The Discerning Texan
All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.
-- Edmund Burke
-- Edmund Burke
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Attack on the horizon?
Matthew Heidt (aka Froggy) thinks that, for a story like this to make the New York Times, it means that someone must be getting really scared about a big attack:
Apparently, the Opinion Editor at the New York Times is on vacation or had a family emergency or something because that page allowed the publication of perhaps the most sensible and thoughtful opinion piece I have read there in some time. Paul Sperry, a Hoover Institute fellow and recent guest of Michael Medved, authored a very important defense of the use of police profiling to interdict islamofascist terrorists on the nation’s critical transportation infrastructure. I’m not kidding. Click the link. I’m serious. No, really, click it.
That this column was published in the NYT at this time is a very pleasant surprise, and yet a disturbing one as well. The NYT head shed must be very concerned that the City is now facing a significant terrorist threat to have allowed a liberal shibboleth like this to be so publicly defiled. I applaud them for it, and I earnestly hope that this sentiment catches on not just in New York, but within security and law enforcement circles nationwide.Over the past several months, I have sensed a creeping anxiety about additional terrorist attacks to the American Homeland. The “Lodi Cell” that was recently rolled up by the FBI Sacramento office started to get me thinking, but coupling that with the 7/7 attacks in the UK made the stakes a bit higher. Some dubious sources have been making the claim that AQ already has nukes positioned inside the US, and then all of a sudden the Commissioner of CBP entertains the idea of a civil Border Patrol. The Tancredo Option discussion has launched another series of deliberations and concerns about what the US will do WHEN not if we get nailed again. The point is that we need to be serious about this situation.
I would like to see the gloves taken off not only in our overseas operations, but also at home. At the risk of offending Bill Johnson at the RMN, I don’t see why we shouldn’t take some steps legislatively to make profiling muslim terrorists and shooting suspected terrorist bombers on sight legal here in the US. Of course these “techniques” and many others should be adopted as war time measures with sunsets and provisions for there discontinuation at the end of hostilities whenever that is.
We are putting a lot of pressure on our law enforcement community to protect us from these threats to our Homeland, so it stands to reason that if we are going to give them this kind of responsibility, they should be also be given the capability to fulfill it.
One more thing, “Over There” sucked. Big time.
h/t RCP… again
Apparently, the Opinion Editor at the New York Times is on vacation or had a family emergency or something because that page allowed the publication of perhaps the most sensible and thoughtful opinion piece I have read there in some time. Paul Sperry, a Hoover Institute fellow and recent guest of Michael Medved, authored a very important defense of the use of police profiling to interdict islamofascist terrorists on the nation’s critical transportation infrastructure. I’m not kidding. Click the link. I’m serious. No, really, click it.
That this column was published in the NYT at this time is a very pleasant surprise, and yet a disturbing one as well. The NYT head shed must be very concerned that the City is now facing a significant terrorist threat to have allowed a liberal shibboleth like this to be so publicly defiled. I applaud them for it, and I earnestly hope that this sentiment catches on not just in New York, but within security and law enforcement circles nationwide.Over the past several months, I have sensed a creeping anxiety about additional terrorist attacks to the American Homeland. The “Lodi Cell” that was recently rolled up by the FBI Sacramento office started to get me thinking, but coupling that with the 7/7 attacks in the UK made the stakes a bit higher. Some dubious sources have been making the claim that AQ already has nukes positioned inside the US, and then all of a sudden the Commissioner of CBP entertains the idea of a civil Border Patrol. The Tancredo Option discussion has launched another series of deliberations and concerns about what the US will do WHEN not if we get nailed again. The point is that we need to be serious about this situation.
I would like to see the gloves taken off not only in our overseas operations, but also at home. At the risk of offending Bill Johnson at the RMN, I don’t see why we shouldn’t take some steps legislatively to make profiling muslim terrorists and shooting suspected terrorist bombers on sight legal here in the US. Of course these “techniques” and many others should be adopted as war time measures with sunsets and provisions for there discontinuation at the end of hostilities whenever that is.
We are putting a lot of pressure on our law enforcement community to protect us from these threats to our Homeland, so it stands to reason that if we are going to give them this kind of responsibility, they should be also be given the capability to fulfill it.
One more thing, “Over There” sucked. Big time.
h/t RCP… again
