivocably showed that children fare better in a “nuclear family” consisting of biological or adoptive parents.

Franken contended that same-sex parents do just as well rearing their kids, ignoring the reality that there were approximately 59 million normal married households in America versus 0.0002% of gay families among the “nuclear households” at the time of the HHS conclusions.

In addition and despite gay claims . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5111)

The Terror that Was September 11th, 2001

The Terror that Was September 11th, 2001

Memories can be strange things which we understandably repress or reduce to selective memory when the conscious thought is too disturbing to dwell on.

For many, thoughts of the events of September 11th, 2001 are, 8 1/2 years later, still too emotional and horrifying to be allowed regular admission to our consciousness.

Yet, they must not be relegated to distant memory lest by doing so we again let down our guard, either individually or collectively, and invite a repetition of that day.

We were 600 miles away from Ground Zero on 9/11, a very safe distance except for the facts our grown kids were in the New York City area and our son was working on 58th Street, less than 4 short miles away and close enough to witness the surrealistic collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Some wounds never heal, surreal or not.

No American has forgotten the horrific, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1539)

An Open Letter to Iran's Grand Poobah

An Open Letter to Iran’s Grand Poobah

The 22nd of Bahman may not ring many American bells but it’s shaping up as an eventful day for Iranians, and for the Great Satan if they follow through with their sinister plans.

It isn’t an official Iranian or Islamic holiday but it sure is time for celebration, as per Iran’s top “holy” cleric, commander in chief, chief bottle washer, and beard shampooer, ”Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Sorry to sound disrespectful to a religious leader but what he said on Monday wasn’t very religious: ”Iran is set to deliver a ‘punch’ that will stun world powers during this week’s 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution.”

That threat doesn’t command or invite any respect so Ali gets none.

The Iranian revolution was effectively launched when Iran’s air force signed up for revolt by throwing its support to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini thereby giving him the gonads to order the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979.

Khomeini’s heir, Grand Poobah Ali Khamenei, went on to be somewhat more specific saying, “The Iranian nation, with its unity and God’s grace, will punch the arrogance (Western powers) on the 22nd of Bahman in a way that will leave them stunned,” according to an AFP report: http://bit.ly/dnFZEb

Big doings must indeed be in the Iranian playbook for the near horizon since Iran’s less-than-holy President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has chimed in with threats against the West to commemorate that mass kidnapping of Americans.

Those threats coincide with a new Usama bin Laden tape so something must truly be afoot.

I feel an open letter to the ayatollah is in order. This should be the prerogative of America’s President Barack Hussein Obama but I’m not certain he’s up to the task. It therefore falls to me, Joe Citizen, to compensate for America’s ineffectual leadership.

Tuesday, February 9th (Bahman the 20th)

Dear Ali,

I hope no offense is taken to my use of your given name since no offense is intended.

I feel this is a friendly, personal missive and I’d like us to be on a first name basis, sort of like when Barack had his beer summit here with Sgt. Crowley and that prof Henry Gates last July.

If and when you respond, you can call me Joe, ok, or Mr. C. if you insist on formality, and feel free to share the contents of this communication with Mahmoud and the other Muslim gutless maniac, Usama.

Now here’s the straight poop, as we say in the States.

First of all, Ali, we Americans don’t take kindly to threats. I might paraphrase the motto of our great state of Texas: “Don’t threat on me!”

That means, Don’t mess with us, okay?

We’ve been tolerating Iran’s nutty warnings for over 30 years now and I have to tell you, we’ve had enough, they’ve gotten very old.

If you want to come at us, then come at us, but cut the baloney. We’ve been tolerating Iran’s silly saber-rattling and, recently, missile-rattling for much too long.

I’m not saying to bring it on because Americans really don’t want any more war. However, if you choose to bring it on, starting on the 20th of Bahman or whenever, rest assured that you won’t get away with it.

You’re guaranteed to receive far more than you bring on.

You may be thinking that you have an easy mark with Obama in our White House but keep in mind it’s America’s White House, not his. The Obama clan are very temporary residents.

With your nascent nuclear program, you may be thinking differently than you were after 9/11/2001. Remember? When Iranians were scared, if I can be indelicate, sh*tless, at the thought Iran would be blamed and that Tehran could be reduced to a molten puddle by September 12th.

You may recall that time when the toothless chants of “Death to America” were suspended for a while in your mosques as you wondered if the Great Satan would take out the Great Persian Charade.

It didn’t happen then but it could be in your future should your Bahman 22nd threats not be just the usual bluster.

There’s an eye of newt spoiling your hummus if you think Americans will let any president get away with minimal retaliation if you guys do something very stupid.

Trust me, if you do something dumb by attacking us or our Western allies, either Obama will order a massive strike against your country or some disobedient officer will level Tehran and accept the consequences. He will then become an American hero.

Either way, your sorry excuse for a country will be returned to the 7th century.

The good news is that then you could personally ask Muhammed where you went wrong.

Mind you, Ali, this is not comparable to one of your warnings. As we say here, it’s not a threat but a promise and America follows through on its promises.

I know it’s late in the game but you made the rules and set the schedule.

The 22nd of Bahman is just two days away. I seriously suggest you call off any plans in progress, call off your terrorist goons, or else both you and we will regret it.

And trust me again, Ali, Iran and Islam will regret it far more.

I know Mahmoud believes the end is near as whackos on our street corners have been preaching for years and you may share that theory.

Whether that theory comes to fruition, whether Iran succeeds in delivering its “punching” and “stunning,” know that Iran will have precipitated it, which may be what you wish to accomplish.

However, as our Boy Scouts say, Be prepared. Be prepared with an alternative in case you merely succeed in wounding this sleeping tiger or our allies. One alternative might be to evacuate Tehran posthaste.

I realize that the new Islamic terrorist battle cry ”Allahu Akbar” is Arabic and not Farsi but do keep in mind that our pledge of retaliation is delivered with our own version of “God is great.” It goes, ”So help me, God,” which has the same effect. In spades.

Sincerely,

(Mr.) Joe Citizen

Terrorism 101, Semester One

Terrorism 101, Semester One

Having the Obamians in charge of the America’s security is like a teacher appointing the wimpiest kid in a class full of rowdies to take names during the teacher’s brief absence. The kid will be lucky to escape with a bloody nose and a broken limb or two.

So will we.

When the boss man refuses to acknowledge that there’s a worldwide war in progress with Islamic jihadists pitted against Western civilization, with the United States designated as the epicenter for another Ground Zero, there’s not much hope for the good guys.

(Note to the Obamians: We are the good guys!)

To be fair, on Thursday, with his back up against the obvious, the president did finally say, “We are at war, we are at war against al Qaeda.” As CNS added, that was ”a departure from the administration’s move in 2009 to discontinue the phrase ‘Global War on Terrorism’ from U.S. policy:” http://bit.ly/8hKF39

So, the new policy simply materialized as a result of Umar Farouk Abdulmutellab’s flubbed Muslim present to Americans on Christmas Day, whereas Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan murdering 12 and wounding 30 at Fort Hood while screaming, “Alahu Akbar” is still untrelated to al Qaeda?

Pardon me, Mr. President, but that doesn’t make any sense and if it does in your mind, why didn’t you connect the Fort Hood dot with the NWA dot when you declared this war which has been going on for years?

I repeat, the boss man refuses to acknowledge that there’s a worldwide war in progress with Islamic jihadists. . .

(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1413)

Washington Outrage and Outrages

Washington Outrage and Outrages

Some people say the very existence of government is an outrage; they’re called anarchists. Many others contend what our present government is doing to America is outrageous; they’re called patriots.

There is some limited common ground between those two segments of the body politic and both should agree the following are affronts to America’s independence:

. Navy Seals Trial: Members of the Special Operations units of the United States Navy SEa, Air, and Land Forces (SEALS) have had one essential mission since their commissioning 47 years ago: to accomplish their assigned mission.

That mission as the acronym suggests can involve reconnaisance, hostage rescue, unconventional warfare, counterterrorism and other direct action assignments anywhere on sea and land.

The general mission of SEALS Matthew Vernon McCabe, 24, Jonathan Elliot Keefe, 25, Julio Antonio Huertas, Jr., 28 was to seek out and destroy Islamic terrorist enemies of the United States.

One captured suspect, Ahmed Hashim Abed, alleged mastermind of the 2004 murder and bodily desecration of 4 Blackwater USA operatives in Fallujah, has now accused these men of assault.

If that’s not absurd enough, the three SEALS are now in process of being disciplined by their superiors and could face anything from pay forfeiture to imprisonment to bad conduct discharges.

To add insult to injury, the Navy has refused to release its evidence of this awful, alleged crime committed against a terrorist even though trials are set for next month: http://bit.ly/4zuZqq

My questions: . . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1364)

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part Three

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part Three

This final installment of “Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist” was postponed in deference to the obsequies for the casualties conducted at Fort Hood and the commemoration of Veterans Day. I chose not to pollute either with the evolving, sickening details surrounding the senseless Muslim murders in Texas which made the Texas Chainsaw murders almost child play.

That evolution becomes more sickening by the day.

