The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
How Did the Orlando Muslim Terrorist's Father Get Into U.S.?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Screenshot 2016-06-12 22.40.14As you may have noticed today, after years of ignoring the concept of “citizenism,” the mainstream media has suddenly converted en masse to citizenism of the most fundamentalist kind: the Orlando shooter was a U.S. citizen. What more do you need to know?

But, being a curious sort, I’m wondering how his father, Seddique Mir Mateen, got to the United States from Afghanistan so the terrorist could be born an anchor baby in New York in 1987.

The elder Mateen is reminiscent of Clock Boy’s dad, who was constantly running for president of Sudan while managing a chauffeur business in Texas. Seddique Mir Mateen, a Florida resident, recently announced on TV his candidacy for president of Afghanistan. Early accounts of his youtube speeches make him sound megalomaniacal. But on the other hand, some of his political accusations, such as that the real bad guys in the region are Pakistan’s ISI, strike me as not wholly delusional. I can’t tell yet whether he was always a complete loon or if at one point he might have seemed to somebody in Washington as the kind of potential Afghan politician it might be handy to have on ice in the U.S. in case of regime change in Kabul, the way lots of members of the Karzai family (that provided the new U.S. backed president of Afghanistan after 9/11) were running restaurants in the U.S. before 9/11.

The younger Mateen referenced the Tsarnaev Brothers of the Boston marathon bombing in his call to 9/11 and had earlier claimed to know them. I’m of course reminded of the unanswered question of how the Tsarnaevs (and their buddy Todashev) got certified as refugees. With the Tsarnaevs, it appears likely that their Uncle Ruslan, a Washington DC area lawyer working on pipeline issues, got some strings pulled, perhap when he was the son-in-law of CIA legend Graham Fuller and they were working on a Chechen resistance front together. The idea that Uncle Ruslan might one day wind up in an Independent Chechnya as the pro-American Energy Minister seems like a not implausible contingency plan.

But there never seems to be much interest in how these people wound up in the U.S. Apparently, it violates the spirit of the penumbra of the Zeroth Amendment to ask how various no-goodniks got here.

 
Hide 97 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. An American citizen murdered gay Hispanics. That is all you need to know. That is all you will be permitted to know.

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Mark2
    @Cwhatfuture

    It's amazing how many credulous idiots there are out there that actually believe in this 'logic.' Human stupidity truly knows no bounds.

  2. “How Did the Orlando Muslim Terrorist’s Father Get Into U.S.?”

    This is the question the MSM doesn’t want to ask. Specifically, I would like to know the visa Seddique Mir Mateen received to live in the US.

  3. I still don’t understand how the fact that these terrorists are often American citizens proves Trump wrong. Perhaps, I need to read more David Brooks and Max Boot articles about the joys and benefits of invading and inviting in the world.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @JohnnyD

    It doesn't. From Trump's statement:


    The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

    We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.
     

    One of the services Trump has provided during this campaign is to shoot holes in the media's elision of 2nd generation Muslim immigrants ("Frenchmen", "Belgians", a "Florida man", etc.) and connect the dots between importing Muslims from backward countries and some of their children becoming terrorists.

    Replies: @wren, @Bugg, @Pittsburgh Thatcherite

  4. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    Steve, are you questioning birth-right citizenship? Are you crazy?

  5. Whenever the subject of second gen immigrants comes up, you need to recall the big UCLA(?) study that showed Hispanics regressing in their most recent generqtions. They are not assimilating. This dude didnt.

  6. A drag queen in Orlando claims Omar Mateen was his friend and that he was not a Homophobe.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/12/drag-queen-orlando-gunman-omar-mateen-was-my-friend.html

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jefferson


    Mateen was a few years out of playing football in high school while King, who is openly gay, had long, flowing extensions, and prettier hair than most of his female co-workers.
     
    Not the time to be tooting your own delusional narcissist horn, King.

    The Mateen stuff could be true. That's the thing with Islam - you can never know if or when your moderate Muslim friend or co-worker will catch the jihad bug.
    , @Anonymous
    @Jefferson

    Afghanistan is the gayest country in the world and, regardless of his birthplace, Mateen was an Afghan. He must have been tempted by the gay lifestyle, if not covertly engaged in it. However, by killing infidels and being killed in turn, all his sins would be forgiven and he would get to enjoy Muslim heaven, where "pearly boys" would be at his disposal.

    Replies: @Cato

  7. @JohnnyD
    I still don't understand how the fact that these terrorists are often American citizens proves Trump wrong. Perhaps, I need to read more David Brooks and Max Boot articles about the joys and benefits of invading and inviting in the world.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    It doesn’t. From Trump’s statement:

    The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

    We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.

    One of the services Trump has provided during this campaign is to shoot holes in the media’s elision of 2nd generation Muslim immigrants (“Frenchmen”, “Belgians”, a “Florida man”, etc.) and connect the dots between importing Muslims from backward countries and some of their children becoming terrorists.

    • Replies: @wren
    @Dave Pinsen

    Listening to NPR today, I couldn't decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.

    They seemed almost happy about the fact that the killer was born in the US, thus proving how stupid Trump is.

    It was frustrating to listen to them.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Frau Katze

    , @Bugg
    @Dave Pinsen

    The MSM couldn't say enough that Mateen was a "Florida man" and "US citizen". As with Uncle Ruslan and the Tsarnaevs, hard to believe any Afghan emigrated to the US at the height of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, unless such a man was involved with the CIA.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Altai

    , @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    @Dave Pinsen

    Permitting the immigration of large numbers of high-risk/low-reward immigrants is catastrophic for a nation.

    Profiling is necessary.

    But it is politically impossible for a government to profile immigrants, especially according to their ethnicity.

    How can a government implement profiling of immigrants without inciting controversy?

    Immigration insurance.

    Immigrants should be required to purchase immigration insurance before they enter a nation.

    Immigration insurance will pay for any prisons, healthcare or schools used by an immigrant or his children.

    The government does not determine the price of an immigrant’s insurance.

    An insurance company of the immigrant’s choice determines the price of an immigrant’s insurance.

    Therefore, a government can avoid accusations of discrimination, while discreetly preventing the immigration of high-risk/low-reward immigrants, by making such immigration prohibitively expensive.

  8. @Dave Pinsen
    @JohnnyD

    It doesn't. From Trump's statement:


    The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

    We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.
     

    One of the services Trump has provided during this campaign is to shoot holes in the media's elision of 2nd generation Muslim immigrants ("Frenchmen", "Belgians", a "Florida man", etc.) and connect the dots between importing Muslims from backward countries and some of their children becoming terrorists.

    Replies: @wren, @Bugg, @Pittsburgh Thatcherite

    Listening to NPR today, I couldn’t decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.

    They seemed almost happy about the fact that the killer was born in the US, thus proving how stupid Trump is.

    It was frustrating to listen to them.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @wren


    Listening to NPR today, I couldn’t decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.
     
    They believe it, but belief is prior to reason and fact.

    For change to happen, either an awakening is necessary, or new hosts.
    , @Frau Katze
    @wren

    That he was a US citizen doesn't change the fact that his parents WEREN'T.

    If Muslims were excluded now, there would still be some of this type of thing. But if they aren't excluded, there will be even more of it.

    Some fraction of Muslims are violent whack jobs. The more Muslims in the population, the more violence there'll be. It's just simple arithmetic.

    And don't overlook homegrown violent whack jobs converting to Islam (it's extremely easy to convert).

    Not sure how the number of converts relates to the number of Muslims, but there might be some connection.

  9. I was glad to read the European and Australian LGBT groups coming out and saying that this wasn’t a Muslim Thing.

    I mean, not like that awful horrible terrible Hate Cake was a Christian Thing.

    The one in whatever southern state that was. The cake that never existed. But was supposed to have existed in some other Platonic dimension, and thus its non-existence was a hate crime.

    Not the pretend one in Austin. The cake that actually existed but wasn’t really a Hate Cake, but was.

    So far I’m seeing less queer anger at a Muzzie who slaughters dozens of queers in cold blood than at a couple people who wouldn’t bake a cake. Think HRC (the group, not the candidate) will sue ISIS?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Olorin

    "So far I’m seeing less queer anger at a Muzzie who slaughters dozens of queers in cold blood than at a couple people who wouldn’t bake a cake. Think HRC (the group, not the candidate) will sue ISIS?"

    You won't find any sympathy for Muzzies among The Log Cabin Republicans and The Pink Pistols.

    Replies: @Olorin

  10. Being an American citizen doesn’t mean anything anymore. The government can kill you three ways to Sunday for practically any reason.

  11. Well, if you are serious about running for President of Afghanistan, only a pro-Taliban candidate is assured of getting a majority of the votes in a truly open election. So that’s the default platform. Can’t say I blame Mateen père.

    Much as I love our men in Kabul, Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai, let’s face it, they’re puppets who rig elections in their own favor…

    But Sailer does put a welcome spotlight on various creeps and oddities who land up on our shores and gain residence rights, thanks to the old blue-blood foreign policy influence network in Washington that goes all the way back to the years of the Dulles brothers. We accept for residence whomever they nominate, for favors they owe to these sundry foreigners as a result of their Great Game adventures.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    It seems like a colorful topic -- people washed up in America by the Kiplingesque Great Game in Afghanistan -- but few others seem interested in it.

    Replies: @Je Suis Charlie Martel, @Ivy, @Neil Templeton

    , @Mr. Anon
    @PiltdownMan

    My understanding is that the Taliban, unlike many of the factions that the US government supports, also opposed the rampant practice of pederasty in Afghanistan and actually took action against it.

    Replies: @gruff

  12. @PiltdownMan
    Well, if you are serious about running for President of Afghanistan, only a pro-Taliban candidate is assured of getting a majority of the votes in a truly open election. So that's the default platform. Can't say I blame Mateen père.

    Much as I love our men in Kabul, Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai, let's face it, they're puppets who rig elections in their own favor...

    But Sailer does put a welcome spotlight on various creeps and oddities who land up on our shores and gain residence rights, thanks to the old blue-blood foreign policy influence network in Washington that goes all the way back to the years of the Dulles brothers. We accept for residence whomever they nominate, for favors they owe to these sundry foreigners as a result of their Great Game adventures.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Mr. Anon

    It seems like a colorful topic — people washed up in America by the Kiplingesque Great Game in Afghanistan — but few others seem interested in it.

    • Replies: @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    @Steve Sailer

    I remember one summer I worked in a restaurant in Georgetown, DC, just down the hill from the Russian Embassy while I edited a book, 1998 maybe...
    One night I met this guy, "Yestekow" at a bar. Huge guy from Kazakhstan. I kept his business card for years because he was such a character. It had a picture of an AK 47 on it and his name. He claimed to sell guns and work for the US government in Central Asia supporting rebels etc. I remember thinking, "What is up with this guy? why is he in Georgetown?"
    I also met a younger Muslim guy at the same dive bar, and I saw him all over Georgetown working various low wage jobs... we became acquaintances and he invited me to a party one weekend. Ended up at this ridiculously posh house down by the Potomac, with all these "Eurotrash" GWU students and international "beautiful people"... It was like nothing I had ever seen. How did this bagger at the Dean & DeLuca know these people so well? Definitely a colorful topic

    , @Ivy
    @Steve Sailer

    Give it time, sadly. There will be more repercussions from our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    , @Neil Templeton
    @Steve Sailer

    Must be tough for an immigrant operative, perhaps highly intelligent, who left a position of some importance to come to America, and then be thought an idiot because of his cultural instincts and because he can't speak the language. I think it likely that America rewards a different array of genetic and cultural traits than would be selected in Afghanistan.

  13. @Olorin
    I was glad to read the European and Australian LGBT groups coming out and saying that this wasn't a Muslim Thing.

    I mean, not like that awful horrible terrible Hate Cake was a Christian Thing.

    The one in whatever southern state that was. The cake that never existed. But was supposed to have existed in some other Platonic dimension, and thus its non-existence was a hate crime.

    Not the pretend one in Austin. The cake that actually existed but wasn't really a Hate Cake, but was.

    So far I'm seeing less queer anger at a Muzzie who slaughters dozens of queers in cold blood than at a couple people who wouldn't bake a cake. Think HRC (the group, not the candidate) will sue ISIS?

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “So far I’m seeing less queer anger at a Muzzie who slaughters dozens of queers in cold blood than at a couple people who wouldn’t bake a cake. Think HRC (the group, not the candidate) will sue ISIS?”

    You won’t find any sympathy for Muzzies among The Log Cabin Republicans and The Pink Pistols.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    @Jefferson

    Just last night Chez Olorin we were kicking around whether Pink Pistols still existed.

