Missouri took care of some of Texas' worse....

And thankfully the trooper is ok and the turd is DOA!

Trooper shot and suspect dead in shootout on I-55

NEW MADRID COUNTY • A Missouri State Highway Patrol trooper remains hospitalized and one of four suspects is dead after a shootout during a traffic stop along I-55 in New Madrid County.

Another suspect remained hospitalized with non life-threatening injuries Sunday night in Cape Girardeau, said Trooper Clark Parrott.

The driver and two passengers -- all from Texas -- were arrested...All were charged with second-degree murder, possession of marijuana and possession of marijuana with an intent to distribute. In addition to the hospitalized suspect, the other two are in custody.

The incident, which occurred about halfway between Sikeston and New Madrid, began about 10 p.m. Saturday when Cpl. Shane Stewart and another trooper stopped a red Ford Expedition for a traffic violation. Stewart was shot while he was talking with one of the four occupants outside the vehicle. The front-seat passenger inside the vehicle shot at Stewart and the bullet penetrated his neck just above Stewart's bullet proof vest. The troopers then shot into the vehicle.

Stewart's injuries are non life-threatening and he is expected to make a full recovery, Parrott said.

The suspect who was killed was the person who fired the gun that injured Stewart..

Wishing you a quick recovery Trooper Stewart...good work out there!

It has started....Obama got Osama...

He can't run on his record on the economy. Or his record on the deficit. Or on foreign policy. Or on health care. So what will he do? From American Commissars:

American Commissars: Propaganda Movie Glorifies Obama Over Bin Laden Ki...: Weasel Zippers Propaganda Movie Glorifies Obama Over Bin Laden Killing, No Mention of Navy SEALs…

Here is the video.



Now the fun thing is the preview shows Joe Bite-Me saying "...he was all alone." after a briefing on the raid and it looked like the walked away to contemplate. Kinda set up like that famous picture of JFK from the back looking like he his contemplating a major decision while in front a desk. In reality Kennedy was reading a paper, but that's another piece of propaganda. Hell, Barrack went off, ordered a pizza and held off a decision for 24 hours.

Of course the SEALS who actually did the work or the intelligence professionals who found him don't deserve any of the credit. It was Barrack.

But the real funny part was at the end with Bill Clinton saying

He took the harder and more honorable path. When I saw what had happened, I thought to myself, I hope that’s the call I would have made.

This from the man who passed on three chances to get UBL in his eight years. What a narcissist.

You wonder who is the bigger idiot in this, Barrack, Joe or Bill.

Leaders, Leadership and their attributes.

I recently received a list of 101 Soldierly Thoughts authored by a Special Forces Major on the subject of Soldiering. And soldiering comes down to one thing, leadership.

At the front gate of Ft Benning GA, the home of the Army Infantry School is a statue named Iron Mike. Engraved on the monument is a two word definition of leadership, Follow Me!.

Points worth contemplating and far too many to go over on this. But two really caught my eye.

ABOVE ALL, IF YOU ARE NOT INFANTRY, YOU ARE SUPPORT!

From a now retired (yes you can snicker) Military Intelligence officer I can't agree more.

But I really was drawn to this one:

85. A Commander who bad-mouths his predecessor will never be truly respected.

When I took my company command I knew one thing I would never do was criticize my predecessor and what he did. No commander does. I wonder if the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in Washington DC could ever understand that as he is not and will never be a leader. And that is why he will never be respected.

A snake in the grass is mad Obama stabbed him in the back.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer piece of human fecal matter.

Specter says Obama ditched him after he voted to pass health law - TheHill.com

Former Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) writes in a new book that President Obama ditched him in the 2010 election after he helped Obama win the biggest legislative victory of his term by passing healthcare reform.

I love that they don't identify him as a Democrat. The Wall Street Jounal Best of the Web identifies his party as R2D2, but R2 is much more intelligent and interesting.

Specter also claims that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) did not uphold his promise to grant him seniority accrued over 28 years of service in the Senate as a Republican.

Specter, who rocked Washington’s political establishment and made headlines around the country when he left the Republican Party to join Democrats in April of 2009, has kept quiet about these slights until now....

...Specter declined to discuss the behind-the-scenes machinations of his party switch when he granted an interview with several news outlets on his final day in the Senate, when he reminisced about his career in his hideaway on the first floor of the Capitol.

He promised instead to put the juicy details in his memoir, “Life Among the Cannibals,” which will go on sale later this month...

...Specter laments that Obama and Vice President Biden did not do more to help him in the final days of his primary race against former Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), who beat him 54 percent to 46 percent in the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate Democratic primary.

Specter writes that Obama turned down a request to campaign with him in the final days of the primary, because the president’s advisers feared he would look weak if he intervened and Specter lost.

“I realized that the president and his advisers were gun-shy about supporting my candidacy after being stung by Obama’s failed rescue attempts for New Jersey governor Jon Corzine and Massachusetts attorney general Martha Coakley. They were reluctant to become victims of a trifecta,” he writes.

The snub was made all the more painful by Obama flying over Philadelphia en route to New York City a few days before the election and then on primary day jetting over Pittsburgh to visit a factory in Youngstown, Ohio, 22 miles from the Pennsylvania border, to promote the 2009 economic stimulus law. The painful irony for Specter is that his vote for the stimulus legislation, which was instrumental to its passage, hastened his departure from the Republican Party.

Specter was also disappointed that Biden, who was only a few blocks away at Penn University, did not attend a pre-primary day rally at the Phillies’s Citizens Bank Park — a missed opportunity Specter attributes to a failed staff-to-staff request.

Just over a year before, Obama and Biden welcomed Specter to the Democratic Party with a press conference at the White House and promised him his full support.

Don't you just hate it when you can't trust people Arlen.....really sucks when a man gives his word after looking you in the eye and then stabs you in the back. Then again you know all about back stabbing.

Specter believes Reid acted with “duplicity” while managing the party switch. Specter said Reid promised him that he would be recognized on the seniority list as a Democrat elected in 1980, but failed to deliver on it.  

Had Specter been given the seniority he was promised, he would have become chairman of the powerful Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations subcommittee and next in line to chair the Judiciary Committee.

Instead, Reid stripped Specter of all his seniority by passing a short resolution by unanimous consent in a nearly-empty chamber, burying him at the bottom of the Democrats’ seniority list.

Specter found out about it after his press secretary emailed him a press account of the switch. Specter was floored that Reid had “violated a fundamental Senate practice to give personal notice to a senator directly affected by the substance of a unanimous consent agreement.”

Specter was left simmering after Reid’s spokesman at the time told the AP that Specter had known about the resolution and even joined in a deal to draft it, which Specter characterizes as a “falsification.”

“Overall, my sense was that Reid didn’t extend himself much to advance my seniority on either committee,” he wrote.

Specter writes that several senior Democrats refused to cede seniority to him, significantly damaging his reelection chances against Sestak.

He says Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), now the chairman of the Labor, Health and Human Services subcommittee, declined a request to let Specter take over as chairman at least until the election.

Sens. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) refused to let him move past them in seniority on the Judiciary Committee.

But Specter praised Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking member of the Democratic leadership, for treating him generously. Durbin gave Specter chairmanship of the Judiciary subcommittee on Crime and Drugs and both Durbin and Schumer let him climb ahead of them on Judiciary’s seniority ladder.

Specter also describes in detail McConnell’s response after learning that he would become the 59th member of the Democratic Caucus — Sen. Al Franken’s (D) delayed victory in Minnesota would give Reid later that year the 60th vote he needed to pass healthcare reform...

A real public servant this leach. Phil Graham switched from Democrat to Republican in the 70s but unlike this snake Graham was a man about it. He resigned after the change and said he would run as a Republican. And he never lost another election for the House or Senate.

The problem with politicians like Specter is his blind quest for power. The fact he voted to nationalize a sixth of this country's economy, destroy the best health care system in the world and waste trillions of dollars to put the US on the road the economic ruin is of no consequence as long as he is the chairman of a committee. Why should he care. His life is good and he'll never have to deal with the damage he caused.

Arlen, you a worthless piece of s#~£ who is a poster child for term limits and IQ tests on Congress. Again, don't go away mad, just go away.

Only in California

Gotta love it.

From the Western Outdoor News.

CAT’S OUT OF THE BAG — California Fish and Game Commissioner Dan Richards is taking intense heat from animal rights activists for engaging in a legal Idaho mountain lion hunt and then committing the “crime” of sharing his success with fellow outdoorsmen in a hunting and fishing publication. Grandstanding state assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, and a candidate for congress in outdoorsman rich coastal northern California, is all over the San Jose Mercury News calling Richards’ resignation. Why? He told a constituent the photo was akin to a full-blown public statement. Ridiculous, but for fellow hunters and anglers, here’s another photo.

