The barbaric attack in London near the iconic Parliament building was followed by the usual outpouring of sympathy. Governments worldwide, including the U.S., expressed solidarity. Perfunctory tributes for the victims rolled in. However, the moral outrage was eerily muted.
After the world was shaken by the events of September 11, 2001, leaders and ordinary citizens were angry. They demanded retribution for the senseless killing of 2,996 people. Since that tragedy, each new assault is greeted with somber public expressions before fading from the world's spotlight.
It raises a troubling question: Have world leaders and global citizens been desensitized to terrorist killings? There appears to be an almost grim acceptance that extremist violence is now a normal part of society. Resignation has become the enemy of action.
No democratic society should ever, ever tolerate terrorism as the price of freedom. Once a country concludes it is helpless to defend itself against the evil of terror, then it invites violence. Soon the terrorists will rule the nation through fear and intimidation the way drug cartels control Mexico.
Clearly, world leaders are tiring of the seemingly endless battle against terror. Too many believe threatening words are a substitute for a military campaign to eliminate ISIS and its Islamist-inspired offshoots. It is not working. The terrorists are winning. Something must change and soon.
Another clear lesson from the London attack is the ongoing failure of counter-terrorism intelligence organizations to deal with the threat. In the days after the brutal siege, it was learned that the killer Khalid Masood had an extensive criminal record and was once investigated for extremism.
Despite his past, Masood was not considered a threat by British intelligence. That has become a familiar pattern after each terrorist ambush both in Europe and the United States. Violent criminals with jihadist backgrounds are escaping detection because of inexplicable intelligence bungling.
For example, the thug who murdered 50 people and injured 53 last year at an Orlando gay night club had been "on the radar" of the FBI since 2013. The perpetrator Omar Mateen had made inflammatory comments about terrorism to co-workers and surfaced in an FBI investigation in 2014.
It was a similar scenario in the San Bernardino slaughter in 2015 when a man and a woman gunned down 14 and wounded 22 in California. The duo, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, had contacts with at least five people under FBI investigation for possible terrorist activities.
In the aftermath of the 2015 carnage in Paris, investigators discovered the mastermind of the massacre Oussama Atar had been arrested and imprisoned by the U.S. in Iraq in 2005. He was incarcerated in three different prisons, but was freed for humanitarian reasons to return to Brussels.
Intelligence impotence is a disturbing pattern that must be reversed if future terrorist attacks are to be prevented. In their defense, counter-terrorism officials are always quick to point out how many plots have been foiled. However, even one murderous rampage is one too many.
Terrorism demands a swift and lethal response, supported by a robust and effective intelligence effort designed to keep the world safe. Public indifference to the massacre of other human beings is the kind of defeatism that will undermine a country's freedom and embolden its enemies.
Monday, March 27, 2017
Monday, March 20, 2017
Fear of Flying: Why The Odds Don't Matter
Next time you're on an airplane peek at the passengers seated around you. Notice the guy with a white-knuckled death grip on the arm rests? His seat belt is so tightly cinched that he's in danger of losing consciousness. His soft whimpers can be overheard three seats away. That's me.
I hate flying. In fact, I don't even like being on an airplane. If God wanted us to soar in the sky, he would have given us wings. I am a land creature. I like the reassuring feel of my feet firmly planted on Earth. And yet I have logged over one million air miles, a sure sign of lunacy.
I take some measure of comfort in the fact there are many Americans who share my phobia. The National Institute of Mental Health says this fear, called aviophobia, affects 6.5 percent of the population. That means there are 20 million of us with the jitters every time we board an airplane.
For me, the fits of fidgeting start the night before the flight. I consult the weather both at my current location and destination. Oh, Oh. Forecast calls for thunderstorms. I imagine violently lurching around the sky, making sleep impossible. I pray the airline crew gets sick, scrubbing the flight.
I acquired my phobia the old-fashioned way. I earned it on a flight from Midland-Odessa to Dallas. It was the summer of 1972. As the commercial plane ascended, I spotted lightning flashes streaking across the evening sky. The takeoff was non-eventful, but we were soon engulfed in a thunderstorm.
The plane bucked and convulsed. Rain pounded the aircraft and downdrafts sent the airliner plummeting a couple thousand feet. I was terrified. When the plane finally landed in Dallas, I breathed for the first time since takeoff. I didn't just kiss the ground. I caressed it.
Now you understand my phobia. Well-meaning friends have tried to soothe my anxiety by reciting the fact that your chances of dying in a plane crash are one in 11 million. The odds are better (one in 5,000) that a person will perish in a car crash, they say. But what if I am that one in 11 million?
Don't get my wrong. I am not afraid of dying. I just think hurtling toward the ground and exploding into a fiery ball on an airplane would be particularly gruesome death. But in a perverse way, I want to be awake if the aircraft plunges to earth. I may never get another opportunity to see a plane crash.
Over the years, I have developed my own coping mechanisms. I always scan the pre-boarding area to see if there are any Catholic nuns on my flight. That is usually a good sign. Surely, God wouldn't allow a plane carrying a sweet old nun to crack-up in midair and unceremoniously thud to the ground.
Conversely, you don't want to occupy a seat next to the loudmouth salesman gulping gin and tonics and telling lewd jokes. His days are numbered. Never take a seat next to an atheist unless you have a death wish.
When I have confided in fellow passengers about my fear of flying, invariably one will employ logic, suggesting no one dies unless it is his or her time. I get that. But what if God is calling the passenger next to me? I get charred in the wreckage along with him. Seems terribly unfair.
Nearly 40 years after my Midland-Odessa experience, I was beginning to think my fears were unfounded. I had encountered no near brushes with death in the skies. And then IT happened. Two years ago I boarded a Southwest Airlines flight in San Antonio on a cloudless day.
We had just started our climb to cruising altitude when the entire plan shuddered. A passenger excitedly reported smoke billowing out of one of the engines. I was convinced this was that one in 11 million flight. The pilot calmly announced our aircraft would return to San Antonio airport.
Operating with only one engine the plane limped back toward touchdown. On approach, I glimpsed out the cabin window and saw the runway lined with a sea of ambulances and firetrucks. My pulse was racing faster than the plane's air speed. Thankfully, we landed safely without incident.
I swore that was my last flight. Never again would I tempt fate. The odds were starting to tilt in favor of an air disaster. Then I remembered I had an upcoming flight to see my grand kids. I couldn't disappoint them. It was at that precise moment that I decided I would become a nun.
Don't get my wrong. I am not afraid of dying. I just think hurtling toward the ground and exploding into a fiery ball on an airplane would be particularly gruesome death. But in a perverse way, I want to be awake if the aircraft plunges to earth. I may never get another opportunity to see a plane crash.
Over the years, I have developed my own coping mechanisms. I always scan the pre-boarding area to see if there are any Catholic nuns on my flight. That is usually a good sign. Surely, God wouldn't allow a plane carrying a sweet old nun to crack-up in midair and unceremoniously thud to the ground.
Conversely, you don't want to occupy a seat next to the loudmouth salesman gulping gin and tonics and telling lewd jokes. His days are numbered. Never take a seat next to an atheist unless you have a death wish.
When I have confided in fellow passengers about my fear of flying, invariably one will employ logic, suggesting no one dies unless it is his or her time. I get that. But what if God is calling the passenger next to me? I get charred in the wreckage along with him. Seems terribly unfair.
Nearly 40 years after my Midland-Odessa experience, I was beginning to think my fears were unfounded. I had encountered no near brushes with death in the skies. And then IT happened. Two years ago I boarded a Southwest Airlines flight in San Antonio on a cloudless day.
We had just started our climb to cruising altitude when the entire plan shuddered. A passenger excitedly reported smoke billowing out of one of the engines. I was convinced this was that one in 11 million flight. The pilot calmly announced our aircraft would return to San Antonio airport.
Operating with only one engine the plane limped back toward touchdown. On approach, I glimpsed out the cabin window and saw the runway lined with a sea of ambulances and firetrucks. My pulse was racing faster than the plane's air speed. Thankfully, we landed safely without incident.
I swore that was my last flight. Never again would I tempt fate. The odds were starting to tilt in favor of an air disaster. Then I remembered I had an upcoming flight to see my grand kids. I couldn't disappoint them. It was at that precise moment that I decided I would become a nun.
Monday, March 13, 2017
Ballooning Debt: A Threat To America's Future
This month America likely will bump up against the Congressional mandated debt ceiling of $20.1 trillion. If the past is a harbinger of the future, lawmakers and the president will increase the nation's borrowing limit rather than deal with the smoldering financial caldron.
On March 1, the nation's debt teetered at $19.9 trillion. But America borrows $100 million every hour of every day to pay for federal budget expenses. At that rate, the debt will nick the $20.1 trillion cap on March 16. Unless Congress lifts the limit, America cannot borrow another penny.
How did the United States reach this financial precipice?
Blame it on Washington lawmakers' insatiable appetite for spending. Since 2000, the federal budget has more than doubled from $1.78 trillion to $4.15 trillion for fiscal 2017. America's debt has nearly quadrupled during the same time frame, soaring from $5.6 trillion to nearly $20 trillion.
The federal government is spending more than it confiscates in taxes from Americans. The result is a deficit. To make up for the gap, Washington must borrow ever increasing amounts of money to fund the federal budget. Both political parties have done little more than pay lip service to the problem.
Despite sharp increases in borrowing, the net interest paid by the feds has remained essentially flat over the last few years, thanks to the Federal Reserve's politically-driven policy of artificially holding down interest rates. Last year's tab for interest on borrowed money was $432 billion.
However, interest rates are ticking upward, which will make it more costly to borrow money to fund the government.
Despite repeated dire warnings, there never appears to be any sense of urgency in Washington to pay down the debt and rein in spending. Former President Obama was the most recent chief executive to sound the alarm about the albatross of debt draped around the neck of U.S. fiscal policy.
At the beginning of his first term, Mr. Obama pledged to tackle government spending. "I refuse to leave our children with a debt they cannot repay--and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control."
If only, Mr. Obama had heeded his own words. Instead, he racked up trillion dollar deficits in his first three budgets. After eight years in office, the former chief executive added a staggering $9 trillion in debt, the largest of any president in the nation's history. So much for fiscal integrity.
Some perspective: it took almost 200 years for the United States to accumulate $1 trillion in public debt. In a single year, the Obama Administration borrowed more than that amount. In just the last 16 years, lawmakers' unchecked spending has piled on nearly $15 trillion in debt.
The spending binge will not be curbed until Congress checks entitlement spending. Fifty-three percent of the federal budget is consumed by Social Security and health care entitlements, including Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare. Elected officials refuse to deal with these hot potato issues.
By postponing the inevitable, Congress and the president are endangering the future financial solvency of the United States. If Washington waits too much longer to address the debt, Draconian taxes and ruthless benefit reductions will be required to restore financial order.
America cannot afford to avoid the issue because the day of reckoning is on the horizon. When it arrives, the younger generation will be punished because most of the burden will fall on their shoulders. Is that the future Americans want to bequeath to their grandchildren?
On March 1, the nation's debt teetered at $19.9 trillion. But America borrows $100 million every hour of every day to pay for federal budget expenses. At that rate, the debt will nick the $20.1 trillion cap on March 16. Unless Congress lifts the limit, America cannot borrow another penny.
How did the United States reach this financial precipice?
Blame it on Washington lawmakers' insatiable appetite for spending. Since 2000, the federal budget has more than doubled from $1.78 trillion to $4.15 trillion for fiscal 2017. America's debt has nearly quadrupled during the same time frame, soaring from $5.6 trillion to nearly $20 trillion.
The federal government is spending more than it confiscates in taxes from Americans. The result is a deficit. To make up for the gap, Washington must borrow ever increasing amounts of money to fund the federal budget. Both political parties have done little more than pay lip service to the problem.
Despite sharp increases in borrowing, the net interest paid by the feds has remained essentially flat over the last few years, thanks to the Federal Reserve's politically-driven policy of artificially holding down interest rates. Last year's tab for interest on borrowed money was $432 billion.
However, interest rates are ticking upward, which will make it more costly to borrow money to fund the government.
Despite repeated dire warnings, there never appears to be any sense of urgency in Washington to pay down the debt and rein in spending. Former President Obama was the most recent chief executive to sound the alarm about the albatross of debt draped around the neck of U.S. fiscal policy.
At the beginning of his first term, Mr. Obama pledged to tackle government spending. "I refuse to leave our children with a debt they cannot repay--and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control."
If only, Mr. Obama had heeded his own words. Instead, he racked up trillion dollar deficits in his first three budgets. After eight years in office, the former chief executive added a staggering $9 trillion in debt, the largest of any president in the nation's history. So much for fiscal integrity.
Some perspective: it took almost 200 years for the United States to accumulate $1 trillion in public debt. In a single year, the Obama Administration borrowed more than that amount. In just the last 16 years, lawmakers' unchecked spending has piled on nearly $15 trillion in debt.
The spending binge will not be curbed until Congress checks entitlement spending. Fifty-three percent of the federal budget is consumed by Social Security and health care entitlements, including Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare. Elected officials refuse to deal with these hot potato issues.
By postponing the inevitable, Congress and the president are endangering the future financial solvency of the United States. If Washington waits too much longer to address the debt, Draconian taxes and ruthless benefit reductions will be required to restore financial order.
America cannot afford to avoid the issue because the day of reckoning is on the horizon. When it arrives, the younger generation will be punished because most of the burden will fall on their shoulders. Is that the future Americans want to bequeath to their grandchildren?
Monday, March 6, 2017
Anarchy: Are Democrats Planning a Coup?
America's bold experiment in democracy has endured for 240 years. However, it may not survive another four years if the Democrats and their militant co-conspirators are successful in betraying the will of the people by toppling the presidency of Donald Trump.
Days after the election, deep-pocketed Democrat Party cash cows, including billionaire George Soros, huddled behind closed doors with union bosses, influential elected officials and liberal organizations at Washington's swank Mandarin Oriental Hotel to hatch a battle plan.
What emerged from that meeting was a scorched earth strategy designed to force a regime change by whatever means necessary, a shocking development for the nation that defined democracy. This was right out of a third-world country's political playbook.
The plan fashioned in secret was to capitalize on the myth of the Russian 'hacking' of the presidential election with a steady drumbeat of allegations about Moscow ties to Trump associates. It mattered little to Democrats there was not a scintilla of evidence the Russians hacked a single voting machine.
In the weeks following the clandestine meeting, protests flared up in many parts of the country. Marches on the nation's capitol became a regular feature. Disgruntled bureaucrats in the federal government formed shadow groups online to share ideas on how to resist the new administration.
Democrats in Congress called for resistance of the Trump agenda. Confirmation of cabinet nominees ground to a halt. Democrat senators boycotted hearings. They stormed out of other meetings, venting their disgust to the media echo chamber. Calls for impeachment rang out in the halls of the Capitol.
Democrats' behavior seemed more at home in Venezuela than in America.
Many Americans believe the media narrative that the acrimony is organic. However, it is becoming clear that the animosity has been orchestrated by radical activists on the payrolls of Soros and former President Obama, who are pulling the strings of protestor puppets.
A group calling itself, Indivisible, has been among the organizers for protests, including those at Town Hall meetings for House and Senate Republicans. The organization with ties to Soros has posted a 26-page guide on its website with pointers for disrupting constituent sessions.
Indivisible is planning a massive anti-Trump march in Washington on April 15, Tax Day. Similar protests are being mapped out for other cities. Indivisible has yet to disclose its donors, but the agitators are allied with MoveOn.Org, another Soros-financed group.
Hungarian-born Soros and his Open Society Foundation have funneled more than $7 billion over the years to more than 50 protest groups, most of which are now involved in an effort to blunt the Trump agenda. Soros wants to remove the president from office, not just thwart his campaign promises.
Organizing for Action, a newly-formed protest movement, traces its roots to Barrack Obama's first presidential campaign. Then it was called Organizing for America, but has morphed into an-anti Trump faction that now is partnering with Indivisible to obstruct the president's program.
The media cartel, led by The New York Times and The Washington Post, are in cahoots with the anti-Trumpers, peddling unsubstantiated stories that rely on unnamed sources and illegal government leaks of classified information. Their reporting is salacious, often untrue and always inflammatory.
The shrill voices in the media have fueled outrageous calls for the assassination of President Trump. Rupert Myers, a political correspondent for GQ magazine, took to social media to tweet the following: "Could Obama murder Trump and Pence, then pardon himself?"
What emerged from that meeting was a scorched earth strategy designed to force a regime change by whatever means necessary, a shocking development for the nation that defined democracy. This was right out of a third-world country's political playbook.
The plan fashioned in secret was to capitalize on the myth of the Russian 'hacking' of the presidential election with a steady drumbeat of allegations about Moscow ties to Trump associates. It mattered little to Democrats there was not a scintilla of evidence the Russians hacked a single voting machine.
In the weeks following the clandestine meeting, protests flared up in many parts of the country. Marches on the nation's capitol became a regular feature. Disgruntled bureaucrats in the federal government formed shadow groups online to share ideas on how to resist the new administration.
Democrats in Congress called for resistance of the Trump agenda. Confirmation of cabinet nominees ground to a halt. Democrat senators boycotted hearings. They stormed out of other meetings, venting their disgust to the media echo chamber. Calls for impeachment rang out in the halls of the Capitol.
Democrats' behavior seemed more at home in Venezuela than in America.
Many Americans believe the media narrative that the acrimony is organic. However, it is becoming clear that the animosity has been orchestrated by radical activists on the payrolls of Soros and former President Obama, who are pulling the strings of protestor puppets.
A group calling itself, Indivisible, has been among the organizers for protests, including those at Town Hall meetings for House and Senate Republicans. The organization with ties to Soros has posted a 26-page guide on its website with pointers for disrupting constituent sessions.
Indivisible is planning a massive anti-Trump march in Washington on April 15, Tax Day. Similar protests are being mapped out for other cities. Indivisible has yet to disclose its donors, but the agitators are allied with MoveOn.Org, another Soros-financed group.
Hungarian-born Soros and his Open Society Foundation have funneled more than $7 billion over the years to more than 50 protest groups, most of which are now involved in an effort to blunt the Trump agenda. Soros wants to remove the president from office, not just thwart his campaign promises.
Organizing for Action, a newly-formed protest movement, traces its roots to Barrack Obama's first presidential campaign. Then it was called Organizing for America, but has morphed into an-anti Trump faction that now is partnering with Indivisible to obstruct the president's program.
The media cartel, led by The New York Times and The Washington Post, are in cahoots with the anti-Trumpers, peddling unsubstantiated stories that rely on unnamed sources and illegal government leaks of classified information. Their reporting is salacious, often untrue and always inflammatory.
The shrill voices in the media have fueled outrageous calls for the assassination of President Trump. Rupert Myers, a political correspondent for GQ magazine, took to social media to tweet the following: "Could Obama murder Trump and Pence, then pardon himself?"
Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, you cannot believe this is the way a democracy is supposed to function. This dangerous game being played by Democrats and the media cabal is fueling rage among all Americans. If it doesn't stop soon, the country could explode.
Or worse, it could descend into anarchy. If you are shaking your head in disbelief, then you have not been paying attention to what is happening in your country.
Or worse, it could descend into anarchy. If you are shaking your head in disbelief, then you have not been paying attention to what is happening in your country.