    Hereabouts it was mostly an online/Yahoo Groups thing. Do you see activity still in your part of the world?

    Replies: @Marty

  14. He actually was born on November 16, 1986. He would have been an “anchor baby,” properly speaking, only if his parents lacked green cards, when he was born, which I have yet to see stated, or even implied. Resident aliens with valid green cards do not need an “anchor baby” to remain legally in the United States.

    • Replies: @Grand Vizier
    @D. K.

    Correct, but only if the green card holder behaves. They do not have to renew his greencard if he is seen as unwanted. A citizenship in the family strenghtens their claim to live in the US.

    Replies: @D. K.

  15. I thought there was potential for liberals to be more reflective on this because the victims were LGBT persons of color. It’s hard to demagogue a group of Hispanic gays as evil racist bigots who created terrorism with their Islamophobia.

    Like, why not propose screening of immigrants for homophobia? “Oh, you’re part of a mosque that calls for stoning of gays? Sorry, you can’t come here.”

    Such a policy could help screen out the most backward cultures from immigrating here while remaining under the banner of enlightened progressivism.

    • Replies: @Travis
    @Das

    just ban all muslims from obtaining residency. Give preference to Christians, as we gave preference to Jews from the USSR.

  16. Why is it that every single terrorist involved in an attack is familiar to the FBI? I mean, everybody and his dog knew the Tsarnaev Brothers, this Mateen guy, the Bataclan shooters, etc.
    You would expect that it would be safer for a terrorist cell to use undetected agents for their attacks.
    Pretty fishy, if you ask me.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @BB753

    It's not at all strange, given our current system. Guys like Mateen don't just wake up one day with sudden jihad syndrome. They usually have been denouncing America, gays, women, Jews, etc. to their co-workers and anyone else who will listen for years. They are not smart enough to hide their true intentions. Eventually this gets them on the radar of the FBI or the local police.

    The problem is what happens next. The 1st Amendment provides broad protection for speech. Unless you say that you planning to go downtown and shoot up a gay club right now, saying almost anything else is not a crime. This is especially true for guys like Mateen who are American citizens and can't be deported. The FBI is just ass covering - they show up at the guy's house, they ask him, "are you planning any violent actions in the near future?", he says nope and they rubber stamp the investigation as case closed.

    Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting. Abdul befriends Omar at the gym and suggests that they shoot up a gay club/synagogue/military installation together. Next thing you know, Omar is on tape and is doing 40 to life.

    Replies: @BB753, @Frau Katze, @EdwardM

    , @tbraton
    @BB753

    You failed to mention the 9/11 hijackers, who were immediately identified as "Al Qaeda" members.

  17. The wages of empire is refuse.

  18. @Dave Pinsen
    @JohnnyD

    It doesn't. From Trump's statement:


    The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

    We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.
     

    One of the services Trump has provided during this campaign is to shoot holes in the media's elision of 2nd generation Muslim immigrants ("Frenchmen", "Belgians", a "Florida man", etc.) and connect the dots between importing Muslims from backward countries and some of their children becoming terrorists.

    Replies: @wren, @Bugg, @Pittsburgh Thatcherite

    The MSM couldn’t say enough that Mateen was a “Florida man” and “US citizen”. As with Uncle Ruslan and the Tsarnaevs, hard to believe any Afghan emigrated to the US at the height of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, unless such a man was involved with the CIA.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Bugg

    "The MSM couldn’t say enough that Mateen was a “Florida man” and “US citizen”."

    George Zimmerman was never described by the mainstream media as a Florida man and a U.S citizen.

    , @Altai
    @Bugg

    Florida Man...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc-lA-S9qkA

  19. @Bugg
    @Dave Pinsen

    The MSM couldn't say enough that Mateen was a "Florida man" and "US citizen". As with Uncle Ruslan and the Tsarnaevs, hard to believe any Afghan emigrated to the US at the height of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, unless such a man was involved with the CIA.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Altai

    “The MSM couldn’t say enough that Mateen was a “Florida man” and “US citizen”.”

    George Zimmerman was never described by the mainstream media as a Florida man and a U.S citizen.

  20. The elder Mateen is reminiscent of Clock Boy’s dad, who was constantly running for president of Sudan while managing a chauffeur business in Texas.

    Cool gun, Omar. Want to bring it to the White House?

  21. What did the FBI know? Why was his file “retired?” Did he get his firearms permit prior to or after the FBI “retired” his file? Did he undergo a background check by his employer? Anyone know?

  22. Looks like another Muslim immigrant “contribution” to America. Maybe Obama will award him the Medal of Freedom or something?

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-praises-muslim-immigrants-for-helping-build-america/article/2533526

  23. Fat chance on figuring out how this nudnik got into the country, America hasn’t sufficiently explained how their President got in the country. These folks who got here by dubious means are almost as frightened of Trump as Hillary is.
    Hillary-Leavenworth 2016, perfect running mates.

  24. Based on the accounts I have read, Mateen drove 120 miles from his home in Port Lucie to Orlando. How did he choose that particular nightclub as his target? Was he familiar with Orlando? Was he familiar with that club? I suppose it’s possible he just picked out the biggest, gayest looking venue from the internet.

    I would also note that Chechen thug Ibragim Todashev, the bomb-brothers associate who was killed under (what appeared to me to be) suspicious circumstances lived (and died) in Orlando.

    • Replies: @Thea
    @Mr. Anon

    Port St Lucie doesn't have any large gay bars. West Palm Beach does. It is a shorter drive so Orlando is quite an interesting location. Perhaps he had a helper in the Orlando neighborhood.

  25. @PiltdownMan
    Well, if you are serious about running for President of Afghanistan, only a pro-Taliban candidate is assured of getting a majority of the votes in a truly open election. So that's the default platform. Can't say I blame Mateen père.

    Much as I love our men in Kabul, Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai, let's face it, they're puppets who rig elections in their own favor...

    But Sailer does put a welcome spotlight on various creeps and oddities who land up on our shores and gain residence rights, thanks to the old blue-blood foreign policy influence network in Washington that goes all the way back to the years of the Dulles brothers. We accept for residence whomever they nominate, for favors they owe to these sundry foreigners as a result of their Great Game adventures.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Mr. Anon

    My understanding is that the Taliban, unlike many of the factions that the US government supports, also opposed the rampant practice of pederasty in Afghanistan and actually took action against it.

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Mr. Anon

    The Taliban also cut heroin production down drastically. Right after we invaded it shot back up again.

  26. @Das
    I thought there was potential for liberals to be more reflective on this because the victims were LGBT persons of color. It's hard to demagogue a group of Hispanic gays as evil racist bigots who created terrorism with their Islamophobia.

    Like, why not propose screening of immigrants for homophobia? "Oh, you're part of a mosque that calls for stoning of gays? Sorry, you can't come here."

    Such a policy could help screen out the most backward cultures from immigrating here while remaining under the banner of enlightened progressivism.

    Replies: @Travis

    just ban all muslims from obtaining residency. Give preference to Christians, as we gave preference to Jews from the USSR.

  27. @BB753
    Why is it that every single terrorist involved in an attack is familiar to the FBI? I mean, everybody and his dog knew the Tsarnaev Brothers, this Mateen guy, the Bataclan shooters, etc.
    You would expect that it would be safer for a terrorist cell to use undetected agents for their attacks.
    Pretty fishy, if you ask me.

    Replies: @Jack D, @tbraton

    It’s not at all strange, given our current system. Guys like Mateen don’t just wake up one day with sudden jihad syndrome. They usually have been denouncing America, gays, women, Jews, etc. to their co-workers and anyone else who will listen for years. They are not smart enough to hide their true intentions. Eventually this gets them on the radar of the FBI or the local police.

    The problem is what happens next. The 1st Amendment provides broad protection for speech. Unless you say that you planning to go downtown and shoot up a gay club right now, saying almost anything else is not a crime. This is especially true for guys like Mateen who are American citizens and can’t be deported. The FBI is just ass covering – they show up at the guy’s house, they ask him, “are you planning any violent actions in the near future?”, he says nope and they rubber stamp the investigation as case closed.

    Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting. Abdul befriends Omar at the gym and suggests that they shoot up a gay club/synagogue/military installation together. Next thing you know, Omar is on tape and is doing 40 to life.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Jack D

    Some first amendment.. Do you think Dylan Roof for instance would have kept a job for long if he had been complaining about Blacks in the workplace? But Mateen could freely talk jihad non-stop for years.

    As for the FBI being hand-tied.. Couldn't they at least have kept a close watch upon Mateen or are there too many jihad nuts to keep track of? Now you're gonna say the FBI is understaffed.

    Also, you'd think Mateen would have set an alarm ring in the FBI headquarters when he legally purchased a AR15..It didn't happen either. Why?

    As for undercover stings, I find them unworthy of a serious organisation and borderline illegal.
    If the FBI can't prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Replies: @Jack D, @E. Rekshun, @Ace

    , @Frau Katze
    @Jack D

    There are too many "questionable" Muslims for that to be feasible. It's too expensive.

    Plus the Muslims are already angry over sting operations.

    If this guy had been put away for years no one would know what he WOULD have done.

    It's not like we can predict an alternative future for the ones locked up. They're just assumed by Muslims to be good guys.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Corvinus

    , @EdwardM
    @Jack D

    In James Comey's speech this morning, he mentioned that as part of the year-long investigation when the shooter originally came to the FBI's attention, the Bureau conducted surveillance, monitored his communications, and "introduced him to a confidential source" (or words to that effect). Maybe he didn't bite, or who knows.

    We need to acknowledge that, even if we destroyed all elements of radical Islam overseas (impossible), ended dependence on oil so that every Arab Muslim country ended up like Yemen or Jordan at best (decades away), and blocked all Muslims from entering the U.S. (not going to happen), it would still take generations to purge the threat. It's not practical to surveil every crazy-sounding Muslim nor to install airport-like security in every public place (though I fear that the latter is coming).

    The only action we can take to reduce the risk of such attacks is to carry more guns. Every private property owner should abandon its "gun free zone" mandate and every person should consider carrying. Some don't want to, fine, but if there were a handful of the 300 people in the club who were packing their guns and knew how to use them, then the death toll would have been much less and the deterrent affect much higher. Let's see a Muslim try this in a honkey-tonk night club in Texas or Wyoming; it wouldn't last long.

  28. Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting.

    These are quite expensive in terms of time and resources, especially evidentiary and prosecutorial, and if the Feds went after every loudmouth braggart, they would be completely tied down and unable to do their regular work.

  29. @Bugg
    @Dave Pinsen

    The MSM couldn't say enough that Mateen was a "Florida man" and "US citizen". As with Uncle Ruslan and the Tsarnaevs, hard to believe any Afghan emigrated to the US at the height of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, unless such a man was involved with the CIA.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @Altai

    Florida Man…

  30. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jefferson
    A drag queen in Orlando claims Omar Mateen was his friend and that he was not a Homophobe.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/12/drag-queen-orlando-gunman-omar-mateen-was-my-friend.html

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    Mateen was a few years out of playing football in high school while King, who is openly gay, had long, flowing extensions, and prettier hair than most of his female co-workers.

    Not the time to be tooting your own delusional narcissist horn, King.

    The Mateen stuff could be true. That’s the thing with Islam – you can never know if or when your moderate Muslim friend or co-worker will catch the jihad bug.

  31. Jack, problem is that the defense lawyers always claim that it was a set-up and their client is too naïve or simple minded to have actually planned a terroristic attack. I find it startling that Mateen, an Afghan , claims he knew the Tsarnaevs, who are/were Chechens. When did that happen? No big flag there.

  32. I wonder how much the FBI and CIA have paid Seddique Mir Mateen and Omar Matten over the years for “intel”?

  33. @wren
    @Dave Pinsen

    Listening to NPR today, I couldn't decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.

    They seemed almost happy about the fact that the killer was born in the US, thus proving how stupid Trump is.

    It was frustrating to listen to them.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Frau Katze

    Listening to NPR today, I couldn’t decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.

    They believe it, but belief is prior to reason and fact.

    For change to happen, either an awakening is necessary, or new hosts.

  34. @Dave Pinsen
    @JohnnyD

    It doesn't. From Trump's statement:


    The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

    We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.
     

    One of the services Trump has provided during this campaign is to shoot holes in the media's elision of 2nd generation Muslim immigrants ("Frenchmen", "Belgians", a "Florida man", etc.) and connect the dots between importing Muslims from backward countries and some of their children becoming terrorists.

    Replies: @wren, @Bugg, @Pittsburgh Thatcherite

    Permitting the immigration of large numbers of high-risk/low-reward immigrants is catastrophic for a nation.

    Profiling is necessary.

    But it is politically impossible for a government to profile immigrants, especially according to their ethnicity.

    How can a government implement profiling of immigrants without inciting controversy?

    Immigration insurance.

    Immigrants should be required to purchase immigration insurance before they enter a nation.

    Immigration insurance will pay for any prisons, healthcare or schools used by an immigrant or his children.

    The government does not determine the price of an immigrant’s insurance.

    An insurance company of the immigrant’s choice determines the price of an immigrant’s insurance.

    Therefore, a government can avoid accusations of discrimination, while discreetly preventing the immigration of high-risk/low-reward immigrants, by making such immigration prohibitively expensive.

  35. @wren
    @Dave Pinsen

    Listening to NPR today, I couldn't decide if the hosts actually believed what they were saying.

    They seemed almost happy about the fact that the killer was born in the US, thus proving how stupid Trump is.

    It was frustrating to listen to them.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Frau Katze

    That he was a US citizen doesn’t change the fact that his parents WEREN’T.

    If Muslims were excluded now, there would still be some of this type of thing. But if they aren’t excluded, there will be even more of it.

    Some fraction of Muslims are violent whack jobs. The more Muslims in the population, the more violence there’ll be. It’s just simple arithmetic.

    And don’t overlook homegrown violent whack jobs converting to Islam (it’s extremely easy to convert).

    Not sure how the number of converts relates to the number of Muslims, but there might be some connection.

  36. Today, June 13, 2016, the MSM has dropped any reference to terror and describes the jihad attack as Orlando massacre or Orlando mass shooting. The Orwellian methods of the MSM on behalf of Obama are disgusting.

    • Agree: Travis
  37. @Jack D
    @BB753

    It's not at all strange, given our current system. Guys like Mateen don't just wake up one day with sudden jihad syndrome. They usually have been denouncing America, gays, women, Jews, etc. to their co-workers and anyone else who will listen for years. They are not smart enough to hide their true intentions. Eventually this gets them on the radar of the FBI or the local police.

    The problem is what happens next. The 1st Amendment provides broad protection for speech. Unless you say that you planning to go downtown and shoot up a gay club right now, saying almost anything else is not a crime. This is especially true for guys like Mateen who are American citizens and can't be deported. The FBI is just ass covering - they show up at the guy's house, they ask him, "are you planning any violent actions in the near future?", he says nope and they rubber stamp the investigation as case closed.

    Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting. Abdul befriends Omar at the gym and suggests that they shoot up a gay club/synagogue/military installation together. Next thing you know, Omar is on tape and is doing 40 to life.

    Replies: @BB753, @Frau Katze, @EdwardM

    Some first amendment.. Do you think Dylan Roof for instance would have kept a job for long if he had been complaining about Blacks in the workplace? But Mateen could freely talk jihad non-stop for years.

    As for the FBI being hand-tied.. Couldn’t they at least have kept a close watch upon Mateen or are there too many jihad nuts to keep track of? Now you’re gonna say the FBI is understaffed.

    Also, you’d think Mateen would have set an alarm ring in the FBI headquarters when he legally purchased a AR15..It didn’t happen either. Why?

    As for undercover stings, I find them unworthy of a serious organisation and borderline illegal.
    If the FBI can’t prevent crime, what is it good for?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @BB753

    The US not being E. Germany, there will never be enough FBI agents to follow every guy like Mateen around 24/7. They would have had to follow him for years or maybe forever. Sting operations are a well proven law enforcement technique. The law is very clear on what does/does not constitute entrapment. People who are truly innocent are not interested in doing jihad no matter what. If an FBI informer asked me to do jihad (or spy for Israel or whatever) I would tell him to f_ck off in 10 seconds flat and call the FBI on him even if I thought he was my best buddy.

    Replies: @BB753

    , @E. Rekshun
    @BB753

    If the FBI can’t prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Neither the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, USCS, Army/Navy/Air Force Intelligence, or dozens of other government and government contractor intelligence agencies prevented,or even had a clue, about 9/11. Yea, so what are they good for? But they got more staffing and funding.

    Replies: @candid_observer, @Jim Don Bob

    , @Ace
    @BB753

    They serve as security monitors.

  38. @Jack D
    @BB753

    It's not at all strange, given our current system. Guys like Mateen don't just wake up one day with sudden jihad syndrome. They usually have been denouncing America, gays, women, Jews, etc. to their co-workers and anyone else who will listen for years. They are not smart enough to hide their true intentions. Eventually this gets them on the radar of the FBI or the local police.

    The problem is what happens next. The 1st Amendment provides broad protection for speech. Unless you say that you planning to go downtown and shoot up a gay club right now, saying almost anything else is not a crime. This is especially true for guys like Mateen who are American citizens and can't be deported. The FBI is just ass covering - they show up at the guy's house, they ask him, "are you planning any violent actions in the near future?", he says nope and they rubber stamp the investigation as case closed.

    Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting. Abdul befriends Omar at the gym and suggests that they shoot up a gay club/synagogue/military installation together. Next thing you know, Omar is on tape and is doing 40 to life.

    Replies: @BB753, @Frau Katze, @EdwardM

    There are too many “questionable” Muslims for that to be feasible. It’s too expensive.

    Plus the Muslims are already angry over sting operations.

    If this guy had been put away for years no one would know what he WOULD have done.

    It’s not like we can predict an alternative future for the ones locked up. They’re just assumed by Muslims to be good guys.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Frau Katze

    You've just made a list of things that have to change. How expensive is it to have 50 people dead and another 50 gravely injured?

    If Muslims are angry over stings, this must mean we need more of them.

    Of course you can't prove what DIDN'T happen, but given that Mateen was born here, the only way to make our streets safe once he was afflicted with jihad syndrome would have been to lock him up for a really long time. Leaving him free was the wrong choice. Jihad syndrome appears to be an incurable disease. A lot of the guys we let out of Guantanamo are back on the battlefield killing Americans. It was insane to let any of them go except for the cases of proven mistaken identity.

    , @Corvinus
    @Frau Katze

    "There are too many “questionable” Muslims for that to be feasible. It’s too expensive."

    Please estimate for the viewing audience how many "questionable Muslims" are in the United States. Then offer exactly your criteria for "questionable". How do you arrive at that conclusion?

    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    But, of course, the Coalition of the Right and the Coalition of the Left will push their own narrative, as seen by the spike in anti-Muslim and anti-gun rants on the Internet.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Frau Katze

  39. @Cwhatfuture
    An American citizen murdered gay Hispanics. That is all you need to know. That is all you will be permitted to know.

    Replies: @Mark2

    It’s amazing how many credulous idiots there are out there that actually believe in this ‘logic.’ Human stupidity truly knows no bounds.

  40. 1. Not White

    2. Anti-Western

    3. Contributes to the destruction of white people and cultures.

    4-1000: see 1,2, and 3.

  41. @Frau Katze
    @Jack D

    There are too many "questionable" Muslims for that to be feasible. It's too expensive.

    Plus the Muslims are already angry over sting operations.

    If this guy had been put away for years no one would know what he WOULD have done.

    It's not like we can predict an alternative future for the ones locked up. They're just assumed by Muslims to be good guys.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Corvinus

    You’ve just made a list of things that have to change. How expensive is it to have 50 people dead and another 50 gravely injured?

    If Muslims are angry over stings, this must mean we need more of them.

    Of course you can’t prove what DIDN’T happen, but given that Mateen was born here, the only way to make our streets safe once he was afflicted with jihad syndrome would have been to lock him up for a really long time. Leaving him free was the wrong choice. Jihad syndrome appears to be an incurable disease. A lot of the guys we let out of Guantanamo are back on the battlefield killing Americans. It was insane to let any of them go except for the cases of proven mistaken identity.

  42. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jefferson
    A drag queen in Orlando claims Omar Mateen was his friend and that he was not a Homophobe.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/12/drag-queen-orlando-gunman-omar-mateen-was-my-friend.html

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    Afghanistan is the gayest country in the world and, regardless of his birthplace, Mateen was an Afghan. He must have been tempted by the gay lifestyle, if not covertly engaged in it. However, by killing infidels and being killed in turn, all his sins would be forgiven and he would get to enjoy Muslim heaven, where “pearly boys” would be at his disposal.

    • Replies: @Cato
    @Anonymous

    A friend once told me that, in most of West Asia, "the shame is in being the goat." Nothing gay about these dudes. They spit on gays. But they are willing to use them sexually.

    Replies: @Randal

  43. @BB753
    @Jack D

    Some first amendment.. Do you think Dylan Roof for instance would have kept a job for long if he had been complaining about Blacks in the workplace? But Mateen could freely talk jihad non-stop for years.

    As for the FBI being hand-tied.. Couldn't they at least have kept a close watch upon Mateen or are there too many jihad nuts to keep track of? Now you're gonna say the FBI is understaffed.

    Also, you'd think Mateen would have set an alarm ring in the FBI headquarters when he legally purchased a AR15..It didn't happen either. Why?

    As for undercover stings, I find them unworthy of a serious organisation and borderline illegal.
    If the FBI can't prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Replies: @Jack D, @E. Rekshun, @Ace

    The US not being E. Germany, there will never be enough FBI agents to follow every guy like Mateen around 24/7. They would have had to follow him for years or maybe forever. Sting operations are a well proven law enforcement technique. The law is very clear on what does/does not constitute entrapment. People who are truly innocent are not interested in doing jihad no matter what. If an FBI informer asked me to do jihad (or spy for Israel or whatever) I would tell him to f_ck off in 10 seconds flat and call the FBI on him even if I thought he was my best buddy.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Jack D

    "The US not being E. Germany.."
    Really, what do you call the NSA? A beacon of freedom?
    BTW, in the 21th century you don't need two FBI agents in a van to follow a suspect. There are more sophisticated high-tech forms of surveillance I don't need to describe here.

  44. Probably goes back to the Reagan / Bush CIA mujahudeen Iran Reagan amnesty BS.

    I have feeling a lot of Muslim drug dealers slid in with the Reagan amnesty.

  45. I”m sure this will be covered in depth on the news. It seems his parents had something to do with our Afghanistan adventures and that’s how they wound up here. Foggy Bottom is always grooming a take-over elite for Country XWZ and Omar’s parents deserve at least a look-see from the press corpse.

    The internets aren’t what they used to be and it’s hard to find information. Example, I racked my brain as to why Hillary wanted Rajiv K. Fernando to have top security clearance and serve on that nuke board. Even they said, “Who is this guy?” Well, he just seems to have popped out of nowhere. In an interview he said he was born in Denmark, but how did he get here and become an DC insider?

    Omar Mateen is, born here or not, what I call imported terror. He didn’t come here yearning to be free or any of that other citizenism stuff. His parents came here to hang out with the Deep State, hoping to get a job running a State and had this angry, unAmerican, unwilling “citizen” anchor baby who would have felt more at home in Afghanistan.

    The underwear bomber had a Nigerian banking father and that’s how we got him. The Boston bombers, imported. And I can’t recall the others, but Obama is wrong to call this domestic terrorism when most of it is imported. Maybe, just maybe we should stop x-raying our own citizens, get the State Dept back on a leash, and be pickier about who we let in.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @YT Wurlitzer

    I'm not aware of any Gulen Cultist terrorism perpetrated in the U.S. by the pro-American Turkish government-in-waiting we have stored in the Poconos, but we do let the Gulenites rip off American taxpayers of several hundred million dollars per year by letting them run the largest charter school network in America. A few years ago, the FBI was raiding their schools and discovering financial hocuspocus, but I haven't heard anything about that in a couple of years. Presumably the CIA had a talk with the FBI ...

    , @wren
    @YT Wurlitzer

    You know, I think Obama may see something of himself in all these characters whose parents were invited over to the US for one reason or another, which is why he really doesn't want people considering it "imported terrorism," or even thinking about how or why their parents came over in the first place.

  46. Relax y’all. This latest shooting in Orlando – It’s all Russia’s fault. How? Let me explain. The deceased individual who perpetrated the shooting claimed as motivation both ISIS and homophobia. This from a descendant of a nation where pedophilia is favorably looked upon – bacha bazi anyone? Not a very plausible explanation.

    How does Russia fits in all this? Easy – Stockholm syndrome. When Russia invaded Afghanistan – it left traumatic genetically transferred traits on the future terrorist. Instead of siding with his own culture – which is supportive of gay relations – at least when it comes to young boys, he sided with the invader – Russia – which is one of the most homophobic countries in the world.