Assemblyman Ben Hueso, D-San Diego, has issued a letter calling on Dan Richards to resign his post on the Fish and Game Commission. As of Friday afternoon, 40 state assemblymen had signed on, all Democrats, just one shy of the majority Hueso needs should he advance to a recall vote.

Last month, Richards celebrated a successful and legal Idaho mountain lion hunt with a photo shared in WON.  Within days, critics ranging from animal rights activists to state assemblymen unleashed furious invective, death threats, and calls for Richards’ resignation or forced ouster. The issue: California preservationists are outraged that a state commission appointee participated in a hunt legal across the Idaho border, but beyond their tolerance here at home.

The Hueso resignation demand letter reads in part, "Your actions have raised serious questions about whether you respect the laws of the people of California and whether you are adequately fit to enforce those laws. Your actions… show a lack of judgment and a disregard for how such action would be perceived by California citizens, many of whom find such actions offensive."...

But its gets better.

Das Williams Proposes Strip Club Tax

Assemblymember Das Williams recently proposed legislation to tax certain California strip clubs at a rate of $10 per customer. The money would fund programs that treat victims of sexual assault and human trafficking, and help pay for forensic rape kits.

It would be up to the clubs to determine how they pay, whether by taking steps to increase profit (i.e., creating a cover charge, upping drink prices, etc.) or simply absorbing the cost. The tax, however, may not be passed to the entertainers, the bill says. “There is a clear nexus between alcohol consumption and violence against women,” Williams said in an interview with The Sacramento Bee. “This [bill] only affects those that serve alcohol.” The two gentleman’s clubs in Santa Barbara County — the Spearmint Rhino locations in the City of Santa Barbara and Santa Maria — don’t serve booze and wouldn’t be affected...

A man legally shots an animal outside of the state and a close to majority of the Assembly (and the moron now Lieutenant Governor, former Mayor of LA) want to remove him. It's not like the state is on the verge of bankruptcy, loosing industries left and right, having a population drain of its productive class while getting a growing welfare class. No, they need to worry about a man's hobby and if they can tax business some more. This idiot Das Williams really think a tax will not be born by the customers or employees. What planet is he is? Oh yea, California.

Officer Down

Corrections Officer Britney Meux
Lake County Indiana Sheriff's Department
End of Watch: Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Age: 25
Tour: 4 years

Corrections Officer Britney Meux was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver at the intersection of 93rd Avenue and Main Street in Crown Point at approximately 7:00 pm.



She and three other corrections officers were jogging along the outer perimeter of the Lake County Jail, while exercising at the end of their shift, when a vehicle struck all four officers.

Officer Meux was killed instantly. The other three officers were transported to hospitals.

 The driver of the vehicle that struck the officers fled the scene and remains at large.

Officer

Meux was a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and had served with the Lake County Sheriff's Department for four years. She is survived by her daughter.

Rest in Peace Sis…We’ll Continue The Watch

Day is done, Gone the sun, From the lake, From the hills, From the sky. All is well, Safely rest, God is nigh.

Security Weekly: Detecting Terrorist Surveillance, March 7, 2012

By Scott Stewart

As we noted last week, terrorist attacks do not materialize out of thin air. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Those planning terrorist attacks follow a discernable process referred to as the terrorist attack cycle. We also discussed last week how terrorism planners are vulnerable to detection at specific points during their attack cycle and how their poor surveillance tradecraft is one of these vulnerable junctures.

While surveillance is a necessary part of the planning process, the fact that it is a requirement does not necessarily mean that terrorist planners are very good at it. With this in mind, let's take a closer look at surveillance and discuss what bad surveillance looks like.

Eyes on a Potential Target

As noted above, surveillance is an integral part of the terrorist planning process for almost any type of attack, although there are a few exceptions to this rule, like letter-bomb attacks. The primary objective of surveillance is to assess a potential target for value, security measures and vulnerabilities. Some have argued that physical surveillance has been rendered obsolete by the Internet, but from an operational standpoint, there simply is no substitute for having eyes on the potential target -- even more so if a target is mobile. A planner is able to see the location of a building and its general shape on Google Earth, but Google Earth does not provide the planner with the ability to see what the building's access controls are like, the internal layout of the building or where the guards are located and what procedures they follow.

The amount of time devoted to the surveillance process will vary depending on the type of operation. A complex operation involving several targets and multiple teams, such as the 9/11 operation or 2008 Mumbai attacks, will obviously require more planning (and more surveillance) than a rudimentary pipe-bomb attack against a stationary soft target. Such complex operations may require weeks or even months of surveillance, while a very simple operation may require only a few minutes. The amount of surveillance required for most attacks will fall somewhere between these two extremes. Regardless of the amount of time spent observing the target, almost all terrorist planners will conduct surveillance and they are vulnerable to detection during this time.

Given that surveillance is so widely practiced, it is amazing that, in general, those conducting surveillance as part of a terrorist plot are usually terrible at it. There are some exceptions, of course. Many of the European Marxist terrorist groups trained by the KGB and Stasi practiced very good surveillance tradecraft, but such sophisticated surveillance is the exception rather than the rule.

The term "tradecraft" is often used in describing surveillance technique. Tradecraft is an espionage term that refers to techniques and procedures used in the field, but the term also implies that effectively practicing these techniques and procedures requires a bit of finesse. Tradecraft skills tend to be as much art as they are science, and surveillance tradecraft is no exception. As with any other art, you can be taught the fundamentals, but it takes time and practice to become a skilled surveillance practitioner. Most individuals involved in terrorist planning simply do not devote the time necessary to master the art of surveillance, and because of this, they display terrible technique, use sloppy procedures and generally lack finesse when they are conducting surveillance.

The main reason that people planning terrorist attacks are able to get by with such a poor level of surveillance tradecraft is because most victims simply are not looking for them. Most people do not practice situational awareness, something we are going to discuss in more detail next week. For those who do practice good situational awareness, the poor surveillance tradecraft exhibited by those planning terrorist attacks is good news. It provides them time to avoid an immediate threat and contact the authorities.

Keying on Demeanor

The behavior a person displays to those watching him or her is called demeanor. In order to master the art of surveillance tradecraft, one needs to master the ability to display appropriate demeanor for whatever situation one is in. Practicing good demeanor is not intuitive. In fact, the things one has to do to maintain good demeanor while conducting surveillance frequently run counter to human nature. Because of this, intelligence, law enforcement and security professionals assigned to work surveillance operations receive extensive training that includes many hours of heavily critiqued practical exercises, often followed by field training with a team of experienced surveillance professionals. This training teaches and reinforces good demeanor. Terrorist operatives typically do not receive this type of training -- especially those who are grassroots or lone wolf militants.

At its heart, surveillance is watching someone while attempting not to be caught doing so. As such, it is an unnatural activity, and a person doing it must deal with strong feelings of self-consciousness and of being out of place. People conducting surveillance frequently suffer from what is called "burn syndrome," the belief that the people they are watching have spotted them. Feeling "burned" will cause surveillants to do unnatural things, such as hiding their faces or suddenly ducking back into a doorway or turning around abruptly when they unexpectedly come face to face with the person they are watching.

People inexperienced in the art of surveillance find it difficult to control this natural reaction. A video that recently went viral on the Internet shows the husband of the president of Finland getting caught staring down the blouse of a Danish princess. The man's reaction to being caught by the princess was a textbook example of the burn syndrome. Even experienced surveillance operatives occasionally have the feeling of being burned; the difference is they have received a lot of training and they are better able to control their reaction and behave normally despite the feeling of being burned. They are able to maintain a normal-looking demeanor while their insides are screaming that the person they are watching has seen them.

In addition to doing something unnatural or stupid when feeling burned, another very common mistake made by amateurs when conducting surveillance is the failure to get into proper "character" for the job or, when in character, appearing in places or carrying out activities that are incongruent with the character's "costume." The terms used to describe these role-playing aspects of surveillance are "cover for status" and "cover for action." Cover for status is a person's purported identity -- his costume. A person can pretend to be a student, a businessman, a repairman, etc. Cover for action explains why the person is doing what he or she is doing -- why that guy has been standing on that street corner for half an hour.

The purpose of using good cover for action and cover for status is to make the presence of the person conducting the surveillance look routine and normal. When done right, the surveillance operative fits in with the mental snapshot subconsciously taken by the target as the target goes about his or her business. Inexperienced people who conduct surveillance frequently do not use proper (if any) cover for action or cover for status, and they can be easily detected.

An example of bad cover for status would be someone dressed as "a businessman" walking in the woods or at the beach. An example of bad cover for action is someone pretending to be sitting at a bus stop who remains at that bus stop even after several buses have passed. For the most part, however, inexperienced operatives conducting surveillance practice little or no cover for action or cover for status. They just lurk and look totally out of place. There is no apparent reason for them to be where they are or doing what they are doing.

In addition to plain old lurking, other giveaways include a person moving when the target moves, communicating when the target moves, avoiding eye contact with the target, making sudden turns or stops, or even using hand signals to communicate with other members of a surveillance team or criminal gang. Surveillants also can tip off the person they are watching by entering or leaving a building immediately after the person they are watching or simply by running in street clothes.

Sometimes, people who are experiencing the burn syndrome exhibit almost imperceptible behaviors that the target can sense more than observe. It may not be something that can be articulated, but the target just gets the gut feeling that there is something wrong or odd about the way a certain person is behaving toward them. Innocent bystanders who are not watching someone usually do not exhibit this behavior or trigger these feelings.

Principles of Surveillance Detection

The U.S. government often uses the acronym "TEDD" to illustrate the principles that can be used to identify surveillance conducted by counterintelligence agencies, but these same principles also can be used to identify terrorist surveillance. TEDD stands for time, environment, distance and demeanor. In other words, if a person sees someone repeatedly over time, in different environments and at a distance, or someone who displays poor surveillance demeanor, then that person can assume he or she is under surveillance.

However, for an individual, TEDD is really only relevant if you are being specifically targeted for an attack. In such an instance, you will likely be exposed to the time, environment and distance elements. However, if the target of the attack is a subway car or a building you work in rather than you as an individual, you likely will not have an opportunity to make environment and distance correlations, and perhaps not even time. You will likely only have the demeanor of the surveillant to key on. Therefore, when we are talking about recognizing surveillance, demeanor is the most critical of the four elements. Demeanor also works in tandem with all the other elements, and poor demeanor will often help the target spot the surveillant at a different time and place or in a different environment.

Time, environment and distance also have little bearing in an instance like the Fort Hood shooting, where the assailant is an insider, works at a facility and has solid cover for action and cover for status. In such instances, demeanor is also critical in identifying bad intent.

The fact that operatives conducting surveillance over an extended period can change their clothing and wear hats, wigs or other light disguises -- and use different vehicles or license plates -- also demonstrates why watching for mistakes in demeanor is critical. Because of a surveillant's ability to make superficial changes in appearance, it is important to focus on the things that cannot be changed as easily as clothing or hair, such as a person's facial features, build, mannerisms and gait. Additionally, while a surveillant can change the license plate on a car, it is not as easy to alter other aspects of the vehicle such as body damage (scratches and dents). Paying attention to small details can be the difference between a potential attacker being identified and the attacker going unnoticed.

One technique that can be helpful in looking for people conducting long-term surveillance is to identify places that provide optimal visibility of a critical place the surveillant would want to watch (for example, the front door of a potential target's residence or office, or a choke point on a route the potential target frequently travels). It is also important to look for places that provide optimal visibility, or "perches" in surveillance jargon. Elevated perches tend to be especially effective since surveillance targets rarely look up. Perches should be watched for signs of hostile surveillance, such as people who don't belong there, people lurking, or people making more subtle demeanor mistakes.

Paying attention to the details of what is happening around you (what we call practicing good situational awareness) does not mean being paranoid or obsessively concerned about security. Living in a state of paranoia and looking for a terrorist behind every bush not only is dangerous to one's physical and mental health but also results in poor security. We are going to talk more about practicing a healthy and sustainable level of situational awareness next week.

Detecting Terrorist Surveillance COPYRIGHT STRATFOR.COM

The Most Interesting Man in the World weighs in

Rush was right...she is a slut!

Officer Down

Deputy Sheriff Barbara Pill
Brevard County Florida Sheriff's Office
Age: 53
Tour: 15 years
Badge # 644

Deputy Sheriff Barbara Pill was shot and killed after stopping a vehicle near the intersection of John Rodes Boulevard and Estates Lane, in Melbourne, shortly before 11:15 am.

The vehicle was wanted in connection with a stolen property call from a local motel. As Deputy Pill made contact with the driver and ordered him out of the vehicle he opened fire on her, striking her multiple times. Responding deputies, Melbourne police officers, and Florida troopers chased the vehicle a short distance until it crashed on Turtlemound Road. A male and female subject in the vehicle were taken into custody and face charges in connection with Deputy Pill's murder.

Deputy Pill was transported to the Holmes Regional Medical Center where she succumbed to the gunshot wound.

Deputy Pill had been in law enforcement for 30 years and served with the Brevard County Sheriff's Office for 15 years. She is survived by her husband, two sons who also serve in law enforcement, and a grandchild.

Rest in Peace Sis…We’ll Continue The Watch

Day is done, Gone the sun, From the lake, From the hills, From the sky. All is well, Safely rest, God is nigh.

I've got a real bad feeling about this...

As I drink my morning coffee, catching up on the news and watching The Redeye, more news on Super Tuesday and how Romney will do so well and likely cripple Santorum or Gingrich. So we'll have another Bob Dole/John McCain. Great....

Now I see how, shocking, the North Eastern RINO's RINO, after months of telling the Republican base he's not a worshiper of the church of climate change may grow in office. From Politico.com.

Will Mitt Romney flip-flop on climate change if he’s elected president?

Some big donors are betting on it.

Romney and his super PAC have taken millions from funders with strong green streaks — despite the fact that the former Massachusetts governor has run to the right in the primary, proclaiming doubts about global-warming science and trashing President Barack Obama’s greenhouse gas emissions policies.

Julian Robertson, founder of the Tiger Management hedge fund, helped put cap-and-trade legislation on the map with $60 million in contributions over the past decade to the Environmental Defense Fund.

Now, Robertson has given $1.25 million to Romney’s Restore our Future super PAC, plus the maximum $2,500 to the Romney campaign.

Other green-minded financial backers may not be giving as much as Robertson, but they still share the view that climate-change science and a solid environmental agenda wouldn’t be a lost cause if Romney won the White House.

“My feeling is that on these issues that people learn,” said former Gov. Thomas Kean (R-N.J.), who maxed out last fall to Romney with a $2,500 check. “And my hope is, as time goes on, he will understand that not everybody agrees on how you deal with these issues, but I hope he will agree with 99 percent of the scientists who believe this is an issue that we have to deal with.”

As president, Kean said he hoped Romney could duplicate his Beacon Hill successes in building coalitions with Democrats on issues such as energy and the environment. In addition, Kean noted that Romney wouldn’t face the same gridlocked climate debate of recent years, in large part because of the boom in domestic natural gas production that’s helped lower the nation’s greenhouse gas emission levels. “The whole game has changed,” Kean said.

...Among the other green Romney donors is Texas businessman and philanthropist Trammell S. Crow, founder of Earth Day Dallas and winner of the Republicans for Environmental Protection’s Green Elephant Award in 2007...

...“I am voting for Mitt Romney and I believe in global warming,” Crow said in a statement to POLITICO...

Romney will learn about global warming. He will probably learn about nationalized health care, Wall Street bailouts, etc. Hey, it's like Obama, just with better taste in clothes.

Why do I think come November 6th I will be drinking a lot...thanks Republican Party. You went into this campaign season coming off a historical victory in 2010 and promptly stabbed the people who put you in office in the back. The Republican Establishment (the one that George Will, etc swears doesn't exist) have offered up another gutless RINO and said "This or the really open socialist..." Obama will drive this country off the cliff in overdrive...Romney will do it in second gear.

God, how did it ever get this bad.

An update on a cop killer

Good news from the Harris County Courthouse

Jurors decided Tuesday to send Carl Wayne Buntion, a career criminal with 13 felony convictions, back to death row for gunning down Houston motorcycle officer James Irby during a routine traffic stop June 27, 1990.

The jury deliberated more than 10 hours since Monday afternoon.

Irby's widow, Maura, pumped her fist as the verdict was read. Buntion did not react.

Defense attorneys for Buntion had argued the 68-year-old has stayed out of trouble and with no acts of violence in the 22 years he has been on death row since being convicted of capital murder in the case in 1991...

Officer James Irby hasn't done much since that day and he won't be coming back to his thank to this POS. From the ODMP article on his murder.

Officer James Irby was shot and killed when he stopped a car for a minor traffic violation.

As he was talking with the driver, the passenger exited the vehicle and shot Officer Irby five times with a .357 handgun.

The suspect was convicted of Officer Irby's murder and sentenced to death, but has received a sentencing trial to be held in 2012 after an appeal determined that the original jury did not receive proper instructions.

This won't bring Officer Irby back to his family but at least they know his killer won't excape justice.

RIP Officer Irby.

Security Weekly: The State of the World: Assessing China's Strategy, March 6, 2012

By George Friedman

Simply put, China has three core strategic interests.

Paramount among them is the maintenance of domestic security. Historically, when China involves itself in global trade, as it did in the 19th and early 20th century, the coastal region prospers, while the interior of China -- which begins about 100 miles from the coast and runs about 1,000 miles to the west -- languishes. Roughly 80 percent of all Chinese citizens currently have household incomes lower than the average household income in Bolivia. Most of China's poor are located west of the richer coastal region; this disparity of wealth time and again has exposed tensions between the interests of the coast and those of the interior. After a failed rising in Shanghai in 1927, Mao Zedong exploited these tensions by undertaking the Long March into the interior, raising a peasant army and ultimately conquering the coastal region. He shut China off from the international trading system, leaving China more united and equal, but extremely poor.

The current government has sought a more wealth-friendly means of achieving stability: buying popular loyalty with mass employment. Plans for industrial expansion are implemented with little thought to markets or margins; instead, maximum employment is the driving goal. Private savings are harnessed to finance the industrial effort, leaving little domestic capital to purchase the output. China must export accordingly.

China's second strategic concern derives from the first. China's industrial base by design produces more than its domestic economy can consume, so China must export goods to the rest of the world while importing raw materials. The Chinese therefore must do everything possible to ensure international demand for their exports. This includes a range of activities, from investing money in the economies of consumer countries to establishing unfettered access to global sea-lanes.

The third strategic interest is in maintaining control over buffer states. The population of the historic Han Chinese heartland is clustered in the eastern third of the country, where ample precipitation distinguishes it from the much more dry and arid central and western thirds. China's physical security therefore depends on controlling the four non-Han Chinese buffer states that surround it: Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang and Tibet. Securing these regions means China can insulate itself from Russia to the north, any attack from the western steppes, and any attack from India or Southeast Asia.

Controlling the buffer states provides China geographical barriers -- jungles, mountains, steppes and the Siberian wasteland -- that are difficult to surmount and creates a defense in depth that puts any attacker at a grave disadvantage.

Challenged Interests

Today, China faces challenges on all three of these interests. 

The economic downturn in Europe and the United States -- China's two main customers -- has exposed Chinese exports to increased competition and decreased appetite. Meanwhile, China has been unable to appropriately increase domestic demand and guarantee access to global sea-lanes independent of what the U.S. Navy is willing to allow.

Those same economic stresses also challenge China domestically. The wealthier coast depends on trade that is now faltering, and the impoverished interior requires subsidies that are difficult to provide when economic growth is slowing substantially.

In addition, two of China's buffer regions are in flux. Elements within Tibet and Xinjiang adamantly resist Han Chinese occupation. China understands that the loss of these regions could pose severe threats to China's security -- particularly if such losses would draw India north of the Himalayas or create a radical Islamic regime in Xinjiang.

The situation in Tibet is potentially the most troubling. Outright war between India and China -- anything beyond minor skirmishes -- is impossible so long as both are separated by the Himalayas. Neither side could logistically sustain large-scale multi-divisional warfare in that terrain. But China and India could threaten one another if they were to cross the Himalayas and establish a military presence on the either side of the mountain chain. For India, the threat would emerge if Chinese forces entered Pakistan in large numbers. For China, the threat would occur if large numbers of Indian troops entered Tibet.

China therefore constantly postures as if it were going to send large numbers of forces into Pakistan, but in the end, the Pakistanis have no interest in de facto Chinese occupation -- even if the occupation were directed against India. The Chinese likewise are not interested in undertaking security operations in Pakistan. The Indians have little interest in sending forces into Tibet in the event of a Tibetan revolution. For India, an independent Tibet without Chinese forces would be interesting, but a Tibet where the Indians would have to commit significant forces would not be. As much as the Tibetans represent a problem for China, the problem is manageable. Tibetan insurgents might receive some minimal encouragement and support from India, but not to a degree that would threaten Chinese control.

So long as the internal problems in Han China are manageable, so is Chinese domination of the buffer states, albeit with some effort and some damage to China's reputation abroad.

The key for China is maintaining interior stability. If this portion of Han China destabilizes, control of the buffers becomes impossible. Maintaining interior stability requires the transfer of resources, which in turn requires continued robust growth of the Chinese coastal economy to generate the capital to transfer inland. Should exports stop flowing out and raw materials in, incomes in the interior would quickly fall to politically explosive levels. (China today is far from revolution, but social tensions are increasing, and China must use its security apparatus and the People's Liberation Army to control these tensions.)

Maintaining those flows is a considerable challenge. The very model of employment and market share over profitability misallocates scores of resources and breaks the normally self-regulating link between supply and demand. One of the more disruptive results is inflation, which alternatively raises the costs of subsidizing the interior while eroding China's competitiveness with other low-cost global exporters.

For the Chinese, this represents a strategic challenge, a challenge that can only be countered by increasing the profitability on Chinese economic activity. This is nearly impossible for low value-added producers. The solution is to begin manufacturing higher value-added products (fewer shoes, more cars), but this necessitates a different sort of work force, one with years more education and training than the average Chinese coastal inhabitant, much less someone from the interior. It also requires direct competition with the well-established economies of Japan, Germany and the United States. This is the strategic battleground that China must attack if it is to maintain its stability.

A Military Component

Besides the issues with its economic model, China also faces a primarily military problem. China depends on the high seas to survive. The configuration of the South China Sea and the East China Sea render China relatively easy to blockade. The East China Sea is enclosed on a line from Korea to Japan to Taiwan, with a string of islands between Japan and Taiwan. The South China Sea is even more enclosed on a line from Taiwan to the Philippines, and from Indonesia to Singapore. Beijing's single greatest strategic concern is that the United States would impose a blockade on China, not by positioning its 7th Fleet inside the two island barriers but outside them. From there, the United States could compel China to send its naval forces far away from the mainland to force an opening -- and encounter U.S. warships -- and still be able to close off China's exits.

That China does not have a navy capable of challenging the United States compounds the problem. China is still in the process of completing its first aircraft carrier; indeed, its navy is insufficient in size and quality to challenge the United States. But naval hardware is not China's greatest challenge. The United States commissioned its first aircraft carrier in 1922 and has been refining both carrier aviation and battle group tactics ever since. Developing admirals and staffs capable of commanding carrier battle groups takes generations. Since the Chinese have never had a carrier battle group in the first place, they have never had an admiral commanding a carrier battle group.

China understands this problem and has chosen a different strategy to deter a U.S. naval blockade: anti-ship missiles capable of engaging and perhaps penetrating U.S. carrier defensive systems, along with a substantial submarine presence. The United States has no desire to engage the Chinese at all, but were this to change, the Chinese response would be fraught with difficulty.

While China has a robust land-based missile system, a land-based missile system is inherently vulnerable to strikes by cruise missiles, aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles currently in development and other types of attack. China's ability to fight a sustained battle is limited. Moreover, a missile strategy works only with an effective reconnaissance capability. You can't destroy a ship if you don't know where it is. This in turn necessitates space-based systems able to identify U.S. ships and a tightly integrated fire-control system. That raises the question of whether the United States has an anti-satellite capability. We would assume that it does, and if the United States used it, it would leave China blind.

China is therefore supplementing this strategy by acquiring port access in countries in the Indian Ocean and outside the South China Sea box. Beijing has plans to build ports in Myanmar, which is flirting with ending its international isolation, and Pakistan. Beijing already has financed and developed port access to Gwadar in Pakistan, Colombo and Hambantota in Sri Lanka, Chittagong in Bangladesh, and it has hopes for a deepwater port at Sittwe, Myanmar. In order for this strategy to work, China needs transportation infrastructure linking China to the ports. This means extensive rail and road systems. The difficulty of building this in Myanmar, for example, should not be underestimated.

But more important, China needs to maintain political relationships that will allow it to access the ports. Pakistan and Myanmar, for example, have a degree of instability, and China cannot assume that cooperative governments will always be in place in such countries. In Myanmar's case, recent political openings could result in Naypyidaw's falling out of China's sphere of influence. Building a port and roads and finding that a coup or an election has created an anti-Chinese government is a possibility. Given that this is one of China's fundamental strategic interests, Beijing cannot simply assume that building a port will give it unrestricted access to the port. Add to this that roads and rail lines are easily sabotaged by guerrilla forces or destroyed by air or missile attacks.

In order for the ports on the Indian Ocean to prove useful, Beijing must be confident in its ability to control the political situation in the host country for a long time. That sort of extended control can only be guaranteed by having overwhelming power available to force access to the ports and the transportation system. It is important to bear in mind that since the Communists took power, China has undertaken offensive military operations infrequently -- and to undesirable results. Its invasion of Tibet was successful, but it was met with minimal effective resistance. Its intervention in Korea did achieve a stalemate but at horrendous cost to the Chinese, who endured the losses but became very cautious in the future. In 1979 China attacked Vietnam, but suffered a significant defeat. China has managed to project an image of itself as a competent military force, but in reality it has had little experience in force projection, and that experience has not been pleasant.

Internal Security vs. Power Projection

The reason for this inexperience stems from internal security. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) is primarily configured as a domestic security force -- a necessity because of China's history of internal tensions. It is not a question of whether China is currently experiencing such tensions; it is a question of possibility. Prudent strategic planning requires building forces to deal with worst-case situations. Having been designed for internal security, the PLA is doctrinally and logistically disinclined toward offensive operations. Using a force trained for security as a force for offensive operations leads either to defeat or very painful stalemates. And given the size of China's potential internal issues and the challenge of occupying a country like Myanmar, let alone Pakistan, building a secondary force of sufficient capability might not outstrip China's available manpower but would certainly outstrip its command and logistical capabilities. The PLA was built to control China, not to project power outward, and strategies built around the potential need for power projection are risky at best.

It should be noted that since the 1980s the Chinese have been attempting to transfer internal security responsibilities to the People's Armed Police, the border forces and other internal security forces that have been expanded and trained to deal with social instability. But despite this restructuring, there remain enormous limitations on China's ability to project military power on a scale sufficient to challenge the United States directly.

There is a disjuncture between the perception of China as a regional power and the reality. China can control its interior, but its ability to control its neighbors through military force is limited. Indeed, the fear of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is unfounded. It cannot mount an amphibious assault at that distance, let alone sustain extended combat logistically. One option China does have is surrogate guerrilla warfare in places like the Philippines or Indonesia. The problem with such warfare is that China needs to open sea-lanes, and guerrillas -- even guerrillas armed with anti-ship missiles or mines -- can at best close them.

Political Solution

China therefore faces a significant strategic problem. China must base its national security strategy on what the United States is capable of doing, not on what Beijing seems to want at the moment. China cannot counter the United States at sea, and its strategy of building ports in the Indian Ocean suffers from the fact that its costs are huge and the political conditions for access uncertain. The demands of creating a force capable of guaranteeing access runs counter to the security requirements inside China itself.

As long as the United States is the world's dominant naval power, China's strategy must be the political neutralization of the United States. But Beijing must make certain that Washington does not feel so pressured that it chooses blockade as an option. Therefore China must present itself as an essential part of U.S. economic life. But the United States does not necessarily see China's economic activity as beneficial, and it is unclear whether China can maintain its unique position with the United States indefinitely. Other, cheaper alternatives are available. China's official rhetoric and hard-line stances -- designed to generate nationalist support inside the country -- might be useful politically, but strain relations with the United States. It doesn't strain relations to the point of risking military conflict, but given China's weakness, any strain is dangerous. The Chinese feel they know how to walk the line between rhetoric and real danger with the United States. It is still a delicate balance.

There is a perception that China is a rising regional and even global power. It may be rising but it is still far from solving its fundamental strategic problems and further yet from challenging the United States. The tensions within China's strategy are certainly debilitating, if not fatal. All of its options have serious weaknesses. China's real strategy must be to avoid having to make risky strategic choices. China has been fortunate for the past 30 years being able to avoid such decisions, but Beijing utterly lacks the tools required to reshape that environment. Considering how much of China's world is in play right now -- Sudanese energy disputes and Myanmar's political experimentation leap to mind -- this is essentially a policy of blind hope.

The State of the World: Assessing China's Strategy COPYRIGHT STRATFOR.COM

Maybe not the greatest judgement in the history of law enforcement.

But I don't see anything criminal here.

Cops and reporters can be at odds often. Sometimes the cops do something that they shouldn't and get caught. Fair enough, every profession has it's problem children. Now of course a reporter will never leave out important facts in a report, take things out of context, tell only one see of a story. Naa, that never happens.

I don't know much about the original story that made this reporter a not liked person at the St Bernard's Sheriff's Office but this was a results.

Calls for punishment in questionable target practice using Lee Zurik's photo

A local crime watchdog says questionable target practice by some St. Bernard Parish deputies calls for punishment.

The head of the Metropolitan Crime Commission says there are still more questions than answers about why police took aim at Lee Zurik.

It dates back to October 2011. When Zurik questioned why people voted in St. Bernard Parish during the local election, even though they have homestead exemptions elsewhere, things got heated.

The allegations of voter fraud involved regular citizens, as well as some sheriff's deputies, who apparently decided to target the messenger.

FOX 8 made the unsettling discovery in the weeks and months that followed the runoff election.
It shows police in St. Bernard Parish used a photo of Lee Zurik's face as a target during firearms training classes.

Outgoing Sheriff Jack Stephens says, "My understanding is that instructors had pictures posted and deputies used all the pictures. Lee was one of 4 or 5 different pictures posted and all the deputies were taking shots."

Stephens apologized, saying it wasn't meant to be a threat, but he didn't reprimand the deputies involved.

"With regards to any punishment, it's hard to use department policy, the law, or ethical violations as the premise for doing that, but it's in bad taste," says Stephens. "So we've admonished the training officers not to use actual photos of anyone anymore."...

...Sheriff Stephens played it off as gallow's humor, a case of dark satire.

I've had a few disagreements with reporters and I could see taking a few shots at a picture of Wayne Dolcefino. But I have a dark sense of humor. Granted this should not be on a police range but otherwise Mr Zurik etc, don't take yourself too serious.

I for one find this shocking...a Maryland judge finds the 2nd Amendment allows a person to possess a gun!

I am a strict constructionist with looking at the Constitution. I concur with Judge Bork when he said judges should "defer to the legislature where the constitution is silent." As much as having morons like Harry Rein in the Senate scares me, I prefer that to an unaccountable judge. That being said, I love this.

Md. Gun Law Found Unconstitutional


BALTIMORE (AP) — Maryland’s requirement that residents show a “good and substantial reason” to get a handgun permit is unconstitutional, according to a federal judge’s opinion filed Monday.

A "judge's opinion", not a ruling. Kinda funny way to report this. Then again this is AP writing.

States can channel the way their residents exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but because Maryland’s goal was to minimize the number of firearms carried outside homes by limiting the privilege to those who could demonstrate “good reason,” it had turned into a rationing system, infringing upon residents’ rights, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg wrote.


“A citizen may not be required to offer a `good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights,” he wrote. “The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.”


Plaintiff Raymond Woollard obtained a handgun permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002, but was denied a renewal in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to “threats occurring beyond his residence.” Woollard appealed, but was rejected by the review board, which found he hadn’t demonstrated a “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun as a reasonable precaution. The suit filed in 2010 claimed that Maryland didn’t have a reason to deny the renewal and wrongly put the burden on Woollard to show why he still needed to carry a gun.


“People have the right to carry a gun for self-defense and don’t have to prove that there’s a special reason for them to seek the permit,” said his attorney Alan Gura, who has challenged handgun bans in the District of Columbia and Chicago. “We’re not against the idea of a permit process, but the licensing system has to acknowledge that there’s a right to bear arms.”


The lawsuit, which names the state police superintendent and members of the Handgun Permit Review Board, was also filed on behalf of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation....


...Many states require gun permits, but Illinois has a ban and six states, including Maryland, issue permits on a discretionary basis, Gura said. In most of those states, these challenges have not succeeded in U.S. District Courts, but they are being appealed, he said...

The ruling will have to stand up to appeal (a safe assumption with the Maryland government) but this is a step in the right direction.

Another look at hate crimes

Last week I posted on my belief that hate crime legislation is unconstitutional because it treats one group differently in the eyes of the law based on skin color, etc. Now we have an interesting look at the other side of the glass. If a black 13 year old boy had been splashed with gasoline and set afire Jessee, Al etc would be on the scene, Eric Holder would be sending in hundreds of US attorneys and federal investigators to handle the matter. Now I wonder if they will be here.

Teenagers poured gasoline on boy walking home from school and set him on fire: cops - NY Daily News

A 13-year-old boy who police say was doused with gasoline and lit on fire last week while walking home from school is recovering from first-degree burns to his face and head.

The boy was just two blocks from his home in Kansas City Tuesday when two teenagers began to follow him and then attacked him, his mother, Melissa Coon, said.
Police have described the suspects as black 16-year-olds, while the victim is white.

"We were told it's a hate crime," Coon told KTLA.

"They rushed him on the porch as he tried to get the door open," Coon told KMBC. "(One of them) poured the gasoline, then flicked the Bic, and said, 'This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve, white boy.'"

By lighting the gasoline, the second attacker "produced a large fireball burning the face and hair" of the boy, according to a Kansas City Police Department report obtained by KCTV.

"It was pretty bad stuff," Detective Stacey Taylor told the TV station, adding that police are concerned the boy may have suffered damage to his eyes and lungs.

Coon said her son put out the fire with his shirt and called 911 himself. He was rushed to the hospital and was treated for his injuries.

She believes the students also attend East High School with her son, and said he will not be returning to the school. She also told KMBC her traumatized family plans now plans to move.

"My 5-year-old came in and asked me, 'Mom, am I going to get set on fire today?'" Coon said. "I was in tears."

Terrorizing a five year old. Great. OK Mr. Attorney General, have you sent your Civil Rights Division down to handle this? We're waiting for an answer.

HBO's Game Change. More like same stuff, different day.

I subscribed to HBO from the early 2000s till 2008 for one man, Tony Soprano. The Sopranos was an excellent series with serious plots, excellent writing and character development. It was a bad day when they whet off. But I drew the line when they kept Bill Maher after his obscene attacks on Sarah Palin among other.

The more things change the more they city the same. A review of the HBO propaganda piece Game Change.

'GAME CHANGE' REVIEW: HBO'S IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION TO BARACK OBAMA


by John Nolte


The only surprise that came with my screening of "Game Change" was in the realization that HBO chose to remake the sci-fi/horror film "The Hidden." For those of you who haven't seen this 1987 cult classic, it's about a dangerous alien who comes to Earth determined to become president of the United States. The alien is crass (it loves red sports cars), unsophisticated (it loves heavy metal) and it speaks in single, bewildered syllables because it doesn't understand the world around it. But while the alien might not be educated, its ruthless survival instincts manage to get it within grasp of its insidious goal, thanks to a senator seeking the presidency.


There is one difference between the two films. "Game Change" ends a little sooner -- at that bone-chilling moment when the audience is made aware of the terrible fact that the terrible alien (Governor Palin) has successfully put itself within reach of the presidency.


Fade to black.


Shudder.


Vote for Barack Obama.


"The Hidden," however, ends with our hero rushing in to save the world … with a flamethrower. The alien is engulfed in fire, falls to the ground, exposes its true, ugly self and explodes into a million slimy pieces. And I think it's pretty obvious that HBO, producer Tom Hanks, director Jay Roach and screenwriter Danny Strong, see themselves as this hero, and their flamethrower is a little something called "Game Change."


To understand just what a heinous piece of propaganda HBO has produced on behalf of President Obama, we have to go back in time to paint a complete contextual picture. HBO announced "Game Change" in early March of last year. This was after a difficult year for the president, when his approval ratings were in worse shape than they are now. This was also a time when many believed, including myself, that Governor Palin would enter the 2012 race to challenge Obama.


In other words, it's just a fact that when HBO decided to pull the trigger, the possibility was very real that Palin could become president of the United States. So what did HBO choose to do as a response? Here are the facts:

1. HBO chose to adapt into a feature film the 10 percent of a 350-plus page book that focused on a vice presidential candidate.


2. HBO chose not to adapt into a feature film that portion of the book focusing on what might have given us some insight into the man currently residing in the Oval Office. 


3. HBO chose a book written by two men who were not on the campaign trail with Governor Palin, who made a conscious choice of their own to tell only the side of the story coming from those who refused to go on the record. Those willing to go on the record, those willing to stake their reputations on their side of the story, were all but ignored by these authors.


4. HBO chose to give left-wing partisans, who openly support Obama, millions of dollars to bring their vision of his likely challenger to life.


5. HBO chose as a release date (their absurdly dishonest protests aside) the Saturday after Super Tuesday. Think about this: If it's March of 2011, and you're remaking "The Hidden," and you're thinking ahead to the most likely day the alien might be one step away from obtaining power, what better day to rush in with your flamethrower than the Saturday after Super Tuesday?

The five points I've listed above are not opinions; they are facts. They are conscious choices made during the political reality of the time by multi-millionaires like Hanks, Roach and Strong backed by one of the most powerful multi-national corporations on the planet. If there was any justice in the world, HBO would now have to register as a super PAC, and the corrupt mainstream media would treat it with the same contempt and foreboding it does any super PAC backing Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich...


...(Julianne) Moore portrays Palin as a Manchurian Candidate for the extreme right who is activated by a phone call from the McCain campaign. Like a hypnotized spy, she's humorless, incapable of any kind of emotional connection with anyone, bewildered by circumstance and absolutely determined to meet the goal she's been programmed to complete. She's cold, snippy, power-hungry and cruel. Yes, she's dangerously ignorant of the simplest ways by which the world works, but it's her calculating political instincts (and we rubes who fall for her beauty, simplicity and venomous hate for Obama) that see her through to triumph.


HBO informs us that Palin speaks in tongues. Moreover, we're asked to believe that a self-made governor -- an honor student who put herself through college, is "flipping" fascinated to discover Germany was our enemy during the world wars. We're told that the very same woman who gave this interview in 2008 had no idea in 2008 that England has a prime minister. We're instructed that the engaged governor, who wrote these emails and who sent her son to war and who understands the complexities of harvesting and trading energy like few others, is shocked to learn Saddam Hussein wasn't behind 9/11, needs a flashcard to memorize what NAFTA is and has never heard of the Federal Reserve.

...Her hypnotic, unnerving lack of a core is always right below the surface. No matter what the situation, there's always a dark, calculating vacancy somewhere in this alien's eyes. And the reasons for this are obvious. HBO and Moore found it imperative to deconstruct Palin's strengths - her warmth, charisma and extraordinary ability to connect with everyday Americans.


Another way HBO does that is to turn the flamethrower on us - on  you, me and anyone who dares support this alien. You see, we must also be exposed by fire, and that fire reveals us as so full of rage and ignorance that we can be manipulated by this alien - manipulated into screaming "Kill him!" at the sound of Obama's name.


HBO's message is simple: you’re either with the cool, smart, classy, sophisticated kids who stand against Palin, or you’re with The Mob, the rubes, the snake handlers, the s4:s-kickers.


Now that I've actually had a chance to screen HBO's "Game Change," I can tell you without any hesitation that if you've seen the trailer, you've seen the movie. The film is nothing more than an extended version of those 107 seconds; for around two hours, Governor Palin is demonized, dehumanized, slandered and maliciously morphed into something unrecognizable - a petty, joyless, snippy, unstable, moronic political mercenary...

I don't see getting HBO anytime soon...I can't wait for the Osama bin Laden movie just before the election showing B Hussein Obama personally popping a cap into OBl.

It begins...the vetting of B Hussein Obama

Last week I mentioned how in death Andrew Breitbart would actually do what the major media refused to do in 2008 (and continues to not do), vet B Hussein Obama's qualifications for the Presidency.

It has started.

From the Big Government, a poster of a Alinsky love movie with a post movie discussion featuring such moderates as Studds Terkel and get ready, Senator Barrack Obama.

Now why wasn't this shown in 07/08? Hey Mrs Clinton, maybe you should have tried this and you might have gotten the nomination.

You know, let's do our own version of the Rather hit piece from 04, where Danny boy tried to say Bush wasn't doing his National Guard duty. Or the late hit piece in 2000 about a 25 year old DWI where they had the information for months but for some reason choose the best time to release it was days from the election.

I have no doubt more is coming and I pray they have saved the best for last. Thanks Andrew...RIP and I know you're gonna enjoy this like us.

Really...a hydration station

If it's Mrs B Hussein Obama and nutrition you know it's BS. It's bad enough that federal agents are policing Pre K kid lunches, now this lawyer with no expertise in nutrition is going after soldiers.

Army Dietitian Touts Warning Labels for Desserts and Fried Foods at Mess Halls | CNSNews.com

The healthy eating campaign has the U.S. military in its sights.

During a panel discussion Thursday on how government can promote healthy eating habits, the U.S. Army touted its mess hall labeling system that places warning on desserts and fried foods.

The event, held at the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington, saw Lt. Col. Sonya Cable highlight the “Go for Green” program, which labels healthy foods green, moderate foods amber, and high calorie foods red.

The nutrition education program alerts soldiers that “red” foods like bacon and apple pie should only be eaten rarely, with a warning: “limit intake.” Foods labeled green, however, such as mustard greens, are deemed “premium fuel for the soldier athlete,” “fresh and flavorful” and “nutrient dense.” Soldiers are advised to eat these frequently.

Cable represents the U.S. Army Soldier Fueling Initiative, which is remaking dining facilities at Initial Military Training sites across the country. She currently serves as a dietitian and the Chief of the Human Dimensions Division within the Initial Military Training Center of Excellence.

During the panel discussion she advised using the “red, amber, green” system in public schools too.

“My eyes got opened very quickly that it really is a community,” she said, about her visit to Fort Jackson, S.C. seven years ago to observe its dining facilities.  “We talk about a village that raises a child.  Well a community develops a brand new soldier, too. And that’s what we found there.”

“When I got there our dining facilities were typical dining facility type styles, you know, the fried foods, salad bars existed,” Cable continued.

“We had soda machines and the pastries were, you know, typical cookies, cake, cakes, pies, all of those types of things.  Well, then we had the challenge of, okay, now we’re taking former civilians, now developing into soldiers and trying to develop them,” she said.  This was the beginning of the Soldier Fueling Initiative and Cable’s efforts to influence the behavior of new recruits.

If you walk into a basic training cafeteria today you will find far fewer fried foods and soda machines have been replaced with “hydration stations,” she explained.

“In the military we all kind of know red means, ‘uh oh, there’s problems,’” Cable said.  “Amber, middle of the road, we’re doing okay.  And green is good to go, all is right. We took that same concept and we applied it to our menus.”

For instance, the program’s Recipe Nutrition Analysis lists pies, cookies, cakes, éclairs, and banana splits as “red” foods – highest in calories and lowest in vitamins and minerals.

Posters and placards encourage soldiers to opt instead for such “green” desserts as baked bananas and fruit cups.

“All the foods are labeled throughout the serving line so that our soldiers would be informed as to making choices related to their performance goals,” Cable said.

“I had some folks say to me, ‘Well, why on earth did you even include the red ones to begin with?’  Two reasons – one, we’ve got soldiers who have racehorse metabolisms that they needed every calorie I could get into them.  And by taking off the ‘red’ we just found that we couldn’t get enough calories in them.”

The second reason for including “red” foods, Cable said, was “so they could learn what contributed positively and maybe what contributed negatively. Not to say that every food is bad, it’s just how they fit into your performance goals.”

On the breakfast menu oven-fried bacon, sausage gravy, butter, sugary cereal and egg, sausage and cheese sandwiches earn a red label. Assorted low-fat yogurt, oven-fried Canadian bacon, broccoli quiche and cholesterol-free scrambled eggs are deemed “high performance” foods.

For lunch and dinner, soldiers are coaxed into choosing hamburger yakisoba over grilled cheeseburgers.

Allright...what the hell is hamburger yakisoba and what moron thinks a hungry as hell soldier will take this over a real burger?

When I was mobalized in 03 we started to have a restaurant bring in meals because there was no mess hall available. I mentioned the budget would allow us to provide steak every day and one of the budget guys (a retired Army major) made a good point, “Mike, we did that within a week they would want burgers and chicken...” He was right.

I might also point out to this group when they tried a similar program in the LA school district the results was a massive waste of money and food and the development of a black market for junk food.

Salisbury steak, BBQ spareribs, grilled pork chops, Yankee pot roast and turkey gravy are discouraged, while baked tuna and noodles, Brussels sprouts, spinach, turkey meatloaf, peas and carrots are “premium fuel for the soldier athlete” that should be chosen frequently.

Cable, who gave a tour of the dining facilities at Ft. Jackson to First Lady Michelle Obama in January, said the program started with basic combat training sites and now is used in all training facilities.

Overs involved in the panel included Ned Holland, Assistant Secretary for Administration at Health and Human Services; Dr. Joel Kimmons of the Division of Nutrition and Physical Activity at the Centers for Disease Control; and Jeff Mills, Food Services Director for D.C. public schools. Panelists discussed their efforts to curb unhealthy eating habits in various branches of government....

I remember as a 23 year old lieutenant in Korea we had a Coke machine with one the choices as Budweiser beer. I said before I have serious heartburn when we tell adults "you're old enough to vote, get married, sign a contract, and die for your country but you cannot have a beer..." Now the Army bureaucracy is telling these troops "your too stupid to decide what to eat."

One problem I see is this Lt. Col. and the other people listed seem to confuse the nutritional requirements for relative inactive student (yes, there are exceptions for the jocks) and soldiers who do physical training and other calorie burning activities daily.

Again, I'm glad I'm now my title is now Major, USAR, Retired.

Again, they find another way to abuse the traveling public....

Anyone who reads this blog knows I have little regard for the TSA and the facade of a job they do. There have been multiple cases of abuse of children, elderly and disabled persons. Yet there has never been a documented case of this harassment stopping any terrorist act. Another classic example.

TSA asks woman to prove her breast pump is real at Lihue Airport

Lihue, HI (KITV) -- A Hawaiian mom says she was humiliated when asked to prove her breast pump was real at an airport.

The woman says she was flagged for additional screening at the Lihue Airport Wednesday because of her electric breast feeding pump.

She claims agents told her she couldn't take the pump on the plane because the bottles in her carry-on were empty.

"I asked him if there was a private place I could pump and he said no, you can go in the women's bathroom. I had to stand in front of the mirrors and the sinks and pump my breast in front of every tourist that walked into that bathroom. I was embarrassed and humiliated and then angry that I was treated this way.

When the bottles were full, she was allowed back on the plane.

The TSA is apologizing, saying the agent made a mistake...

How many billions have we wasted on this legalized harassment. Please Republicans, rip this organized grouping of innocent people from the budget.

I can get behind this campaign!

Thanks Legal Insurrection for the link!

Somewhere up there Breitbart is smiling.....

Reading this morning's Houston Chronicle, the AP on the death of Mr Breitbart.

Andrew Breitbart used the Internet relentlessly to ignite political scandal and expose what he saw as media bias, even if he sometimes had to edit the facts to do it...

The Associated Press is complaining about someone editing the facts. This is the same AP that wrote in news article, not an opinion piece the following:

President Barack Obama is reaping political benefits from the country’s brighter economic mood. A new poll shows that Republicans and Democrats alike are increasingly saying the nation is heading in the right direction and most independents now approve the way he’s addressing the nation’s post-recession period

OK. Does anyone out there think the economy is improved since January 2009? Or this editing the facts?

Here is another one.

WASHINGTON - (AP) -- Most Americans don't share Rick Santorum's absolutist take on abortion. He's out of step on women in combat. He questions the values of the two-thirds of mothers who work. He's even troubled by something as commonplace as birth control -- for married couples. Even among a Republican presidential field eager to please religious conservatives, Santorum's ideas stand out...

Again, this is the start of a news article, not an opinion piece.

I read on one of the articles about him in the last 24 hours he would start many days with reading Internet post criticizing him. Said if he was getting them to react he must be doing something right.

RIP Andrew. Even in death you will do something AP refused to do. Actually vet B Hussein Obama and his qualifications for the highest office in the land.

A different way to handle someone who's had a few too many...

I've booked countless drunks in my time on the streets and I gotta say this is an index worth looking at. From this morning's Houston Chronicle

City planning sobering center for drunks

The city plans to open a sobering center at the Star of Hope mission downtown later this year, an 84-bed facility where police would bring detainees whose only offense is drunkenness instead of booking them into jail.

Police arrest 19,000 people a year for public intoxication who account for an estimated $4 million to $6 million in jail costs annually.

People brought to the sobering center would have no arrest on their records and would be released once they’re sober...

...”I think it’s a much more cost-effective way of doing business. It’s much more effective in terms of police officers not being tied up with an arrest on a busy weekend for a simple charge of p.i. (public intoxication) that’s a non-violent crime.”...

...The city will pay for the $3 million in renovations needed to the warehouse from the proceeds of voter-approved public safety bonds. The city’s annual costs to lease, pay for staffing and cover utilities for the facility is estimated at $1.5 million.

“Incarcerating individuals whose only criminal behavior is public intoxication diverts law enforcement from more serious or life-threatening crimes,” said Mayor Annise Parker in a released statement. “Sobering centers in other cities have proven to be time savers for patrol officers, allowing them to quickly return to their assigned duties to deal with more serious crimes.”

Gotta say I like this.

Security Weekly: Detection Points in the Terrorist Attack Cycle, March 1, 2012

By Scott Stewart

Last week's Security Weekly discussed the fact that terrorism is a tactic used by many different classes of actors and that, while the perpetrators and tactics of terrorism may change in response to shifts in larger geopolitical cycles, these changes will never result in the end of terrorism. Since that analysis was written, there have been jihadist-related attacks in Afghanistan, Nigeria, Yemen and Pakistan, an assassination attempt against the president of Abkhazia, and a failed timed-incendiary attack against the Athens subway. (The latter incident, which militant anarchists claimed, reinforces that jihadists are not the only ones who practice terrorism.)

But while terrorism is a continuing concern, it can be understood, and measures can be taken to thwart terrorist plots and mitigate the effects of attacks. Perhaps the most important and fundamental point to understand about terrorism is that attacks do not appear out of nowhere. Individuals planning a terrorist attack follow a discernable cycle -- and that cycle and the behaviors associated with it can be observed if they are being looked for. We refer to these points where terrorism-related behavior can be most readily observed as vulnerabilities in the terrorist attack cycle.

The Attack Cycle

Many different actors can commit terrorist attacks, including sophisticated transnational terrorist groups like al Qaeda; regional militant groups like India's Maoist Naxalites; small, independent cells like the anarchists in Greece; and lone wolves like Oslo attacker Anders Breivik. There can be great variance in attack motives and in the time and process required to radicalize these different actors to the point that they decide to conduct a terrorist attack. But once any of these actors decides to launch an attack, there is remarkable similarity in the planning process.

First, there is the process of selecting or identifying a target. Often an actor will come up with a list of potential targets and then select one to focus on. In some cases, the actor has preselected a method of attack, such as a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, and wants to find a target that would be vulnerable to that specific type of attack. In other cases, the actor will pick a target and then devise a method of attack based on that target's characteristics and vulnerabilities. Simply put, the execution of these steps can be somewhat fluid; some degree of planning or preparation can come before target selection, and sometimes target selection will be altered during the planning process. The time required to execute these steps can also vary considerably. Some attacks can be planned and executed within hours or days, while more complex plans, such as those used in the 9/11 or Mumbai attacks, may take months or even years to complete.

Frequently, those planning an attack will conduct detailed surveillance of potential targets to determine what security measures are in place around the target and to gauge whether they have the ability to successfully attack it. If the target is too difficult to attack -- commonly known as a hard target -- the attack planners will typically move on to their next target, which may prove easier to attack. (When they do continue with attacks against targets whose security measures exceed the attackers' capabilities, those attacks fail.) We refer to this stage as preoperational surveillance, which means surveillance that is conducted before the operation is fully planned.

After the target has been selected, a second round of surveillance is conducted. This round will be far more detailed and is intended to provide all the details necessary for planning the attack. For example, if the attack is being planned against a static facility, this round of surveillance will generally try to obtain a detailed description of the target's physical security features and security force procedures. It will also focus on establishing a baseline understanding of the activity that can be expected around the facility at the time of day the attack is anticipated.

If the target of the attack is an individual, the individual's residence, office and other places the individual frequents will be surveilled. Additionally, the surveillance team will look for patterns and routines that the target follows between these known locations. The team will often analyze the target's usual routes looking for choke points, or places the target must pass to get from one point to another. If the surveillance team identifies a choke point that the target passes through predictably, it will then try to determine whether that point will allow the attackers to deploy in secret, permit them to spot and control the target, and provide them with good escape routes. If it does, this point will frequently be chosen as the attack site.

In the case of large organizations, different groups or individuals may conduct different phases of the surveillance. Many organizations use specialized operatives for surveillance, though the operational planner will often attempt to get eyes on the target to help with the planning process. For instance, it is known from court testimony in the Mumbai case that David Headley made five extended trips to Mumbai as those attacks were being planned. The repeated trips were required because the operational commanders in Pakistan considered India a hostile environment and the operational planners could not go there to conduct the surveillance themselves. As a result, Headley was sent to observe and report on specific things as planning for the attacks progressed.

During the planning phase, the personnel to be used in the attacks are identified and trained in any special skills they may require for the mission, including languages, marksmanship, hand-to-hand combat, small-boat handling or land navigation. To protect operational security, the operatives may not be briefed in any great detail about the target of their operation until they are very close to being deployed.

Many times the planning phase will end with a dry run, as the preparation did for the 9/11 attacks, when some of the hijackers took their assigned flights in August 2001. While conducting a dry run, the attackers will generally be unarmed to ensure they do not needlessly bring law enforcement attention to themselves.

Sometimes an attacker will have acquired weapons for the attack before the planning phase. Other times the concept of the operation will be constrained by the weapons and money available. But quite frequently, the weapons for the attack will be acquired during the planning phase, after the target has been selected and the means of attack have been established.

Once planning, training and weapons acquisition are complete, the attack team can be deployed. The attack team frequently will again conduct surveillance of the target, especially if the target is mobile and the attack team is deployed and waiting at a predetermined attack site.

If it was properly planned, an attack is very likely to succeed once it has moved to the operational phase. Sometimes attacks do fail because of mistakes or bad luck, but by and large there is no way to stop an attack once it has been set in motion.

At the attack's conclusion, the attackers will seek to escape the scene. The exception is suicide attacks or when, like Breivik, the attacker intends to be captured as part of the media exploitation phase, the final step in the cycle.

Regardless of whether the attack is a suicide attack against a church in Nigeria or a timed-incendiary attack against a subway in Athens, the same attack cycle is followed. With an eye toward averting future attacks, a thoughtful observer can use the attack cycle model to understand how an attack was planned and executed.

Vulnerabilities

While plots are occasionally thwarted at the last second, for the most part law enforcement and security personnel must detect and interdict the plot before it gets to the attack phase to have any chance of stopping it. Once the bullets fly or the explosive device is detonated, there is little security forces can do but initiate their immediate action drills in an effort to reduce the body count. This means that an emphasis must be placed on identifying attackers earlier in the process, well before they are in a position to strike.

Unless security forces have a source inside the group that is planning the attack or manage to intercept the group's communications, the only way to identify attack planners is by noting their actions. This is especially true of a lone wolf attack, where no external communication occurs. The earliest point in the attack cycle that the attackers can be identified by their actions is during the preoperational surveillance required for target identification.

There is a widely held conception that terrorist surveillance is generally sophisticated and almost invisible, but when viewed in hindsight, it is frequently discovered that individuals who conduct terrorist surveillance tend to be quite sloppy and even amateurish in their surveillance tradecraft. We will discuss what bad surveillance looks like, and how to recognize it, in more detail next week, but for now it is sufficient to say that poor surveillance tradecraft is a significant vulnerability in the terrorist attack cycle.

As noted above, additional surveillance is often conducted at later stages of the attack cycle, such as in the planning stage and even sometimes in the attack stage, as the attackers track the target from a known location to the attack site. Each instance of surveillance provides an additional opportunity for the assailants to be identified and the attack to be prevented.

During the planning phase and as the operatives prepare to deploy, communication between and movement of group members often increases. Additionally, group members may engage in outside training that can attract attention, such as playing paintball, visiting the firing range or, as was the case with the 9/11 pilots, attending flight schools. This increase in activity, which also might include money transfers, leaves signs that could tip off the authorities.

Another significant vulnerability during the attack cycle is weapons acquisition. This vulnerability is especially pronounced when dealing with inexperienced grassroots operatives, who tend to aspire to conduct spectacular attacks that are far beyond their capabilities. For example, they may decide they want to conduct a bombing attack even though they do not know how to make improvised explosive devices. It is also not uncommon for such individuals to try to acquire Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, automatic firearms or hand grenades. When confronted by this gap between their capability and their aspirations, grassroots operatives will often reach out to someone for help with their attack instead of settling on an attack that is within their ability. Increasingly, the people such would-be attackers are encountering when they reach out are police or domestic security agency informants.

As far back as 2010, jihadist leaders such as Nasir al-Wahayshi of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula recognized this problem and began to encourage grassroots jihadists to focus on conducting simple attacks against soft targets. Nevertheless, grassroots jihadists are consistently drawn toward spectacular attacks, as seen in the Feb. 17 arrest near the U.S. Capitol of a Moroccan man who thought his handler, who was in fact an FBI informant, had equipped him for a suicide attack. Unlike most jihadists, other types of grassroots militants, such as anarchists, are far more comfortable conducting simple attacks with readily available items.

Personality traits and psychological profiles aside, anyone desiring to plan a terrorist attack must follow the attack planning cycle, which at certain stages will necessarily open them up to detection.

Detection Points in the Terrorist Attack Cycle COPYRIGHT STRATFOR.COM