I just paid $2.51 a gallon for regular unleaded in Lakewood NJ. Double w00t.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Al Qaeda's Newst Recruiter
California Senator Dianne Feinstein recently sponsored an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill which would close down the Defense Department’s detention center in Guantanamo Bay and prohibit the practice of rendition, in which prisoners are shipped to states whose interrogation techniques are more, well, direct. The effect of the Feinstein Amendment would be to integrate jihadist detainees into the federal prison system where they would receive further legal protections. Presumably, the good folks at the American Bar Association would rush to the defense of these misunderstood individuals and put up a spirited legal defense in the name of the rule of law.
What in fact the Feinstein Amendment shows is that a significant portion of the American legislative community is dangerously ignorant to even the most fundamental aspects of counter-insurgency warfare. If the Feinstein Amendment passes—which, fortunately, it likely will not—al Qaeda and other jihadist groups would be irreparably strengthened in what would be a cataclysmic abdication of all semblance of rational policy.
Reasonable minds can differ on subjects such as Guantanamo Bay and the legal status of jihadist detainees. The legal community, while misguided, can be patriotic while insisting that greater access to legal resources be provided to detainees. What is not patriotic, nor rational, is granting al Qaeda unhindered access to the ideal recruitment demographic on a permanent basis. The unwavering lesson of every insurgency in history is that prison is the ideal recruitment ground for insurgent factions. Prisoners are necessarily in constant communication with each other, and all it takes is one radical to evangelize the message of radicalism amongst a population which is already at odds with the government.
Simply put, there is no better recruiting ground than prison. Every insurgency—from the IRA famously training and conducting exercises behind British prison bars in full defiance of powerless guards, to the terrible school of French Indo-China, to the FLN radicalizing common Algerian criminals against the French, has directly utilized the unparalleled access that prison provides to convert and radicalize its target demographic. If you put members of terrorist cells in standard prisons, they will recruit more followers. There’s no gray area here: either we want to contribute further to the propagation of jihadist ideology or we wish to isolate the Islamist prophets of doom from the general population—especially the segments which would most receptive to these ideas.
The genius of Guantanamo Bay is that it segregates insurgents from the rest of prison population. Individuals in Guantanamo (with the few inevitable exceptions) are already radicalized and consequently no harm is done in detaining them. However, the minute that radical population is mixed with common inmates, the jihadists will have scored a tremendous victory on a scale far greater than September 11th ever was. If one purposely set out to loose a counter-insurgency, the absolute first thing one would do would be to provide guerrillas the human resources that are the sinews of any insurgency. Senator Feinstein, has, unwittingly, proposed this very thing.
But who's on first?
Chuck Cedar: We're looking for somebody. Longfellow Deeds.
Murph: Wow! Is that's Deeds's first name?
Cecil Anderson: Well, if the Deeds you're referring to is Longfellow Deeds, then yes, that is Deeds's first name.
Murph: Well, I don't know Deeds's first name, maybe it's Greg.
Cecil Anderson: Maybe it's Longfellow.
Murph: Maybe. But I don't know. I know another guy named Greg. You want me to call him up?
Chuck Cedar: No! Thank you. Please. Just tell us where Deeds lives.
Mr Deeds
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Simpsons Movie Review (extended).
Just saw the Simpsons movie and it was a big bowl of awesome covered in awesome sauce with extra awesome on the side. Go see it.
Spoilery nitpickiness follows:
I guess the writers were so elated at the thought of not having to follow the rules and regulations the FCC imposes on the televised version of the Simpsons, they felt the need to break a rule or two, just because they could. Unfortunately, the naughtiness they come up with seems forced and unnatural and tacked on and unnecessary. It just doesn't fit, aside from Homer flipping a lynch mob the double-barreled bird. Marge utters a mild profanity under extreme stress.
After an extended (and utterly brilliant and utterly Simpsons) sequence in which Bart skateboards in the nude, with various objects shielding our tender eyes from having to view his animated junk, we actually do see the Simpson Family Jewels. Yeah, it was amusing, because the animators played with our expectations, but come on- Bart is a ten year old, after all. I didn't need to see that.
Minor quibbles, really. The movie really adds something to the Simpson world- it isn't just an 86 minute long TV episode. Marge and Homer's relationship evolve, as does Bart's relationship with Homer.
Worth the wait.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
It's important to cover all possibilities.
Marty McFly: That's right, Doc. November 12, 1955.
Doc: Unbelievable, that old Biff could have chosen that particular date. It could mean that, that point in time inherently contains some sort of cosmic significance. Almost as if it were the junction point for the entire space-time continuum. On the other hand, it could just be an amazing coincidence.
Back to the Future, Part II
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