    Just ask Obama for his rationale why he didn’t go to the Sochi Olympics. Because he took offense on the part of LGBT community and their treatment in Russia. So there you go. It’s all Russia’s fault. Case closed.

  47. @BB753
    Why is it that every single terrorist involved in an attack is familiar to the FBI? I mean, everybody and his dog knew the Tsarnaev Brothers, this Mateen guy, the Bataclan shooters, etc.
    You would expect that it would be safer for a terrorist cell to use undetected agents for their attacks.
    Pretty fishy, if you ask me.

    Replies: @Jack D, @tbraton

    You failed to mention the 9/11 hijackers, who were immediately identified as “Al Qaeda” members.

  48. @Jack D
    @BB753

    The US not being E. Germany, there will never be enough FBI agents to follow every guy like Mateen around 24/7. They would have had to follow him for years or maybe forever. Sting operations are a well proven law enforcement technique. The law is very clear on what does/does not constitute entrapment. People who are truly innocent are not interested in doing jihad no matter what. If an FBI informer asked me to do jihad (or spy for Israel or whatever) I would tell him to f_ck off in 10 seconds flat and call the FBI on him even if I thought he was my best buddy.

    Replies: @BB753

    “The US not being E. Germany..”
    Really, what do you call the NSA? A beacon of freedom?
    BTW, in the 21th century you don’t need two FBI agents in a van to follow a suspect. There are more sophisticated high-tech forms of surveillance I don’t need to describe here.

  49. @Mr. Anon
    Based on the accounts I have read, Mateen drove 120 miles from his home in Port Lucie to Orlando. How did he choose that particular nightclub as his target? Was he familiar with Orlando? Was he familiar with that club? I suppose it's possible he just picked out the biggest, gayest looking venue from the internet.

    I would also note that Chechen thug Ibragim Todashev, the bomb-brothers associate who was killed under (what appeared to me to be) suspicious circumstances lived (and died) in Orlando.

    Replies: @Thea

    Port St Lucie doesn’t have any large gay bars. West Palm Beach does. It is a shorter drive so Orlando is quite an interesting location. Perhaps he had a helper in the Orlando neighborhood.

  50. Let’s give a little credit to Congressman “Good Time” Charlie Wilson, the late hard-drinking, coke-sniffing representative from Texas who not only managed to get Congress to appropriate huge sums to the mujahidin fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80’s (even lobbying for arming them with Stinger missiles) but managed to convince his coterie of divorced, moneyed, fast-living Texas babes to fall in love with the brave fighters of Afghanistan, even though none of them would have lasted a minute living in that blessed land with their lifestyle. Real deep thinkers all.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @tbraton

    Charlie Wilson's War (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472062/) is one of the few Tom Hanks movies I can stand. It's worth watching. Volunteers, before he got famous and became a libtard, is another. He should have been shot for Forrest Gump.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @tbraton

  51. @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    It seems like a colorful topic -- people washed up in America by the Kiplingesque Great Game in Afghanistan -- but few others seem interested in it.

    Replies: @Je Suis Charlie Martel, @Ivy, @Neil Templeton

    I remember one summer I worked in a restaurant in Georgetown, DC, just down the hill from the Russian Embassy while I edited a book, 1998 maybe…
    One night I met this guy, “Yestekow” at a bar. Huge guy from Kazakhstan. I kept his business card for years because he was such a character. It had a picture of an AK 47 on it and his name. He claimed to sell guns and work for the US government in Central Asia supporting rebels etc. I remember thinking, “What is up with this guy? why is he in Georgetown?”
    I also met a younger Muslim guy at the same dive bar, and I saw him all over Georgetown working various low wage jobs… we became acquaintances and he invited me to a party one weekend. Ended up at this ridiculously posh house down by the Potomac, with all these “Eurotrash” GWU students and international “beautiful people”… It was like nothing I had ever seen. How did this bagger at the Dean & DeLuca know these people so well? Definitely a colorful topic

  52. If we had a civics course kind of government, those who brought in families that either directly or via the next generation, caused violent crime (AT ALL) would be jailed even as those they resettled (in the USA) were deported…possibly from altitude depending on the crime involved.

    Of course, we don’t have that.

    From politicians and bureaucrats to the “resettlement agency” people they pay to plant land mines inside our borders, being held to account for their actions is laughably beyond the possible.

    For now.

    I’d like to see the fathers and brothers of people injured or killed by any “resettled” invaders (or their kids) use Resettlement Watch to identify those who placed those poisonous snakes in their midst…and use the INDIVIDUALS involved for target practice.

    Resettlement agencies might have trouble recruiting employees if someone finally notified them that their actions might have consequences….

  53. @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    It seems like a colorful topic -- people washed up in America by the Kiplingesque Great Game in Afghanistan -- but few others seem interested in it.

    Replies: @Je Suis Charlie Martel, @Ivy, @Neil Templeton

    Give it time, sadly. There will be more repercussions from our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  54. @BB753
    @Jack D

    Some first amendment.. Do you think Dylan Roof for instance would have kept a job for long if he had been complaining about Blacks in the workplace? But Mateen could freely talk jihad non-stop for years.

    As for the FBI being hand-tied.. Couldn't they at least have kept a close watch upon Mateen or are there too many jihad nuts to keep track of? Now you're gonna say the FBI is understaffed.

    Also, you'd think Mateen would have set an alarm ring in the FBI headquarters when he legally purchased a AR15..It didn't happen either. Why?

    As for undercover stings, I find them unworthy of a serious organisation and borderline illegal.
    If the FBI can't prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Replies: @Jack D, @E. Rekshun, @Ace

    If the FBI can’t prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Neither the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, USCS, Army/Navy/Air Force Intelligence, or dozens of other government and government contractor intelligence agencies prevented,or even had a clue, about 9/11. Yea, so what are they good for? But they got more staffing and funding.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @E. Rekshun

    My guess is that there is simply no good way to "predict" terrorism, in the sense that one can put together data and a model that would predict with good performance -- that is, with few Type I errors, and few Type II errors -- that a given individual would commit a terrorist act. Basically, any set of criteria that would finger a good proportion of terrorists (few Type I errors) would also include a great many individuals who are not going to become terrorists (many Type II errors), and any set of criteria that would infrequently include individuals who are not going to become terrorists (few Type II errors) would miss a very high proportion of actual terrorists (many Type I errors).

    That's just the way these things typically work out when a trait of interest (being a terrorist) is in fact quite rare.

    If you really want to prevent something like terrorism (i.e., few Type I errors), therefore, you pretty much have to cast a very wide net, and into that net many innocents will be caught (many Type II errors). That's the central dilemma here.

    But one very effective net is the use of "Muslim": at this point, twice as many people have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the US than by all other kinds of terrorists combined, and yet they constitute only 1-2% of the population. Of course, a "Muslim" net is still very broad in that the vast proportion of Muslims are not terrorists, and even if one becomes more selective, the great proportion of those still selected will not be terrorists.

    But to give up the information "Muslim" provides, one essentially has to give up any hope of preventing terrorism. Casting the net only wider, by including the 98% of the population who are not Muslims, renders the whole process entirely useless.

    It's definitely a political and moral problem to settle on an approach that can be applied to Muslims who are American citizens fairly. But effectively to exclude Muslims from immigration (where of course they have no rights with respect to entry) is quite another story -- though I think the better way by far is to do so not explicitly, but on the basis of the unstable countries from which they come.

    In short, not allowing most Muslims to immigrate is probably the single most effective thing we can do to fight terrorism.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Neil Templeton

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @E. Rekshun

    Head Start was shown to have no effect lasting beyond 2nd grade back in the 90s, so Congress doubled its budget. Because there is nothing wrong with the ideas, they just haven't been tried hard enough by the smart people. See Cuba, Cambodia, Venezuela, the US under Hillary for examples.

  55. @Jack D
    @BB753

    It's not at all strange, given our current system. Guys like Mateen don't just wake up one day with sudden jihad syndrome. They usually have been denouncing America, gays, women, Jews, etc. to their co-workers and anyone else who will listen for years. They are not smart enough to hide their true intentions. Eventually this gets them on the radar of the FBI or the local police.

    The problem is what happens next. The 1st Amendment provides broad protection for speech. Unless you say that you planning to go downtown and shoot up a gay club right now, saying almost anything else is not a crime. This is especially true for guys like Mateen who are American citizens and can't be deported. The FBI is just ass covering - they show up at the guy's house, they ask him, "are you planning any violent actions in the near future?", he says nope and they rubber stamp the investigation as case closed.

    Of course if they really cared, they would do something like an undercover sting. Abdul befriends Omar at the gym and suggests that they shoot up a gay club/synagogue/military installation together. Next thing you know, Omar is on tape and is doing 40 to life.

    Replies: @BB753, @Frau Katze, @EdwardM

    In James Comey’s speech this morning, he mentioned that as part of the year-long investigation when the shooter originally came to the FBI’s attention, the Bureau conducted surveillance, monitored his communications, and “introduced him to a confidential source” (or words to that effect). Maybe he didn’t bite, or who knows.

    We need to acknowledge that, even if we destroyed all elements of radical Islam overseas (impossible), ended dependence on oil so that every Arab Muslim country ended up like Yemen or Jordan at best (decades away), and blocked all Muslims from entering the U.S. (not going to happen), it would still take generations to purge the threat. It’s not practical to surveil every crazy-sounding Muslim nor to install airport-like security in every public place (though I fear that the latter is coming).

    The only action we can take to reduce the risk of such attacks is to carry more guns. Every private property owner should abandon its “gun free zone” mandate and every person should consider carrying. Some don’t want to, fine, but if there were a handful of the 300 people in the club who were packing their guns and knew how to use them, then the death toll would have been much less and the deterrent affect much higher. Let’s see a Muslim try this in a honkey-tonk night club in Texas or Wyoming; it wouldn’t last long.

  56. @YT Wurlitzer
    I"m sure this will be covered in depth on the news. It seems his parents had something to do with our Afghanistan adventures and that's how they wound up here. Foggy Bottom is always grooming a take-over elite for Country XWZ and Omar's parents deserve at least a look-see from the press corpse.

    The internets aren't what they used to be and it's hard to find information. Example, I racked my brain as to why Hillary wanted Rajiv K. Fernando to have top security clearance and serve on that nuke board. Even they said, "Who is this guy?" Well, he just seems to have popped out of nowhere. In an interview he said he was born in Denmark, but how did he get here and become an DC insider?

    Omar Mateen is, born here or not, what I call imported terror. He didn't come here yearning to be free or any of that other citizenism stuff. His parents came here to hang out with the Deep State, hoping to get a job running a State and had this angry, unAmerican, unwilling "citizen" anchor baby who would have felt more at home in Afghanistan.

    The underwear bomber had a Nigerian banking father and that's how we got him. The Boston bombers, imported. And I can't recall the others, but Obama is wrong to call this domestic terrorism when most of it is imported. Maybe, just maybe we should stop x-raying our own citizens, get the State Dept back on a leash, and be pickier about who we let in.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @wren

    I’m not aware of any Gulen Cultist terrorism perpetrated in the U.S. by the pro-American Turkish government-in-waiting we have stored in the Poconos, but we do let the Gulenites rip off American taxpayers of several hundred million dollars per year by letting them run the largest charter school network in America. A few years ago, the FBI was raiding their schools and discovering financial hocuspocus, but I haven’t heard anything about that in a couple of years. Presumably the CIA had a talk with the FBI …

  57. @YT Wurlitzer
    I"m sure this will be covered in depth on the news. It seems his parents had something to do with our Afghanistan adventures and that's how they wound up here. Foggy Bottom is always grooming a take-over elite for Country XWZ and Omar's parents deserve at least a look-see from the press corpse.

    The internets aren't what they used to be and it's hard to find information. Example, I racked my brain as to why Hillary wanted Rajiv K. Fernando to have top security clearance and serve on that nuke board. Even they said, "Who is this guy?" Well, he just seems to have popped out of nowhere. In an interview he said he was born in Denmark, but how did he get here and become an DC insider?

    Omar Mateen is, born here or not, what I call imported terror. He didn't come here yearning to be free or any of that other citizenism stuff. His parents came here to hang out with the Deep State, hoping to get a job running a State and had this angry, unAmerican, unwilling "citizen" anchor baby who would have felt more at home in Afghanistan.

    The underwear bomber had a Nigerian banking father and that's how we got him. The Boston bombers, imported. And I can't recall the others, but Obama is wrong to call this domestic terrorism when most of it is imported. Maybe, just maybe we should stop x-raying our own citizens, get the State Dept back on a leash, and be pickier about who we let in.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @wren

    You know, I think Obama may see something of himself in all these characters whose parents were invited over to the US for one reason or another, which is why he really doesn’t want people considering it “imported terrorism,” or even thinking about how or why their parents came over in the first place.

