Dix coverage

wonkette_milblog_conf.jpgAna Marie Cox, aka “Wonkette”, was at last weekend’s MilBlog Conference and assured us all that she “got” the military and then asked if reporting positive things ignored by Legacy Media wasn’t “politicizing” the issue. That didn’t make a whole lot of sense to Murdoc at the time for a number of reasons, but then we get this about the Ft. Dix story:

Ok. So, the plot was: six dudes from New Jersey buy some guns and storm Fort Dix. The Fort Dix that is full of lots and lots of Army reservists with way, way more guns. And, like, extensive military training and shit. Yes, thank god these terrorists have been caught and locked up before they could be killed within minutes of deciding to carry out the dumbest fucking terrorist plot we’ve ever heard of.

Seems to Murdoc that A) she might be trying to make a wee bit of a political point here, and B) she obviously doesn’t “get” it when it comes to the usual situation on military bases.

It’s not like everyone is walking around in body armor with loaded M16s and air support a radio call away. C’mon. Weapons are usually secured (as in locked up) and ammunition generally isn’t issued. As far as I can tell, this is the standard procedure at Dix.

No, these bastards wouldn’t have been able to “take over” the base, and when the response arrived they would have been toast. But they would have probably been able to cause a fair number of casualties in the meantime.

Not terribly impressive commentary.

UPDATE: Pick of Cox at the MilBlog Conference via Pinch’s collection.

Scrolling through Wonkette (which Murdoc doesn’t frequent, to say the least) reveals that my conception of what a ‘big time’ professional blogger does is way off base…

UPDATE 3: Actually, I can’t tell for sure if this post was written by Cox or not. She’s moved on from Wonkette, only posting occasionally if I understand correctly. There’s no byline on post.

UPDATE 2: I read The terrorists next door? Fort Dix plot suspects lived quietly in N.J. suburb this morning on MSNBC.com.

This bit made me wonder:

The Dukas were living in America illegally, having entered two decades ago on now-expired visas. In almost every way, they were products of typical U.S. suburban life. Shain, 26, and Eljvir, 24, attended Cherry Hill West High School and often played soccer in their front yard.

I wondered A) Why did they rush right past the illegal bit and go right into explaining how they seemed like regular folks, and B) Where had they entered the US?

The answer to ‘B’ is:

The brothers entered the United States near Brownsville, Texas, in 1984, the source said, which would put their ages at 1 to 6 when they crossed the border.

The source said there is no record of them entering by way of a regular border crossing, so they are investigating whether they were smuggled into the country.

(via Malkin)

At least MSNBC.com decided to include this:

They were also no strangers to the police. Tatar and the Dukas were habitual offenders, stopped dozens of times a year for speeding, illegal passing and driving without a license. Dritan Duka pleaded guilty in 2000 to possession of drug paraphernalia and Shain Duka to possession of marijuana — low-level charges that at the time did not trigger immigration background checks.

Only one brother had a driver’s license, and only briefly. But they drove anyway and were ticketed regularly by Cherry Hill police — including four citations in one five-week period for Dritan Duka. The three had their driving privileges suspended — meaning they could not even apply for a license — 54 times in less than a decade.

William Kushina, a Cherry Hill Police Department spokesman, said the department could do nothing about serial unlicensed driving except continue to issue tickets and suspend privileges. “You can’t physically restrain a person from driving,” he said.

You can’t physically restrain a person from driving“?!? WTF?

If only there were some place we could put such persons. You know. A place that had locked doors. Bars on the windows. That sort of thing.

Comments

  1. Jerry, thanks for the fantasy. I’m sure it’s shared by many. I may very well be in such a situation, here or overseas. The difference between you and I is that I’m not going to let it ruin my life by turning me into a crybaby who needs a codpiece-wearing father figure or a violence-loving fool. The world is what it is. It’s dangerous in lots of ways and we do what we can to make it safer. Again: I’m glad they got that tip and investigated it and I’m glad that nobody got hurt or killed. Even you. Life goes on now. Aber jetzt Deutschland!… uszzzzzzzzzzzzz…

  2. It’s almost like you guys are sticking up for these bozos. What’s up with that?’ (sticking UP for them….just how much medication are you on, anyway?) Thom, you ARE on the same planet as the rest of us, right? And we are talking about the same six that all the news media is calling terrorists, that ADMITTED they were planning a terrorist act, right? The same six that made a VIDEO regarding said plan, right? And yet you made this comment: ‘The incessant need to link to anything that might maybe could be ‘TERRORISM!!!’ is obsessive and weird and comes across as hopeful.’ Earth to thom….. Hello?…..

  3. codpiece-wearing father figure…..’ oh brother, what decade are you living in anyway.

  4. codpiece-wearing father figure’ Can you *SERIOUSLY* say something like that without following it up with a statement about ‘bathing in the moisture of the President’s soiled and blood-soaked underwear’? I hear that’s what the intellectuals are using *APT* metaphors these days. I mean, if you’re going to DO IT, do it right. Stephen Colbert would eat you for breakfast! Here’s to hoping you continue to pull metaphors like that out for YEARS to come here at MO!

  5. I can say something like that, KTLA. I just did. My gut told me to say that. And I prefer just ‘codpiece-wearing father figure.’ It’s economical. And about the comparison to Colbert: Stop the gushing! It’s embarassing already. I get it – you like me. And I forgot I had to dumb it down. Sorry. I mean ‘sticking up for them’ as in you’re arguing with me that they’re not buffoons. WTF? Do you want them to be expert terrorists? Do you want to compliment them? Why not mock them? It’s fun. It’s American. We laugh at bad guys, remember?

  6. Nope, you just don’t get it. ‘soiled and blood-soaked underwear’ is really setting the minimum bar these days, I think you should leave the attack metaphors out of the posts if you aren’t going to try. We really deserve better.

  7. Okay, you’re right, KTLA. I’ll try harder. i just don’t like to think about George’s soled underwear. Call me squeamish. And your welcome, Murdoc. I do feel I’ve been distracting you from your other duties here. I apologize for that. But they begged me to stay. Something about Aaron. And I do get the biblical reference. I hear that all the time.

  8. Thom, There is something to be said for keeping a sense of proportion when dealing with risk. Drugs that were benefiting many tens of thousands of sick people have been banned because of slim evidence that under very specific circumstances they might have lethal side effects. That kind of hysteria causes massive damage to the companies involved and we lose a sure benefit in order to avoid a possibly nonexistent, but certainly small risk. It is simply unrealistic to waste billions in order to save perhaps half a dozen people, but we do it all too often. I am glad that since you are such a coldly rational and hardheaded guy you agree with me. But when it comes to jihadi terrorism, things are a bit different. First, jihadism has no benefits whatsoever, although this may not be self-evident to a guy who links to Michael Moore on his blog. The risk is hard to nail down, but it is potentially big. We are not talking about side effects or things that are statistically bound to happen anyway. There is intent. We know for sure that there is intent to do harm on a scale of Bali and New York. What is uncertain is the capability. Twenty failed or small-scale attacks tell us very little about the success or scale of the twenty first. You may be willing to bet the farm (or someone else-

  9. Take your meds Thom. You’ll feel better. Really. When I start seeing the words ‘prissy’ and ‘cod piece wearing figure father’ used in a sentence, I know it’s time to bow out.

  10. Murdoc, I thought you banned the word the described heavily armed and armored sea going craft with 16 inch guns from your site.