I remember seeing a photo of a soldier decked out as an operator would be in Modern Warfare 2 a year or two ago. One of our mods commented: Wouldn't last five minutes.
Ace published a link but bearingarms.com provided the link to the GearWhoresAnonymous Facebook page. Some of the comments are pretty funny.
At least their" booger hook is off the bang switch".
#1
The shorter, plumper lad appears to have a partially used roll of '90mph tape' hanging from his kit. Is he expecting to attach even more pieces of gear? Glad he remembered his 'mag bag.' No sense littering the premises with candy wrappers and soda cans.
#2
As the InstaProf would point out, the militarization of our constabulary continues. This is 'militarism' rather than 'military' as the imagery and regalia overwhelms the intent or function of the organization. It unfortunately lends more credence to the term 'Police State' that alienates the population from what used to be a 'beat cop'.
#5
Gads! What were they thinking when they designed those? Why did they agree to wear them? The only thing they could have done worse is to make them pink.
OTOH, if I came up against one of those guys wearing a tutu, he'd probably have the upper hand because I'd be laughing so hard and he'd probably be pi$$ed off for having to wear that "uniform".
[AmThinker] But Obama has set his party up for even more severe voter retaliation in 2014. By limiting the 2013 initial rollout of Obamacare to just 11 million people, he has doomed 270 million Americans to suffer anxiety about the impacts of the wildly unpopular program during an election year.This may explain why the January 22nd Gallup Poll reveals that an all-time high of 65% of Americans are dissatisfied with the U.S. system of government and its effectiveness; versus 41% for President Bush in 2006, who the press referred to at the time as a "very unpopular president."
If the Republicans only achieve the average gain of an opposing party in the 6th year of a presidents' term, they will pick up six seats for control the Senate and push their majority in the House of Representatives to 68 seats. But with President Obama's approval rating at the same level as President Bush plus voter's dissatisfaction with government 24% higher, Democrats appear to be facing an epic election disaster.
Be sure to vote this November.
I'll vote against if I have to (yet again), but I sure would like someone to vote for...
#3
Rest assured, the House RINOs will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by passing amnesty, destroying any reason for anyone to be concerned about being an American. Without restrictions on the federal judiciary, they'll all be declared new voters by court room fiat regardless of what the RINOs claim the pass. Whether the conservatives just stay home or wait for the new voters to be stuffing the ballot boxes will simply be a matter of a couple of years to have the ultimate effect.
#6
If Republicans pass amnesty I'll never vote Republican again. And it won't matter anyway because the Republican Party will be toast. They've already turned California from red to blue. If they pass amnesty the whole country will go blue and there won't be squat that anybody can do about it.
[DAWN] WHAT do you do when the killers say that they will kill you if you say that they are killers? Should you sell your soul to the devil? Or should you venture out saying what you think is right, knowing that it is open hunting season?
If you are an apologist, supporter or sympathiser of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistain (TTP), you're not on their target list and the state tries to appease you. If you are critical of TTP-led terror, you're marked and the state leaves you to fend for yourself. In this situation what side should a rational mind pick?
Remember Swat? Within a year or so we saw a coercive consensus transformed into a conformist consensus under the brutal Fazlullah regime. Wouldn't you fear those who demonstrate their intent and capacity to maul fellow citizens without any qualms? When those under threat don't resist coercion in the interest of self-preservation, a conformist consensus is born. But this doesn't happen until the state acts as a neutral bystander twiddling its thumbs watching one set of citizens force another into submission by threat or use of force.
We have slowly degenerated to a point where the state has lost its monopoly over violence and state officials their autonomy and anonymity. Now we have general and specific terror targets, both within the state and society. The state institutions -- the armed forces, intelligence and law enforcement agencies -- are general targets. And then there are individuals within institutions who are specific targets either due to their sensitive posts or personal convictions.
Any citizen who happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time is a legitimate general target for terrorists. Then there are specific group and individual targets: Hazaras, Shias generally, and now journalists are group targets; religious leaders who speak against the terror-driven tyrannical model of faith or anchors critical of hard boyz or perceived as liberal are on individual hit lists. Political parties, of liberal persuasion, and individual leaders, vocal about their opposition to terror, have been marked as group and individual targets respectively.
Aren't TTP sympathisers forcing officials and citizens to follow their lead and strike a Faustian bargain? If the state cannot protect you, why not seek patronage of hard boyz who can hurt you at will? This could work for political parties and citizens who aren't on target lists.
But what about those who are? What can Hazaras do to appease terrorists? What can non-journalist media staff do to save their lives? Caught in the crosshairs by virtue of their work, what should coppers and soldiers do? What should ordinary citizens do who are at the wrong place at the wrong time?
The gamble of pro-talkers is simple: so long as there is a bigger target, the lesser target is safer. The state and society is thus confronted with prisoners' dilemma: you can be anti-TTP and a target, or a sympathiser and relatively safe. We have created this dilemma because we fail to unite on basic principles: there can be no justification ever for one set of citizens to kill fellow citizens in pursuit of any political or ideological objective; and the state can never agree to share monopoly over violence with non-state actors.
So what would Imran Khan ... aka Taliban Khan, who who convinced himself that playing cricket qualified him to lead a nuclear-armed nation with severe personality problems... or Chaudhry Nisar negotiate with Fazlullah? How to abide by his vision of the Sharia and ways to implement it? Would they take his counsel on how to raise their kids or be 'better' Moslems? Would they endorse the revisionist mission of changing world geography, invading foreign territories and forcing their denizens to embrace the TTP's brand of faith? If support for talks is meant to be more than a personal insurance policy and thus not an end in itself, shouldn't the object of proposed talks and non-negotiable redlines be clearly stated?
If negotiations are meant to mainstream Fata and elicit the support of rustics for Pakistain, its Constitution and policies, let's talk to leaders of all tribes and not those of a terror outfit.
If local support in Fata is key to the terror conundrum, let's propose new self-governance structures for Fata and service delivery guarantees by the state. And if the object is to separate hardened hard boyz from misguided accomplices, why not propose a workable amnesty and rehabilitation scheme to those who wish to stop fighting?
Pakistain has too many soft targets: schools, mosques, bazaars, funerals, politicians, coppers, soldiers, defence installations etc. While there is no excuse for security failures, it is not possible to protect all citizens and state assets by protection alone.
The state must focus on extinguishing the threat. We need politicians to shape the national narrative against terror. And we need the army and police to cleanse themselves of TTP sympathisers, dispel the impression that we have a capacity problem and bolster public faith in the state's will and ability to win his war.
Our anti-terror policy must focus on minimising collateral damage. But let's realise that there will be more bloodshed, both by the TTP and in defending Paks against it. Re-establishing the writ of state over North Wazoo and other no-go areas is only one component of an anti-terror policy. The cancer has spread all over. We need surgery for the most affected parts followed by chemotherapy for the body politic. It will be no ride in the park. But this fight is for the existence of the idea of Pakistain that is worth fighting for.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/28/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
[The Exchange] If Champ were being perfectly honest, hed explain to a nationwide audience that Washington politicians mostly plan to sit on their hands in 2014, with posturing for political advantage in the November elections far more important than helping strengthen the U.S. economy. That's why Champ will reportedly be more aggressive in using executive authority to pursue pet projects, in lieu of authorization from Congress.
Voters, for their part, also have a dwindling appetite for government solutions to economic problems. Its not even clear theres much Washington could do if it wanted to. My fellow Americans, Champ might say if administered truth serum, this year, youre on your own.
No, he definitely won't tell us "we're on our own."
#2
Obama speech summary "thanks democrats and RINOs for listening; tea party go to hell, lie, lie, lie, stutter fib, laugh , lie... Since my policies to create jobs and create equity have been destroyed by George bush I plan to go around congress and take money from my enemies and give it to my friends and supports. Lie, lie, good night."
#3
Well, as some observant ready mentioned here yesterday; the Dems and Rhino Pubs have reached common ground on one major point. They both fok'n HATE the Tea Party and want it to go away.
#7
Thanks, #2 Airandee - saves me the time and trouble of watching it.
Not that I would have anyway ....
Posted by: Barbara ||
01/28/2014 13:46 Comments ||
Top||
#8
HT AOSHQ: Greg Gutfeld's SOTU Obama Drinking Game. Caution - severe liver damage may occur
Every time he says folks, drink. Every time he says fair share, drink. Every time he says extraordinary, drink. Every time he brags about working tirelessly, drink. When he frets about lack of compromise, drink. If he says, Bring me a bill, and Ill sign it, drink. When he brings up the middle class, the people hes ruining, drink. Every time he says, Its the right thing to do, drink. Every time he cites someone that his policies have helped, drink. If shes in the audience, drink some more. Every time he says, I never said it would be easy, drink. If he says that after mentioning ObamaCare, drink again. If he says ObamaCares rough start was worth it, drink. And every time he reminds us that running a country is really hard, say, Yeah, we can tell, and drink Finally, each time you feel like youre being screwed, drink. And if you still buy anything from this gas bag, then you deserve the worlds worst hangover, and enjoy it, cause you built that.
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/28/2014 14:03 Comments ||
Top||
#9
that's a good drinking game, but
Stephen Green of Vodka pundit has been making these up for years.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
These law enforcement kit trends have a way of changing. I'm awaiting the Paki-India border guard look. 
[DAWN] WHAT do you do when the killers say that they will kill you if you say that they are killers? Should you sell your soul to the devil? Or should you venture out saying what you think is right, knowing that it is open hunting season?
Wazoo
Wacko birds, wacko birds I tell ya ! 
