2007 October 20 Saturday
National Security Types Fear IED Bombs In America

Elements of the US government fear that Muslims (not that they call them Muslims of course) will start setting off improvised explosive devices in American cities and towns.

The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI agree that the homemade explosive devices that have wreaked havoc in Iraq pose a rising threat to the United States. But lawmakers and first responders say the Bush administration has been slow to devise a strategy for countering the weapons and has not provided adequate money and training for a concerted national effort.

First off, more money for first responders will not prevent bombs from going off in the first place. Not having people around living in your society who try to plant bombs along streets and roads is the only way to prevent IEDs from going off in your society. Yet the reporter thinks it important to report how Washington DC's bomb squad uses trailers as offices whereas LA's bomb squad has a new $8 million building. News flash: The people in LA aren't any safer as a result. Hello Mr. Reporter. You should look a little more critically at self-serving sources of information.

We invaded Iraq. Our troops stayed for years. The locals and their Jihadist allies therefore got lots of opportunities for training and practice on what works. Now the Bush Administration fears they'll put all that practical training to effective use back in America.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who told the Senate last month that such bombs are terrorists' "weapon of choice," said yesterday at a local meeting that President Bush will soon issue a blueprint for countering the threat of improvised explosive devices, or IEDs. Chertoff's department said in a draft report on IEDs earlier this year that national efforts "lack strategic guidance, are sometimes insufficiently coordinated . . . and lack essential resources."

What does Mr. Chertoff think "strategic guidance" would look like? I'm sure he's not on the clue train for what we most obviously ought to do if we really think Muslim terrorists might start blowing up lots of bombs along busy streets in America. Does anyone have an idea what we ought to do about it? Show of hands? Anyone?

At the risk of stating the obvious: Keep Muslims out of America. If they aren't here they can't blow up bombs here.

Such a diabolical, fiendish plan is beyond the pale back in the halls of the US Department of Homeland Security and way beyond the pale in the White House. My guess is the Democratic National Committee would be horrified (at least publically) at the suggestion. But we already have 300 million people. We don't need any more. Most of the world is not Muslim in any case and therefore a visitor and immigrant ban specifically aimed at Muslims would not put a big crimp on commerce. Plus, a disproportionate amount of economic activity is concentrated among peoples who are not Muslims.

Here is what Mr. Chertoff imagines as elements of a strategy against IEDs:

He said his department has provided $1.7 billion in grants related to the IED threat, trained workers at 16 ports and deployed thousands of new explosives detectors at airports, and plans to increase the screening of small boats and private aircraft that might carry bombers or bombs.

Think about how huge American is. sensors at a handful of locations would provide little protection. Sensor systems do far more to assure the public than they do to provide protection.

Bomb makers who are in America don't need to smuggle bombs in. They can make bombs here. If IED makers make it into the United States with enough funding to go to work they won't need to target airplanes and ports. They'll be able to blow up bombs on very busy packed freeways and tunnels under rivers. The main problem occurs once we get bomb makers inside our borders. Techno-gadgetry in select locations will do little to protect us once that happens.

I think America exists primarily for the people who are already American citizens. I do not think we have a moral obligation to let in anyone who wants to come here. There is nothing morally wrong with trying to protect our way of life from people who believe in very different values and ways of living. I want to live in a relaxed society where security concerns do not require us to look around paranoically at people in airplanes or at boxes that fall off of trucks and lay on the sides of roads. I'm not willing to give that up just so we can pretend that all the peoples of the world share enough common values to all live together in Mayberry RFD.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2007 October 20 08:44 AM  Immigration Terrorism


Comments
Wolf-Dog said at October 20, 2007 4:01 PM:

The main problem with terrorism is that currently 70 % of the GDP of the U.S. happens to be consumption. Believe it or not, the world is competing for the privilege of manufacturing things for us to consume. If trade gets disrupted, then there will be shortages of every sort. Not just oil shortages.

dchamil said at October 20, 2007 4:16 PM:

Randall, with this post I think you just blew your chance of being invited to the president's Ramadan dinner next year!

Kenelm Digby said at October 21, 2007 6:29 AM:

Americans must be aware that a very substantial portion of 'British' immigrants and visitors to the USA are really Pakistanis, and that a substantial potion of those are fully indoctrinated in Islamism, are sympathetic to Al Qaida, and have even received 'basic training' at covert classrooms and camps situated in the UK.
Considering that those of Pakistani descent now probably account for 20% of births in the UK (This figure will grow, 'Mohammed' is the most popular boy's name in England), this is not a trivial warning.

Roach said at October 21, 2007 12:56 PM:

Our policy based on the false freedom of open borders requires us all to live in fear, under heavy security, and generally less free than we had previously been accustomed. As in monetary systems, the bad currency drives out the good.

Angry said at October 22, 2007 5:25 AM:

I am just surprised it hasn't happened already. I live in the NY metro area and we have a large muslim population, all of who I consider to be either terrorists or supporters of terror. In fact, the 9-11 terrorists hung out in a strip bar only a few blocks from where I used to live. There is no way that the local state and federal authorities can really do anything about this. We would all have to be in the police department. Ride a bus, take the subway, the PATH, Amtrak, etc...it is all one big, soft target just waiting for some lunatic with a bomb in a backpack. In London, the cleaning crews were scraping body parts off the walls. Muslims, whether "citizens" or not should be offered money to leave the US, if they don't take the cash and the plane ticket, they should be deported, at gunpoint, if necessary. Of course, that is only wishful thinking on my part. I guess plenty of people will have to get killed so we can show how polite and tolerant we are.

PS: Fuck you Chertoff.

Wolf-Dog said at October 24, 2007 4:17 AM:


But in any case, the American Muslim percentage is very low (%1 if you exclude the Muslim African Americans) compared to what is happening in Europe. In addition, I believe that the FAR more segregated European Muslims have much higher birth rate than American Muslims. Thus despite the American military involvement with the Muslim world, the real problem for the US is much smaller than Europe if the US manages to cut its losses and withdraw to its shell. But if the US withdraws, then Europe will almost certainly suffer more blackmailing when the oil supplies fall into the hands of the emerging Islamic superpower.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright