Department of Homeland Stupidity
So, if you're in the US Dept. of Homeland Security, and an asset like this walks into your office, what would you do?
Well, if you work in the Obama administration, you do your level best to deport him as a terrorist before he lets the rest of the country know how incompetent you are.
Mosab Hassan Yousef wrote a book, Son of Hamas: A Gripping Account of Terror, Betrayal, Political Intrigue, and Unthinkable Choices, depicting his life as both the son of one of the founders of Hamas and as an agent for the Shin Bet. He wrote the book after coming to the US in 2007 and seeking political asylum. Two years later, DHS denied his request for asylum on the grounds that he represented a "danger" to the country.
They let him walk around for two years and then decided he was dangerous? And after making that decision, he's been free to move around for another year? How dangerous could he really be? The stooges at DHS make Larry, Curley, and Moe look like Einsteins.
How secure are you knowing that our DHS can't tell the difference between a terrorist and a counter-terrorist? Then again, they can't tell the difference between a terrorist and an 80 year old grandmother either.
Blatant Corruption in the White House
Obama Skips Out on Memorial Day
Why Societal Decay Never Reverses
At this post over at Snowflakes in Hell, Bob S. left this comment:
And would we worry about the backlash when people realized that we didn’t believe that angle but was only using it to manipulate them into doing what we want?
Would you feel comfortable taking that type of approach instead of something that more accurately reflects what you values are?
I’m not sure that I would feel comfortable with that level of manipulation. I think it would resemble too much the tactics of those opposing our rights.
Caleb addressed his comment, saying:
Bob S. – who gives a damn what our tactics are as long as 1) we win, and we 2) don’t sacrifice our personal integrity in so doing?
Sebastian followed up with:
I think Bob’s complaint was along the lines that it falls under your number two category. My retort would be that Caleb’s number one trumps number two. The point is to get the sign down. If I had to manipulate someone into looking at it another way, that they might not have thought of, I’m fine with that. I have no qualms about adoption the tactics of my enemy that work.
Seeking some understandable clarification on the issue, The Packetman asked:
So winning trumps personal integrity?
Sounds like, Ends justify the means.
Either one is bad.
Sebastian responded with:
Considering what’s at stake, yes winning trumps integrity. Politics and social change are not a process of integrity. Do you think the progressives won by patting themselves on the head for their integrity?
It's a debate with no good answer. Any society is characterized by its member's willingness to abide by rules of conduct that allow them to function together. We call these rules civilization, and they generally include concepts like decency, honor, altruism, and fair play. As long as all sides agree to keep these rules, then the society functions. If some members decide not to follow the rules, the society functions less well. In order to maintain functional efficiency, the society may institute self regulating mechanisms to curtail the damage caused by rule breakers, like jail, exile, or other forms of punishment. Breaking the rules gains the perpetrator an advantage; the purpose of the punishment is to make the cost of that advantage higher than the benefit gained. A well designed system of rules will create a well balanced society as long as most members choose to follow the rules.
Eventually, however, one group or another will find that the advantages of breaking the rules can outweigh the costs of the punishment if they are careful, and plan well. They act to circumvent the rules, rather than break them. They work to block enforcement of the rules, or work to change the rules to ones that allow them to maintain their advantage. When opposed, they use deception and intimidation to silence facts. If they proceed with care, the balance of power will have shifted so far that by the time the opposition realizes that the game has been changed, it is already too late to do anything about it. They are at such a disadvantage that they have no winning move. If they continue to play by the rules, they lose. If they decide to ignore the rules, and play like their opposition, they become the opposition and they lose.
The only winning play is to be the first group to break the rules.
I'm sure there's a games theorist out there somewhere who could put numbers and logical symbols to all of this; in fact, they probably already have. The bottom line is simply that if your opponent has no honor, you can choose to lose honorably, or simply lose.
Why Are You Surprised?
But it was a comedy show, so it was funny, right?
All in a day's work in Hollywood.
Neocutis: Proudly Bearing the Countess Bathory Seal of Approval
Yep, if you use their Bio-restorative line of skin care products, you can rest easy in the knowledge that you are smearing fetal cell proteins all over your youthful toned skin.
If that makes you a little bit squeamish, well, don't worry. Only one fetus died in the making of this product, and as long as they maintain the cell line properly, only one will ever have to die.
Doesn't that make you feel better?
The truly sad part of this is that there will be millions of people who won't have a problem with it.
Columbus Day/Indigenous People Day
Yesterday, some of us celebrated Indigenous People Day, honoring those people who stayed home, risked little, and discovered nothing because they, well, because they were there first?