Anti-American Pseudo-Science & Dirty Laundry
Anti-American-Exceptionalism & Pseudo-Science Exposed
The Left loves to undermine the ennobling concept of American Exceptionalism (a “shining city on a hill” -- see also the Prager University video link in my favorite links), to make it easier for us to go the way of other countries & their failures. One of their favorite tactics is to besmirch our Founding Fathers, and thereby delegitimize or dismiss the system they produced – they are prone to reject completely anyone or thing exhibiting what they perceive as the slightest hypocrisy. They seem to jump at any opportunity or possibility, and propagate it in school textbooks and other works.
Well, here is an example of where they took a blind leap into error, as has now been demonstrated. But of course being liberal or Left means never having to say you’re sorry, or wrong. William Hyland has published “In Defense of Jefferson,” about our 3rd president who has long been accused of fathering a child through a slave girl, Sally Henning. The rumor began in Jefferson’s day from a political opponent, and a DNA check years ago did seem to indicate her descendants had DNA from a Jefferson male. However, the Science article was very misleading in narrowing it to Thomas Jefferson. However, as Hyland shows, Thomas’ less discreet brother was known to socialize intimately with the slaves (unlike Thomas), and he enumerates various other clear evidences that it was Thomas’ brother, and not Thomas who fathered the child.
No one claims the Founding Fathers were perfect, and I was willing to accept a sexual indiscretion of a lonely widower along with the great qualities and achievements of Jefferson (King David also comes to mind). But to now realize that was a falsehood that I didn’t need to accept angers me, especially understanding their motives -- or at least intended effects. And it makes me wonder what other similar disinformation they've promulgated over the years -- it surely warrants a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s doubtful that the truth will get the exposure that the falsehood long did (including productions of various kinds), or will set the record straight in much of the public’s mind. Just another example, on top of Climate Gate, of science being misused, or misinterpreted. True science, of course is objective and apolitical, but bits and pieces of it ("cherry-picking"), rather than its entirety, can be misconstrued or misused for political purposes – just as statistics can be misused. And the secularly inclined public is inclined to believe anything couched as “science” as gospel truth, even more so than the religious believe what follows “thus saith the Lord...” in scripture. This is another example of the universality of faith, or in this case the less admirable & more dangerous variety -- blind faith, in both science and religion, as discussed in my other blog (accessible thru my profile link).
Dirty Underwear & Other Laundry Exposed
The Nigerian Christmas-day underwear bomber seems to have exposed more than his own fizzled underwear (and fulfilled the adage “liar, liar, pants on fire”) – also much of this administration’s (and our intelligence & transportation security’s) dirty laundry.
8 years after 9/11, we still appear unable to “connect the dots,” despite the young man’s credible father approaching the US embassy & intelligence agency about his son being radicalized in Islam and making threats, the UK denying him a visa after false statements he made, his record in Yemen (new haven for Al Qaida) with connections to the same mentor as Maj. Hasan, his being on a US watch list, his buying a one-way ticket with cash & carrying no luggage, etc. All this seems more than enough to have ensured denial of a visa, and refusal to board him on the plane, or at least special security screening at the airport. These are the first and most important layers of defense that failed. Once on the plane with an explosive device, there is very little if anything that could be done to prevent disaster, except the pure luck that the device failed to detonate properly. The sorry immediate solution of making passengers suffer their last hour on a long flight, keeping them tied to their seats and with nothing in their laps, would do nothing to prevent a device smuggled onboard from going off at some other time.
Compounding these failures, the Obama administration failed miserably in their reaction and explanations. Rather than plainly admit to mistakes and offer any reassurance of making air travel safe, their first inclination was to cover their political derrières in typical Obamaspeak fashion. Janet Napolitano, our guardian in Homeland Defense, claimed that after the attempt, “the system worked.” After all, after the bomb failed to detonate properly, fellow passengers (not knowing they were part of “the system”) pounced on the smoldering perpetrator, and crew doused & restrained him. And they got word out to all other flights to be on the lookout for similar (hopefully fizzled) attempts. Although the truth has come out that actually very few flights were notified, leaving the pilots’ comm. lines clogged with rumors and queries. No acknowledgement of the failure of the system to prevent him boarding, or immediate efforts to correct that. And little comfort had the bomb detonated properly.
And it is still unclear whether even a full-body scan would necessarily clearly show such a small device in private parts – nothing short of a full strip-search or X-ray may work if they are not screened prior to coming to the airport. And heaven forbid any profiling would pull a young Muslim male from Nigeria with one-way, cash-bought ticket & no luggage out for special screening, rather than a granny. And then covering for the State Dept., Hillary Clinton reassuringly claimed that they had done everything by the book. No indication that they would do anything differently, or that the book may need changing.
After too long a time, Obama emerged from his Hawaiian vacation to make a poor attempt to make up for these inadequate, political statements. And describing the attempt as an "isolated incident." Let's see,... same Yemeni mentor as Maj. Hasan, same explosive & method as previous attempts, Al Qaida affiliate, many Yemeni jihadis at Guantanamo, Yemeni Al Qaida threats this week force closure of US & UK embassies in Yemen,... right -- just a lone wolf. Either Obama himself can't connect dots, or he once again by Obamaspeak is trying to downplay the scope of the war on terror. And now Mr. Attorney General Holder has halted any further interrogation of the perpetrator by Mirandizing him with all the rights of a US citizen, & entering him into the civilian court system, rather than leaving the enemy combatant in the rightful custody of the military. And over 70% of the US public is for waterboarding him to get whatever actionable intelligence we can (even if not admissible in his trial, it could save lives).
This trend to civilian justice for enemy combatants seems to be the precedence they are now establishing and intend to follow. And there appears to be no rationale (at least that they feel comfortable or obliged in sharing) other than Leftist emotion, as evidenced in Obama counterterrorism advisor John Brennan's exchange: "WALLACE: Just briefly, what’s the downside of treating him as an enemy combatant? BRENNAN: There’s — there are no downsides or upsides in particular cases...." Now there's some deep thinking and logic, strong principles and clear direction. Where does Obama keep coming up with these buffoons? This is where he gets his advice?
Perhaps this is all in keeping with Obama’s notion that toning down the rhetoric from “war on terror,” and fooling ourselves that it is not (and we therefore do not need to follow long-standing precedents in all previous wars), will somehow (who knows how, or has any historical validation?) improve our relations with Al Qaida and others in the world who don’t like us, not to mention appeasing his Leftist base. Which of course is more important than saving American lives & the airline industry. But of course Mr. Obama’s family, Janet Napolitano, Hillary Clinton & Eric Holder don’t fly commercial. Maybe they’d have a bit more ability to relate to, and properly respond to, our concerns if they did.
And for all the bleeding-heart liberals who bemoan profiling and intrusions on privacy associated with airport security, I like the suggestion (however impractical) of having 2 planes for every destination – one with full screening, and one without – take your choice. Gee, I wonder which the terrorists would choose?
The Left loves to undermine the ennobling concept of American Exceptionalism (a “shining city on a hill” -- see also the Prager University video link in my favorite links), to make it easier for us to go the way of other countries & their failures. One of their favorite tactics is to besmirch our Founding Fathers, and thereby delegitimize or dismiss the system they produced – they are prone to reject completely anyone or thing exhibiting what they perceive as the slightest hypocrisy. They seem to jump at any opportunity or possibility, and propagate it in school textbooks and other works.
Well, here is an example of where they took a blind leap into error, as has now been demonstrated. But of course being liberal or Left means never having to say you’re sorry, or wrong. William Hyland has published “In Defense of Jefferson,” about our 3rd president who has long been accused of fathering a child through a slave girl, Sally Henning. The rumor began in Jefferson’s day from a political opponent, and a DNA check years ago did seem to indicate her descendants had DNA from a Jefferson male. However, the Science article was very misleading in narrowing it to Thomas Jefferson. However, as Hyland shows, Thomas’ less discreet brother was known to socialize intimately with the slaves (unlike Thomas), and he enumerates various other clear evidences that it was Thomas’ brother, and not Thomas who fathered the child.
No one claims the Founding Fathers were perfect, and I was willing to accept a sexual indiscretion of a lonely widower along with the great qualities and achievements of Jefferson (King David also comes to mind). But to now realize that was a falsehood that I didn’t need to accept angers me, especially understanding their motives -- or at least intended effects. And it makes me wonder what other similar disinformation they've promulgated over the years -- it surely warrants a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s doubtful that the truth will get the exposure that the falsehood long did (including productions of various kinds), or will set the record straight in much of the public’s mind. Just another example, on top of Climate Gate, of science being misused, or misinterpreted. True science, of course is objective and apolitical, but bits and pieces of it ("cherry-picking"), rather than its entirety, can be misconstrued or misused for political purposes – just as statistics can be misused. And the secularly inclined public is inclined to believe anything couched as “science” as gospel truth, even more so than the religious believe what follows “thus saith the Lord...” in scripture. This is another example of the universality of faith, or in this case the less admirable & more dangerous variety -- blind faith, in both science and religion, as discussed in my other blog (accessible thru my profile link).
Dirty Underwear & Other Laundry Exposed
The Nigerian Christmas-day underwear bomber seems to have exposed more than his own fizzled underwear (and fulfilled the adage “liar, liar, pants on fire”) – also much of this administration’s (and our intelligence & transportation security’s) dirty laundry.
8 years after 9/11, we still appear unable to “connect the dots,” despite the young man’s credible father approaching the US embassy & intelligence agency about his son being radicalized in Islam and making threats, the UK denying him a visa after false statements he made, his record in Yemen (new haven for Al Qaida) with connections to the same mentor as Maj. Hasan, his being on a US watch list, his buying a one-way ticket with cash & carrying no luggage, etc. All this seems more than enough to have ensured denial of a visa, and refusal to board him on the plane, or at least special security screening at the airport. These are the first and most important layers of defense that failed. Once on the plane with an explosive device, there is very little if anything that could be done to prevent disaster, except the pure luck that the device failed to detonate properly. The sorry immediate solution of making passengers suffer their last hour on a long flight, keeping them tied to their seats and with nothing in their laps, would do nothing to prevent a device smuggled onboard from going off at some other time.
Compounding these failures, the Obama administration failed miserably in their reaction and explanations. Rather than plainly admit to mistakes and offer any reassurance of making air travel safe, their first inclination was to cover their political derrières in typical Obamaspeak fashion. Janet Napolitano, our guardian in Homeland Defense, claimed that after the attempt, “the system worked.” After all, after the bomb failed to detonate properly, fellow passengers (not knowing they were part of “the system”) pounced on the smoldering perpetrator, and crew doused & restrained him. And they got word out to all other flights to be on the lookout for similar (hopefully fizzled) attempts. Although the truth has come out that actually very few flights were notified, leaving the pilots’ comm. lines clogged with rumors and queries. No acknowledgement of the failure of the system to prevent him boarding, or immediate efforts to correct that. And little comfort had the bomb detonated properly.
And it is still unclear whether even a full-body scan would necessarily clearly show such a small device in private parts – nothing short of a full strip-search or X-ray may work if they are not screened prior to coming to the airport. And heaven forbid any profiling would pull a young Muslim male from Nigeria with one-way, cash-bought ticket & no luggage out for special screening, rather than a granny. And then covering for the State Dept., Hillary Clinton reassuringly claimed that they had done everything by the book. No indication that they would do anything differently, or that the book may need changing.
After too long a time, Obama emerged from his Hawaiian vacation to make a poor attempt to make up for these inadequate, political statements. And describing the attempt as an "isolated incident." Let's see,... same Yemeni mentor as Maj. Hasan, same explosive & method as previous attempts, Al Qaida affiliate, many Yemeni jihadis at Guantanamo, Yemeni Al Qaida threats this week force closure of US & UK embassies in Yemen,... right -- just a lone wolf. Either Obama himself can't connect dots, or he once again by Obamaspeak is trying to downplay the scope of the war on terror. And now Mr. Attorney General Holder has halted any further interrogation of the perpetrator by Mirandizing him with all the rights of a US citizen, & entering him into the civilian court system, rather than leaving the enemy combatant in the rightful custody of the military. And over 70% of the US public is for waterboarding him to get whatever actionable intelligence we can (even if not admissible in his trial, it could save lives).
This trend to civilian justice for enemy combatants seems to be the precedence they are now establishing and intend to follow. And there appears to be no rationale (at least that they feel comfortable or obliged in sharing) other than Leftist emotion, as evidenced in Obama counterterrorism advisor John Brennan's exchange: "WALLACE: Just briefly, what’s the downside of treating him as an enemy combatant? BRENNAN: There’s — there are no downsides or upsides in particular cases...." Now there's some deep thinking and logic, strong principles and clear direction. Where does Obama keep coming up with these buffoons? This is where he gets his advice?
Perhaps this is all in keeping with Obama’s notion that toning down the rhetoric from “war on terror,” and fooling ourselves that it is not (and we therefore do not need to follow long-standing precedents in all previous wars), will somehow (who knows how, or has any historical validation?) improve our relations with Al Qaida and others in the world who don’t like us, not to mention appeasing his Leftist base. Which of course is more important than saving American lives & the airline industry. But of course Mr. Obama’s family, Janet Napolitano, Hillary Clinton & Eric Holder don’t fly commercial. Maybe they’d have a bit more ability to relate to, and properly respond to, our concerns if they did.
And for all the bleeding-heart liberals who bemoan profiling and intrusions on privacy associated with airport security, I like the suggestion (however impractical) of having 2 planes for every destination – one with full screening, and one without – take your choice. Gee, I wonder which the terrorists would choose?
Comments
Post a Comment