Archive for the ‘anti-terrorism’ Category

“Don’t forget what I inherited when I took this job”

May 5, 2011

Those are the words that I want Obama to utter tonite at Ground Zero.

Channeling Bart Simpson, the President belabors his inheritance to explain away all things he does that don’t work.

Think tillion dollar stimulus package,

But, when legacy initiatives work out well, he likes to act like he created them out of whole cloth — from a standing start.

Think TARP — a program I disagreed with — that sure seems to have worked.

Think what you may about Bush & Cheney, but in the final analysis, they kept the homeland safe post-9/11 and put in place an effective intelligence infrastructure.

Would be nice if Obama explicitly said that at Ground Zero.

Except for maybe a vague parenthetical reference, I’m betting the under.

We’ll see …

Posted in anti-terrorism | Leave a Comment »

How does Holder (and his boss) reconcile this one?

May 4, 2011

Again, I agree with the UBL action and outcome.  Period.

But, I’m eager to see how Obama and Holder finesse this one:

Just a couple of months ago, they were fighting to have KSM — #2 on the al-Quaeda org chart — properly lawyered up and given a civil trial in New York City.

But, this week, they were comfortable with violating a country’s sovereign rights and fatally shooting an unarmed (but resisting) UBL.

How the heck do these guys reconcile the positions?

I guess that they’ve concluded that  “rule of law” is situation-specific.

The good news: maybe they’ll quit lecturing  us on morality and the rule of law. 

Maybe.  But I’m betting the under.

Posted in anti-terrorism | Leave a Comment »

Q&A: Why didn’t UBL hear the helicopters ?

May 3, 2011

We live close to CIA headquarters in Langley, and  we often hear loud (make that VERY loud) gov’t copters over head. 

So, I wondered: why didn’t UBL hear the helicopters coming and tunnel his way out of the complex?

A military analyst on Fox broke the code.

First, the copters have a ‘low noise’ mode that dampens some of the sound.  Dampens the sound, but doesn’t silence it.

The real key was where UBL’s digs were situated.

Since the mansion was in the middle of 3 miltary complexes, it was common for copters to be flying in the area at all times of the day and night.

So, UBL probably assumed that they were friendly Paki copters — not US Navy copters.

Then, the landing and engagement were so quick that UBL didn’t have time to do anything but grab the women he used as shield.

In the words of the analyst: “UBL and the Pakis were too clever by half  by situating in the military area.  It gave the copters the cover they needed to breach the airspace undetected.”

Pretty interesting , huh?

Posted in anti-terrorism | Leave a Comment »

I slept better last nite knowing that Canada is de-nuking.

April 14, 2010

I never have trusted the Canadians … I figure that if you’re willing to toss off your hockey gloves and wail on an opponent at mid-rink, then you’re probaably willing to lob nukes at a neighboring country.

So, I was pleased to hear of Obama’s nuclear coup — getting Canada to scale back its nuclear ambitions.

According to USA Today, in the marquee deal of  Obama’s Nuclear Security Summit,  Canada agreed to a plan to send spent nuclear fuel back to the U.S.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/04/obama-strikes-nuke-deals-with-mexico-canada-others/1

Let me make sure I understand, we still don’t have agreement in the US where to stash our nuclear waste (not in my backyard, please), but now we’re going to take Canada’s radioactive garbage … and that’s a good deal that will make us safer ?

BTW: Canada doesn’t do nuke weapons.  According to Wikipedia — the Homa Files ultimate reference source — Canada is listed as a nation with the capability (infrastructure, material and experts) to quickly make nuclear weapons … but hasn’t and has never intended to do so.

* * * * *

Is it just me, or does the Nuclear Summit seem like US gun control on steroids?  The good guys agree to restraints … so that the only deadly strike capability rests in the hands of rogue states and terrorists.  I must be missing something …

Posted in anti-terrorism | 1 Comment »

Things change: Terrorist "renditions" – bad by Bush, ok by Obama

February 6, 2009

Ken’s Take: Under Bush, terrorist renditioning was dirtier than dirt.  A clear violation of terrorists rights.  Now, it’s ok.  Hmmmm.

* * * * *
Excerpted from LA Times, “Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool”, February 1, 2009 

The CIA’s secret prisons are being shuttered. Harsh interrogation techniques are off-limits. And Guantanamo Bay will eventually go back to being a wind-swept naval base on the southeastern corner of Cuba.

But even while dismantling these programs, President Obama left intact an equally controversial counter-terrorism tool.

Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that the rendition program might be poised to play an expanded role going forward because it was the main remaining mechanism — aside from Predator missile strikes — for taking suspected terrorists off the street.

The Obama administration appears to have determined that the rendition program was one component of the Bush administration’s war on terrorism that it could not afford to discard.

The decision underscores the fact that the battle with Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups is far from over and that even if the United States is shutting down”

“In some ways, [rendition] is the worst option,” the former official said. “If they are in U.S. hands, you have a lot of checks and balances, medics and lawyers. Once you turn them over to another service, you lose control.” the prisons, it is not done taking prisoners.

The decision to preserve the program did not draw major protests, even among human rights groups. Leaders of such organizations attribute that to a sense that nations need certain tools to combat terrorism.

Full article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,1822531,full.story 

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>  The Homa Files Blog

Posted in anti-terrorism, Government & Politics, Obama Administration, Terrorism | Leave a Comment »