  58. @Frau Katze
    @Jack D

    There are too many "questionable" Muslims for that to be feasible. It's too expensive.

    Plus the Muslims are already angry over sting operations.

    If this guy had been put away for years no one would know what he WOULD have done.

    It's not like we can predict an alternative future for the ones locked up. They're just assumed by Muslims to be good guys.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Corvinus

    “There are too many “questionable” Muslims for that to be feasible. It’s too expensive.”

    Please estimate for the viewing audience how many “questionable Muslims” are in the United States. Then offer exactly your criteria for “questionable”. How do you arrive at that conclusion?

    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    But, of course, the Coalition of the Right and the Coalition of the Left will push their own narrative, as seen by the spike in anti-Muslim and anti-gun rants on the Internet.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Corvinus


    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
    Are agreeing with or criticizing what you call the “narrative”?

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Corvinus

    , @Frau Katze
    @Corvinus

    My comments were based on reading about the situation in Europe. There are about 3,000 Muslim extemists being monitored in the UK according to this link:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

    The population of the USA is about 5 times higher than the U.K. However, the fraction of the population that is Muslim is considerably higher in the U.K.

    I'm sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can't find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.

    So the USA likely could afford it, at the present time. But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels.

    Europeans are used to higher rates of taxation than Americans, so that counteracts the higher number of Muslims to some extent.

    Also, American Muslims, via their self-appointed guardians CAIR, have fought surveillance of mosques successfully. No law enforcement personnel can listen in on imams.

    The U.K. used to do that (watch certain mosques); I'm not sure if they still are. The extremists are blatant in the UK, or at least they used to be. I think there had been some success at the mosque level.

    CAIR have also complained about sting operations, but AFAIK this has come to nothing so far.

    I'm not a lawyer but I think that the European governments can do more surveillance without the same pushback that you see with groups like CAIR. The governments have a more authoritarian streak, they lack anything like your US Constitution.

    So, increased surveillance may be possible now. But if something isn't done to stop more Muslims from arriving, it will not stay that way.

    Another point: not all dangerous Muslims are obvious targets for surveillance, especially with groups like CAIR putting up every road block they can think of. Some are intelligent enough not to give themselves away.

    As an aside, Russia uses draconian techniques to keep their millions of Muslims under control. Mention sharia law and you'll be tossed in jail. Keep talking about it and you'll be dead.

    But give Russia a few more decades of high Muslim birth rates and well below replacement for the non-Muslims.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Corvinus

  59. @E. Rekshun
    @BB753

    If the FBI can’t prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Neither the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, USCS, Army/Navy/Air Force Intelligence, or dozens of other government and government contractor intelligence agencies prevented,or even had a clue, about 9/11. Yea, so what are they good for? But they got more staffing and funding.

    Replies: @candid_observer, @Jim Don Bob

    My guess is that there is simply no good way to “predict” terrorism, in the sense that one can put together data and a model that would predict with good performance — that is, with few Type I errors, and few Type II errors — that a given individual would commit a terrorist act. Basically, any set of criteria that would finger a good proportion of terrorists (few Type I errors) would also include a great many individuals who are not going to become terrorists (many Type II errors), and any set of criteria that would infrequently include individuals who are not going to become terrorists (few Type II errors) would miss a very high proportion of actual terrorists (many Type I errors).

    That’s just the way these things typically work out when a trait of interest (being a terrorist) is in fact quite rare.

    If you really want to prevent something like terrorism (i.e., few Type I errors), therefore, you pretty much have to cast a very wide net, and into that net many innocents will be caught (many Type II errors). That’s the central dilemma here.

    But one very effective net is the use of “Muslim”: at this point, twice as many people have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the US than by all other kinds of terrorists combined, and yet they constitute only 1-2% of the population. Of course, a “Muslim” net is still very broad in that the vast proportion of Muslims are not terrorists, and even if one becomes more selective, the great proportion of those still selected will not be terrorists.

    But to give up the information “Muslim” provides, one essentially has to give up any hope of preventing terrorism. Casting the net only wider, by including the 98% of the population who are not Muslims, renders the whole process entirely useless.

    It’s definitely a political and moral problem to settle on an approach that can be applied to Muslims who are American citizens fairly. But effectively to exclude Muslims from immigration (where of course they have no rights with respect to entry) is quite another story — though I think the better way by far is to do so not explicitly, but on the basis of the unstable countries from which they come.

    In short, not allowing most Muslims to immigrate is probably the single most effective thing we can do to fight terrorism.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @candid_observer

    To quote Homer Simpson, "Doh"!

    No offense meant candid_observer to your well said post.

    , @Neil Templeton
    @candid_observer

    The Recognition Problem is the bane of a low trust society.

  60. @Jefferson
    @Olorin

    "So far I’m seeing less queer anger at a Muzzie who slaughters dozens of queers in cold blood than at a couple people who wouldn’t bake a cake. Think HRC (the group, not the candidate) will sue ISIS?"

    You won't find any sympathy for Muzzies among The Log Cabin Republicans and The Pink Pistols.

    Replies: @Olorin

    Just last night Chez Olorin we were kicking around whether Pink Pistols still existed.

    Hereabouts it was mostly an online/Yahoo Groups thing. Do you see activity still in your part of the world?

    • Replies: @Marty
    @Olorin

    The other day in Marin County I saw a 70-ish lady wearing a "Second Amendment Sisters" t-shirt.

    Replies: @Olorin

  61. @tbraton
    Let's give a little credit to Congressman "Good Time" Charlie Wilson, the late hard-drinking, coke-sniffing representative from Texas who not only managed to get Congress to appropriate huge sums to the mujahidin fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80's (even lobbying for arming them with Stinger missiles) but managed to convince his coterie of divorced, moneyed, fast-living Texas babes to fall in love with the brave fighters of Afghanistan, even though none of them would have lasted a minute living in that blessed land with their lifestyle. Real deep thinkers all.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Charlie Wilson’s War (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472062/) is one of the few Tom Hanks movies I can stand. It’s worth watching. Volunteers, before he got famous and became a libtard, is another. He should have been shot for Forrest Gump.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Jim Don Bob

    Agree about the maximally irritating Forrest Gump.

    The Road to Perdition and Bridge of Spies are decent, if not great, Tom Hanks movies.

    , @tbraton
    @Jim Don Bob

    I read the book and then saw the movie. I thought the casting of good guy Tom Hanks as the womanizing, drinking and coke-sniffing Charlie Wilson was not Hollywood's best idea, unless the notion was to clean up Wilson's reputation. In fact, I thought it was the worst casting since Hanks was picked to lead the "Bonfire of the Vanities" as a "master of the universe." Actually, I thought the best actor in the Wilson movie was the late Philip Seymour Hoffman as Gust Avrakatos, the CIA guy who hooked up with Wilson. I am not a big fan of Mike Nichols, the director, but it's obvious that "Charlie Wilson's War was Hollywood's endorsement of our involvement with the mujahidin in Afghanistan against the Soviets. This was the same Hollywood known for its close association with communism and the standing ovation for Lillian Hellman at the 1977 Academy Awards followed by the snub of Elias Kazan, one of greatest movie directors, at the same Academy Awards more than 10 years later. Remember that our numbnut President labeled the War in Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history, as the "good war" in 2008 and acted accordingly as President. As far as I am concerned, we should have gotten out of Afghanistan as quickly as we got in, after the fiasco at Tora Bora, when Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan "allies" and secure his escape.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

  62. @E. Rekshun
    @BB753

    If the FBI can’t prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Neither the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, USCS, Army/Navy/Air Force Intelligence, or dozens of other government and government contractor intelligence agencies prevented,or even had a clue, about 9/11. Yea, so what are they good for? But they got more staffing and funding.

    Replies: @candid_observer, @Jim Don Bob

    Head Start was shown to have no effect lasting beyond 2nd grade back in the 90s, so Congress doubled its budget. Because there is nothing wrong with the ideas, they just haven’t been tried hard enough by the smart people. See Cuba, Cambodia, Venezuela, the US under Hillary for examples.

  63. @candid_observer
    @E. Rekshun

    My guess is that there is simply no good way to "predict" terrorism, in the sense that one can put together data and a model that would predict with good performance -- that is, with few Type I errors, and few Type II errors -- that a given individual would commit a terrorist act. Basically, any set of criteria that would finger a good proportion of terrorists (few Type I errors) would also include a great many individuals who are not going to become terrorists (many Type II errors), and any set of criteria that would infrequently include individuals who are not going to become terrorists (few Type II errors) would miss a very high proportion of actual terrorists (many Type I errors).

    That's just the way these things typically work out when a trait of interest (being a terrorist) is in fact quite rare.

    If you really want to prevent something like terrorism (i.e., few Type I errors), therefore, you pretty much have to cast a very wide net, and into that net many innocents will be caught (many Type II errors). That's the central dilemma here.

    But one very effective net is the use of "Muslim": at this point, twice as many people have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the US than by all other kinds of terrorists combined, and yet they constitute only 1-2% of the population. Of course, a "Muslim" net is still very broad in that the vast proportion of Muslims are not terrorists, and even if one becomes more selective, the great proportion of those still selected will not be terrorists.

    But to give up the information "Muslim" provides, one essentially has to give up any hope of preventing terrorism. Casting the net only wider, by including the 98% of the population who are not Muslims, renders the whole process entirely useless.

    It's definitely a political and moral problem to settle on an approach that can be applied to Muslims who are American citizens fairly. But effectively to exclude Muslims from immigration (where of course they have no rights with respect to entry) is quite another story -- though I think the better way by far is to do so not explicitly, but on the basis of the unstable countries from which they come.

    In short, not allowing most Muslims to immigrate is probably the single most effective thing we can do to fight terrorism.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Neil Templeton

    To quote Homer Simpson, “Doh”!

    No offense meant candid_observer to your well said post.

  64. @Jim Don Bob
    @tbraton

    Charlie Wilson's War (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472062/) is one of the few Tom Hanks movies I can stand. It's worth watching. Volunteers, before he got famous and became a libtard, is another. He should have been shot for Forrest Gump.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @tbraton

    Agree about the maximally irritating Forrest Gump.

    The Road to Perdition and Bridge of Spies are decent, if not great, Tom Hanks movies.

  65. @Jim Don Bob
    @tbraton

    Charlie Wilson's War (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472062/) is one of the few Tom Hanks movies I can stand. It's worth watching. Volunteers, before he got famous and became a libtard, is another. He should have been shot for Forrest Gump.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @tbraton

    I read the book and then saw the movie. I thought the casting of good guy Tom Hanks as the womanizing, drinking and coke-sniffing Charlie Wilson was not Hollywood’s best idea, unless the notion was to clean up Wilson’s reputation. In fact, I thought it was the worst casting since Hanks was picked to lead the “Bonfire of the Vanities” as a “master of the universe.” Actually, I thought the best actor in the Wilson movie was the late Philip Seymour Hoffman as Gust Avrakatos, the CIA guy who hooked up with Wilson. I am not a big fan of Mike Nichols, the director, but it’s obvious that “Charlie Wilson’s War was Hollywood’s endorsement of our involvement with the mujahidin in Afghanistan against the Soviets. This was the same Hollywood known for its close association with communism and the standing ovation for Lillian Hellman at the 1977 Academy Awards followed by the snub of Elias Kazan, one of greatest movie directors, at the same Academy Awards more than 10 years later. Remember that our numbnut President labeled the War in Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history, as the “good war” in 2008 and acted accordingly as President. As far as I am concerned, we should have gotten out of Afghanistan as quickly as we got in, after the fiasco at Tora Bora, when Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan “allies” and secure his escape.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @tbraton


    Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan “allies” and secure his escape.
     
    He didn't have to bribe our "allies", whoever they were at that point in time. We hadn't quite secured the premises and installed our government in Kabul before he fled over the mountains to his new sponsors in Pakistan, for who he was prime hidden collateral—the goose that laid the golden eggs of American foreign aid for them.

    They built him a safe house, actually a safe mansion, half a mile down the road from their elite officer academy and hid him. And we went on paying the Pakistanis billions in aid money to go on being our "ally" while we looked for him and to help us wage war against the Afghan Taliban—his simpleton tribal erstwhile hosts who had no particular beef with faraway America once he had left.

    But the Taliban had moved its headquarters to Quetta in Pakistan, since the Pakistanis were sponsoring them, too...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @tbraton

  66. Principal-Agent problem. State Department pros and other foreign policy agents face little exposure to loss as they trade away high value assets like US currency, military tech, access to US markets, and fast-track immigration to our country in exchange for low value resources like the promise of corrupt, tepid, and incompetent assistance in the War on Terror. Very little return on investment from the Principal’s POV, but quite interesting and lucrative for the Agents.

    This game has the added feature of extended play. Voter demand for national security, or a convenient substitute, is highly inelastic, making possible the serial abuse of taxpayers for generations.

  67. @Corvinus
    @Frau Katze

    "There are too many “questionable” Muslims for that to be feasible. It’s too expensive."

    Please estimate for the viewing audience how many "questionable Muslims" are in the United States. Then offer exactly your criteria for "questionable". How do you arrive at that conclusion?

    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    But, of course, the Coalition of the Right and the Coalition of the Left will push their own narrative, as seen by the spike in anti-Muslim and anti-gun rants on the Internet.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Frau Katze

    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Are agreeing with or criticizing what you call the “narrative”?

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    D'oh. I meant "Are you agreeing . . ."

    , @Corvinus
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I agree that it is radical Muslims attacking. I do not agree with this simplistic notion that guns = evil or Muslims = evil.

  68. @candid_observer
    @E. Rekshun

    My guess is that there is simply no good way to "predict" terrorism, in the sense that one can put together data and a model that would predict with good performance -- that is, with few Type I errors, and few Type II errors -- that a given individual would commit a terrorist act. Basically, any set of criteria that would finger a good proportion of terrorists (few Type I errors) would also include a great many individuals who are not going to become terrorists (many Type II errors), and any set of criteria that would infrequently include individuals who are not going to become terrorists (few Type II errors) would miss a very high proportion of actual terrorists (many Type I errors).

    That's just the way these things typically work out when a trait of interest (being a terrorist) is in fact quite rare.

    If you really want to prevent something like terrorism (i.e., few Type I errors), therefore, you pretty much have to cast a very wide net, and into that net many innocents will be caught (many Type II errors). That's the central dilemma here.

    But one very effective net is the use of "Muslim": at this point, twice as many people have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the US than by all other kinds of terrorists combined, and yet they constitute only 1-2% of the population. Of course, a "Muslim" net is still very broad in that the vast proportion of Muslims are not terrorists, and even if one becomes more selective, the great proportion of those still selected will not be terrorists.

    But to give up the information "Muslim" provides, one essentially has to give up any hope of preventing terrorism. Casting the net only wider, by including the 98% of the population who are not Muslims, renders the whole process entirely useless.

    It's definitely a political and moral problem to settle on an approach that can be applied to Muslims who are American citizens fairly. But effectively to exclude Muslims from immigration (where of course they have no rights with respect to entry) is quite another story -- though I think the better way by far is to do so not explicitly, but on the basis of the unstable countries from which they come.

    In short, not allowing most Muslims to immigrate is probably the single most effective thing we can do to fight terrorism.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Neil Templeton

    The Recognition Problem is the bane of a low trust society.

  69. @Corvinus
    @Frau Katze

    "There are too many “questionable” Muslims for that to be feasible. It’s too expensive."

    Please estimate for the viewing audience how many "questionable Muslims" are in the United States. Then offer exactly your criteria for "questionable". How do you arrive at that conclusion?

    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    But, of course, the Coalition of the Right and the Coalition of the Left will push their own narrative, as seen by the spike in anti-Muslim and anti-gun rants on the Internet.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Frau Katze

    My comments were based on reading about the situation in Europe. There are about 3,000 Muslim extemists being monitored in the UK according to this link:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

    The population of the USA is about 5 times higher than the U.K. However, the fraction of the population that is Muslim is considerably higher in the U.K.

    I’m sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can’t find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.

    So the USA likely could afford it, at the present time. But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels.

    Europeans are used to higher rates of taxation than Americans, so that counteracts the higher number of Muslims to some extent.

    Also, American Muslims, via their self-appointed guardians CAIR, have fought surveillance of mosques successfully. No law enforcement personnel can listen in on imams.

    The U.K. used to do that (watch certain mosques); I’m not sure if they still are. The extremists are blatant in the UK, or at least they used to be. I think there had been some success at the mosque level.

    CAIR have also complained about sting operations, but AFAIK this has come to nothing so far.

    I’m not a lawyer but I think that the European governments can do more surveillance without the same pushback that you see with groups like CAIR. The governments have a more authoritarian streak, they lack anything like your US Constitution.

    So, increased surveillance may be possible now. But if something isn’t done to stop more Muslims from arriving, it will not stay that way.

    Another point: not all dangerous Muslims are obvious targets for surveillance, especially with groups like CAIR putting up every road block they can think of. Some are intelligent enough not to give themselves away.

    As an aside, Russia uses draconian techniques to keep their millions of Muslims under control. Mention sharia law and you’ll be tossed in jail. Keep talking about it and you’ll be dead.

    But give Russia a few more decades of high Muslim birth rates and well below replacement for the non-Muslims.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Frau Katze


    I’m sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can’t find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.
     
    I'm sure we could free up some budget dollars for the task if we dismissed the TSA from duties like making blue-eyed grandma Betty from Omaha take off her shoes at the airport.
    , @Corvinus
    @Frau Katze

    "But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels."

    There were 3.3 million Muslims of all ages living in the United States in 2015, or about 1 percent of the total U.S. population, the Pew Research Center reports. The figure is an update to Pew's 2011 estimate of 2.75 million Muslims living in the United States.

    If Americans as a society seek to limit immigration, that reflects the will of the people. Which I support.

    I do not support merely targeting an entire group of people just because an extremely small percentage of its population employ violence to achieve their goals.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

  70. @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    It seems like a colorful topic -- people washed up in America by the Kiplingesque Great Game in Afghanistan -- but few others seem interested in it.

    Replies: @Je Suis Charlie Martel, @Ivy, @Neil Templeton

    Must be tough for an immigrant operative, perhaps highly intelligent, who left a position of some importance to come to America, and then be thought an idiot because of his cultural instincts and because he can’t speak the language. I think it likely that America rewards a different array of genetic and cultural traits than would be selected in Afghanistan.

  71. @Anonymous
    @Jefferson

    Afghanistan is the gayest country in the world and, regardless of his birthplace, Mateen was an Afghan. He must have been tempted by the gay lifestyle, if not covertly engaged in it. However, by killing infidels and being killed in turn, all his sins would be forgiven and he would get to enjoy Muslim heaven, where "pearly boys" would be at his disposal.

    Replies: @Cato

    A friend once told me that, in most of West Asia, “the shame is in being the goat.” Nothing gay about these dudes. They spit on gays. But they are willing to use them sexually.

    • Replies: @Randal
    @Cato


    A friend once told me that, in most of West Asia, “the shame is in being the goat.” Nothing gay about these dudes. They spit on gays. But they are willing to use them sexually.
     
    That was pretty much the ancient Greek attitude as well. Approved (to some extent) male homosexuality was pretty much a matter of pederasty.

    It seems to be a fairly common, if unpleasant, male attitude, particularly in warrior cultures. See also US "prison rules" - you're only gay if you are the one receiving.

    Just one of the ways western Christian culture was better than many others.
  72. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Corvinus


    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
    Are agreeing with or criticizing what you call the “narrative”?

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Corvinus

    D’oh. I meant “Are you agreeing . . .”

  73. @tbraton
    @Jim Don Bob

    I read the book and then saw the movie. I thought the casting of good guy Tom Hanks as the womanizing, drinking and coke-sniffing Charlie Wilson was not Hollywood's best idea, unless the notion was to clean up Wilson's reputation. In fact, I thought it was the worst casting since Hanks was picked to lead the "Bonfire of the Vanities" as a "master of the universe." Actually, I thought the best actor in the Wilson movie was the late Philip Seymour Hoffman as Gust Avrakatos, the CIA guy who hooked up with Wilson. I am not a big fan of Mike Nichols, the director, but it's obvious that "Charlie Wilson's War was Hollywood's endorsement of our involvement with the mujahidin in Afghanistan against the Soviets. This was the same Hollywood known for its close association with communism and the standing ovation for Lillian Hellman at the 1977 Academy Awards followed by the snub of Elias Kazan, one of greatest movie directors, at the same Academy Awards more than 10 years later. Remember that our numbnut President labeled the War in Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history, as the "good war" in 2008 and acted accordingly as President. As far as I am concerned, we should have gotten out of Afghanistan as quickly as we got in, after the fiasco at Tora Bora, when Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan "allies" and secure his escape.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan “allies” and secure his escape.

    He didn’t have to bribe our “allies”, whoever they were at that point in time. We hadn’t quite secured the premises and installed our government in Kabul before he fled over the mountains to his new sponsors in Pakistan, for who he was prime hidden collateral—the goose that laid the golden eggs of American foreign aid for them.

    They built him a safe house, actually a safe mansion, half a mile down the road from their elite officer academy and hid him. And we went on paying the Pakistanis billions in aid money to go on being our “ally” while we looked for him and to help us wage war against the Afghan Taliban—his simpleton tribal erstwhile hosts who had no particular beef with faraway America once he had left.

    But the Taliban had moved its headquarters to Quetta in Pakistan, since the Pakistanis were sponsoring them, too…

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    Sounds like Mateen the Elder's viewpoint, which isn't all that crazy.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    , @tbraton
    @PiltdownMan

    Before he got to Pakistan, he had to escape from Tora Bora. I remember reading accounts back then that blamed Osama's escape on the fact that we used our "trusty" Afghan allies to guard a certain sector, and they allowed Osama to escape. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    "The Northern Alliance fighters continued a steady advance through the difficult terrain, backed by air strikes and U.S. and British Special Forces. Facing defeat, al-Qaeda forces negotiated a truce with a local Afghan militia commander to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, some critics believe that the truce was a device to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape.[7]. . .

    A former Delta Force commander, using the pen name "Dalton Fury", who fought at Tora Bora, wrote that bin Laden escaped into Pakistan on or around December 16, 2001. Fury gives three reasons for why he believes bin Laden was able to escape: (1) the US mistakenly thought that Pakistan was effectively guarding the border area, (2) NATO allies refused to allow the use of air-dropped GATOR mines, which would have helped seal bin Laden and his forces inside the Tora Bora area, and (3) over-reliance on native Afghan military forces as the main force deployed against bin Laden and his fighters. Fury states that, as it was Ramadan, the Afghan forces would usually leave the battlefield in the evenings to break their day-long fasts. He suggested this allowed the al-Qaeda forces a chance to regroup, reposition, or escape.[17]"

    I believe we have plenty of evidence from our experiences in Afghanistan that the Afghans are highly corrupt people, so the idea that Osama was able to bribe his way out of Tora Bora does not sound especially implausible.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Jim Don Bob

  74. @PiltdownMan
    @tbraton


    Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan “allies” and secure his escape.
     
    He didn't have to bribe our "allies", whoever they were at that point in time. We hadn't quite secured the premises and installed our government in Kabul before he fled over the mountains to his new sponsors in Pakistan, for who he was prime hidden collateral—the goose that laid the golden eggs of American foreign aid for them.

    They built him a safe house, actually a safe mansion, half a mile down the road from their elite officer academy and hid him. And we went on paying the Pakistanis billions in aid money to go on being our "ally" while we looked for him and to help us wage war against the Afghan Taliban—his simpleton tribal erstwhile hosts who had no particular beef with faraway America once he had left.

    But the Taliban had moved its headquarters to Quetta in Pakistan, since the Pakistanis were sponsoring them, too...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @tbraton

    Sounds like Mateen the Elder’s viewpoint, which isn’t all that crazy.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Steve Sailer

    Who knows for sure? It's one explanation that fits the facts, the more conventional ones may be true instead.

    But I suspect it is an explanation not examined openly very much, since it would hurt our foreign policy establishment's pride to acknowledge that we've been in an abusive relationship with Pakistan and been played for patsies for the last 15 years.

    But at the end of the day, Mateen the elder, Taliban, Pakistan...who cares? AfPak is a textbook case of a foreign entanglement—Pat Buchanan is hoarse from pointing this out to anyone who will listen.

  75. @BB753
    @Jack D

    Some first amendment.. Do you think Dylan Roof for instance would have kept a job for long if he had been complaining about Blacks in the workplace? But Mateen could freely talk jihad non-stop for years.

    As for the FBI being hand-tied.. Couldn't they at least have kept a close watch upon Mateen or are there too many jihad nuts to keep track of? Now you're gonna say the FBI is understaffed.

    Also, you'd think Mateen would have set an alarm ring in the FBI headquarters when he legally purchased a AR15..It didn't happen either. Why?

    As for undercover stings, I find them unworthy of a serious organisation and borderline illegal.
    If the FBI can't prevent crime, what is it good for?

    Replies: @Jack D, @E. Rekshun, @Ace

    They serve as security monitors.

  76. @Frau Katze
    @Corvinus

    My comments were based on reading about the situation in Europe. There are about 3,000 Muslim extemists being monitored in the UK according to this link:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

    The population of the USA is about 5 times higher than the U.K. However, the fraction of the population that is Muslim is considerably higher in the U.K.

    I'm sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can't find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.

    So the USA likely could afford it, at the present time. But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels.

    Europeans are used to higher rates of taxation than Americans, so that counteracts the higher number of Muslims to some extent.

    Also, American Muslims, via their self-appointed guardians CAIR, have fought surveillance of mosques successfully. No law enforcement personnel can listen in on imams.

    The U.K. used to do that (watch certain mosques); I'm not sure if they still are. The extremists are blatant in the UK, or at least they used to be. I think there had been some success at the mosque level.

    CAIR have also complained about sting operations, but AFAIK this has come to nothing so far.

    I'm not a lawyer but I think that the European governments can do more surveillance without the same pushback that you see with groups like CAIR. The governments have a more authoritarian streak, they lack anything like your US Constitution.

    So, increased surveillance may be possible now. But if something isn't done to stop more Muslims from arriving, it will not stay that way.

    Another point: not all dangerous Muslims are obvious targets for surveillance, especially with groups like CAIR putting up every road block they can think of. Some are intelligent enough not to give themselves away.

    As an aside, Russia uses draconian techniques to keep their millions of Muslims under control. Mention sharia law and you'll be tossed in jail. Keep talking about it and you'll be dead.

    But give Russia a few more decades of high Muslim birth rates and well below replacement for the non-Muslims.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Corvinus

    I’m sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can’t find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.

    I’m sure we could free up some budget dollars for the task if we dismissed the TSA from duties like making blue-eyed grandma Betty from Omaha take off her shoes at the airport.

  77. @Olorin
    @Jefferson

    Just last night Chez Olorin we were kicking around whether Pink Pistols still existed.

    Hereabouts it was mostly an online/Yahoo Groups thing. Do you see activity still in your part of the world?

    Replies: @Marty

    The other day in Marin County I saw a 70-ish lady wearing a “Second Amendment Sisters” t-shirt.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    @Marty

    I remember them as well...from the Aughts...but didn't they go away?

    Interestingly re: Jefferson's point, a friend mentioned over dinner that Pink Pistols released a response to the Orlando attack.

    I looked it up, and it appears that it's a one-person reply by Gwendolyn Patton, a self-described libertarian who's been with the Philadelphia chapter for many years. The response appears to be written by her, representing PP nationally.

    Pink Pistols arose from Jonathan Rauch's 2000 piece in Salon advocating lawful carry for LGBT people.

    There have been various online presences, some lasting awhile, some not. The Seattle group has an active FB page; the Tacoma group hasn't touched their Yahoo group since 2013; Spokane's 22-member Yahoo group has been moribund since 2009. Portland (OR) group, much more active. San Jose's has active Meetups, SF has only an e-mail address.

    Judging from Citizen Mateen's activities, there was no chapter in Orlando.

  78. @Steve Sailer
    @PiltdownMan

    Sounds like Mateen the Elder's viewpoint, which isn't all that crazy.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Who knows for sure? It’s one explanation that fits the facts, the more conventional ones may be true instead.

    But I suspect it is an explanation not examined openly very much, since it would hurt our foreign policy establishment’s pride to acknowledge that we’ve been in an abusive relationship with Pakistan and been played for patsies for the last 15 years.

    But at the end of the day, Mateen the elder, Taliban, Pakistan…who cares? AfPak is a textbook case of a foreign entanglement—Pat Buchanan is hoarse from pointing this out to anyone who will listen.

  79. @Mr. Anon
    @PiltdownMan

    My understanding is that the Taliban, unlike many of the factions that the US government supports, also opposed the rampant practice of pederasty in Afghanistan and actually took action against it.

    Replies: @gruff

    The Taliban also cut heroin production down drastically. Right after we invaded it shot back up again.

  80. @Marty
    @Olorin

    The other day in Marin County I saw a 70-ish lady wearing a "Second Amendment Sisters" t-shirt.

    Replies: @Olorin

    I remember them as well…from the Aughts…but didn’t they go away?

    Interestingly re: Jefferson’s point, a friend mentioned over dinner that Pink Pistols released a response to the Orlando attack.

    I looked it up, and it appears that it’s a one-person reply by Gwendolyn Patton, a self-described libertarian who’s been with the Philadelphia chapter for many years. The response appears to be written by her, representing PP nationally.

    Pink Pistols arose from Jonathan Rauch’s 2000 piece in Salon advocating lawful carry for LGBT people.

    There have been various online presences, some lasting awhile, some not. The Seattle group has an active FB page; the Tacoma group hasn’t touched their Yahoo group since 2013; Spokane’s 22-member Yahoo group has been moribund since 2009. Portland (OR) group, much more active. San Jose’s has active Meetups, SF has only an e-mail address.

    Judging from Citizen Mateen’s activities, there was no chapter in Orlando.

  81. @PiltdownMan
    @tbraton


    Osama Bin Ladin was able to bribe our Afghan “allies” and secure his escape.
     
    He didn't have to bribe our "allies", whoever they were at that point in time. We hadn't quite secured the premises and installed our government in Kabul before he fled over the mountains to his new sponsors in Pakistan, for who he was prime hidden collateral—the goose that laid the golden eggs of American foreign aid for them.

    They built him a safe house, actually a safe mansion, half a mile down the road from their elite officer academy and hid him. And we went on paying the Pakistanis billions in aid money to go on being our "ally" while we looked for him and to help us wage war against the Afghan Taliban—his simpleton tribal erstwhile hosts who had no particular beef with faraway America once he had left.

    But the Taliban had moved its headquarters to Quetta in Pakistan, since the Pakistanis were sponsoring them, too...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @tbraton

    Before he got to Pakistan, he had to escape from Tora Bora. I remember reading accounts back then that blamed Osama’s escape on the fact that we used our “trusty” Afghan allies to guard a certain sector, and they allowed Osama to escape. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    “The Northern Alliance fighters continued a steady advance through the difficult terrain, backed by air strikes and U.S. and British Special Forces. Facing defeat, al-Qaeda forces negotiated a truce with a local Afghan militia commander to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, some critics believe that the truce was a device to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape.[7]. . .

    A former Delta Force commander, using the pen name “Dalton Fury”, who fought at Tora Bora, wrote that bin Laden escaped into Pakistan on or around December 16, 2001. Fury gives three reasons for why he believes bin Laden was able to escape: (1) the US mistakenly thought that Pakistan was effectively guarding the border area, (2) NATO allies refused to allow the use of air-dropped GATOR mines, which would have helped seal bin Laden and his forces inside the Tora Bora area, and (3) over-reliance on native Afghan military forces as the main force deployed against bin Laden and his fighters. Fury states that, as it was Ramadan, the Afghan forces would usually leave the battlefield in the evenings to break their day-long fasts. He suggested this allowed the al-Qaeda forces a chance to regroup, reposition, or escape.[17]”

    I believe we have plenty of evidence from our experiences in Afghanistan that the Afghans are highly corrupt people, so the idea that Osama was able to bribe his way out of Tora Bora does not sound especially implausible.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @tbraton

    Thank you for the additional details.

    I wondered at the time, and have wondered since, why there seemed to be a sudden lessening of vigor in our pursuit of Bin Laden barely three months after 9/11.

    It still seems odd to me that that we were willing to outsource the all-important task of securing of the Afghan border near Tora Bora so soon to our newfound Afghan allies, who were still an army of untrained irregulars and mujahedin at that time.

    Why was there no hot pursuit? Why did we not commit US forces to finishing the mission they had invaded Afghanistan for weeks previously—to capture or kill Bin Laden and Al Qaeda? It was December 2001, the American public was still livid with anger, and would have supported any operation or commitment of military forces en masse to the task of cutting off Tora Bora.

    I'm no military expert, and Tora Bora is extraordinarily rugged terrain, but we didn't even try to do the job ourselves. What gives?

    I'm not suggesting conspiracy, but would be interested in the rationale.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @tbraton

    Dalton Fury has also written several books featuring former Delta op Colt Raynor. Pretty good reads - lots of action and not too unbelievable. http://www.amazon.com/Dalton-Fury/e/B001J93AUS

  82. @tbraton
    @PiltdownMan

    Before he got to Pakistan, he had to escape from Tora Bora. I remember reading accounts back then that blamed Osama's escape on the fact that we used our "trusty" Afghan allies to guard a certain sector, and they allowed Osama to escape. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    "The Northern Alliance fighters continued a steady advance through the difficult terrain, backed by air strikes and U.S. and British Special Forces. Facing defeat, al-Qaeda forces negotiated a truce with a local Afghan militia commander to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, some critics believe that the truce was a device to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape.[7]. . .

    A former Delta Force commander, using the pen name "Dalton Fury", who fought at Tora Bora, wrote that bin Laden escaped into Pakistan on or around December 16, 2001. Fury gives three reasons for why he believes bin Laden was able to escape: (1) the US mistakenly thought that Pakistan was effectively guarding the border area, (2) NATO allies refused to allow the use of air-dropped GATOR mines, which would have helped seal bin Laden and his forces inside the Tora Bora area, and (3) over-reliance on native Afghan military forces as the main force deployed against bin Laden and his fighters. Fury states that, as it was Ramadan, the Afghan forces would usually leave the battlefield in the evenings to break their day-long fasts. He suggested this allowed the al-Qaeda forces a chance to regroup, reposition, or escape.[17]"

    I believe we have plenty of evidence from our experiences in Afghanistan that the Afghans are highly corrupt people, so the idea that Osama was able to bribe his way out of Tora Bora does not sound especially implausible.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Jim Don Bob

    Thank you for the additional details.

    I wondered at the time, and have wondered since, why there seemed to be a sudden lessening of vigor in our pursuit of Bin Laden barely three months after 9/11.

    It still seems odd to me that that we were willing to outsource the all-important task of securing of the Afghan border near Tora Bora so soon to our newfound Afghan allies, who were still an army of untrained irregulars and mujahedin at that time.

    Why was there no hot pursuit? Why did we not commit US forces to finishing the mission they had invaded Afghanistan for weeks previously—to capture or kill Bin Laden and Al Qaeda? It was December 2001, the American public was still livid with anger, and would have supported any operation or commitment of military forces en masse to the task of cutting off Tora Bora.

    I’m no military expert, and Tora Bora is extraordinarily rugged terrain, but we didn’t even try to do the job ourselves. What gives?

    I’m not suggesting conspiracy, but would be interested in the rationale.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @PiltdownMan


    "I wondered at the time, and have wondered since, why there seemed to be a sudden lessening of vigor in our pursuit of Bin Laden barely three months after 9/11."
     
    I think--to the extent that this was true--it was simply because after Tora Bora, no one was sure where Osama was, so pursuit naturally lessens when one doesn't know where to pursue.

    "It still seems odd to me that we were willing to outsource the all-important task of securing of the Afghan border near Tora Bora so soon to our newfound Afghan allies, who were still an army of untrained irregulars and mujahedin at that time."
     
    As Rumsfeld remarked in other circumstances, "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." The army we had in Afghanistan--a country without sea ports or other heavy logistics infrastructure--in December 2001 was a few dozen special forces and a few hundred Afghan allies.

    "Why was there no hot pursuit?"
     
    I don't think it was obvious at the time that Osama had escaped. Up until later Osama public communications made it obvious, it was a credible possibility that he had been obliterated or buried by US bombing.
  83. @Cato
    @Anonymous

    A friend once told me that, in most of West Asia, "the shame is in being the goat." Nothing gay about these dudes. They spit on gays. But they are willing to use them sexually.

    Replies: @Randal

    A friend once told me that, in most of West Asia, “the shame is in being the goat.” Nothing gay about these dudes. They spit on gays. But they are willing to use them sexually.

    That was pretty much the ancient Greek attitude as well. Approved (to some extent) male homosexuality was pretty much a matter of pederasty.

    It seems to be a fairly common, if unpleasant, male attitude, particularly in warrior cultures. See also US “prison rules” – you’re only gay if you are the one receiving.

    Just one of the ways western Christian culture was better than many others.

  84. @D. K.
    He actually was born on November 16, 1986. He would have been an "anchor baby," properly speaking, only if his parents lacked green cards, when he was born, which I have yet to see stated, or even implied. Resident aliens with valid green cards do not need an "anchor baby" to remain legally in the United States.

    Replies: @Grand Vizier

    Correct, but only if the green card holder behaves. They do not have to renew his greencard if he is seen as unwanted. A citizenship in the family strenghtens their claim to live in the US.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Grand Vizier

    The father has been in the United States for over thirty years, since the Reagan Administration. If he has a police record himself, since arriving here, I have yet to hear about it. "Ditto" the mother....

  85. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Corvinus


    Again, the narrative is radical Muslim attack. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
    Are agreeing with or criticizing what you call the “narrative”?

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Corvinus

    I agree that it is radical Muslims attacking. I do not agree with this simplistic notion that guns = evil or Muslims = evil.

  86. @Frau Katze
    @Corvinus

    My comments were based on reading about the situation in Europe. There are about 3,000 Muslim extemists being monitored in the UK according to this link:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

    The population of the USA is about 5 times higher than the U.K. However, the fraction of the population that is Muslim is considerably higher in the U.K.

    I'm sure I read that Germany had to cut back on monitoring due to cost, but I can't find the article now. Again, they have a higher Muslim percentage.

    So the USA likely could afford it, at the present time. But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels.

    Europeans are used to higher rates of taxation than Americans, so that counteracts the higher number of Muslims to some extent.

    Also, American Muslims, via their self-appointed guardians CAIR, have fought surveillance of mosques successfully. No law enforcement personnel can listen in on imams.

    The U.K. used to do that (watch certain mosques); I'm not sure if they still are. The extremists are blatant in the UK, or at least they used to be. I think there had been some success at the mosque level.

    CAIR have also complained about sting operations, but AFAIK this has come to nothing so far.

    I'm not a lawyer but I think that the European governments can do more surveillance without the same pushback that you see with groups like CAIR. The governments have a more authoritarian streak, they lack anything like your US Constitution.

    So, increased surveillance may be possible now. But if something isn't done to stop more Muslims from arriving, it will not stay that way.

    Another point: not all dangerous Muslims are obvious targets for surveillance, especially with groups like CAIR putting up every road block they can think of. Some are intelligent enough not to give themselves away.

    As an aside, Russia uses draconian techniques to keep their millions of Muslims under control. Mention sharia law and you'll be tossed in jail. Keep talking about it and you'll be dead.

    But give Russia a few more decades of high Muslim birth rates and well below replacement for the non-Muslims.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Corvinus

    “But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels.”

    There were 3.3 million Muslims of all ages living in the United States in 2015, or about 1 percent of the total U.S. population, the Pew Research Center reports. The figure is an update to Pew’s 2011 estimate of 2.75 million Muslims living in the United States.

    If Americans as a society seek to limit immigration, that reflects the will of the people. Which I support.

    I do not support merely targeting an entire group of people just because an extremely small percentage of its population employ violence to achieve their goals.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Corvinus

    So during the Cold War, we should have opened borders to anyone from the USSR or Eastern Bloc because only a small percentage of them were spies or saboteurs?

  87. @tbraton
    @PiltdownMan

    Before he got to Pakistan, he had to escape from Tora Bora. I remember reading accounts back then that blamed Osama's escape on the fact that we used our "trusty" Afghan allies to guard a certain sector, and they allowed Osama to escape. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    "The Northern Alliance fighters continued a steady advance through the difficult terrain, backed by air strikes and U.S. and British Special Forces. Facing defeat, al-Qaeda forces negotiated a truce with a local Afghan militia commander to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, some critics believe that the truce was a device to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape.[7]. . .

    A former Delta Force commander, using the pen name "Dalton Fury", who fought at Tora Bora, wrote that bin Laden escaped into Pakistan on or around December 16, 2001. Fury gives three reasons for why he believes bin Laden was able to escape: (1) the US mistakenly thought that Pakistan was effectively guarding the border area, (2) NATO allies refused to allow the use of air-dropped GATOR mines, which would have helped seal bin Laden and his forces inside the Tora Bora area, and (3) over-reliance on native Afghan military forces as the main force deployed against bin Laden and his fighters. Fury states that, as it was Ramadan, the Afghan forces would usually leave the battlefield in the evenings to break their day-long fasts. He suggested this allowed the al-Qaeda forces a chance to regroup, reposition, or escape.[17]"

    I believe we have plenty of evidence from our experiences in Afghanistan that the Afghans are highly corrupt people, so the idea that Osama was able to bribe his way out of Tora Bora does not sound especially implausible.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Jim Don Bob

    Dalton Fury has also written several books featuring former Delta op Colt Raynor. Pretty good reads – lots of action and not too unbelievable. http://www.amazon.com/Dalton-Fury/e/B001J93AUS

  88. @Grand Vizier
    @D. K.

    Correct, but only if the green card holder behaves. They do not have to renew his greencard if he is seen as unwanted. A citizenship in the family strenghtens their claim to live in the US.

    Replies: @D. K.

    The father has been in the United States for over thirty years, since the Reagan Administration. If he has a police record himself, since arriving here, I have yet to hear about it. “Ditto” the mother….

  89. I haven’t seen a legitimate birth certificate that shows he was born in Queens. All I’ve seen is his name change request. Why did he want to change his last name? What’s going on here? Why aren’t more Americans questioning these events?

  90. @Corvinus
    @Frau Katze

    "But do you want to wait till the US hits European levels? If nothing is done to stop it, it will eventually reach those levels."

    There were 3.3 million Muslims of all ages living in the United States in 2015, or about 1 percent of the total U.S. population, the Pew Research Center reports. The figure is an update to Pew's 2011 estimate of 2.75 million Muslims living in the United States.

    If Americans as a society seek to limit immigration, that reflects the will of the people. Which I support.

    I do not support merely targeting an entire group of people just because an extremely small percentage of its population employ violence to achieve their goals.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    So during the Cold War, we should have opened borders to anyone from the USSR or Eastern Bloc because only a small percentage of them were spies or saboteurs?

  91. “So during the Cold War, we should have opened borders to anyone from the USSR or Eastern Bloc because only a small percentage of them were spies or saboteurs?”

    This is an entirely separate matter. The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were deemed by our government as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Entire Muslim nations are NOT put on that same plane. Moreover, Russian subversives during the Cold War were seeking to collect information to benefit its country militarily. Radical Muslims simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible given our past and current meddling.

    What were the efforts taken by the federal government during the Cold War to deport ALL Russian-born American citizens, or citizens of Russian descent?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Corvinus


    "The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were deemed by our government as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Entire Muslim nations are NOT put on that same plane.
     
    A lot of Americans would put Islam on the same plane. An aspiring chief executive has also expressed doubts about Muslim intentions.

    "Moreover, Russian subversives during the Cold War were seeking to collect information to benefit its country militarily. Radical Muslims simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible given our past and current meddling."
     
    Oh, they "simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible". Well that's okay then.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  92. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    1987 the Soviets were still in Afghanistan, and Osama Bin Laden was considered a worthy enough ally in the fight against the Soviets to receive US money and arms. Unfortunately he used that money and arms no only to fight the Soviets but also to kill more moderate tribal leaders he viewed as rivals, they better to cement his power.
    Does that answer your (stupid) question?

  93. @Corvinus
    "So during the Cold War, we should have opened borders to anyone from the USSR or Eastern Bloc because only a small percentage of them were spies or saboteurs?"

    This is an entirely separate matter. The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were deemed by our government as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Entire Muslim nations are NOT put on that same plane. Moreover, Russian subversives during the Cold War were seeking to collect information to benefit its country militarily. Radical Muslims simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible given our past and current meddling.

    What were the efforts taken by the federal government during the Cold War to deport ALL Russian-born American citizens, or citizens of Russian descent?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    “The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were deemed by our government as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Entire Muslim nations are NOT put on that same plane.

    A lot of Americans would put Islam on the same plane. An aspiring chief executive has also expressed doubts about Muslim intentions.

    “Moreover, Russian subversives during the Cold War were seeking to collect information to benefit its country militarily. Radical Muslims simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible given our past and current meddling.”

    Oh, they “simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible”. Well that’s okay then.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Almost Missouri

    "A lot of Americans would put Islam on the same plane. An aspiring chief executive has also expressed doubts about Muslim intentions."

    Who is this "a lot of Americans"?

    Right, because an entire religion and their adherents are perpetually going all Jihad on the United States.

    "Oh, they “simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible”. Well that’s okay then."

    Of course it's not "ok". But you're kidding yourself if you believe American Muslims in general are going to adhere to radicalists ordering them to blow themselves up or murder in the name of Allah.

  94. @PiltdownMan
    @tbraton

    Thank you for the additional details.

    I wondered at the time, and have wondered since, why there seemed to be a sudden lessening of vigor in our pursuit of Bin Laden barely three months after 9/11.

    It still seems odd to me that that we were willing to outsource the all-important task of securing of the Afghan border near Tora Bora so soon to our newfound Afghan allies, who were still an army of untrained irregulars and mujahedin at that time.

    Why was there no hot pursuit? Why did we not commit US forces to finishing the mission they had invaded Afghanistan for weeks previously—to capture or kill Bin Laden and Al Qaeda? It was December 2001, the American public was still livid with anger, and would have supported any operation or commitment of military forces en masse to the task of cutting off Tora Bora.

    I'm no military expert, and Tora Bora is extraordinarily rugged terrain, but we didn't even try to do the job ourselves. What gives?

    I'm not suggesting conspiracy, but would be interested in the rationale.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    “I wondered at the time, and have wondered since, why there seemed to be a sudden lessening of vigor in our pursuit of Bin Laden barely three months after 9/11.”

    I think–to the extent that this was true–it was simply because after Tora Bora, no one was sure where Osama was, so pursuit naturally lessens when one doesn’t know where to pursue.

    “It still seems odd to me that we were willing to outsource the all-important task of securing of the Afghan border near Tora Bora so soon to our newfound Afghan allies, who were still an army of untrained irregulars and mujahedin at that time.”

    As Rumsfeld remarked in other circumstances, “you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” The army we had in Afghanistan–a country without sea ports or other heavy logistics infrastructure–in December 2001 was a few dozen special forces and a few hundred Afghan allies.

    “Why was there no hot pursuit?”

    I don’t think it was obvious at the time that Osama had escaped. Up until later Osama public communications made it obvious, it was a credible possibility that he had been obliterated or buried by US bombing.

  95. @Almost Missouri
    @Corvinus


    "The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were deemed by our government as a threat to democracy and capitalism. Entire Muslim nations are NOT put on that same plane.
     
    A lot of Americans would put Islam on the same plane. An aspiring chief executive has also expressed doubts about Muslim intentions.

    "Moreover, Russian subversives during the Cold War were seeking to collect information to benefit its country militarily. Radical Muslims simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible given our past and current meddling."
     
    Oh, they "simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible". Well that's okay then.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “A lot of Americans would put Islam on the same plane. An aspiring chief executive has also expressed doubts about Muslim intentions.”

    Who is this “a lot of Americans”?

    Right, because an entire religion and their adherents are perpetually going all Jihad on the United States.

    “Oh, they “simply want to inflict as many casualties as possible”. Well that’s okay then.”

    Of course it’s not “ok”. But you’re kidding yourself if you believe American Muslims in general are going to adhere to radicalists ordering them to blow themselves up or murder in the name of Allah.

  96. He got in to the US because he was a CIA asset from the war against the USSR in Afghanistan.

    Like much jihadi activity against the West, this is blowback from that campaign.

  97. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It’s my understanding the shooter’s parents came to the US legally as refugees, in 1985, during the Reagan administration, when Afghanistan was occupied by Soviet forces and the US was providing military assistance to Afghan resistance fighters, including factions that later emerged as “the Taliban” in 1994.

    btw, because his parents entered the US legally, the shooter does not qualify as an “anchor baby” (child of illegal immigrants).

    Meanwhile, Donald Trump has suggested the massacre wouldn’t have happened if the parents had been denied entry to the US, because of the father’s statements of support for the Taliban, never mind those statements were made AFTER he was already a legal resident of the US. Moreover, as evidenced above, it’s logically impossible that the father made such comments before his entry because the Taliban didn’t exist yet.

    This isn’t the first time Trump has stumbled over the sequence of events on an important issue (or maybe it was on purpose and he’s just scamming us). When he claimed the judge in the Trump University case was biased against him because “He’s Mexican, I’m building a wall,” Trump failed to notice that most of the judge’s rulings against him were issued BEFORE he announced he was building a wall. Obviously, in those rulings, the judge could not have been biased by something that hadn’t happened yet.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS