FBI releases video of the Times Square Bomb attempt

The FBI has released a video showing a simulation of the Times Square Bombing attempt by Faisal Shahzad (who pled guilty and will be sentenced next week).  The effects of such a bomb—had it been assembled and detonated correctly—would have been devastating.

In his statements to investigators following the May 1 attack, Shahzad said he believed his device would have killed about 40 people. 

Judging from the video released today by the FBI, which is urging that the Federal Court sentence him to the maximum of life in prison, 40 people may have been the low side of the estimate.

Watch the whole thing.  This video belongs right next to the word “scary” in Webster’s Dictionary.

---

---

ABC News: Credible but “not specific” threat of Mumbai-style terrorist attack

ABC News is reporting that US and European authorities have uncovered a plot to carry out “Mumbai-style” commando terrorist attacks against soft targets in Europe and North America.

---

  

A senior US official said that while there is a "credible" threat, no specific time or place is known. President Obama has been briefed about the threat, say senior US officials.

Intelligence and law enforcement authorities in the US and Europe said the threat information is based on the interrogation of a suspected German terrorist allegedly captured on his way to Europe in late summer and now being held at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan.

US law enforcement officials say they have been told the terrorists were planning a series of "Mumbai-style" commando raids on what were termed "economic or soft" targets in the countries. Pakistani militants killed 173 people with guns and grenades during the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India.

---

The Obama White House has consistently shown a weak hand to those in the islamofascist arena.  From stating a willingness to speak with Iran without preconditions, to promising a Gitmo shutdown (an unkept promise, to date); from the arguably premature pullout of combat troops from Iraq to stubbornly sticking to a similar pullout in Afghanistan. And a recent revelation that Obama believes the US could absorb another 9/11…

This is a projection of weakness.  It’s a clear demostration that this administration has no stomach for the fight.  Our allies don’t honestly believe they can trust us and our enemies don’t believe we’ll fight back.

Such a stance invites attacks like the ones described above.

If you’re going to a big football game this weekend, or if you’re going shopping or planning to visit a tourist destination or theme park, keep your eyes open and your finger on the safety switch.

Mullen: “National Debt is a Security Threat”

  Mullen: National Debt is a Security Threat

He’s right on one point, wrong on the other. 

Yes, the national debt is a serious national security threat.  But no, cutting Pentagon spending is not the answer. 

Cutting domestic spending—especially on entitlements and other social programs—is where the opportunity lies for cutting the deficit and in turn, the level of national debt.  According to the executive.gov article: 

 

---

The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security, according to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.

“That’s one year’s worth of defense budget,” he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending.

“We’re going to have to do that if it’s going to survive at all,” Mullen said, “and do it in a way that is predictable.”

---

Arbitrarily cutting back on defense spending is not the way to control the deficit or reduce the national debt.  As of FY 2010, the Pentagon had asked for a mere $533.8 billion in regular funding, or about 3.6 percent of an estimated GDP of $14.6 trillion.  As we know, GDP is not going to get anywhere close to $14.6 trillion in FY 2010.  That accounting period ends on September 30, 2010, and at the current rate of 1.6% of growth, we can expect to see GDP at no more than $13.5 trillion, at best.  So it’s true that defense spending will increase as a percentage of GDP for this fiscal year.

Defense spending is not the problem, even with two wars and the effects of replacing aging or destroyed equipment.  No, the problem is the off-budget spending on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other entitlement programs.  Those programs grow as fast as the population of entitled recipients grow.  Until real entitlement program reform occurs, the programs will continue to eat an ever larger portion of federal receipts, crowding out critical expenditures for defense, transportation infrastructure, education, promotion of interstate commerce and a host of other activities that are the constitutional responsibilities of government.

When it comes to budget-cutting, the first targets of liberals are defense-related expenditures.  According to their logic, making America weaker and less able to defend herself means that our enemies are less likely to go on the aggressive.  Do you think Russia, China and Iran believe that cutting defense spending to balance the budget is a good idea?

SRSLY?

Gimme some feedback in the comments.