Our president, with wife Michelle in tow, made a duty-appearance at those services on Tuesday appearing very somber as he read the names of the 13 dead, declaring them heroes, promising “the killer will be met with justice–in this world and the next.”

Obama incorporated brief and touching biographical notes on each victim, including a newlywed and a pregnant mother, whose death brought the body count to fourteen.

He lamented “the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know: No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts.”

His very presidential speech omitted 2 significant references. There was no mention of the dreaded T-word, Terrorism, nor of the suspected perpetrator of those “murderous and craven acts:” http://bit.ly/XBMIE

Obama out of pique had passed on attending the celebrations in Berlin remembering “the fall of the wall” and had postponed his jaunt to China in order to squeeze in his trip to Fort Hood but his omissions of the T-word and any reference to Hasan’s Islamic-terrorist connections were very telling.

They were in line with his efforts to play those connections down even as the facts continue to pile up. . . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1318)

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part Two

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part Two

Amid new allegations that the Obama administration is withholding “critical information” concerning the murders at Fort Hood, ranking Republican Pete Hoekstra is demanding the CIA and the FBI release full details on what he calls “a terrorism attack” at our military facility in Texas.

Why a congressman would have to insist the government inform the governed of such information is beyond me. It smacks of Whitewater–and whitewash: http://bit.ly/3W73Fk.

However, there’s much more about those murders.

Todd Huston on AmericanConservative.com outed something the Obama administration would very much like to keep under wraps, the connection between the alleged murderer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, and the Obamians.

Handwriting on a wall is one thing, often equivalent to scrawled grafitti. Messages chiseled into a wall by a dedicated terrorist are something else again. . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1315)

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part One

Terrible Terror, Terrible Terrorist: Part One

Though it was in full swing prior to 9/11/2001, few Americans paid much attention to the reality of terroristic activity around the globe.

In the intervening 8 years, after a flurry of outrage and alarm, and two ongoing wars, many of us–too many of us–have retreated into a comfortable cocoon of terrorism-denial.

With mushrooming unemployment and with so many other personal and domestic problems on our plates, why bother worrying ourselves over something we can’t individually do anything about?

That denial, that gut refusal to come to terms with the truth that America is engaged in a worldwide struggle against the Islamic jihad, is almost as dangerous as the terrorism itself.

One individual who has adopted a blase’ demeanor toward the all-important issue is our terrorism-averse president who also happens to be the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, our chief line of defense from enemy attack.

Obama campaigned against the Iraq War, banned “harsh” interrogation techniques to elicit life-saving information from prisoners, promised to shutter GITMO, and banned the use of the term War on Terror.

Mr. President, point of information: Ignoring the threat of continuing terrorism and, worse, minimizing it to the point of absurdity, won’t make it go away.

I’ve long suspected the motivations of President Obama . . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=

What Do We Do About Israel? Part II

What Do We Do About Israel? Part II

The signs have been frequent and definitive: The Obama administration is no Bush administration when it comes to American-Israeli relations or, for that matter, the survival of the Jewish state of Israel.

Despite assurances by Obama that he would stand by Israel, many Jews who stood by their liberal man last November 4th are coming to realize his promises represented a bait and switch game, as prominent attorney Alan Dershowitz put it.

Still vainly attempting to find some positive affirmations in Obama’s public positions since the election, Dershowitz concludes his essay, “Has Obama Turned on Israel,” with the understatement that, “There may be coming changes in the Obama administration’s policies that do weaken the security of the Jewish state:” http://bit.ly/103KNc.

Alan, you ain’t seen nothing yet! The “settlements” issue may come to seem an irrelevancy compared to what lies ahead.

A Jewish news service even sees dangers for Israel in the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded Obama since it could lead to a reticence in opposing the most imminent threat against Israel, Iranian nuclear ambitions: http://bit.ly/2nfJUs.

But what do Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian lands or the Iranian threat to Israel mean to us in the long term?

Precious little.

The simplest solution to determine what Americans truly feel about Israel and how far they are prepared to go to risk a major war between the United States and the Muslim world, including possible enormous casualties and a probable, crippling oil embargo, is to ask the American people what they think. . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1266)

Ominous Handwriting on America's Wall

Ominous Handwriting on America's Wall

I suspect that I’m either totally nuts or a prophet in my own land. Either way, we all know that such prophets are usually consigned to the loony bin.

Cassandra, the hot daughter of Troy’s Priam and Hecuba, was no exception. She angered Apollo by rejecting his lusty advances so, in a fit, after giving her the gift of prophecy, he cursed her with the bane of prophecy without acceptance.

In other words, she would be able to see the future vividly; at the same time, her fellow Trojans would deem her a fruitcake and view her prophecies as lunacies. Then came the Trojan Horse which she anticipated and the rest is history.

I’m neither hot nor female nor endowed with special Appolonian or God-given gifts. I just think that America’s future is so obvious that only idiots and Democrats, if that’s not redundant, can’t see it.

Or, to be somewhat gracious, they refuse to accept it.

As preface to those contentions, please see “Is Drudge Hinting Another 9/11 Is Imminent?” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1239.

Although one day does not a trend make, in that article I referenced a slew of single-day headlines on DrudgeReport.com which, taken cumulatively, suggest the United States of America is under attack by Islamic terrorists even if those attacks had been thwarted.

(More difficult to thwart may be attacks from “within,” people and forces which will remain unidentified since identification here would provoke rabid charges of vile prejudice. In any event, it doesn’t require deep insight to discover what they share in common.)

Like cockroaches and other vermin, if jihadists are rooted out in a few venues, it’s as certain as God created maggots that probably many more are still luking in their ratholes.

If nothing else, terrorists are a patient and determined lot as evidenced by the years of planning leading up to September 11th, 2001.

In the “Is Drudge . . .” article, I also pointed out some of the profusion of contemporaneous evidence of social, political, and international events which signify growing sea changes in the philosophical thinking throughout America and the rest of Western civilization.

I barely scratched the surface in that regard.

So, what’s it all mean? Specifically and conclusively, it’s impossible to say.

Generally, it’s not a good thing.

That is, unless one accepts the disturbed notion that abandoning American and Western European touchstone values and traditions developed over centuries should be discarded, from national independence to accepted moral understandings of the value of human life, to de-valuing cherished principles, is a good thing.

Nations, societies, and peoples naturally evolve over time. If not, they fail to thrive and fail to survive. History has shown, repeatedly, that when nations, societies, and peoples evolve into amoral, subservient, and weak entities they also perish.

Cassandra’s Troy, Hellenic Greece, the Byzantine Empire, the Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire and almost all great civilizations . . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1240)

Is Drudge Hinting Another 9/11 Is Imminent?

Is Drudge Hinting Another 9/11 Is Imminent?

“Imminent” can mean all sorts of things, like in the next few minutes, the next hour, the next day, next week but it always means pretty damned soon.

With this president’s abject and repetitive demonstrations of weakness, servitude, and remorse for America’s history, could another, or far worse, 9/11 be in the relatively immediate offing?

No one would dare attack a confident, powerful, and united nation.

Knowing that retribution would be timid or non-existent, even the most cowardly, most inept, and weakest of enemies would be encouraged to assault a country in disarray, confusion, and under domestic assault.

Such chaos furnishes an added dollop of motivation to extra-national terrorists, especially jihadists inspired by Allah.

Before terrorism in America devolved into an insignificant issue under the Obama administration, we used to hear about color-coded warning levels and “chatter,” i.e., heightened activity among potential Islamic enemies detected by elements of our national security agencies.

No more.

Instead today we hear not chatter but of overt activity, not through government channels but rather from independent news agencies such as DrudgeReport.com.

Consider just one day’s worth of headlines on Drudge: . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

An Open Letter to President Obama II

An Open Letter to President Obama, re: Terrorism (Part II)

Dear Mr. President:

I trust you had the opportunity to read Part I of my letter which detailed some of my concerns over your administration’s handling of what President Bush termed the War on Terror: http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1219.

I’m aware you don’t take kindly to either the word “war” or the word “terror” but that doesn’t make war and terror any less a reality.

We are, regrettably, engaged in that undeclared, worldwide war and have been so engaged for decades. September 11th, 2001 was merely the day it arrived in all its sickening glory on our shores but it dates back, at least, to 1972.

Should you have any doubts as to the worldwide nature of the Islamic threat, for your edification, here is a list of previous “battles:”



• 1972 The massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes–Germany

• 1974 The bombing of TWA Flight 841–over the Ionian Sea

• 1977 Subway bombing–U.S.S.R.

• 1981 Assassination of Anwar Sadat–Egypt

• 1983 Bombing of the American Embassy–Lebanon

• 1983 Bombing of Gulf Air Flight 771–United Arab Emirates

• 1983 Bombing of our Marine Barracks–Lebanon . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

An Open Letter to President Obama

An Open Letter to President Obama, re: Terrorism

Dear President Obama:

The eighth anniversary of 9/11 recently passed, with little recognition from your White House. You prefer to honor that awful day by calling it “A National Day of Service and Remembrance,” with the remembrance part almost as an afterthought.

Your Democratic congress has now rubber-stamped your wish. Now 9/11 will be equated with a day to pick up trash on city streets and volunteering to work as ACORN militants rather than as a day for commemorating a vicious, mindless, unprovoked attack on our national soil by Islamic fanatics which resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

Demonstrating the absurdity of that designation, Sen. Charles Schumer (D. N.Y.) fully supports it: http://bit.ly/FOdSi.

With all due respect, Mr. President, I firmly believe that you and your fellow Democrats are either living in a fantasy world or, and I hesitate to write this, that you yearn for another 9/11 thinking that the popularity that accrued to President Bush in 2001 will somehow accrue to you after the next massacre.

Frankly, I don’t think that will happen and if the next attack is as ugly as 9/11, you and your Democratic Party will, rightfully, be seen as culpable due to years of minimizing and/or ignoring the threat that has never diminished, has never disappeared.

With any luck, following that assault–which will inevitably come and which very well may be far more devastating to our country–the Democratic Party may not survive as a viable political institution.

I honestly hope it does survive, despite its stupidity and iniquity.

More importantly, I hope we survive as a nation.

I’ve heard that you are a constitutional scholar, Mr. President, so I wouldn’t presume to suggest I could offer any insights into your consitutional scholarship. I will therefore only present my admittedly ignorant observations.

The Founding Fathers, based on my limited understanding, understood that this new country needed checks and balances on the various powers and therefore sculpted into the Constitution the counterbalancing executive, legislative, and judicial branches. We need opposing parties to keep the party in power in check.

One essential requisite for any American political party, however, is that its fundamental interest be the well being, . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

9/11

“Another story concerned a friend of a friend, a married immigrant from Poland who jumped to his death from one of the World Trade Center towers. His young wife spoke little English and was still grieving when she hurled herself off her Brooklyn apartment building roof a few weeks later. Her husband is included among the two-thousand nine hundred and seventy-four fatalities in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania on 9/11. That distraught woman and countless others like her are not included in that tally. She deserves mention because she and her fellow ancillary victims should be remembered. Their stories accentuate the misery that resulted from our failure to prevent those unprovoked assaults on the United States. They also should serve as reminders, warnings of what could happen again.” (Excerpted from An Immodest Proposal for Ending and Winning the War on Terrorism,p. 11.)

Eight years ago tomorrow, on September 11th, 2001, America was attacked. There’s no need to recount the details of that attack by mostly Saudi Arabian Islamic terrorists.

Or, is there?

It’s very normal for people to try to forget horrific events in their lives or to shift them onto the backburners of our consciousness. That’s probably beneficial for our mental health, especially if those people witnessed the horrors first hand.

It’s also very dangerous.

Our president was probably busily organizing communities in Chicago on September 11th, 2001 and/or preparing for the next session of the Illinois State Senate. He was far removed from New York City, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, PA and perhaps that distance from the scenes of destruction accounts for his blase’ attitude toward the very present danger that is terrorism today.

Out of duty, no doubt President Obama will say a few words tomorrow commemorating the eighth anniversary of the worst assault on America in our history, but only out of duty.

It seems our president, one, fails to perceive the ongoing and possibly imminent threat of Islamic terrorists and, two, wants Americans to honor that day although not in remembrance of what happened.

President Obama may or may not be a Muslim in his heart but he definitely discounts the terrorist threat from rabid Muslims and has abandoned the use of the word “terrorism,” as if ignoring it will make it go away. It doesn’t work that way, Mr. President.

Obama has also minimized the sacred nature of 9/11 by declaring the day should be recognized as a “day of service,” suggesting that serving our communities would be tantamount to honoring the thousands of innocents who died.

Please take a few moments to visit http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/. That website, (with which I am not affiliated in any way), features photos, videos, and other other pertinent information on 9/11/2001. None of it is cheery, all of it is important to remember.

To paraphrase George Santayana, those who forget the past may rue the day when it re-occurs. And maybe it will re-occur closer to home.

Fly the flag tomorrow!

Next Weekend II: Friday, a Day Of Remembrance

Next Weekend, Part Two: Friday, a Day of Remembrance

(Part One reminded America that a massive march on Washington is scheduled for next Friday, a march designed to once again ignite the sleeping giant, the too-silent majority, to rise up and take back our country from the radical Leftists now running it–into the ground.

Part Two represents another reminder–of what could happen, again, if we fail to take our country back.)

The day preceding the March on Washington, Friday, September 11th, 2009, is a day that should forever be commemorated as the day on which America and all Americans were subjected to a horror exceeding any other horror visited on our nation in its 220 year history: September 11th, 2001.

That late summer day dawned with all that was good and true and beautiful in its clear skies in New York City, in Washington, D.C., and in Shanksville, PA. Regrettably, rarely can the good, the true, and the beautiful endure long on our fragile planet.

Collective memories tend to fade over years as the human psyche relegates to its recesses that which is disturbing, that which we would rather forget, that which we hope will not re-occur, and certainly not occur near us.

Unfortunately or not, that psychic tactic only affords a temporary, and perilous, self-delusion.

President Obama, America’s Delusionist in Chief, was still a lowly Illinois state senator in 2001, still a parishioner seated in a pew in Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church.

He may even have heard Jeremiah’s jeremiad concerning 9/11, you know, the one when he ranted that we deserved what we got that day, when he screamed, “God damn America!” and “America’s chickens have come home to roost.”

Obama may have skipped church that day or surely he would have stormed out, Michelle and the kids in tow.

And maybe not.

Suggestive of Barack/Barry’s missing the point of 9/11 and buying into Wright’s thesis, he now absurdly wants that date to be celebrated as some vague “day of service,” more aptly called, “Obama’s Plan to Desecrate 9/11:” http://bit.ly/agXaD.

That desecration, that violation of the sanctity of September 11th, is repugnant beyond imagining, except by those who consciously or unconsciously have already forgotten its meaning.

A scant eight years in our past, 9/11/2001 should not require reminders . . .

(Read the rest and see the pictures at http://genelalor.com)

Part Two: To Nuke Or Not To Nuke

Intimations of Destiny Part Two: To Nuke Or Not To Nuke

Please see “Intimations of Destiny Part One: The Paper Tiger Surrenders in Pieces,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1121. That article focused on America’s inexorable slide into history’s dustbin due not to any fundamental systemic flaws or weaknesses but to an absence of resolve and to a widespread gut fear of winning our wars at all costs. Our fate, our future as a nation, is inextricably joined to the question of whether we are committed to winning our wars. We cannot expect to continue as the last super power unless we do.

………………………………………………………………………………….

The “War is Hell” observation of Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman provided no great insight into the nature of war since it merely stated the obvious. Any student of warfare and, more so, anyone who has endured the horrors of war could attest to its hellishness.

Far more hellish for nations and their inhabitants are the consequences of losing a war, especially when losing is a direct result of a failure of commitment to victory and when the opposing force has no regard for human life and the “civilities” of modern warfare.

That is precisely the road America is travelling today, with a savage foe waiting at the dead end, eager to wreak a grisly vengeance.

Gen. Douglas MacArthur said, “In war, there is no substitute for victory.” Put another way, if victory in war is not the goal, why even bother? And, if all-out, Sherman-esque scorched-Earth execution of war is considered beneath a nation’s dignity, why participate in the first place?

It would be simpler and far less bloody to surrender to an enemy at the outset of hostilities.

For America, all-out war today obviously relates to the question of using or not using the most fearsome weapons ever designed by human beings, nuclear weapons.

We employed our only two such devices in Japan to end World War Two in the Pacific. We won. We refused to use them in Korea and Viet Nam, and we lost. The idea of using nukes in the War on Terror, in the wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan, is apparently not even on the table.

We will lose those wars as well when President Obama shamelessly retreats when the going gets even tougher than it already is.

America should have learned from the 54,000 soldiers killed in Korea and from the 58,000 killed in Viet Nam. We should have learned but did not learn that when we must go to war, we should try to win. Mostly, we should have learned that when we go to war, to fight the enemy’s brand of war is foolhardy and deadly.

We may be fighting on that enemy’s turf but to play his games, as in fighting ground battles on that turf, fighting with our most potent weaponry sitting on the shelf, should be an impeachable offense for any commander in chief.

The best war, if there is such a thing, is one concluded as quickly as possible. In our case, that would mean using our weaponry to our best advantage and not being suckered into fighting the enemy’s kind of war.

We’re doing just that once again, which is the reason we will lose once again.

The question of whether or not to use tactical nuclear weapons is much less a military decision than it is a diplomatic, a humanitarian, and an emotional call.

Contemporary thought seems to be that being vaporized by a nuke is more unpleasant than other forms of warfare. Was being incinerated in the Dresden firestorm, dying slowly from an excruciating belly wound inflicted by a blast from an AK47, being ripped apart by an IED or a car bomb any less horrific than dying in a nuclear attack?

What a bunch of hogwash!

Does America, the only nation ever to use nukes, dare to detonate even tactical nukes again? We will not. Rather, our leaders are content in the notion of losing wars if the alternative is victory as the result of repeating our alleged iniquities committed over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

At least the United Nations will smile kindly on us for accepting gracious and bitter defeat. However, losing the War on Terror would mean far more than bitter defeat. It would mean the end of the United States as we know and love it.

I humbly suggest that America cease sucking up to misguided and self-serving world opinion and opt to win our current wars, by any means possible including the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

As ugly as that option is, the alternatives for America are much uglier.

Just as today it is thought obscene and merciless to deploy nukes, centuries ago during the Crusades the medieval Church considered the crossbow . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

Part One: The Paper Tiger Surrenders in Pieces

Intimations of Destiny Part One: The Paper Tiger Surrenders in Pieces

I had the pleasure of visiting with a member of the newest generation last weekend, not with teenagers who, whether they like it or not, are really part of the present generation, but with my 2 year old grandson.

With all the upheaval going on in Washington where Obama is so obsessed with radical change for its own sake and throughout the planet where revolutionary and terrorist forces are in play to complement Obama’s radicalism in their own land and in their own ways, his future isn’t promising.

Other movements are also disquieting for him and his generation.

In a number of quarters we are witnessing efforts to unseat the formerly almighty dollar as the world’s preeminent currency of exchange. If successful as they very well may be, those efforts may not alter Americans’ day-to-day life at first but would be a clear signal that the “American Era,” our dominance over world affairs, is over.

The long-term effects of what lay ahead, perhaps the China Era, as many believe, may be conjectural but in no way suggest good tidings for the United States and its approximately 305 million citizens, or for my kids and grandkids.

More imminent than Sino supremacy over the planet and its peoples and the resultant effects on our country is the matter of wars we are about to lose, lose for the same reasons we lost the last two–the lack of a resolve to win.

One of those current wars, the most consequential by far, is the War on Terror which has unilterally been suspended by the Obama administration due to a lack of interest in favor of his naive hands across the seas policies.

As with any war, if the opponent concurred in the suspension of hostilities, we would be in a state of truce. If not, as is the case with Islamic terrorists, we would be, and are, in a seriously disadvantaged and dangerous position.

Our president is so enamored of himself that he seems to believe that if he extends his, America’s, open hand in friendship and conciliation, Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will unclench his smarmy fist. Mahmoud has already and repeatedly shown that Iran’s fist is still very much clenched, save that one middle finger salute in our direction.

I have no idea what Obama really expects from his make-nice policies toward America’s unrepentant enemies. However, you could sooner anticipate the lamb lying down with the lion at night and believing it will be grazing when the sun rises than expect Iran in 2009 to extend an unclenched fist.

It matters not that the American hand has been rebuffed and bitten by the Persian lion. Hope springs eternal for this ass of a president with whom we are burdened and who almost makes one yearn for a return of the most incompetent leader in our history, bumbling Jimmy Carter.

Barack Obama is a man-in-waiting for that mantle of most grossly, naively incompetent commander-in-chief to be conferred on him. Based on his first six months, he is clearly on target.

It won’t be conferred as a result of China’s machinations and its economic boom which will take a while. It will be rightfully awarded when Obama retreats under fire and loses the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, probably within the next two years or less but definitely after the 2010 congressional elections.

Obama will slog through at least until December, 2010 after which he can with relative safety run, hide, and surrender and keep the baying hounds of the Left at bay and stop their sniping at his heels, all the while pretending he wanted to win in the first place.

The irony is that he, we, will lose those wars not because of Obamian initiatives and lack thereof but because he will mindlessly pursue the same initiatives and lack thereof which led to our defeats in Korea and Viet Nam.

One of America’s greatest generals, Douglas MacArthur,

was eerily prescient of America’s decline and fall as a great power half a century ago when spoke the memorable line that was disregarded and forgotten by our leaders the moment it was uttered.

“In war there is no substitute for victory,” said MacArthur, a truism that speaks for itself yet has been ignored since it was spoken.

Removed from command as Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers by President Truman in 1951 for insubordination, MacArthur technically was fired for refusing to heed the president’s orders. In fact he was dismissed for failure to cease and desist in his attempts to achieve victory in Korea.

(For a concise and scholarly account of the Truman-MacArthur Korean conflict, see http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-17-3-b.html.)

Harry Truman was absolutely correct in overruling MacArthur’s impertinence. It was his right and duty as America’s civilian commander to exert his authority under the Constitution. He was absolutely wrong, however, in disregarding MacArthur’s insights and premonitions.

The consequences: . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)

MUTICULTURALISM AND TERRORISM--2009

AND THE BEAT GOES ON: MULTICULTURALISM AND TERRORISM–2009

No one can ever accuse the government of the United States of having an excess of either intelligence or discretion.

The World Trade Center hasn’t even been rebuilt, in fact it’s far from being re-built, yet our State Department in 2008 extended invites to 3400 residents of nations deemed state sponsors of terrorism to come on in!

Out of a total of 50,000, Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Sudan have been allotted thousands of what are called “diversity visas” furnished to nations with low immigration numbers so that they can beef up their emigration to America. The program was mandated by our Congress and implemented by our Foggy Bottomites: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=41385.

Nowadays, it’s considered un-American to question the value of further diversification of our population despite any number of studies, and common sense, that indicate such programs are counterproductive and serve to undermine our national integrity.

Whether termed diversity or by its companion buzzword, multiculturalism, the idealistic concept and its implementation have been shown to function not as an enhancement of our melting pot of peoples but rather as a divisive construct, the effects of which is a balkanization into enclaves of foreigners who speak a language other than English and continue foreign practices, traditions, and cultures rather than seeking absorption into our general population.

See this analysis, “The Absurdity of Multiculturalism,” by Ralph S Musgrave, author and social commentator, http://ideas.repec.org/e/pmu56.html.

Writing principally for a U.K. audience, he thoroughly debunks the fatuous, and perilous, underpinnings of a theory much in vogue today but which actually serves to divide, not simply to diversify: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=41385

We are a nation built on immigration....

(Read the rest of this article @ http://genelalor.com/.)

ISN'T IT TIME FOR AN ULTIMATUM?

ISN’T IT TIME FOR AN ULTIMATUM?

It struck me a long time ago that our leaders in America almost blithely go about our business with such little concern for our well-being, most specifically with regard to future attacks by terrorists on our soil.

They’ve put us in a defensive posture with such tactics as airport screenings and patdowns and with all sorts of other defensive measures which are supposed to make us feel secure and to continue travelling, shopping, attending various sporting events and the like but we’re about as secure as we were on September 10th, 2001.

It’s all a charade, a deadly charade, as evidenced by the recent report on the probability of some sort of WMD attack by the year 2013: http://themoderatevoice.com/24772/report-wmd-bioattack-or-nuclear-attack-likely-on-us-by-2013/.

Not by 2012 or 2011, mind you, and not in 2009, but by 2013 and not by 2014.

I can’t believe I’m the only person in America who perceives the absurdity of such a report, absurd not because it was written and given to President Bush by the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism but that the United States of America felt the need for such a commission.

We are not India, we are not Pakistan, we are not a banana republic which should be sitting back and saying, as this report does, “Our margin of safety is shrinking, not growing:” http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/01/national/main4641534.shtml?source=mostpop_story. And CBS.com and other media simply post the story as if it were the equivalent of another bloody murder or more news on Governor Blago’s scandals.

CBS asks the question: Are we ready? Are we ready for a nuclear or biological or any other mass attack on our nation.

I say that if we have to ask the question, we are not, and the fact that our “margin of safety is shrinking” attests to that. Of more relevance is the question, Why are we not doing something about it?

Why are we sitting back and in effect saying, Well, we’ve done what we can to insure our national security but we know it’s not enough so just bring it on and let’s see what happens? Is that not the same defeatist approach that France adopted with its farcical Maginot Line?

An ounce of prevention is said to be worth a pound of cure. That hackneyed maxim is fine advice for avoiding the flu but has no application when we are discussing our future and, conceivably, the national survival of the United States. In our current situation as we await another devastating attack or attacks, an ounce of pre-emption is worth a ton of phony, misleading security efforts which that commission admits are useless.

I’m not proposing that we attack all or any of our many enemies, enemy nations or groups within ostensibly friendly nations. That would enhance our security but would be far beyond the pale of civilized response even to this grave threat.

What I propose is outlined in my book, An Immodest Proposal for Ending and Winning the War on Terror. In a nutshell, my proposal is to put our enemies, is to put the planet, on notice that America will just not tolerate attacks on our soil. That’s it, pure and simple. I obviously flesh out that notice in great detail in the book as well as detailing the repercussions of such attacks.

Is this alarmist? Is issuing an ultimatum that no enemy had better try to mess with us, to tread on us, to attack us, alarmist? You’re damned right it is! Is the book alarmist, again damned right it is, but before condemning that alarm, consider the alternative of waiting patiently and stupidly to be hit and maybe pummeled into the dust of history.

This is not a pitch to sell said book, which is available on Amazon.com. and at other outlets. In fact, I will be more than happy to provide a complementary copy, at my expense including shipping and handling, to anyone who sincerely wants to read it and who will promise to try to do something about the peril our country faces.

If I’m wrong, if the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism is wrong, then you get a free book to use to light a fire.

I hope we’re wrong.

(http://genelalor.com/)