Category Archives: Intelligence

Glenn Is Great

Ann Coulter, Gender, Glenn Beck, Intelligence, John McCain, Media, Political Correctness, Pop-Culture, Pseudo-intellectualism, Republicans, The Zeitgeist

The One and Only Glenn Beck, still a scrupulously good fellow despite fame and fortune, would contend that only G-d is great, and that’s what makes Mr. Beck so good.

His humility and love of grace aside, Glenn is one of the most important popular forces for liberty today.

Yes, he often gets it wrong. Yes, he often confuses genuine forces for liberty (Ron & Rand Paul, Peter Schiff) with snake-oil merchants (the neoconservatives Andrew Breitbart and Stephen Moore). Yes, he overestimates the wisdom of the American People, and never touches the topic which accounts for the future dissolution of the people and the election of another. (Embellish, if you will.)

BUT.

No one in mainstream media has done what Glenn has to drive home the reasons and consequences of an irrevocably insolvent America: the twin evils of monetary policy and mind-boggling state profligacy.

And no one, myself excluded, has come out swinging as Glenn has against the Meghan McCain phenomenon and what IT represents. Meghaaan’s delusions of grandeur are those of America’s miseducated, exceedingly arrogant, deeply dopey, utterly outsourceable youth, worshiped, nay deified, by parents and pedagogues (and slowly being displaced by Asia’s pleasant, wickedly hardworking, bright, respectful kids). Glenn hasn’t quite gotten there, but he’s almost there.

Today Glenn galvanized his comedic gifts to roast this fattened goose. Not one Republican has done so satisfactorily. Laura Ingraham practically apologized for lampooning Meghan McCains’s unmistakable moronity; Michelle Malkin also backed down from a less-than adequate evisceration. Coulter opted out as usual, and said nothing much important (as she does on immigration).

Updated: Coakley’s Corrupt! What About Journalism?

Democrats, Ethics, Etiquette, IlanaMercer.com, Intelligence, Journalism, Liberty, Media, Political Philosophy, Private Property

WE KNOW that Attorney General Martha Coakley, who lost Ted Kennedy’s U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts, is at the very least philosophically corrupt. But what about the said omissions of those who’re supposed to check the “lady” and her posse? I mean the roving citizen journalists, endeavoring to expose her?

I watched the hereunder YouTube clip twice. Perhaps I missed something but, as far as I could see (and hear), nowhere did the “journalist” filming the Coakley goons’ crass conduct articulate for her viewers why they ought to be furious at the conduct of these fascistic public servants.

WATCH the clip. What lessons for citizens does it impart? How does this YouTube snippet help, or even convey, the cause of liberty? The answers to these questions: “Nada” to the first; “it doesn’t” to the second. Not unless you consider being polite and not calling journalists Nazis as contributions to liberty and freedom.

Goons say to journalist, “You are on private property.” Journalist replies softly, “We want some questions answered,” “Why so rude?,” and, “We’re on a public sidewalk.”

Unless “journalist” is able to append a principled tag to her gritty clip, the Democrat mafia appears merely impolite.

THE SHORT, SWEET instructive reply to these fattened fascists would have been this: “You are NOT on private property but on public, taxpayer-funded property. You and Coakley are civil servants, beholden to the public who pays your way.”

What service do you perform as a putative journalist if you cannot convey the only philosophical truth the viewer ought to take away from this snippet? None, as I am sure a Democrat journalist could easily film similar infractions.

All this journalist has done is add a tit to the other side’s tat.

I grow impatient with the “Age of the Idiot” activist. Resources such as this blog and its companion site, ilanamercer.com, can help the corrupt and the clueless (with attribution please) become acquainted with the now “defunct foundations of the republic.”

But to take instruction, one has to have courage and humility. Dream on, ilana.

Update (Jan. 24): Say the Democrat Party paid for the offices of this candidate. Is this property then accessible only to a select portion of the public? Was Coakley seeking to represent some constituents to the exclusion of others? At the very least, journalists ought to be able to pose such question, when a politician’s brown shirts turn them away from said premises on the grounds that the offices from which a candidate is operating are walled off from the individuals she is endevoring to represent.

What do you say?

Security With Intelligence

Affirmative Action, Government, Homeland Security, Intelligence, Israel, Terrorism

Inadvertently—and in a characteristically witty way—Isaac Yeffet seems to second my diagnosis that, “Homegrown retardation is far more pressing a problem than homegrown terrorism in modern-day America.”

The multi-talented Yeffet is the former security director of Israel’s airliner, El Al, “pioneer in counter-terrorism,” and entrepreneur.

Yeffet attempted to explain the concept of utilizing intelligence, as in brain power, to Huckabee. (Please someone locate and post that YouTube), but Heehaw Huck kept insisting on blaming the system.

Updated: ‘The System’ Did It

Free Markets, Government, Homeland Security, Intelligence, Propaganda, Regulation, Terrorism, The State

“A nimble adversary” is how Obama characterized a bunch of rag-tag terrorists—Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula—who had resorted to recruiting for their mission a clumsy, inept boy, about whom ample warnings existed in “The system.”

Mr. Abdulmutallab was not placed on the no-fly list “despite the government’s having information that showed him to be not only a threat, but also a threat with a visa to visit the United States.”

Inflating 23-year-old Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s abilities does wonders to lessen our failings, which are legion.

Remember and rehearse: What failed was the (intelligence) system. No flesh-and-blood was involved in the many monumental mistakes. All there was was an amorphous thing called “The system.”

Pray tell if you know of a private company, subject to market forces, getting away with assigning blame to their “system,” rather than to its constituent parts—individual operators. Such a firm would be without customers.

(And people who know they’d get fingered and fired from their private-sector jobs for such failings are clamoring for a public option to serve as competition to the health care insurance industry.)

Under the stumble-bumble Bush administration, we experienced, and forgave, the criminal negligence that facilitated the most devastating terrorist attack on US soil.

Condy Cow (CC) ignored “a 1999 report by the Library of Congress stating that suicide bombers belonging to al-Qaida could crash an aircraft into U.S. targets,” stating that it belonged to the realm of analysis, and wasn’t ‘actionable intelligence.'”

We’re still debating the same disconnected darn dots.

CC then blamed her ineptness on the need to reform Washington’s atrophied alphabet soup of intelligence agencies. Ten years on, the Obama administration is doing the same, although to his credit, the president has taken responsibility for the failures; says they embarrassed him, and accuses his people of letting him down (brownie point for Barack).

The bare-bones truth is that the National Security Council, headed by Rice, was an office created to advise the president on anything relating to national security and to facilitate inter-agency cooperation. If suspicion existed – analytic, synthetic, prosaic or poetic – Rice should have put the squeeze on the system she oversaw.”

The same goes for the people (the same folks, really) operating “The System” today.

On Condy’s watch America experienced perhaps the worst intelligence lapse ever: Remember the Phoenix FBI agent who wrote a memorandum about the bin Ladenites who were training in U.S. flight schools? Agent Ken Williams’ report was very specific. Over and above the standard sloth the memo met in the Washington headquarters, it transpired that the FBI was as concerned about ‘racial profiling’ then as it is today.

Since Bush, the way we talk about security failures has changed little, bar some semantic tweaks. Neither will it. There are simply no incentives in a government “system” to make it amenable to corrective feedback. The reason nothing changes is because of the nature of “The System.”

Update (Jan. 8): And the concept of terrorism in its aspirational stage? What state-speak is that?