“We had to destabilize the area, in order to save it.” – William Lehman

“We had to destabilize the area, in order to save it.” – William Lehman

An alleged expert on economics named Thomas Piketty has written a screed on how to combat Daesh… Well, first off, Dr. Piketty is not just an Economist, He seems to be the inheritor of the crown from Keynes on the school of “let’s redistribute the worlds wealth so that everyone has the same outcome” now since Mommy and Daddy where Trotskyites, this is not terribly surprising. In his biography he quickly claims to be “a firm believer in capitalism, private property, and the market”. He keeps using those words, I don’t think they mean what he thinks they mean. I base this belief on the observation that his PHD thesis and all of his later work is completely wrapped around the concept of wealth redistribution and the glories of Socialism. (Which of course gives him firm chops as a believer in the market/snerk\)

Well, with this sort of background, you can guess I am sure, what his solution to Daesh is, and you would be right… As explained by Jim Tankersley’s blog (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/30/why-inequality-is-to-blame-for-the-rise-of-the-islamic-state/?utm_content=bufferad4c4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer) He believes that Inequality is a major driver of Middle Eastern terrorism, and yes, folks, it’s all our (the west) fault. He goes on to point out that the M.E. political and social system is fragile because of the high concentration of oil wealth in few countries with relatively little population, in fact he claims (possibly not without reason) that it’s the worst in the planet. All in all, he claims that the “have not’s” are in a state of semi-slavery, which causes the Jihadists, along with the casualties of the wars in the region, perpetuated by “the West”. “These are the regimes that are militarily and politically supported by Western powers, all too happy to get some crumbs to fund their [soccer] clubs or sell some weapons. No wonder our lessons in social justice and democracy find little welcome among Middle Eastern youth.” We should combat this by “ensure(ing) that Middle eastern oil money funds “regional development,” including far more education”

So let me get this straight. The way to combat Daesh is to force (since they are unlikely to do it willingly) the five or six relatively stable governments (note I said relative) to do what they have proven over the last century that they will not do on their own. IE distribute the wealth equally with the enemy tribes within their own nation. And this will stop Daesh from being able to recruit. This seems to be the basic bottom line to his whole manifesto, if only we the west could make the governments of Saudi, UAE, Qatar etc. give more of their money to help the people instead of helping the people in power, all would be sweetness, light and unicorn farts.

Well the problems with that theory are legion, but let’s just hit a couple high notes.
First the vast majority of the clowns in high places in Daesh (and I’m speaking anything above cannon fodder) are middle class or upper class. They have degrees from various universities, here and abroad. These are not the poor, the poor don’t as a rule revolt, at least not successfully. But get the middle class and upper class pissed (cough G. Washington, P. Revere, T. Jefferson etc etal) and you have a problem. Based on how they are running the areas they do control, they have made it obvious that they’re no Clara Barton distributing free lollypops to the peoples. They just want to be the guys that get all the money, instead of being second tier, and they want the power.
Second how in God’s earth are you going to make the house of Saud do this? Asking pretty please ain’t likely to help. So you’re going to have to force it. Let’s examine this for a second. To stabilize an area we are going to want to destabilize the regimes that are semi stable??? To save the village we had to destroy it? Now don’t mistake me, I am second to none in my complete disrespect for the douches that make up the ruling family in Saudi. But throwing another nation into chaos is just not likely to help. Throwing all the semi stable nations in the region into chaos (wait, isn’t that what Obama tried with the “Arab Spring”? How the fuck is that working for you sparky?) well, I just don’t see that as a reasonable answer.

Daesh has shown themselves to be an excellent opportunistic virus. Find a place with a power vacuum and they’re THERE! Syria, Iraq (another thank you to Obama, for that, though in fairness, Bush was already working on pulling us out, mainly because the Iraqi government wouldn’t give us a Status of Forces agreement that we could live with. Was Bush bluffing? We don’t know. We do know that Obama pulled us out, and Daesh moved in) and Libya (again a hat tip to Arab Spring, and O) all have very large and effective going concerns as part of the umbrella that is Daesh. Now this putz wants us to destabilize more governments to force them to redistribute the wealth…

Tell you what Sparky, show me a place that Redistribution of wealth has worked for more than fifteen years before everything went to shit, and tell me how much of what I EARN you get to take to give to the people that don’t earn anything, and we can talk. (my answer will probably still be NO, but we can at least talk)

217 responses to ““We had to destabilize the area, in order to save it.” – William Lehman

  1. James Schardt

    Iraq was bluffing on the SOFA. They were more surprised than we were when we pulled out. It was actually only a few hardliners that didn’t like us anyways that were causing trouble with the talks. They thought they were still dealing with a Bush. Instead, they got Biden.

    • I believe the Arabs like to ‘haggle’ when buying or selling. The Iraqis expected something in return for the SOFA. Didn’t have to be significant, just proof that they stood-up to the US in the agreement.
      As for Piketty, like all socialist, he has a solution (wealth redistribution) he likes, so he fits it to every problem he sees. Old have a hammer, every problem is a nail. What is so frustrating is all the times and places that has been tried and the result is always #FAIL.

      • Donald, EXACTLY

      • So, Obama’s refusal to haggle was a matter of disrespecting the Arab culture? Sheesh – what a cowboy!

      • One notices that Piketty doesn’t notice that in the Middle East, rich vs poor is tied, pretty hard, to oil. Yet there are places in the world with oil that are rich. It might occur to him that the inequality there is the inequality between a lottery winner and his neighbors and reflects a far deeper problem: why can’t they make themselves wealthy by any other means?

    • I suspect as much, but Can’t prove it.

  2. The sad fact is that the US government is probably supporting Daesh directly or indirectly. Meditate on that for a while.

    • because the ‘support no one and just let them stew’ option has worked so well in the past.

    • Chris, your hat’s too tight. use more tinfoil next time.

      • Tricky. With this president, conspiracy theories and paranoid thoughts are probably reasonable.
        Give guns to Mexican cartels to promote gun control in US? Check
        Use IRS to blindside and encumber political opponents? Check
        Destabilize multiple Arab countries? Check
        Leave Ukraine high and dry, abort missile defense in NATO allies? Check
        Promote racial tensions at home? Check
        Don’t know if this picture will show…

      • Morrigan, go play outside in the sandbox or read some more fantasy while the adults talk about “Real Life” at the “Big Table”. If you want to continue to believe in the goodness of the US government we can get you some milk and cookies later.

        • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

          Well Mr. Nelson, you were sounding like a Lefty blaming everything bad on the US.

          Now you’re sounding like a real jerk.

          • The Other Sean

            Blaming Obama and his cronies is almost never wrong. OTOH, perhaps it is in this case.

            • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

              Blaming Obama may be correct, but slamming another poster here is not. [Frown]

              • The Other Sean

                A good point, indeed. “Can’t we all just get along?”

              • And tinfoil hat and “Lefty” isn’t slamming. If I was a SJW, I’d be screaming “microaggressions” and failing my arms. LOL

                If you want to wish in the goodness/competence of our current administration or ignore history or believe that 2 + 2 = 5, then somebody may call you on it. As for tinfoil conspiracies go, it’s obvious that to a knowledgeable, broadly well read person* that the situation has been SNAFU for sometime.

                *(I mean someone that reads more than just the SFF genre and mainstream media. A good place to start is this page or sources collected by Ed Wallace. http://www.insideautomotive.com/sources.htm)

              • Particularly the author of the guest post.

                • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

                  That’s a mistake. [Wink]

                  Of course, part of the problem for me is that I have somewhat agreed with other comments about “wearing tin-lined hats” but I absolutely hate comments about “shut up and listen to the Adults talk”.

                  I’ve heard too much from the Lefties about them being the Adults with everybody else being the Children.

                  Of course, it doesn’t help when the Lefties are the ones behaving like little children. [Frown]

          • Paul,

            I don’t like the facts and the situations going on in the world. But I’m not going to ignore them and sing Kumbaya around the campfire and pretend that Washington is the source of unicorns that poop ice cream. 10 years ago folks said that I had a tin foil hat when I politely reminded them about the NSA and their abilities. You see how well the egg looks on their face now days.

            As for the “Lefty” comment? I don’t solely blame the US. I blame the lack of true ethical/moral leadership in the world. The folks trualy in power are playing their “Great Game” which doesn’t take make consideration for the common or uncommon people that are affected by their shenanigans.

            And I’m not Left. Last night was “data night” for me and my bride, which we spent at the local gun range working on our Winchester/NRA pistol qualifications. I’m as about Left as Eric Raymond, but I’m not as right as Vox Day.

          • Accusing the US government of doing something isn’t the same as accusing the US as a nation of doing it… yet. If Mr. Nelson is being a jerk for responding to the accusation that he is a tinfoil-hat-wearing-nut with what amounts to “grow up” then how long before we see demands for safe carp-free spaces here?

            Personally I would be shocked if the US wasn’t providing support for ISIS in some way. (The Tsarnov brothers were getting welfare from Mass. Hasan was on the Army payroll. Surely these guys can figure out how to commit some kind of NGO or welfare fraud at least.)

            The question in my mind is more: Is the U.S. gov’t deliberately helping ISIS? It would not surprise me if they were in limited (they hope) ways. I think we are serious about not wanting them to make gains in Iraq and fighting them there, but at the same time I think there would be few tears shed in the present Administration if ISIS had some successes against Assad (and now the Russians) in Syria. I don’t think for one minute the current presidential administration in the US would shrink from slipping some intel to ISIS (or some bad intel to their opponents) if it would help them achieve some convenient tactical or operational victory over our ‘competitors’ for regional influence there. This crew is very enamored by their own cleverness and too narcissistic, I’m afraid, to fear that they’d be ‘too clever by half’ and wind up having the worm turn on them.

        • Nelson, I fully understand why you might get confused, with two different names, (though the pictures are the same) but I’m the guy that wrote the blog that you’re replying to… That means I get to sit at the big table.

          • A CROSS-DRESSER! Are the horns tucked under the hat in your other picture? Quite a few people use different names here, I always assumed it was to protect them from the wrath of TOR.

            • Snicker. No, it’s more of the complications of working off different computers at different times of the day, plus the complication of how various programs work. Once you’re on a system with a moniker, you’re stuck with it, and if you’re logging on from a different setup (like in this case, my .navy.mil account…) well trying to make all of your presences on the either match is more work than I find it’s worth.

      • No. I’ve heard the same from people in the military. Only instead of US government read “this administration.” I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I know it worries me. Things like “the US switched sides in the war on terror” are horrifying.

        • Think of all the bad things we know ‘this administration’ has done. 1-Gun Running to Mexico, 2-No border security 3-Catch and Release Illegals with criminal records 4-Let an Ambassador and three others die because no one wanted to pick up the phone at 3AM. 5-Rumors that military that tried to rescue ‘our own’ were relieved of command.

          The things that have ‘leaked out’ are odious to the extreme. I’m afraid that when we find out *all* the things, our horror will be ten-fold.

    • If he means “We probably managed to give money and support to some of the wrong people, especially if close personal friends of Obama liked them,” it’s probably true. I’m sure some of those Syrian groups are affiliated with everybody convenient.

      But on purpose? No.

      • BobtheRegisterredFool

        But Vox Day….

        Obama doesn’t seem to appoint top level officials that he doesn’t have a powerful hold on. It seems remotely possible that anyone in a position to put the whole picture together is so much his creature that they won’t. Or at least they won’t blow the whistle. Add in the unbelievable incompetence, and I can see them doing it on purpose with an underwear gnome justification.

      • This^ I agree is more likely than not. Frankly I differentiate between what the guy sitting at 1600 Pa. Ave does, from what “the United States” does.

        • Me too. Sorry if I got confused.

          I’m trying to figure out the calculus that makes the man in the White House figure that a little more oil not being spilled in the desert is more important than hundreds of thousands of lives.

          Maybe BP and Haliburton should be tried for genocide for the Gulf spill or Exxon for the Alaska spill.

          Silly me! Corporations are people, unless they commit crimes…

          • But don’t you see — spilling oil in the desert might destroy the habitat of some rare endangered species of desert lizard/mouse/bug indistinguishable from about a dozen other related nearby species of desert lizard/mouse/bug except to a trained biologist.

            Whereas there seem to be an excessive number of humans who contribute to global environmental degradation, so the loss of a few hundred million of them is acceptable. Unfortunate, but not significant in the overall, high altitude view from the ivory tower.

            As for our contributing to ISIS/ISIL/IS/NOT IS/Daesh/Dot/Whatever — the reports I’ve seen indicate it is formed of the remnants of Saddam’s Republican Guard, radicalized and transformed, so it is all the fault of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld for not doing something or other which the Left would have screamed about had they done it.

            • Since it is a desert, could we release some Arrakian Spice Worms in the place (just some small ones 100′-200′ long)? It would greatly reduce the unnecessary strife and wars, and provide a steady source of income other than oil.

  3. Chris is right. They support and pay the same militia groups on one side of the border and fight them on the other side. It’s insane.

    • So.. international policy overall now makes as much sense as the LBJ ‘strategy’ in Vietnam? Ouch. Very ouch. Much ouch. So ouch.

      • Even to point of micromanaged targeting

      • So.. international policy overall now makes as much sense as the LBJ ‘strategy’ in Vietnam?

        Lyndon Johnson told the nation
        have no fear of escalation
        I am trying everyone to please
        And thou it really isn’t war
        I’m sending fifty thousand more
        To help save Vietnam from the Vietnamese.

        From a song by Tom Paxton.

        Because he was so afraid of possibly leading us into a nuclear World War III with those supporting the communist forces in Vietnam, and because he so wanted to remake America and be popular with the people President Johnson moved by half measures, wasted the lives of American forces and failed utterly.

        Thinking about it present policy may be very much like that.

        • Only massively stupider, because we’re dealing with 3rd generation red diaper babies, indoctrinated beyond whatever capacity they had to reason and think.

          • I’m not sure on the stupider… I fear it might be massively greater malice. I mean his wife lived her most of her life before she was ‘proud’ of anything the US had done.

            • Ladybird did see that pretty flowers were planted by the roadside.

              The present first lady has rendered school lunches even more inedible in the eyes of the students.

            • Come now – you don’t actually believe she is proud of anything the US has done even now, do you?

              • Well, she was at least happy (at the time) that the country elected Obama president. Probably considered it our stupidity instead of being proud. I think her stay as First Female with massive staff isn’t enough in her mind.

                CACS: Yes, not only the flowers, but the willingness to have America call her ‘Ladybird’ speaks well of her.

        • The one thing I recall from reading Charlie Company was that is made no sense to those where there. They figured even if they ‘simply’ formed up all across the southern border of South Vietnam and just marched north, the method and results would make more sense. Amazingly simplistic? Yes. Horribly inefficient? Yes. Still probably better than what was done? Sadly.

  4. The basic problem with this is _taking_ the wealth and _giving_ it to others.

    What we need to encourage–everywhere–is the wealthy _using_ the money to start corporations and _employing_ people.

    This is an uphill battle in the parts of the Middle East where there is not a culture and history of the dignity of working for other people. Every man wants to be the one who owns the goats. The goat herders are dirt beneath their feet. Generally Pakistani, these days.

    Just giving away money doesn’t fix a culture mired in the mindset of nomadic herders.

    Hell, handouts are regressing whole areas in the West. Welfare ghettos where jobs have gone from hard to get to a chumps game.

    • So many ‘nails’ (unevenly distributed wealth) and always the same glass hammer to drive them (“just redistribute it!”). Arranging things so those ‘without’ can – and can see how they can – *work*/*provide value* and thus generate their own wealth is harder… but that hammer is made of steel, perhaps with a lead slug. It’s a right bastard to swing, BUT the damn thing works.

    • The idea that works is part of one’s vocation (i.e. how one lives a proper and godly life) seems to be strictly European, with some Chinese parallels (but not completely identical.) How do you convince a culture backed by a thousand +years of raiding and plundering craft workers and farmers that the best thing to do is settle down and start farming and doing craft work (or the modern equivalent?) It didn’t work so well when the US government tried it with the Plains Indians, and they didn’t have the cultural substructure of the Middle East/South Asia. *shrug* ‘Tis a challenge indeed.

      • Raiding and plunder has to become seen as a losing proposition. “Here’s how to die ignominiously.” or “Here’s how to get maimed, and then laughed at – *forever* – for being so damn stupid.” Not nice. Not easy.

        • The Other Sean

          Raiding and plundering tend to stop when three things happen:
          1. The raiding and plundering has so shifted economic patterns such that there’s not enough left to plunder.
          2. The raiders are sufficiently discouraged via violence.
          3. The raiders take over permanently. (See vikings for example.)

          • Raiding and plundering can occur “bloodlessly” by buying the government and paying for the laws that allow a select group to raid and plunder economically.

      • BobtheRegisterredFool

        So my settle the mid east and put the surviving natives on reservations plan actually has some justification? It is still too much trouble to be worth it if we could find a cheaper way to make the old world leave us alone.

      • I think the ‘rule of law’ (in spite of being badly damaged by VileProgs) and respect for private property are two of the pre-conditions. I think the Chinese way is similar, with an element of ‘don’t get caught’.
        I get depressed by some of the VileProg efforts. One recent WaPo article was some next-generation Bush going to bat for land owners on the Red River against the Bureau of Land Management (Don’t google BLM, another ‘group’ has taken over the acronym.) The river changed course (imagine that) and after three generations of Texans have worked and lived there, the BLM has decided it is ‘public land’.
        Now, the BLM is one thing, but in the comment section, many of the readers were like ‘Throw them off, they just want to drill for oil’ or ‘All this land belongs to America, they are squatters.’ No consideration for 3+ generations of blood, sweat, toil and tears, just the State is just, you will be assimilated.

        • What is the over/under on percentage of the people saying ‘All this land belongs to America, they are squatters’ are also Open borders supporters?

          I just might want a piece of that pool if the % is under 80.

    • BobtheRegisterredFool

      This. I wouldn’t say it is the only basic problem, but they are proposing to fix the economy and create wealth by raping the economy and creating poverty.

    • Stop taxing and regulating the crap out of business, and it’s happy to spend the extra profit on expanding, which means hiring more people. Tax and over-regulate, and business shrinks, jobs go away. This is evidently very hard to understand. I submit that if government were taxed and regulated as a business, it would soon shrink to its natural size.

  5. BobtheRegisterredFool

    As I said on MGC earlier this week, there is an implication to both this proposal to fix terrorism, which Harf has also advocated, and the gun control proposal to stop shootings.

    Many of the terrorist leadership have western engineering degrees.

    If both assertions are correct, we should be restricting the study of engineering both to the number the economy can provide jobs for, and to those wealthy enough to afford an engineering education without loans or scholarships.

  6. Here is my proposal to destroy Muslim terrorism: create a federal Bureau of Muslim Affairs who’s sole job is to care for Muslims and promote Muslim extremism. Model them on the Dept. of Education. In a generation there will be 10 BoMA employees for every remaining actual Muslim in the world and midnight SWAT team raids will be tracking down the last few unlicensed, non-union violent jihad instructors.

  7. An alleged expert on economics named Thomas Piketty has written a screed on how to combat Daesh… …
    … We should combat this by “ensure(ing) that Middle eastern oil money funds “regional development,” including far more education” …
    So let me get this straight. The way to combat Daesh is to force (since they are unlikely to do it willingly) the five or six relatively stable governments (note I said relative) to do what they have proven over the last century that they will not do on their own.

    Yeah. If you believe that is possible then picture this:

    Because that’s easier said than done.

  8. Yeah, inequality is the driver … it works like this:

    “You have something. I want it. I’ll kill you and take it.”

    They used to call that “Imperialism”. What has happened to leftist language these days??!

  9. Piffle. Daesh are the jayvee of terrorism, so we don’t need to do anything of the level Pikety claims to deal with the likes of them. We can rebuke Daesh by holding a huge carbon footprint Global Warming Climate Change Conference at which all the attendees squander millions of dollars, eat fabulous five-star meals (try the sorbet, dahling! It’s $36 but you can charge it to the taxpayers) and preen for an international audience.

    Yep, that’ll show Daesh! Not sure just exactly what, but it will certainly show them.

    White House adviser Valerie Jarrett explains.

    • I believe it will show them that we are utter morons, and they really only need to worry about the Russian threat.

  10. Read a very interesting article by Dick Morris today that stated ISIS is making on the order of $2 million a day off the oil they take from Iraqi fields. The wells and refineries being fixed targets of known location you would think that they would be obvious military objectives. Instead, our bombers have been instructed to leave them strictly alone as taking them out would have environmental and infrastructure consequences.
    This policy ostensibly comes directly from POTUS as his driving concern is over climate change and global warming and pollution. ISIS terrorists are simply a nuisance that as a lawyer and community organizer he can explain away with clever rhetoric.
    I know Morris can sometimes live up to his first name, but he does often bring up valid points.

  11. Christopher M. Chupik

    It’s official: Piketty understands the Middle East as well as he does economics.

    Not at all.

    • I was going to say that if there is any evidence that Piketty has more than three brain cells to rub together, I have yet to see it.

      • The Other Sean

        Piketty has been observed verbalizing. Even mere Progressive blather requires more than three brain cells… though how much more intelligence than a five year old is an open question.

        • Half a century ago, one of Mack Reynolds’ characters said, “If economists could guess better than random chance even 51% of the time, they should be millionaires.”

          • On the other hand, there was a prominent economist who was lamenting that politicians never ask economists questions the latter can answer. Economists can tell you what will happen if you impose rent controls, raise the minimum wage, or raise taxes. What they can’t tell you is how to eliminate poverty or grow the economy. Unfortunately for us, far too many non-economists with economics degrees have the ears of far too many politicians.

  12. Don’t care how many examples he comes up with, I still ain’t gonna talk with him. Unless you call dressing down, and cursing to several generations to be “talking”. I’m a bit loud for it to be talking.

  13. Christopher M. Chupik

    But his ignorance is hardly surprising. We live in an era where the current POTUS believes that global warming causes high tides and that fish swim through the streets of Miami. What is some redistributionist nonsense compared to idiocy on that scale?

  14. That was unfair to Keynes.
    While I find most of his ideas morally repugnant, they’re much more psych ops aimed at attempting to defeat the business cycle than they are attempts at redistribution.
    His central insight was that uncertainty freezes liquidity, and his goal was to use the government, media, and whatever other lever came to hand to inject certainty and stability into the market.
    Mass redistribution does pretty much the opposite of that. (Look at his quotes about the evils of inflation. They’re very much on point to this discussion.)

    I was aghast during Obama’s first term when the media was talking about his embrace of Keynesian economics–for doing things Keynes had specifically argued against.
    (I’m almost convinced they stuck a magnet in his corpse and wrapped his coffin in copper wire in a truly unhinged alternative energy experiment.)

  15. OT: Sandy “Socks” Berger shuffled off the mortal coil. Archive researchers around the world are standing at their tables and giving his spirit the Sinal Salute or Hawaiian Peace Sign as it passes.

    • BobtheRegisterredFool

      I want to know how the ferryman’s fee was potentially so damaging to the Clinton campaign that they needed it gone now.

  16. BobtheRegisterredFool

    Gunshots fired in California.
    Now I’m a rumormonger.
    Crimefornia has many shootings.
    I dunno. Burma Shave.

  17. Second name released. Ah….not Swedish…

    • And a question my son had: How did CAIR have time to hook up with the Sayeed Farook brother in law and plan a press conference before we peasants got told the name through the media?

      • The Other Sean

        Not that I’m not suspicious of CAIR, but there may be an innocent explanation in the form of next-of-kin notifications. (Do they do those for perpetrators as well as victims?) Even if the brother-in-law wasn’t next of kin for Farook or wife, one of his kin may have been, and let him know before the name got out through the media.

  18. And Moonbeam Brown is sending out the wrong message:

    California Gov. Jerry Brown canceled the state’s annual Christmas tree lighting ceremony Wednesday night “out of respect for Californians affected by today’s tragedy,”

    He should be inviting as many as can make it to the ceremony, making it a memorial to those slain today by more misunderstanders of islam. Especially so since it appears the central target of the attack WAS a Christmas party.

    • Apparently Brown doesn’t want to deliver a powerful rebuke to those terrorists.

    • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

      First I don’t like Governor Moonbeam.

      However, I wonder if he’s in a no-win situation.

      Hold the tree lighting and IMO there would be people complaining about holding it “after this tragedy”.

      Obviously, he’s getting complaints about postponing it.

      No matter what he does there will be complaints. [Frown]

  19. Batten the hatches. Moral equivalence is on the way. It’s really all they’ve got, as moronic as it is.

  20. Well, here’s something to warm our hearts a bit; Burl Ives singing “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day.”

    Good night.

  21. Another thing to consider. Reports from the scene- which very well may be wrong- are that the weapons were fully automatic. If so- where did they come from? Gun stores don’t carry them. And if you’re going to be honest about the illegal gun trade, a couple of mid-easterners showing up to purchase some FAW’s from a gang banger are unlikely to leave the purchase point with their money, the guns, or their lives. And just about any other type of illegal arms dealer in the U.S. is likely to drop a dime on mid-easterners purchasing FAWs. They may be in an illegal trade, but they’re not stupid. That leaves them being smuggled in directly for jihad and being stored and distributed from- where? My guess would be a mosque. As for where they were smuggled from- the mid-east is full of AK-47 FAWs.

    Of course, they could have taken some SAWs and modified to FAWs. I doubt it.

    Just pure total speculation on my part.

    • BobtheRegisterredFool

      I’m silly tired, and contrarian; the only alternative I can think of sounds conspiracy crazy.

      ATF forced a legitimate dealer to make the sale secretly.

      I think I saw a report of an AR, but I have no confidence in that.

    • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

      The “automatic weapons” appears to be wrong but there are reports that the weapons were legally purchased.

  22. a useful quote occurs to me:

    Men do not become tyrants in order that they may not suffer cold. — Aristotle