The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Will Israel Invade Gaza Again?

Posted on | November 18, 2012 | 10 Comments

Israeli air attacks now are, in the words of IDF Capt. Eytan Buchman, “part of our overarching goal of toppling Hama’s command and control capabilities.” That is to say, degrading the organizational infrastructure, which would hinder a concerted resistance to an Israel invasion on the ground in Gaza. The IDF has mobilized reserves and is clearly prepared to make such an invasion, but U.S. officials are worried:

The Obama administration is increasingly concerned about the escalating violence in Gaza, believing that a ground incursion by Israel there could lead to increased civilian casualties, play into the hands of the militant Palestinian group Hamas and inflict further damage to Israel’s standing in the region at an already tumultuous time.
Though President Obama uttered immediate and firm public and private assurances that Israel has a right to defend itself from rocket attacks emanating from Gaza, administration officials have been privately urging Israeli officials not to extend the conflict, a move that many American officials believe could benefit Hamas.

Frankly, I doubt Bibi Netanyahu will let his military options be dictated by worry-warts in Washington — or London, for that matter. Melanie Phillips notes that British Foreign Secretary William Hague is making concern-troll noises about the “international support” Israel might lose if it sends troops into Gaza:

So according to these leaders, Israel absolutely has the right to defend itself — but not actually to take the action that will defeat its attackers! And just whose international support might Israel lose by such a casualty toll? Why, the support of leaders like Hague and Obama!  What hypocrisy, furthermore, from those who have been bombing the living daylights out of Afghanistan but impose a totally different standard on Israel.

Western leaders who reserve to themselves the right to use military power as they see fit, evidently wish to apply a special standard to Israel, and if Netanyahu ignores them, perhaps it will disabuse Israel’s enemies of the idea that Israel is a tool of Western imperalism.

It was on the occasion of the three-week Israeli invasion of Gaza in January 2009 that I invoked Sonny Corleone’s famous warning to Carlo: “If you touch my sister again, I’ll kill you.”

Some people never learn . . .

UPDATE: In the aftermath of the 2009 Gaza War, the eminent hysteric Glenn Greenwald emitted some of his inimitable idiocy about “America’s ongoing, one-sided support for Israel generally and for Israel’s attack on Gaza specifically.” This prompted me to write one of the acknowledged classic entries in the category, “Gee, Stacy, Why Don’t You Tell Us What You Really Think?”

 Swear to God, if they ever want a Gentile prime minister, my first order would be to deploy the IDF in a north-south line, facing east. My second order would be “forward march” and the order to halt would not be given until it was time for the troops to rinse their bayonets in the Jordan. After a brief rest halt, the order “about face” would be given, and the next halt would be at the Mediterranean coast.
That’s my “Middle East peace plan,” and until it’s carried out, there will be no peace.

That post inspired Andrew Sullivan to nominate me for a “Malkin Award” and, in the final voting, I placed second to Glenn Beck that year.

 

 

Category: Israel

Geopolitics and ‘Amateur Assclowns’

Posted on | November 18, 2012 | 91 Comments

Daily Caller tech editor Josh Peterson quotes me accurately about the Anonymous hacker war against Israel:

“These people who engage in these attacks don’t know me from Adam, and all they know is ‘Oh, TheOtherMcCain.com has criticized Anonymous,” he said.
He is also critical of the severity of the impact that Anonymous’ activities have on geopolitics, stating that “we may be on the verge of Armageddon” in the Middle East.
“This is serious stuff. This is global geopolitics involved here, and for these amateur ass-clowns, the laptop brigades, to be fucking around here,” said McCain.
“Are they insane?” he said.

Read the rest. Excuse the blunt language, but if these Anonymous hackers think they can side with Hamas against Israel without consequence, they’ve got another think coming. Dude, if the FBI gets you, that’s one thing. If the Mossad ever gets you? Hey, accidents happen:

The Israel Air force struck Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh’s headquarters in the northern Gaza Strip early Saturday morning, according to the IDF Spokesman’s Office.

Oops. Here’s video from the guided missile camera:

PREVIOUSLY:

 

Category: Israel, Terrorism

Neal Rauhauser’s Sick Obsession and the #Anonymous #OpIsrael Hamas Scam

Posted on | November 17, 2012 | 67 Comments

Just got off the phone with a reporter who was wondering why this blog was named in the second paragraph of a press release from Anonymous about their support for the terrorist group Hamas:

It has come to our attention that conservative and pro-Israeli groups throughout the blogosphere have taken advantage of Operation Israel, attempting to solidify public opinion against Anonymous.
TheOtherMcCain.com posted an editorial this morning which stated the following: “If you ever doubted that Anonymous was a terrorist organization, they have now removed all reason for doubt.”

The post mentioned: “Thugs of a Feather: #Anonymous Supports Hamas Terrorists Against Israel.” Several news sites as well as bloggers have called attention to the pro-Hama declarations made by various accounts claiming to speak on behalf of Anonymous. So why, among all the sites reporting and commenting on this phenomenon, am I singled out in this press release that goes yammering on about the “oppression imposed by the Israeli government,” etc.?

The answer in two words: Neal Rauhauser, who has spent the past 24 hours figuratively high-fiving himself on his Blog Nobody Should Link, celebrating the fact that our site was targeted for an online attack yesterday that blocked or slowed traffic. This was not a DDOS attack, which requires the use of multiple accounts, but rather another method that can be done from a single computer.

In other words, it would appear, Rauhauser personally attempted to shut down our site, then tried to pretend that it was a collective attack by Anonymous, and has since carried on at his blog in an effort to convince others to join in on the attack. It’s a dishonest scam.

As for the press release from Anonymous, if Neal did not write it himself, it is almost certain that the person who did write it named my site so prominently at the prompting of Rauhauser, who has often boasted of his connections to Anonymous.

As anyone who has studied Rauhauser’s harassment methods knows, he has a childish love of the “you can’t catch me” game: He engages in surreptitious attacks on the targets of his cyberstalking and, if they publicly accuse him of it, Rauhauser then denies his involvement and mocks his target as being “paranoid” for suspecting him. Rauhauser did this in the 2010 “TwitterGate” scandal; after Neal’s involvement was exposed, he did the “you can’t catch me” trick, and succeeded in convincing some people that the orchestrated online harassment of Tea Party activists was just a “prank” that got out of hand.

Now, some people have suggested that I should just ignore Neal Rauhauser, as if ignoring him would cause him to stop his obsessive cyberstalking. It won’t, and this is not about me. When I ignore Rauhauser, his other targets — he has a long list of people with whom he is fanatically obsessed — continue to suffer harm and, in fact, even greater harm occasionally befalls those who assist Rauhauser in his harassment.

Former Anonymous spokesman Barrett Brown was arrested by the FBI after he got involved in one of Rauhauser’s operations. In recent weeks, Rauhauser has tried to gin up another one of his crazy conspiracy theories to explain Brown’s meltdown, but those of us who watched it happen know the part Neal played in that sad episode.

Neal Rauhauser is a dangerous person, perhaps more dangerous to his “friends” than to his enemies, and his latest apparent stunt — inciting Anonymous supporters against me — is a classic example. Anyone who permits themselves to be baited into criminal activity will  be subject to the same kind of prosecution that sent the “LulzSec” hackers to prison. And look what Anonymous is doing now:

Anonymous attacks over 650 Israeli sites, wipes
databases, leaks email addresses and passwords

Are these people insane? The United States government considers Hamas a terrorist organization. Not only is any U.S. resident participating in these criminal intrusions individually liable for those federal crimes, but Anonymous as an organization now must be considered a national security threat, giving aid to terrorists against a U.S. ally.

Indeed, what Anonymous calls the #OpIsrael project may be the work of foreign agents who have infiltrated the Anonymous collective. In an online space where people are intensively secretive about their identities, no one can be sure of another person’s actual motives. Therefore, in regard to #OpIsrael, the question is, “Cui bono?”

Who benefits from the online attacks on Israeli sites? Hamas. And who supports Hamas? Iran. The possibility that #OpIsrael is, in fact, a project of Iranian intelligence operatives cannot be dismissed. Any teenage techie who thinks it’s just a lot of lulz to get involved in this stunt — or any misguided idealist who thinks that hacking Israeli computers is a way to prevent “oppression” — is apt to learn a hard lesson.

It’s all just fun and games until someone ends up in federal prison. And if you don’t believe me, ask Barrett Brown.

UPDATE: A reader in the comments recommends Parmy Olson’s book, We Are Anonymous: Inside the Hacker World of LulzSec, Anonymous, and the Global Cyber Insurgency.

UPDATE II: Welcome, Instapundit readers!

UPDATE III: Geopolitics and ‘Amateur Assclowns’

 


Category: Israel, Terrorism

Harry Reid’s Benghazi Cover-Up

Posted on | November 17, 2012 | 29 Comments

Now that we know for a fact that President Obama deliberately deceived Americans about the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi — remember, the president promised to “get to the bottom of it” — now the Senate Majority Leader does his part to suppress the ugly truth:

If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid didn’t make it clear enough to Republicans that he opposes a select committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks, he said it again Friday: No way.
In letters to key Republican senators, Reid put his foot down — again — on the idea of a special panel to dig into the Sept. 11 assault that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three diplomatic aides in Libya. A select committee would need a floor vote to be created, and Reid said he wouldn’t permit it.
“I refuse to allow the Senate to be used as a venue for baseless partisan attacks,” Reid wrote in the three-page letter, released Friday evening.

And, of course, by “baseless partisan attacks,” what Harry Reid actually means is, the truth.

Category: Uncategorized

FMJRA 2.0: Push The Button

Posted on | November 17, 2012 | 6 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Apparently, Everybody Involved in the Petraeus Scandal Is a Swinging Sex Freak

The Stalinist at Montclair State

2013: A Century Of Progress

Bizarre Statistical Improbabilities

The Slut Paula Broadwell

Rule 5 Sun- er, Tuesday

Please Don’t Tickle Me, Elmo — Or: What’s the Muppet Age of Consent?

If You Were Saying to Yourself, ‘This Petraeus Scandal Isn’t Crazy Enough …’

BREAKING NEWS: The Economy Sucks

Less ‘Representative’, More ‘Democracy’

FMJRA 2.0: Luxury Cage

Could InstaVision Invite Reince Priebus On For A Chat?

O’Neill: “All Politics Is Local”

The Other Woman’s Jealousy of the Central Command Liaison Brought About the Downfall of CIA Director Petraeus

The Republican Clown Car Campaign

The Triumph of Androgyny

When You’re Down to Your Last $4 Million, Hallucinogens May Seem Fun

LIVE AT FIVE: 11.13.12

Capitalization and Heteronormativity?

LIVE AT FIVE: 11.14.12

Awesome: Hamas Leader Destroyed by Twitter Message, Israeli Air Strike

Heckuva Job, Susan Rice!

Paranoid Theory: ‘Karl Rove Was Out Raising Money to Keep Santorum Alive’

Obama Administration’s Benghazi Gambit: Protect Rice, Scapegoat CIA

If The GOP Can’t Win On Mature Government In 2014. . .

Women’s Basketball Star Revealed as Lesbian, Also Violently Crazy

Israel Continues Kicking Ass in Gaza (With Another Awesome War Porn Video)

LIVE AT FIVE: 11.16.12

Great: Voters Legalize Marijuana, Unions Put Munchies-Maker Out of Business

Top linkers this week:

  1. Lonely Conservative (8)
  2. Daley Gator (6)

;_;

I’m going to be off the Internet much of next week , so the deadline for the FMJRA is extended to Saturday, November 24. Thanks to everyone for their linkagery.

 

 

 

Category: FMJRA Award

Jonah Goldberg Is Wrong

Posted on | November 17, 2012 | 36 Comments

He has made his peace with “compassionate conservatism” with an argument that bespeaks intellectual fatigue:

The evolving demographics of the country, combined with the profound changes to both the culture and the economy, demanded that the GOP change both its sales pitch and its governing philosophy.
Compassionate conservatism increasingly faded from view after 9/11. Bush ran as a war president first and a compassionate conservative second (at best) in 2004. Still, it’s worth remembering that Bush won a staggering (for a Republican) 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. Romney got 27 percent.
Moreover, according to exit polls, Romney decisively beat Obama on the questions of leadership, values, and economic expertise, but he was crushed by more than 60 points on the question of which candidate “cares about people like me.”
I still don’t like compassionate conservatism or its conception of the role of government. But given the election results, I have to acknowledge that Bush was more prescient than I appreciated at the time.

Exit polls, Jonah? You’re going to surrender to the Entitlement Culture on the basis of exit polls? If we have to start making arguments for limited government en Espanol, so be it, but first things first: Why did Romney lose the election?

Did Romney lose because of his policy positions? Or did Romney lose because the Obama campaign, with the eager assistance of what Andrew Breitbart called the Democrat-Media Complex, succeeded in portraying Romney as a stereotypical Clueless Republican?

That the Clueless Republican does not “care about people like me” is not really a matter of policy, but of perception, and a big part of that perception is about narrative arc.

People want many things in a presidential candidate, but one thing they pretty much require is that the candidate be able to tell a story about his life and career — who he is — in the context of how he intends to govern. The up-by-the-bootstraps biography of Ronald Reagan stood him in good stead throughout his political career which, in case you’ve forgotten, didn’t really begin until 1964 when Reagan was past 50.

Romney’s narrative arc didn’t work so well. Among the candidates for GOP nomination this year, only Herman Cain had the up-by-the-bootstraps Reaganesque biography. Of course, Rick Perry also came from humble origins, and Rick Santorum’s tales of his Italian immigrant father were inspirational, but both Perry and Santorum entered politics early in life which, generally, is a liability for a presidential candidate.

The “cares about me” question is a matter of perception, not policy, and is in large measure a proxy for “likeability,” which is a very superficial, instinctive reaction. George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” barely enabled him to defeat the unlikeable Al Gore and the equally unlikeable John Kerry. In 2012, in addition to having the Allstate Insurance man as their candidate, Democrats also trotted out the unctuously faux-empathetic Bill Clinton. The Republicans, by contrast, gave primetime convention spots to egotistical blubberbutt Chris Christie and the disgruntled ramblings of Clint Eastwood.

Given the manifold advantages of the Democrats in the past campaign — and incumbency is an advantage not to be underestimated — and the various specific shortcomings and failures of the Republicans, the GOP defeat is not really difficult to explain.

Furthermore, and quite importantly, the election was actually quite close: A margin of 3 percentage points (about 3 million out of 110 million cast) in the popular vote, with Romney competitive in all the key swing states. Romney lost Florida by only 70,000 votes out of 8.3 million and lost Ohio by about 100,000 out of 5.1 million. These are not landslide margins. This was not a “mandate” election for Obama, no matter what anybody tells you, and for Republicans to let themselves be spooked by exit polls or to propose a wholesale reorganization of their party because of a panic about “demographics” is absurd.

Like I said, Jonah, I blame your endorsement of “compassionate conservatism” on intellectual fatigue. You wrote that when you were tired and discouraged. So are we all tired and discouraged. So let’s rest up, recover our morale, and try to think calmly about the future.

Also, Jonah, you should adopt my rule: Never talk strategy in public.

It has become entirely too common, in the “Smartest Guy in the Room” competition among pundits (and would-be pundits) to proclaim strategic insights to the public, and it’s just stupid. This  is comparable to an NFL coach putting up a message on the Jumbotron screen: “We’re going to run a play-action pass.” Democrats can read the Internet, you know. Hell, they invented the Internet.

Finally, Jonah, I think Rush Limbaugh is closer to the mark in analyzing the root causes of the GOP’s problem:

The things that [younger people] just assume are true, like there is no doubt whatsoever that we are destroying the planet with global warming, no doubt. They can’t even conceive of what you and I both know to be the truth, and that is, the whole global warming thing is a hoax. They do not even think it’s a political issue. They do not realize that everything they believe in has been totally corrupted by politics. What they think is science is nothing more than corruption by the left, but they don’t know any better.

Global warming? Democrats invented that, too. Like “homophobia” and the “War on Women,” Republicans are losing young “skulls full of mush” because of phony issues manufactured by the Democrats, issues skillfully marketed by the Democrats’ leftist allies in academia, the news media and the entertainment industry.

Category: Election 2012, Jonah Goldberg

Sun Rises In East, And President Obama Knew About Benghazi

Posted on | November 17, 2012 | 19 Comments

by Smitty

We explore realms of the obvious:

In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.

Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”

. . .

How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows?

One explanation might be that the President figures we “can’t handle the truth”. And by “can’t handle” I mean “do not deserve” or “lack the power to hold him to anything like doing the job of President”.

Chris Cassone has recorded the Benghazi anthem. Spread it virally. May the deaths of Stevens, Smith, Woods and Doherty, arguably the most blatant combat snuffing since Uriah the Hittite, be a millstone about Obama’s neck.

Aside: just to let you know how far America has fallen, the Russian government has passed a budget, while a buried Ronald Reagan spins with sufficient angular velocity for use as a stable element.

via Insty

Category: Barack Obama, Libya

Democrat Forced to Confess That, Indeed, He Is Well-Hung ’70s Porn Star

Posted on | November 16, 2012 | 7 Comments

Mark Suben was recently re-elected District Attorney of Cortland County, N.Y. Today he admitted that in the 1970s, he performed in porn films under the name “Gus Thomas.”

And by “admitted,” of course I mean, bragging.

Category: Scandal
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin