« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

NY incident – dangerous new level of attack

NY incident – dangerous new level of attack

Posted on 06 May 2010 | Edit

There are some simple steps to connecting the dots.

  1. You have to believe in the existence of dots
  2. You have to look for dots everywhere
  3. You have to look for patterns between the dots.

The biggest problem everyone seems to have is believing dots exist. Yesterday Bill Bennett focused like a laser on why we had these series of miss fire attacks. (dot….dot….dot). The consensus among the callers, some experts and Bennett’s show staff was it was luck. Now lets look at it differently.

  1. We are at war. We have been waging that war on enemy territory and winning.
  2. The enemy isn’t defeated and we have given them some breathing room to regroup and reorganize. They intend to continue the fight.
  3. They realize that we win because we take the fight to the streets of their cities. They want to win.

You may not see the connection so let me explain it. They are probing our defenses. What makes Faisal Shahzad’s mission many times more dangerous then any previous attack since the Washington DC sniper is that Faisal acted as a special ops soldier. He had a mission, an exfiltration plan, and a good chance of survival. This changes everything!

DOT: The enemy is probing our defenses. Each of these failed instances helped the enemy understand where are weakness are, and how to exploit them.

DOT: How hard would it be to smuggle teams of special ops soldiers into the country across the Mexican border?

DOT:Interdiction strikes could be carried out against transportation, and energy targets by individuals who infiltrate, execute there mission and have a reasonable expectation of successful exfiltration.

DOT: The probes have proved we are not able to intercept these attacks, and have defined weaknesses and even cracks in our reaction when an attack has been discovered. The idiots in Washington gave them all the information they need about how issues are handled, who is involved, what agencies are involved. Heck we even told them they have two hours even if they are identified to get out. Worse, the idiots in Washington told them how we identified the suspect.

DOT: 40% of the illegal immigrants infiltrating the country from Mexico are classified “OTM” (Other than Mexican).

The enemy doesn’t need suicide bombers. They can send special ops soldiers to the country to carry out sniper attacks, interdiction strikes against transportation systems (including energy transmission pipes and lines) and terrorist attacks. Sooner or later they are going to realize that America is more than New York city.

Faisal Shahzad’s actions raise the level of threat far beyond anything we have seen so far. With a little better planning, he escapes. With a better detonator, he blows up something and escapes. You don’t need suicide bombers for that kind of mission, for that you can use soldiers.

WmCraig
Solvo Reor

Cross Posted at Freedoms Light Org

COMMENTS

  • blooch

    If the attack fails, Obama’s clowns, as they pat themselves on the back, telegraph vital info to the terrorists on our counterterrorism methods. If an attack is successful, the terrorists read between the lines of the DC blame game while savoring their win.

    And this doesn’t even include the intentional and unintentional leaks that occur in the spaces between the dots.

    • solvoreor

      Lets see, now, if I was a military strategist I would resolve the problem this way. Have someone else buy the SUV. Register it and park it. Mail the keys to the bomber then leave the country. The actual bomber would pick it up, use it, and while the government runs around trying to find the owner, the bomber leaves the country.

      If you can develop a solution infiltrate trained soldiers, then exfiltrate them, you don’t need to develop “BIG” plans. Soldiers understand a lot of little wounds would be more effective and not require suicide bombers. With the right plans they could stay in the country and execute multiple operations.

      And telling the world exactly how they were caught and what was done with them serves no American benefit.

  • http://www.freedoms-light.org faro

    You mean this isn’t just an isolated wacko? Really?

    Of course, I am being sarcastic. Its about time someone started connecting the dots. Every generation of Americans has been called to defend freedom and we are no different. Millions of people and a number of nations support a militant extremist ideology or at least symathize with it. After the 1993 attack on the WTC, Americans quickly forgot about it until 2001. I fear with the current crop of appeasers in leadership positions, we will not connect the dots until the puzzle is completed by our enemies and this time it won’t take eight years for them to return with a more advanced strategy.

  • solvoreor

    Well,
    If you can smuggle drugs, guns, and infiltrate people into the country you can smuggle a few stinger hand held anti-air missiles.

    If you can smuggle drugs, guns and infiltrate people, including bad guys into the country you can disable the power grid, disrupt gas and oil delivery, disable railroads, threaten air planes and inflict a lot of little wounds throughout middle America.

    Of course if you stop the infiltrations (illegal immigration) then everything else becomes harder and stopping the bleeding much easier

    The solution lies in the paradigm of Scalable local Activism. There is no way I will ever agree on everything with people in San Francisco (as one example). Nothing wrong with that. Unless they think they can dictate I live my life, or I try and dictate how they should liver theirs. Nothing wrong with being different. If the State of California wants to be a Safe Haven for terrorists (among other illegal aliens) that is their choice. As long as I don’t have to contribute tax dollars to support it. And I don’t think they should contribute tax dollars to support my state either. When did diversity mean that we had to become a homogenized country where every state, city and county has the same mall, the same schools, and the same thoughts?

    In other words. This is a big, diverse country. The proper place to resolve problems is at the smallest local level. The solution is to develop consensus from beneficiaries that scales up to include everyone that benefits. Safe neighborhoods is a great idea (SB1070 is the Support for our law enforcement and safe neighborhoods act) What we have here is a local initiative that has scaled up to a logical level. maybe a consortium of states in the region might choose to adopt similar measures and cooperate. Another increase in scale. But you can’t scale up something like this to the National level because there are too many conflicting interests. Which is why the Obama Administration with all their ideas is worse that incompetent, they are irrelevant. Worse for them better for us.

    WmCraig
    Solvo Reor