It's happened again, as we all knew it would and, sadly, know it will again. A casual outing, a sudden explosion, and the death of innocents at the hands of a lunatic following an insane ideology.
ISIS is taking credit, which should certainly merit another "mother of all bombs" or even a low-yield nuke - whatever it takes to get their attention.
But as satisfying as that could be, it won't immediately stop the danger from "lone wolf" operatives. And indeed, there
is no way to stop the danger - only to reduce it, and even that at great cost.
The Manchester killer was known as a radical to British police and was, apparently pointlessly, "on their radar." Which reflexively makes us wish that
everyone on the radar was simply swept up and locked away. But is that really what we want?
Consider who was "on the radar" for terrorism under Barack Obama: "Right-wing extremists." A group defined by Homeland Security as people who were
pro-life, opposed to illegal immigration, those who resist federal takeover of the states, and military veterans. Odds are everyone reading these words would fall into one or more of those "extreme" categories.
We simply can't eliminate
possible threats without the
certainty of eliminating many of our protected freedoms. And the terrorists know it.
That being said, British authorities currently have a list of over 3500 "potential terrorists" including about 400 who left the UK to be trained by ISIS to fight in war zones like Syria and Iraq
before returning to the UK.
As counter-terror measures go, these people should be seen as low-hanging fruit: give them one week to get the hell out of the UK or lock them up. There are plenty of vacancies at Guantanamo.
Freedom-loving Western cultures can't erase every risk. But we can and
must take greater preemptive actions than are currently in play.
BONUS: MOUTHING OFF
On a less somber day, we would have enjoyed roasting Monica
"Wet Clean Up, Aisle 7" Lewinsky for her appalling editorial in the New York Times, celebrating the death of Fox News's Roger Ailes for allegedly exploiting her "personal tragedy." But we're not in the mood, so we'll cut straight to the chase.
Lewinsky was a lying, lascivious little slut back in the day, and she remains unapologetic for her role (and roll in the hay) in
disrupting American government. If Bill Clinton, that miserable tower of human excrement, hadn't been busy fighting his removal from office, he might have actually been doing presidential things like, oh,
nailing Osama bin Laden when he had multiple opportunities.
Would the World Trade Center towers have fallen if Bill Clinton's pants hadn't? We can't know, but we can say with certainty that it's at least possible that they wouldn't have. Which is why, Monica, this appalling story
isn't really about you and never was. So do the decent thing, accept your shame, and - unlike your time spent kneeling on the Oval Office rug -
shut your disgusting mouth.
BONUS TWO: SPEAKING OF ANNOYING WOMEN
Michelle Obana attempts a saucy, Jane Russell off-the-shoulder look...
