Category Archives: Lord Love a Duck

Counter-ISIL Strategy: Designed to fail.

Did we call it? USS Arleigh Burke launches Tomahawks against targets that essentially round off to zero. Navy photo.

Did we call it? USS Arleigh Burke launches Tomahawks against targets that essentially round off to zero last night, as part of the Potemkin offensive. Navy photo.

The president has a simple, straightforward strategy for combating ISIL in the Middle East. But there’s just one problem with it: it’s designed to fail.

As he describes the Allied approach, it comprises ground forces provided by the Iraqis, along with separately-stovepiped air forces provided by the US (and possibly some allies, if he can convince any of them to sign on to a war he himself prosecutes halfheartedly). The problem is, for precision strikes to be effective you need two things: one, eyes on target to control and direct the fire, and two, precision guided munitions. In the past every attempt to use one or the other in isolation has come a cropper.

For example, the Kosovo War was conducted by PGM without eyes on the ground. Most of the ordnance was wasted on decoys or mistaken targets. In 1998, the US conducted a retaliatory strike against several Al-Qaeda-related targets in Afghanistan and Africa. The strikes were carried out using PGMs – specifically, sea-launched cruise missiles. The missiles we will have we hit their targets, but the targets were at best, worthless: in Afghanistan, we blew up the empty bleachers at training camps; and at worst, counterproductive: in Africa, we blew up an unrelated factory because of bad intelligence. In 1993, in Somalia, we tried putting Special Operations Forces on the ground without PGMs or, for that matter, any air support to speak of. We know how that worked out.

Precision guided munitions and drone strikes appeal to Washington politicians because politicians are men of incrementalism and half-measures and compromises, and these weapons are half-measures. War is no place for half-measures; ask a Vietnam veteran.

Some in the commentariat see the problem, that is, the problem of will and intent, if not the tactical and operational problem of how these half-measures can be even half-effective without skilled guidance from the ground, in close proximity to the targets (and therefore, in close proximity to the enemy). Angelo Codevilla, writing in The Federalist:

This indulgence so overwhelms our ruling class’s perception of reality that the recipes put forth by its several wings, little different from one another, are identical in the one essential respect: none of them involve any plans which, if carried out, would destroy the Islamic State, kill large numbers of the cut-throats, and discourage others from following in their footsteps. Hence, like the George W. Bush’s “war on terror” and for the same reasons, this exercise of our ruling class’s wisdom in foreign affairs will decrease respect for us while invigorating our enemies.

via Washington’s Ruling Class Is Fooling Itself About The Islamic State.

Codevilla is right, and he is right on target: none of the plans being kicked around by the amateur strategists in DC have either the intent or the capability of defeating the enemy.

There’s another problem with the absence of boots on the ground — what happens when a pilot goes down? Without a PR package on standby, he or she stars on al-Jazeera’s Beheading of the Week.

History tells us how Fortune disposes of irresolute half-measures. We’ve mentioned Vietnam, but another eerie parallel to the situation now unfolding in Syria and Iraq (and threatening Jordan and Lebanon) is the Bay of Pigs invasion of April 17-19, 1961.

Operation Bumpy Road was ordered by President Eisenhower, but was not ready to execute yet… and therefore the go/no-go decision fell to Eisenhower’s successor, John F Kennedy.

But Kennedy couldn’t decide, “go” or “no-go”. Instead he, And his brother, Atty. Gen. Robert F. Kennedy, decided to micromanage the invasion plan. They moved the invasion, from a place where a failure could’ve left the survivors in good position to conduct guerrilla warfare from the mountains, to a place where a failure would have left the survivors defenseless on the water’s edge. And then they cut the planned Exile Air Force airstrikes, to well below the minimum the professional planners had originally been willing to accept. (Once the operation was undeway, RFK cut the strikes still further).

Result: the biggest US foreign policy fiasco of the 20th Century.

And it looks like the prototype of what they’re planning now.

Well, the 21st Century is young.

UPDATE

Well, what did we tell you? The image we just added to this is not a file photo of the futile, symbolic, domestic-politics-driven cruise missile pinpricks against AQ in 1998. No, it’s from last night’s futile, symbolic, domestic-politics-driven cruise missile pinpricks against Khorasan (same Islamic turd with a new label on the punch bowl):

U.S. strikes hit the group’s “training camps, an explosives and munitions production facility, a communications building, and command and control facilities,” according to a Pentagon statement released Tuesday morning.

…White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes …

Wait, was he the guy who used to be a campaign flack, or the guy who used to be a campaign van driver? We get our incompetent national security officials confused sometimes…

Rhodes said that Syrian opposition forces alone are “certainly unable” to combat the threat of the Khorasan Group.

What Syrian oppo is he referring to? ISIL, against whom we’re supposedly also launching ineffectual pinpricks with one eye on the approval ratings and the other on the midterm elections? The Al-Nusra Front, which has made common cause with AQ? AQ itself? There’s no western, pluralistic opposition.  They were wiped out during a previous period of half-measures and poll-watching!

And what good can we expect a handful of Tomahawk pinpricks directed at empty bleachers (“training camps”) and mud huts (“explosives and munitions production … and command and control facilities”) to do? Ah, but it makes a manikin look more like a man, perhaps.

And finally — the Navy was critically low on Tomahawks before this little play opened in off-Broadway national security theater. Now they’re lower than that, and nothing to show for it.

 

“Non-Traditional Legal Analysis” of Self-Defense Case

Law-ScaleAndHammerSurely you remember the George Zimmerman trial? We mean the one in the courtroom where he was acquitted in about the length of time it took the jury to choose a foreman. But we understand if you may be thinking of the much louder one that took place in the media, where the President and the press sentenced him to be hung, drawn and quartered, salted, boiled and eaten, with the trial to follow, in no particular rush since the outcome was already res judicata and known far and wide.

Well, the University of Miami law school has decided that its assembly line for unemployed JDs would not be complete without a course on the case, to be taught by a lawyer from the firm that managed the other trial (the media-circus variety). Andrew Branca, who tweeted the bulk of the trial from a live TV feed, and wrote extensively about it, brings the snark:

A short-course on the Zimmerman trial could, of course, be utterly fascinating, if taught by the attorneys actually involved: Angela Corey, Bernie de la Rionda, and John Guy for the State, and Mark O’Mara and Don West for the defense. The trial strategies and tactics involved, the various decision-points and choices made, how set-backs were overcome, or not overcome, would all be vastly insightful.

Alas, that is not what this course is to offer. Its focus will instead be far less substantive: social justice, generally, and a great many specifics never actually relevant to the trial. Among these are:

  • “federal civil rights violations”–none were ever found, despite tremendous resources devoted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
  • “Stand Your Ground”–never at any point relevant in either the physical confrontation nor the criminal trial
  • “international human rights standards”–oofah

At its heart, of course, the Zimmerman trial was simply a very straightforward and traditional case of an aggressor committing a vicious aggravated assault upon an entirely innocent victim, that victim lawfully defending themselves with a legally carried pistol, and the aggressor dying as a result of that lawful act of self-defense.

There’s not much room for “social justice” there, however, so instead in this course  “…students will engage in non-traditional legal analysis, exploring the literature on the sociological intersection of race and the law, and examine and reflect on complementary forms of advocacy, such as the use of the media as a tool of advocacy….” (emphasis added)

“Non-traditional legal analysis”? “Sociological intersection of race and the law”? “Use of the media as a tool of advocacy”? Yeah, that sounds like Crump & Park, alright.

Question: How’d that work out for them in the Zimmerman trial?

But wait, there’s more: “The course will highlight . . . the ability of music to communicate messages that impact legal reform.”

Music.  Oofah.

via Trayvon Martin | George Zimmerman | University of Miami.

We think “oofah” is Andrew’s version of “Lord Love a Duck.”

Look, Zimmerman is a poor candidate for sainthood, but he didn’t murder anybody. And when “social justice” comes to conclusions diametrically opposed to the actual justice system with courts and everything, it earns its scare quotes.

It’s worth going to the original post at Legal Insurrection to see one of Andrew’s finds — the same airheaded attorney that will teach this “class” in a four minute snit (stet) on the Greta Van Susteren show after Zimmerman was acquitted. You will be amused to learn, having seen her struggle to match wits with Van Susteren, that her undergrad minors at Georgia were Political Science and African American Studies, both of which require a student to fog a mirror for an
“A”; and her law degree is from Florida State University Law, another assembly line for unemployed JDs which places about two-thirds of graduates in law positions. The single biggest employer of FSU Law graduates is government.

The Greatest Jet Never – the TSR-2

These short newsreels depict the TSR.2, a revolutionary warplane that was quietly taken out and shot (literally; the protype ended up on a tank range as a target) by a declining Britain in 1966.

TSR2-Newsreels.mkv

(You need a .mkv video player to play this. We recommend VLC).

The TSR-2 had planned capabilities than nothing in RAF service quite matches today. These inclue a design speed of Mach 1.1 at 200 feet, and Mach 2 at altitude, with a combat radius of over 1,000 nautical miles. It was designed for nuclear and conventional strikes. It had a precision strike capability 10 to 20 years ahead of the US’s developments in that genre, including capability to deliver television-guided smart weapons. It had modular reconnaissance capability, including live datalink. It was, militarily speaking, a revolution in the air.

So why did it die so early, and so hard? What killed the TSR-2?

  • British politics, in part. It became a football contested by the Labor and Conservative parties of the time, not on its merits but as a way to score points on the other side. It didn’t help that the plane was designed with a potential war with the USSR in mind, and Harold Wilson just couldn’t see the Soviet Union as an enemy.
  • Galactically bad judgment by British MOD and parliamentary leaders, going back to Sir Duncan Sandys (pronounced “Sands”) and his 1957 Defence White Paper which concluded that the manned aircraft was obsolete, and Britain henceforth would place its faith entirely in missiles and other robotic systems. Was this decision the dumbest in the history of air war — dumber than Hitler’s 1942 decision not to produce jet fighters? Unlike Hitler, Sandys was a man of generally good judgment; he had been deeply involved in the nation-saving development of Radar, and many other British technical coups of WWII. But unlike England, Germany’s aeronautical industry recovered (until pan-European consolidation, but that’s another complaint). The British leaders who actually killed off the jet, Secretary of State for Defence Denis Healey and Minister of Aviation Roy Jenkins (who later, as Home Secretary, would do his best to decriminalize crime),
  • Britain’s Soviet-inspired postwar industrial policy, which relied on central planning and forced consolidations in the thriving and innovative British aeronautical industry. (The one holdout against forced consolidation, Handley-Page, was forced into bankruptcy instead, and the planners counted this a victory). Thousands of aeronautical engineers and tens of thousands of skilled workers lost their jobs (perhaps a third to a half of them found new jobs in Canada or the USA. The guys who went to Canada wound up in the USA when Canada had a similar brainstroke vis-a-vis the CF-105).

english_workers_use_an_english_wheel_to_make_tsr_skins

  • The inability of the consolidated firms, wracked by personnel turbulence and culture clashes, to perform at the level of the previous, private industry. This led to the actual TSR.2 failing to meet many of its optimistic performance goals.
  • Further bad judgment in assigning responsibility, which left the stumbling Vickers firm (descendant, in part, of Hiram Maxim’s machine gun enterprise) in charge over the capable, proven (they designed and built the successful Canberra and Lightning jets), team from English Electric.
  • Still further bad judgment, in the political assignment of the untried Bristol Olympus design. All the delays, and most of the cost overruns, came from the immaturity of this powerplant.
  • Even further bad judgment, in making the subcontractors report to the Ministry, rather than to the prime contractor, which had no control whatsoever. This was symptomatic of Ministry micromanagement, which included delaying the project so that non-pilots could haggle over the position and labeling of instruments and switches.
  • Failure to plan for the normal problems found between drafting board and first flight, including engines that fell short of spec and weight gain. This left the design team and the MOD managers facing new decisions, one option of which was always to cancel the whole project.

In the end, they canceled the TSR.2, and they scrapped, burned, and shot up the airframes, tools and tooling, and burnt and shredded most of the paperwork, to make sure it did not rise from the dead to embarrass Whitehall. They also ordered that the scrapping and burning be as well publicized as possible — the broke British government managed to film the arson with color film.

tsr-2_prototypes_burn

 

 

And when they canceled the plane, they initially required industrial managers to keep the decision secret from their own, doomed-to-layoffs, workforces.

Why were these extreme measures taken? As with other instances where this has happened, like the cancellation of the Avro Arrow CF-105 in Canada, and the cancellation for further Republic F-105 Thunderchief acquisitions in the USA in favor of the on-paper TFX, the decisionmakers probably knew that they were screwing up. Hence, the seemingly vindictive destruction of the ability to reverse the decision — a reversal which might ding the decision-maker’s “legacy.”

Healey and Jenkins, the only men who could have issued these orders of vandalism, have made pro-forma denials ever since the initial British public reaction to the cancellation and destruction of the TSR turned out to be negative. Neither is a man of any particular demonstrated integrity (quite the contrary), but it’s anyone’s guess whether the vandal was one or both. They also canceled the nascent Harrier project (then called P.1154) on the grounds it would never fly, and canceled a transport plane. Healey would scrap new (and renewed) aircraft carriers and preside over the greatest unilateral disarmament of an undefeated nation in world history.

Had Denis Healey been in the pay of the KGB he could have done no more damage to British defense policy and strength. (The same is true of Jenkins; his junior position meant he could do less damage than Healey). The TSR cancellation, especially when coupled with the many other cancellations that came out of the 1964 Labour government, fundamentally ended a half-century of British aeronautical industry leadership, and ultimately led to the near-dissolution of the British aerospace industry.

The TSR.2 cancellation continues to have repercussions. Britain and its European defense partners are looking for a replacement for the aging Panavia Tornado jet. Rumor is they’re looking for a plane that’s supersonic on the deck, and with a 1000 nautical mile radius of action….

The Eisenhorror Continues

This mess is the "tapestry" for the Ike Memorial.

This mess is the “tapestry” for the Ike Memorial. And we thought that Chairman Maotin Luther King was bad.

We have covered, long ago, the saga of the abominable Eisenhower Memorial, which even earlier we called, deservedly, emetic. This disaster is the result of a runaway commission of Washington insiders, who chose society architect Frank Gehry sight unseen. Gehry produced an abominable hackery of chain-link-fence “tapestries” and a statue of a child in an empty field.

The Eisenhower family is unsatisfied with this insulting abortion of an art-school undergrad C-minus design, and Congress tried to pull the plug on the failed commisssion and the Gehry eyesore. Gehry, for his part, has taken his fee (paid up front) and rather than produce the construction plans he was paid for, spent the money on a sleazeball lobbyist, figuring that with enough of a lobbying presence he can always hit the taxpayers up for more money (he’s received, and blown, $15 million so far).

From Mona Charen’s syndicated column:

The Eisenhower Memorial Commission was established in 2002 with a budget of $64 million. It is staffed by nine full-time employees, some earning six-figure salaries, and presided over by a 93-year-old, ailing board chairman.

Without a design competition, the commission chose a design by Frank Gehry that critics, including the Eisenhower family, regard as insulting to Eisenhower’s memory. Featuring enormous metal “tapestries” eight stories tall that would depict the Kansas prairie, the block-long memorial park with its enormous metal curtains would dwarf the statuary in the center. The original design called for Ike to be portrayed as a barefoot boy. Thus is a key figure in the history of the 20th century reduced to insignificance. Historians sometimes do that to people — memorials are meant to do the reverse.

The boy Ike has since been replaced, after protests, with a proposed statue of Ike as a cadet. Not much better. West Point has produced many cadets but only one Eisenhower. Gehry now proposes to eliminate the tapestries, but keep the pillars. Commission member Bruce Cole, who believes a simple statue of the man would have been best (and most consistent with Ike’s wishes), says the pillars standing alone “look for all the world like industrial smokestacks.” Others say they evoke an unfinished highway overpass or the final scene of Planet of the Apes.

Since the memorial has been stalled, you may ask, what happened to the money? After 15 years, the commission has spent $41 million, including paying Gehry 95 percent of the price of construction drawings before the design was approved. According to the set Washington Examiner, Gehry used some of the $15 million he received to hire former Clinton counsel Gregory Craig to help secure approval of the design. That’s how it goes when you’re well-connected in Washington.

Republicans in Congress declined the commission’s request for $50 million more. They appropriated just $1 million last year, which still leaves the corrupt commission in business. Is this farce to be the only memorial to one of our greatest leaders?

via Memorial to Waste | National Review Online.

You gotta love Washington. It’s the only place where anybody would kill something off by giving it “just” $1 million a year.

Here’s a better idea:  give it $0 a year, and let Ike’s family hire a sculptor, and do a Kickstarter or Indiegogo fund raiser to pay him. We’d hit that. What’s the problem with doing it that way?

Ah, yes. No scope for grifters, grafters and grabbers of the Gregory Craig variety. If there is no waste, no carrion, there is nothing for him to feed on, and he would have to get a job in the productive economy — something he has never learned how to do.

As for Gehry, let him find people that want to live in leaky, rusty eyesores, or corporations that want to make their employees work in them, on his own. He’ll survive, or not, without a handout from the US Government.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have lighters

Anyone who’s ever read a gun control organization’s website knows, accidents are a reason to Do Something!!!1!

So, what do you do about an “accident” like this?

A SUV full of teenagers crashed in Idaho after one of the passengers lit the driver’s armpit hair on fire with a lighter, authorities said Wednesday.

All five young people in the Ford Bronco were hurt in the crash Sunday and received medical treatment, the Ada County Sheriff’s Office said.

Two of the passengers, ages 15 and 16, were thrown from the vehicle, but none of the five suffered life-threatening injuries.

The sheriff’s department said the rollover occurred after a 16-year-old boy was goofing off in the front seat and lit 18-year-old Tristian Myers’ armpit hair on fire while Myers was driving. The crash happened at about 5:30 a.m. in southeast Boise.

It looked like this:

armpit hair prang

Deputies cited Myers with inattentive driving, while the 16-year-old was cited for interfering with the driver’s safety. The passenger’s name wasn’t released. A 17-year old also was in the front seat but was not cited.

Deputies also said none of the teens was wearing a seatbelt, and there was evidence Myers was driving too fast.

via Sheriff: Burned armpit hair led to Idaho car crash – Yahoo News.

Too fast. No seatbelt. Stupid prank. About the only dumb-ass driver stunt these kids missed was a skinful of Judgment Juice. At what point did it cease being An Accident and become A Lead-Pipe Certainty?

One is reminded of Forrest Gump’s Mama’s principle: “stupid is as stupid does.”

Come to think of it, but not only applies to the prank pulling kids, but also to the gun control organizations.

Shenyang Juvenile Delinquency Campaign

Apparently, China has a real problem with JD’s. The Chinese have another problem, too, although they haven’t yet cottoned to it: sociologists and psychologists. These pseudo-scienticts are a much more serious threat to society than criminals; murder and theft have been with us since Genesis, but the soft -ologies are mostly a 20th Century “own goal.” As China grows stronger and wealthier, these academics appear, parasites eating away their host from within.

In any event, the bright sparks at the Shenyang Center for Psychological Research have concluded, based on their interviews with a bunch of juvie soul-takers and widowmakers, that they’re depraved, not on account of they’re deprived, but because their parents called them bad names when they were small.

“Words can be weapons,” the Shenyang center argues, and their clever way of illustrating it is to take the insult (like “moron” or “you’re garbage”) and turn the characters (Chinese characters naturally) of the word of phrase into a stylized image of the weapon the particular little darling used. Like this:

While we’re thrilled with the brilliance of their concept, as science it’s a bit thready. Chinese parents are notoriously firm with their kids. Is the kid who took up a gun and killed somebody the only kid ever called a “moron”? We’re kind of doubtful about that, although we recognize no real, credible numbers for the denominator can possibly be created.

While, “Don’t call your kid ‘moron’ or ‘garbage'” is probably a good rule of parenting thumb, we can’t escape the suspicion that the people doing this are not going to be reached by public service announcements coming from artists and -ologists. So who’s the “moron”?

Of course, it wouldn’t be WeaponsMan.com if we didn’t look into the story of the kid who was told, “you’re garbage,” and had those words turn into a weapon, to wit, a crossbow. The kid was Liu Jiakai, a farm kid who had the cross of an alcoholic father to bear:

Whenever he got drunk, he went crazy. He used to say I was useless, I was garbage.

Sometimes I wondered if I was his real son.

My mother was sick, she had a brain tumor. Paying for her treatment put us in debt. And then I dropped out of middle school… and found a job working on an OEM production line. Partly to make money, but also I really didn’t want to see my father.

The foreman was just like my father, bad-tempered. He also called me, “garbage, garbage, garbage.”

Later one day I made a cross-bow and shot him in the hip. I never thought he would end up a paralytic.

I really regret what I did. The thing is, calling me, “garbage,” you know, deeply affected me. But my father will never know how much.

For those of you looking to critique your next meal at the Great Wall Buffet, “garbage” in Mandarin sounds kind of like “fee-oh-uh”.

But we dunno. Does everybody who gets called names as a kid plan out elaborate and violent revenge… and then execute the plan? Maybe the kid’s father called it right.

We lack Liu’s daddy issues, but wish we could learn a bit more about his crossbow. You can learn more about the Shenyang campaign for parental civility at WordsCanBeWeapons.com, but unfortunately, no more details about Liu’s homemade crossbow.

Homemade crossbow? We’d be remiss if we didn’t mention, that’s what you get with gun control in a brutal police state.

Pennsylvania’s Crazy Knife Laws

commando knifeA few days ago, we used this picture of a Fairbairn-Sykes dagger to illustrate a knife attack story. (Turns out our doer used a kitchen knife, not anything so military as this Deadly Assault Knife, the Preferred Weapon of Screenwriters). But Andrew Branca, author of the Law of Self Defense and a no-kidding MA self-defense lawyer, pointed out that possession of the F-S commando dagger was in itself banned in the wacky state of Massachusetts.

A bud from Pennsylvania suggests that the Keystone State has seen Massachusetts’s madness and raised it. Here’s the PA state law:

§ 908. Prohibited offensive weapons.

(a) Offense defined. –A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if, except as authorized by law, he makes repairs, sells, or otherwise deals in, uses, or possesses any offensive weapon….

“Offensive weapons.” –Any bomb, grenade, machine gun, sawed- off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches, firearm specially made or specially adapted for concealment or silent discharge, any blackjack, sandbag, metal knuckles, dagger, knife, razor or cutting instrument, the blade of which is exposed in an automatic way by switch, push-button, spring mechanism, or otherwise…… or other implement for the infliction of serious bodily injury which serves no common lawful purpose…..

Machetes, friends. We’ve seen Christ knows how many machete homicides, mostly among the recently-immigrated wing of The Diversity, and what lawful purpose is there for a jungle tool in freaking Pennsylvania?  But you can bet your last Benjamin that the state that gave us the original Benjamin has never prosecuted a violent criminal under this code. Laws like this are “catch-me, ****-me” laws meant to be deployed against non-criminals who have run afoul of officialdom.

If Pennsylvania is an outlier, Philadelphia’s city ordinance is somewhere out by the asteroid belt.

§10-820. Cutting Weapons in Public Places. [180]
(1) Definition.

Cutting Weapon. Any knife or other cutting instrument which can be used as a weapon that has a cutting edge similar to that of a knife. No tool or instrument commonly or ordinarily used in a trade, profession or calling shall be considered a cutting weapon while actually being used in the active exercise of that trade, profession or calling.

(2) Prohibited Conduct. No person shall use or possess any cutting weapon upon the public streets or upon any public property at any time.

(3) Penalty. The penalty for violation of this section shall be a fine of not less than three hundred (300) dollars and imprisonment of not less than ninety days.

Laws like this are not designed for even-handed enforcement. They are designed to empower officers with great discretion, and produce selective enforcement.

Selective enforcement, once enabled, always leads inexorably to corruption.

Pennsylvania also bans body armor — and that one, 18 PA 907(c) is a felony.

(Why no links to the PA code? We’re not making this up: they deliberately don’t put it online. Cripes, can’t have the peasants learning the law).

The sad thing is that a knife is a handy tool and an effective defensive weapon against anything but a gun, and situationally useful against an assailant with a gun, at contact range. You are better armed with a knife than with nothing at all. (And indeed, with a knife like that F-S, a V-42, or an old Applegate-Fairbairn, you can be positively hazardous to anyone except a gun wielder who keeps a distance from you).

Want your kids to hate America? Michigan has a school for that

"Lucky us, we're dead. At least we were spared this!"

“Lucky us, we’re dead. At least we were spared this!”

The Detroit suburb of Rochester Hills is very protective of its young charges. It doesn’t want its students to see any of the wrong things. Such as American soldiers.

When Lt. Colonel Sherwood Baker tried to meet his daughter, who was sitting in the counseling office at her high school, the Army officer was denied entrance by school security. When Baker asked why he couldn’t enter the office building, security told him that the school’s policy does not allow military uniforms because it may ‘offend students.’

The security officer claimed that men and women dressed in uniform were not allowed on the campus

…”So they gave him a choice, told him he could phone in to the office or go home and change his clothes,” said [his wife, who was outside in a car while all this was going on].

Baker was told of the same policy by four individual staff members at the school.

Baker and his wife arrived at Rochester during normal school hours to settle a dispute in regards to their daughter’s class schedule.

Rochester Hills is the home of the Islamic Association of Greater Detroit, which, unlike an Army officer, is always welcome in the schools. Imagine that.

After the publicity hit, of course, the superintendent of schools backpedaled. Hey, he’s a veteran himself. Who is Baker supposed to believe, him or his lyin’ ears?

Rochester superintendent Robert Shaner, himself a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, has since issued an apology to Baker and his family.

Again, after the publicity hit. True, that’s probably better than trying to brazen it out. As far as the slack we should cut Shaner for having once been a Marine, does that excuse Lee H. Oswald?

Shaner said that there is no district policy banning those in uniform, and believes the incident occurred because of staff’s misunderstanding of current policy.

People have asked, “What could that public policy be, the one hiding behind the superintendent’s and/or the friendly reporter’s telling elision, that the policy could be misinterpreted so readily in such a way?” Really, even to be misinterpreted like that, and so completely misrepresented that none of four employees had it remotely right, it has to be a pretty poorly drafted policy, right?

Well, you’ll never get a straight answer out of shifty superintendent Shaner, the ex-Marine (ex- used advisedly). But our guess is that the policy bans military recruiters, a common pose among educators on the troop-hating fringe of the left. And it probably was described to the non-astrophysicists serving as school clerks and security officers as a ban on uniformed military. Good luck getting these anti-American weasels to admit it, though.

Exit question: what’s the difference between sending your kid to a bad public school like Rochester Hills, and child abuse?

via Army officer denied entry to his daughter’s high school for wearing his uniform | abc7.com.

PS. We’re not anti-public-school. Kid is in public high school. But we do have to pay careful attention to what he’s being told, and sometimes he needs a near-cult-victim level of deprogramming from some of the bullshit they feed him.

The neighbor kids who attend private schools, and other acquaintances who’ve attended prep schools, have needed different kinds of deprogramming.

But as an exit image for the administrators of Rochester Hills, take this:

soldier with M1

 

 

UPDATE

This is what passes for an assignment in the DC public schools, which are the most expensive per-student, and arguably the worst in outcomes, in the United States, possibly the world.

Real DC homework 9-9-14

Kiddie Diddler to be Released on Technicality

Timothy McKenna, admitted child rapist, 2010 mugshot.  Coming soon to a day care center near you.

Timothy McKenna, admitted child rapist. 2010 mugshot. Coming soon to a day care center near you.

Miranda, the man, came to the usual bleak end of those who choose a life of crime, but Miranda the <i>decision</i>, and its progeny, have gladdened the heart of many a violent criminal. Take Timothy McKenna, who admitted raping a five-year-old girl. But he didn’t stop there — he kept raping her. And raping her. Until she was ten, and getting too old for him. (In the way of these creatures, he no doubt moved on to another child).

He raped her just about daily — somewhere between hundreds and two thousand times.

But when the cops came to talk to McKenna, they were too hard on him, the NH Supreme Court just ruled. (Alternate link).

McKenna was at the Errol campground and restaurant he owned when two Newmarket officers and a state trooper arrived in October 2010 to question him about a report of sexual assaults. They asked him to get into the cruiser to talk, but McKenna asked whether they could walk and talk instead.

The uniformed trooper remained in his cruiser as the two Newmarket officers walked around asking him about the allegations. McKenna walked toward the woods, but the officers stopped him, saying they wanted to stay in the trooper’s line of sight. After about 75 minutes and several admissions by McKenna, police say, he was placed under arrest.

The majority said the officers’ insistence that McKenna not enter the woods and remain in view of the trooper was a “significant factor” in the court’s ruling that McKenna was in custody and should have been read his Miranda rights. The three justices said the officers’ polite manner and calm voices do not diminish the accusatory nature of their questions and their assertions that they thought he’d committed the sexual assaults.

But hey, he’s all but a hero, to his fans. He’s the Jerry Sandusky of the ACLU set: sexually transgressive, and he didn’t use one of those icky guns. Well, in a manner of speaking.

The judges ruled that the confession, the arrest, and everything that flowed from it was tainted. McKenna must be released, and stricken from the register of sex offenders, lest the decisions of those cops crimp the perv’s ability to target his future victims.

But here’s a little fact, from the Supreme Court’s own opinion, that the media hasn’t picked up:

The officers had an arrest warrant in their possession, and it was their intention to arrest the defendant that day, unless the defendant provided the officers information that established that he could not have committed the crime — for example, if the defendant had evidence that he had been outside of the country during the alleged incidents.

In other words, nothing McKenna could have said (since, as we know now, he did rape the child) would have prevented his arrest that day. But criminal-loving judges can erase it and turn him loose. Q.E.D.

The prosecutor from this case believes that there are other victims out there, who didn’t come forward.

In one of the bizarre turns the case took, the judges ruled that McKenna must walk because the police told him they had evidence of his guilt: “confronting the defendant with evidence of guilt,” they said, “weighs in favor” of him being under arrest and subject to a Miranda warning.

The forgotten person in all this legal argy-bargy is, as usual, the victim. It took years for therapists to convince the emotionally shattered child to come forward and testify against her tormentor, which the brave girl, by then a teenager, did.

She’s 20 now, old enough that she might have kids of her own. And it a couple of years, they’ll be just the right age for Timothy McKenna. But hey, the usual suspects are cool with him, because he’s just Doing His Own Thing™, and Who Are We To Judge™?

There was a time when our society would not only convict a monster like McKenna, we’d cheerfully execute him. Yet our law schools, law firms, and courts are full of people who think what McKenna did was no big deal — no doubt, some of them think he can’t be a criminal because he didn’t use a gun.

Random stuff happens in courts all the time. The courts are so mired in verbiage that any occurrence of justice is the purest happenstance. And we grow inured to the lawyers’ toxins and their poisonous effect on society. But this decision is as wrong as raping a child.

Islamic Jihad Propaganda and other Pulitzer Bait

Islamic JihadJournalists wonder why America hates them, and why they poll lower than telemarketers, pedophiles, ebola or even Congress. If any journalists happen to read WeaponsMan, they’ll find out by the end of this post.

ITEM: The website that absorbed the failed news magazine Newsweek has a new lease on life — as a propaganda outlet for Islamic Jihad. IJ supporter and Beast writer Jesse Rosenfeld has been running repeated stories about a supposed Israeli atrocity in the village of Khuzaa, where six of his IJ comrades seeking martyrdom apparently found it.

In previous stories, Rosenfeld tried to sell the six decomposing men, at least one of whom was dressed in a camouflage uniform, as civilians. And if you read his latest story, he seems to have but a single source, a putative IJ fighter. Making Rosenfeld his bitch steno pool, Abu Muhammad dictates:

However, as the ground invasion neared, according to Abu Muhammad, an intense Israeli campaign that included bombing from F-16s and intense artillery fire killed many fighters. Civilians began fleeing as shelling intensified, but real panic came when Israel moved in its tanks, and the civilian exodus began in earnest.

During this phase of the fighting, the Palestinian resistance in the town hunkered down and waited as the Israeli shelling and aerial bombardment laid waste to one building after another in order to clear a path for tanks and jeeps. From the tunnels, the fighters could hear above them Israeli troops carving out the buffer zone that would eat up about 44 percent of Gaza’s territory and leave much of that area reduced to rubble.

“After we had been in the tunnels about a week, with the Israelis firing mortars, they drove in with the tanks,” said Abu Muhammad, who apologized about his uncertain grasp on specific dates. He’d lost track of the days after so much time underground, he said, but he remembered, “There were around 60 tanks.”

Flag_of_the_Islamic_Jihad_Movement_in_Palestine.svg

Only when Israel had positioned its forces around Khuzaa did the armed Palestinian groups begin their counterattack, according to Abu Muhammad. “First we targeted the tanks and the jeeps with IEDs,” he said mechanically, as if recalling a combat briefing. In the second stage of their effort to bog down and then repel Israeli forces, the three guerrilla factions launched a multi-pronged hit-and-run campaign from all directions.

“Some of our people would come out of the ground, attack the soldiers and then disappear back into a tunnel,” said the combat veteran.  “Others surprised them from empty houses,” he said.

“The guerrillas found themselves in an all-out firefight at the entrance to the tunnel.”
In one of those brazen attacks, says Abu Muhammad, fighters used a shoulder-fired rocket to hit a house the Israeli army had taken over, killing two of the soldiers with sniper fire as they fled the building. He is unable to give an overall estimate of Israeli or Islamic Jihad casualties in Khuzaa, but says 130 fighters from his group were killed during the war. (Israeli intelligence puts that number at 182.)

When I visited Khuzaa on four occasions during and after the war, there were clear signs of an intense battle in the ruins of the town. Incoming and outgoing machine-gun fire covered homes and apartments near positions taken by Israeli soldiers. Israeli bullet casings littered the floors of the entrances to residences that were transformed into stucco barracks.

via Did Israel Execute Jihadists in Gaza? – The Daily Beast.

Abu Muhammad said there was another guy, and describes what the other guy saw, but IJ didn’t make that guy available to their loyal scribe, so the corroboration for Rosenfeld’s single source is the single source’s alleged hearsay from another source.

It’s all Propaganda

tonguebathThe rest of the Beast is similarly slanted Scheissdreck. We’ll just describe one more ITEM: There’s a story about Chuck Todd’s debut as host of Meet The Press – a slavering tongue bath of Todd’s reproductive tackle to the same extent that Todd’s fawning, servile “interview” of the President was a slavering tongue bath, in turn, of Todd’s President Boyfriend. It’s getting pretty meta in the Washington press corps.

The media wonders, sometimes, why their stock is so low with the public. Jesse Rosenfeld, the Jake Lingle of the Islamic Jihad, is one reason. The Chuck Todd tongue baths — incoming and outgoing — are two more reasons.

bettercallsaulAnd then – ITEM. There’s William Langewiesche, the Vanity Fair writer who in 2007 worked with a plaintiff’s attorney to craft a one-sided, partly fabricated and the remainder slanted, story in that mostly celeb-gossip magazine, to help advance the lawsuit.

“You and I are now firmly on the same side,” he told [the ambulance chaser] in one of his emails. “But actually we were about an hour after I met you.”

Footnote: I emailed Langewiesche, asking if this is the way he approaches all his stories and if there was some explanation of how his conduct constituted fair journalism that I was failing to understand. He didn’t reply.

Gee, that’s special. (Well, not really. That’s typical, that’s what they learn at J-School). Langewiesche has written a defense of his so-called ethics that is mostly heat, not light; it amounts to, “sure I was on the side of the ambulance chasers, because they were right, and the oil company was eeevil.” In his words:

As to my being on Donziger’s side: yes, and openly so, but only to this degree—after weeks of fieldwork, and an even longer time being stonewalled by Chevron, I concluded, quite explicitly in the piece, that the plaintiffs were essentially right…

So here we have a professional journalist, the Miami Herald’s Glenn Garvin, crucifying another pro, Langewiesche, for the sort of underhanded misreporting that’s characteristic of the entire profession. Journalists come to their desks with a Manichean worldview, and every story is a B-western with good guys in white hats and bad guys in black hats. They make the decision early on, select the Narrative they’re going for, and from then on, the facts are cut to size, beaten to fit, and painted to match.

We have discharged our duty to our readers by linking, above, the takedown and the reponse. Personally, we’re amused by the outraged bleat that how dare a fellow ink-stained wretch treat a member of the Guild like the Guild treats the Muggles.

This is no less than Carnegie’s maxim about talent in generations, playing out on the public stage. Langewiesche’s father wrote a book on airmanship, published 70 years ago, that’s still cherished by new generations of pilots — at least, by those who aspire to mastery of the craft. The son inherited the skill with words, but that’s the extent of it.

Rather like a gun, verbal facility can be used for good or for ill. Q.E.D.

And then, again, ITEM: there’s the Guardian’s Damian Walter, who wanted his readers to loathe a book editor and publisher, one Toni Weisskopf, as much as he loathes her himself. Since she hasn’t done anything loathsome, he just made up a bunch of quotes and stuff. Novelist Larry Correia (author of the great HK: Because You Suck. And We Hate You meme) finally wrung an admission to the fabrication out of Walter, who is not very bright and perseverates like an autistic kid. (We just gave you the tl;dr version because we don’t have Larry’s patience for putting up with this scrote).

Perhaps Damian is striking for a job at Vanity Fair.

Bottom line: we can’t imagine why people don’t trust the media. Can you?