I’ve been sitting here dumbfounded by BO’s reaction to this latest attempted terrorist attack. What the heck is he thinking? How can he possibly be that incredibly naive, that resoundingly stupid? I mean, really? Sure, he’s incompetent, inexperienced, socially inept, narcissistic, and a radical leftie loon, but even he can’t possibly believe the drivel he burbles. Lone extremist? Really? We need to look at lists to fix the problem of bin Laden? Really? And closing Gitmo and sending (what is it, 90?) terrorists to Yemen for “rehabilitation” is a good idea? Really?
No. I don’t believe even a nutjob radical loon can have the access to the information he has and still be that friggin’ ignorant. I can believe that random citizens are that stupid, look at their fringe media some time, you’ll see why. But BO, in the Oval Office? Commander in Chief? Privy to all the most secret information in this nation?
And let’s just give Gitmo a bit of a think, shall we? I mean, how bad is Gitmo compared to the prisons in the middle east? Doesn’t Sharia law require that hands and heads be lopped off for minor offenses? Isn’t gang rape (of both men and women) a fun way to pass the time? Do we really believe that they are offended and upset that our prisons waterboard a minor percentage of prisoners? Do we really imagine for a second that they are offended by, much less tortured by, loud music and having smoke blown in their faces? Hell, the 9/11 gang spent their last few nights of life in strip clubs, and the Fort Hood terrorist was a strip club regular.
But we seem to forget that Alinsky had a fun little rule for radicals that includes holding the enemy to their own standards, making them keep their own promises, live by their own rules. Isn’t it far more likely that bin Laden and his lackeys are doing just that than that Gitmo is some kind of mythic place of fear and revulsion that inspires young men to join the jihad in outrage? My God, they are provided special little mats to pray on, given three squares, watch television, and handled with kid gloves. In an Iranian prison, people are beaten to death, gang raped, and tortured to death on a daily basis (for speaking out in opposition to their government). And not just in Iran, the same brutal practices are carried out in prisons and in streets across the middle east. They think nothing of chopping off someone’s hand for voting or for stealing or for the hell of it. They think nothing of watching beheadings on television.
They know, though, how to use our own freedoms against us. We know this because of the many terrorists living in the U. S., learning to fly planes here, and demanding to be tried in NYC rather than a military court. They know how to play us, and they play us hard. They have been doing so for decades, so is it really so incredible to think that they are using our insane propensity to look the other way if someone seems a bit too radically extreme in their Muslim faith against us? Look at that scumbag who shot up Fort Hood. He was practically walking around with a giant sign over his head saying I’m going to kill me some Americans in the name of Allah and Imam whatever the hell, and we did nothing. We didn’t want to seem like we were unfair or singling him out. Why the hell not? You don’t think bin Laden is watching all this and laughing his head off? You don’t think he knows that we’re incompetent? He knows that we were supposedly looking for people who bought one-way tickets in cash, and he also knows that our system doesn’t just fail, it sucks beyond comprehension. So the underpants bomber bought his one-way ticket in cash (and it seems that he didn’t even have a passport!).
And bin Laden also knows that we are sensitive to accusations of being unjust or of being torturers, etc. and etc., so the al Queda rule book is full of instructions on how to cry “torture” and “abuse.” Remember, these are people who think nothing of jumping on Americans, beating them to death, setting them on fire, dragging them through the streets while crowds cheer, and then hanging their bodies from bridges. How brutal do you think they really find a punch in the nose or gut? They are playing us. Period. Alinsky-style with sprinkles on top.
Here’s an Alinsky refresher (how much of this fits al Queda’s tactics? BO’s?):
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)
RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)
RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
My question is this: does BO know it? This is the supreme leader of the Alinsky-squad. The rulingest radical of them all. He helped train ACORN morons in the art of “community organizing” (that just means slamming people, organizations, governments, and whatever else with Alinsky, unfiltered and undiluted.). He ran an Alinsky-based campaign that out Alinsky’d the Clinton power duo. Is it really possible that he is being played by such a blatant Alinsky method? I don’t think so. You can’t play a player. But then again, maybe he’s fallen into the rather common trap of thinking himself above being attacked and played by such methods? Or maybe he’s just stupid as hell?