Look on the horizon cowardly Somali pirate, whats that you see?

Look in the sky cowardly Somali pirate, what’s that you see?

WSJ:

Private security firm Blackwater Worldwide began holding meetings in London on Tuesday with potential clients for a new business venture — protection from pirates.

The Moyock, N.C., firm, which has grown rapidly through State Department security work in Iraq, has been courting shippers and insurance firms about protecting ships in pirate-infested waters. It’s meeting with more than a dozen firms this week and hopes to drum up its first contract.

There have been almost 100 attempts this year to seize ships off East Africa, fewer than half of which were successful, according to the U.S. Navy. On Nov. 30, two skiffs harassed an Oceania Cruises Inc. ship passing through the Gulf of Aden. Eight shots were fired at the cruise liner, which evaded the boats, according to the Miami-based company.

Shooting at an ocean liner full of grandma’s and families with their kids.  Nice.  I’ll cherish the day you become shark bait.

So stay home sissy bedwetter’s and fill your diapers, your not needed, wanted or welcome, as usual, your asses are covered.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama, soon to be the first black U.S. president, is on the road to making good his pledge to have a Cabinet and White House staff that are among most diverse ever, although some supporters are asking him to go even further. He added to the minority representation at the top of his administration Wednesday when he named New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Hispanic, as Commerce Secretary.

But some Latinos are grumbling it is not enough after all the support they gave him in the campaign, and gays and Asian-Americans are pushing for some representation in remaining Cabinet announcements. But overall Obama is allaying some early concerns that a black president wouldn’t need to put so much importance on diversity of those working under him.

White males you suck.  Looks like its time to hand over the country to any female Latino midget with a learning disability who happens to be gay and has a black auntie.

Die honkey crackers die!

Hey Bill Richardson, speak English in my country asshole or we’ll take your white bread name and give you a nice moooooslim one to match your masters.  Fucking asshole.  I guess I’m the only one pissed?

Oh yeah, anyone see’s Todd Harris this weekend at the pub, smack him in his stupid mouth and pull his GOP card.

Todd Harris, a Republican operative, gave Obama credit for how he is handling appointments.

“He really seems to be reaching out to people that he doesn’t need to reach out to politically,” said Harris, who worked for Sen. John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign. “He is not filling his administration with a bunch of Illinois cronies and he really is getting people with a diverse set of views. As an American, that’s a breath of fresh air.”

Doesn’t need to reach out politically?  Looks like someone is on their knees looking for a new job.  Show some dignity you freakin Nancy.

There, I said it…

(AP) Amy Vollmar, 43, from Bowling Green, Ohio, a worker for Chrysler for the past 24 years, listens…

I honestly only posted this because of the picture.  I know she’s probably a wonderful woman, wife, mother and human being.  She can probably pound brews with the big boys and may be capable of administering a severe ass whoopin.  But would ya get a load of that mug!  Yowzah!  Caption away!

DETROIT (AP) - Worried about their jobs and warned that the cost of failure could be a depression, hundreds of leaders of the United Auto Workers voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to make concessions to the struggling Detroit Three, including all but ending a much-derided program that let laid-off workers collect up to 95 percent of their salaries.

“Everybody has to give a little bit,” said Rich Bennett, an official for Local 122 in Twinsburg, Ohio, representing Chrysler workers. “We’ve made concessions. We really feel we’re doing our part.”

Union leaders also agreed to let the cash-starved automakers delay billions of dollars in payments to a union-administered trust set to take over health care for blue-collar retirees starting in 2010.

The rest here.

Back to Missus Vollmar, is that the best “eat shit and die” face you’ve ever seen or what?

Dear Civilians, ‘We know that the current state of affairs in our great nation has many civilians up in arms and excited to join the military.  For those of you who can’t join, you can still lend a hand.  Here are a few of the areas where we would like your assistance:

1. The next time you see any adults talking (or wearing a hat) during the playing of the National Anthem - kick their ass.

2. When you witness, firsthand, someone burning the American Flag in protest - kick their ass.

3. Regardless of the rank they held while they served, pay the highest amount of respect to all veterans.  If you see anyone doing otherwise, quietly pull them aside and explain how these veterans fought for the very freedom they bask in every second.  Enlighten them on the many sacrifices these veterans made to make this Nation great.  Then hold them down while a disabled veteran kicks their ass.

4. (GUYS) If you were never in the military, DO NOT pretend that you were.  Wearing battle dress uniforms (BDUs) or Jungle Fatigues, telling others that you used to be ‘Special Forces,’ and collecting GI Joe memorabilia, might have been okay when you were seven years old.  Now, it will only make you look stupid and get your ass kicked.

5. Next time you come across an Air Force member, do not ask them, ‘Do you fly a jet?’  Not everyone in the Air Force is a pilot.  Such ignorance deserves an ass-kicking (children are exempt).

6. If you witness someone calling the Coast Guard ‘non-military’, inform them of their mistake - and kick their ass.

7. Next time Old Glory (the flag) prances by during a parade, get on your damn feet and pay homage to her by placing your hand over your heart.  Quietly thank the military member or veteran lucky enough to be carrying her - of course, failure to do
either of those could earn you a severe ass-kicking.

8. Don’t try to discuss politics with a military member or a veteran.  We are Americans, and we all bleed the same, regardless of our party affiliation.  Our Chain of Command is to include our Commander-In-Chief (C in C).  The President (for those who didn’t know) is our C in C regardless of political party.  We have no inside track on what happens inside those
big important buildings where all those representatives meet.  All we know is that when those civilian representatives screw up the situation, they call upon the military to go straighten it out.  If you keep asking us the same stupid questions repeatedly, you will get your ass kicked!

9. ‘Your mama wears combat boots’ never made sense to me - stop saying it!  If she did, she would most likely be a vet and therefore could kick your ass!

10. Bin Laden and the Taliban are not Communists, so stop saying ‘Let’s go kill those Commies!’  And stop asking us where he is!  Crystal balls are not standard issue in the military.  That reminds me- if you see anyone calling those damn psychic phone numbers, let me know, so I can go kick their ass!

11. ‘Flyboy’ (Air Force), ‘Jarhead’ (Marines), ‘Grunt’ (Army), ‘Squid’ (Navy), ‘Puddle Jumpers’ (Coast Guard), etc., are terms of endearment we use describing each other. Unless you are a service member or vet, you have not earned the right to use them.  Using them could get your ass kicked.

12. Last, but not least, whether or not you become a member of the military, support our troops and their families.  Every Thanksgiving and religious holiday that you enjoy with family and friends, please remember that there are literally thousands of soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen far from home wishing they could be with their families. Thank God for our military
and the sacrifices they make every day.  Without them, our country would get it’s ass kicked.’  ‘It’s the Veteran, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press.’  ‘It’s the Veteran, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech.’  ‘It’s the Veteran, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate.’  ‘It’s the Military who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.’

One more:

13. If you ever see anyone either standing for or singing the national anthem in Spanish - KICK THEIR ASS.

Now go kick some ass!

Note from me, I will disregard portions of number eight for the next four years.

Snip:

As the inestimable economist John Lott pointed out, the “corrections” in the Senate race generated more new votes for Franken than all the votes added by corrections in every race in the entire state — presidential, congressional, state house, sanitation commissioner and dogcatcher — combined.

And yet the left-wing, George Soros-backed Secretary of State, Mark Ritchie, stoutly defended the statistically impossible “corrected” votes. There’s something fishy going on in Minnesota besides the annual bigmouth bass tournament.

Fortunately, the very outrageousness of the “corrections” scam brought national attention to the Minnesota recount, at which point it became more difficult to keep “finding” votes for Franken. Under the glare of the national media, the steady accretion of post-election ballots for Franken came to a screeching halt, rather like a child who, after being caught red-handed, tactfully removes his hand from the cookie jar.

More, more, more

Yep, Franken is an absolute leftist turd of the smelliest kind…

Why you ask do I refer to socialist liberals as turds as often as I do?  Because that’s just the first thing that comes to mind when I think of them, smelly, useless and disgusting.

What ever happened to the good old days of hanging of a few of these animals carcasses out to rot as a deterrent?  If you were to ask Pelosi or, (blasphemy warning) Obama, they’d probably recommend forming a thirty person committee of lawyers, each paid $250,000 per year, to come to the conclusion five years later that Judge Judy should handle the matter…

On the surface, last week’s attack on Mumbai was remarkable for its execution and apparently unconventional tactics. But when compared to a plot uncovered 15 years ago that targeted prominent hotels in Manhattan, it becomes apparent that the Mumbai attack was not so original after all.

The 1993 New York Landmarks Plot

In July 1993, U.S. counterterrorism agents arrested eight individuals later convicted of plotting an elaborate, multistage attack on key sites in Manhattan. The militants, who were linked to Osama bin Laden’s then-relatively new group, al Qaeda, planned to storm the island armed with automatic rifles, grenades and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). In multiple raids on key targets combined with diversionary attacks, they aimed to kill as many people as possible.

The planned attack, which came to be known as the “Landmarks” plot, called for several tactical teams to raid sites such as the Waldorf-Astoria, St. Regis and U.N. Plaza hotels, the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, and a midtown Manhattan waterfront heliport servicing business executives and VIPs traveling from lower Manhattan to various New York-area airports. The militants carried out extensive surveillance both inside and outside the target hotels using human probes, hand-drawn maps and video surveillance. Detailed notes were taken on the layout and design of the buildings, with stairwells, ballrooms, security cameras and personnel all reconnoitered.

The attackers intended to infiltrate the hotels and disguise themselves as kitchen employees. On the day of the attack, one attack team planned to use stolen delivery vans to get close to the hotels, at which point heavily armed, small-cell commando teams would deploy from the rear of the van. Stationary operatives would use hand grenades to create diversions while attack teams would rake hotel guests with automatic weapons. The attackers planned to carry gas masks and use tear gas in hotel ballrooms to gain an advantage over any security they might come up against. They planned to attack at night, when the level of protection would be lower.

The targeted hotels host some of the most prestigious guests in Manhattan. These could have included diplomats like the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who traditionally keeps an apartment in the Waldorf-Astoria, or even the U.S. secretary of state, who is known to stay at the Waldorf during U.N. sessions. They also host various business leaders. If successful, the attackers doubtless would have killed many high-profile individuals key to New York’s stature as a center for financial and diplomatic dealings.

Meanwhile, the plots to detonate explosives in the Lincoln and Holland tunnels would have blocked critical transportation infrastructure, sowing chaos in the city as key escape routes were closed off. And VIPs seeking to escape the city via the midtown heliport would have been thwarted by the attack planned for that location. In fact, the heliport attack was planned to be carried out using watercraft, which also could have been used to target transport ferries, further disrupting transportation in and out of Manhattan. The New York City Police Department could plausibly even have quarantined Manhattan to prevent the attackers from fleeing the city.

With the city shut down and gunmen running amok, the financial center of the United States would have been thrown into chaos and confusion until the attackers were detained or killed. The attacks thus would have undermined the security and effectiveness of New York as a center for financial and diplomatic dealings.

At the time, U.S. counterterrorism officials deemed that the attack would have had a 90 percent success rate. Disaster, then, was averted when federal agents captured the plotters planning the Landmarks attack thanks to an informant who had infiltrated the group. Along with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing just four months earlier, which killed six people but was intended to bring down both towers, the United States dodged a major bullet that could have been devastating to New York.

The Nov. 26 Mumbai Attack

A little more than fifteen years later, the Nov. 26 attacks in Mumbai closely followed the script of the New York plot. Militants armed with AK-47s, grenades and military-grade explosives carried out a very logistically sophisticated and coordinated attack on the financial capital of India.

(click to view map)

Clearly, the Mumbai attack involved extensive preoperational surveillance. Attackers had maps of the targeted hotels, and according to the Indian Marine Commandos who raided the Taj Mahal hotel, the militants moved around as if they knew the hotel’s layout by heart. Advance members of the attack teams had already taken up positions in the hotels, stockpiling firearms, ammunition, grenades and food that were quickly accessed and used to maintain the attackers’ positions in the hotels. One of the attackers reportedly also had taken a job as an intern chef in the Taj Mahal hotel kitchen, so his movements raised less suspicion and he had a detailed knowledge of the entry points and corridors. For such attacks, preparedness is key, and escaping alive is a long shot. The attackers therefore must have been highly motivated and willing to die — a rare combination that requires immense amounts of training and ideological zeal.

At least two teams entered the city by watercraft, breaking up into smaller groups as they made their way to the Taj Mahal hotel, Oberoi-Trident hotel complex and Nariman (also known as Chabad) House, a Jewish center in the same area of Mumbai. These tactical teams dispersed across the city, attacking prominent sites where foreign VIPs were sure to be present. They infiltrated the hotels through back entrances and kitchens, thus enhancing the element of surprise as they opened fire on guests in the dining areas and atriums of the hotels.

Beyond killing people and holding hostages in Mumbai’s most prestigious hotels, other attack teams assaulted additional strategic sites in Mumbai, creating a sense of chaos and confusion over the whole city. Mumbai’s main train station, Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, as well as Cama Hospital, offices of The Times of India newspaper, restaurants, a theater, and bars frequented by foreigners also were attacked. The attackers’ excellent coordination — the multiple attacks took place nearly simultaneously — thus ensured maximum confusion and chaos, frustrating police responses. This could explain in part why operations like those at Nariman House and the hotels lasted for more than 48 hours.

Similarities between New York and Mumbai

The similarities between the Landmarks plot and the Nov. 26 Mumbai attack are quite obvious. In symbolic terms, as the Mumbai attack unfolded, many onlookers said that an attack on Mumbai is to India what an attack on New York is to Americans. In more concrete terms, the targets, methods, weapons and geography involved were similar (if not identical), and the unconventional style of the attacks points to a common author.

U.S. counterterrorism forces in 1995 detained Landmarks plot mastermind Ramzi Yousef, who remains in U.S. federal prison. But his ideas obviously did not stay behind bars. This illustrates how a plan’s initial failure does not mean the threat has been eliminated. Indeed, Stratfor observed in 2005 that the 1993 Landmarks plot (among others) should not be discounted, as al Qaeda or other terrorist groups are known to return to past targets and plot scenarios.

The similarities between the Landmarks plot and the Mumbai attack exist at several levels.

The first relates to the target set. Both New York and Mumbai are the respective financial centers of their countries and home to their nations’ major stock exchanges. In both cities, the planners had picked out high-profile soft targets — sites that have less security personnel and countermeasures than, say, a military installation or key government building. Softer security means gaining access to strategic assets and people is easier. Stratfor has long stressed the importance of maintaining vigilance at soft targets like hote ls that cater to international guests, as these are likely targets for militant Islamists. Both plans also involved infiltrating hotel staff and booking rooms in the hotels to gain inside information and store supplies.

The second similarity involves how both plans included peripheral targets to cause confusion and chaos and thus create a diversion from the main targets. In Mumbai, transportation infrastructure like the city’s main railway station was attacked, and militants detonated explosive devices in taxis and next to gasoline pumps. Meanwhile, roving gunmen attacked other sites around the city. In a country where coordination among first responders is already weak, the way the attackers fanned out across the city caused massive chaos and distracted security forces from the main prize: the hotels. Attacking Cama Hospital also sowed chaos, as the injured from one scene of attack became the targets of another while being rescued.

A third similarity exists in the geography of the two cities. In both plots, the use of watercraft is a distinctive tactical similarity. Watercraft gave militants access at unconventional locations where security would be more lax. Both Mumbai (a peninsula) and Manhattan (an island) offer plenty of points where militants can mount assaults from watercraft. Such an attack would not have worked in New Delhi or Bangalore; these are landlocked cities where militants would have had to enter by road, a route much more likely to encounter police patrols. Being centers of trade and surrounded by water, both Mumbai and New York have high levels of maritime traffic. This means infiltrating the area from the water would raise minimal suspicions, especially if the craft were registered locally (as was the case in the Mumbai attack). Such out-of-the box tactics take advantage of security services, which often tend to focus on established threats.

A fourth similarity lies in transportation. In addition to using watercraft, both plots involved the use of deceptive vehicles to maneuver around the city undetected. The Landmark plotters used taxis to conduct surveillance and planned on using a delivery van to approach the hotels. In Mumbai, the attackers planted bombs in taxis, and at least one group of militants hijacked a police van and used it to carry out attacks across the city. Using familiar vehicles like taxis, delivery vans or police vans to carry out surveillance or attacks reduces suspicion and increases the element of surprise, allowing militants to stay under cover until the moment of attack.

An Off-the-Shelf Plan

As indicated, the striking similarities between the Landmarks plot and the Mumbai attack suggest that Ramzi Yousef and other early al Qaeda operatives who helped prepare the Landmarks plot in New York authored the Mumbai plan. Considering that the militants launched their original attack from Karachi, Pakistan, and the previous involvement of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency — which has connections with al Qaeda leaders in western Pakistan — it is very likely that al Qaeda in Pakistan at least provided the blueprints for this attack. On-the-ground operations like training, surveillance and the actual attack appear to have been carried out by the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba in connection with Indian Islamist groups.

Here we see more evidence of the existence of an ideological or strategic battle space that exists in the radical Islamist world, which has been greatly influenced by al Qaeda. Like a contingency plan that might sit on the shelf for years or decades before it is useful, terrorist plots (especially good ones) can have a long shelf life and be applied in various scenarios. In fact, plans that sit on the shelf longer might actually be more effective as security officials focus their attention on evolving threats and forget old ones.

Just because a plot has been disrupted, the threat has not been eliminated. Once terrorists happen upon a successful model, they are likely to follow that model. This can be seen in al Qaeda’s return to the World Trade Center in 2001, eight years after the initial truck bomb attacks in 1993. It can also be seen in the fact that Mumbai has been the target of multiple attacks and threats, including train bombings in 2006 that killed approximately 200 people. Though the tactics might have differed, the target set remained the same. Various parts of the attack cycle can change, but rarely does an attack occur that is completely novel.

Ultimately, the biggest difference between the Landmarks plot and the Mumbai attack is that the Mumbai attack succeeded. The failure of the Landmarks plot probably provided key lessons to the planners of the Mumbai attack, who were able to carry out the stages of the attack without detection and with the full element of surprise. Gauging by the success of the Mumbai incident, we can expect similar strategies and tactics in future attacks.

Tell Stratfor What You Think

This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to www.stratfor.com