I saw United 93 the other day with my girlfriend. I had to walk out during a large segment of it. The camera shook a lot, even when filming the air traffic control tower and other transportation organization shots, to create the “documentary” feel. It worked, but that combined with the stress of watching these evil terrorists sitting next to their future victims made me sick. How can anyone sit there and live beside people, and then board a plane with the intention of killing themselves as well as all of these innocent people? Pure evil, that’s what. These terrorists thought they were going to paradise; boy were they wrong. They did not hijack the planes because of economic disparity (though we should fight hunger), they did not kill those innocent human beings because of some racial prejudice. No, they mass murdered thousands of people because they thought that they would go to paradise for killing people that disagree with them: people that are not Muslim.

George Will also has some commentary on the film, which he quotes “The Soldier’s Faith,” an 1895 speech:

“In this snug, over-safe corner of the world . . . we may realize that our comfortable routine is no eternal necessity of things, but merely a little space of calm in the midst of the tempestuous untamed streaming of the world, and in order that we may be ready for danger. . . . Out of heroism grows faith in the worth of heroism.”

The message of the movie is: We are all potential soldiers. And we all may be, at any moment, at the war’s front, because in this war the front can be anywhere.

Go see the movie. And remember why we are tracking down terrorists and trying to secure weapons of mass destruction.

Drudge points to a disturbing story about how some terrorist groups have bought unmanned flying drones:

It may sound like science fiction, but the prospect that suicide bombers and hijackers could be made redundant by flying robots is a real one, according to experts.

The technology for remote-controlled light aircraft is now highly advanced, widely available — and, experts say, virtually unstoppable.

Models with a wingspan of five metres (16 feet), capable of carrying up to 50 kilograms (110 pounds), remain undetectable by radar.

And thanks to satellite positioning systems, they can now be programmed to hit targets some distance away with just a few metres (yards) short of pinpoint accuracy.

That’s not good. Hopefully we’ll come up with some way to prevent them from obtaining them and shooting these things down if they do try to use them.

Remember the Islamic terrorist who drove through a crowd of students at the University of North Carolina? He was just indicted:

A man charged with trying to kill students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill by driving through a popular campus gathering spot was indicted Monday on nine counts of attempted first-degree murder.

Mohammed Taheri-Azar, a UNC-Chapel Hill graduate, also was indicted on four counts of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and five counts of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury.

Taheri-Azar is accused of driving through the gathering spot, known as the Pit, on March 3, hitting nine people. He has said his actions were in retaliation for the deaths of Muslims throughout the world caused by the United States.

So killing innocent civilians is okay? According to this terrorist it is. Michelle Malkin points out that some have considered raising a fund for the defense of this terrorist.? At the University of South Florida where I am almost done with my Master’s in Journalism, some professors have wondered why we didn’t ask more questions on why the 9-11 hijackers did what they did. I got the answer–because they thought they were going to paradise!? Which is dead wrong.

Related: V for Vendetta: Imaginary Dictatorships and Fake Bravery, Victimhood

“Blowing up a building can change the world” –V for Vendetta

V for Vendetta is not a bad movie in itself. If you watch the context of the movie, V is simply defending himself against a dictatorship, which definitely could be argued for. There are some true evil villains in the movie, like the perverted priest.

But V for Vendetta was not made in a complete vacuum, separate from our real world; in fact, many of the people involved with the project compare the movie to the current world. The dictatorship is run by “arch-conservatives,” and their symbol looks a lot like the Christian Cross, except an extra horizontal line (perhaps to throw people off?).

MTV.com has more with Hugo Weaving, the star who plays V (and also Mr. Smith in the Matrix), producer Joel Silver, and the director:

“This government is Stalin’s Russia, or Hitler’s Germany, or Franco’s Spain,” Silver says. Filmgoers, however, might be forgiven for asking  in light of the script’s ominous talk of “rendition” and a protracted war on terror whether the filmmakers also take aim at America under George W. Bush.

“I would say so,” says Hugo Weaving (“The Matrix,” “The Lord of the Rings”), who brings V’s emotions to life in the film, despite acting the entire time behind a coldly grinning mask.

“The term ‘terrorist’ is the kind of label we stick on people when we don’t want to understand why they’re doing things,” Weaving says.

“One man’s terrorist,” adds Silver, “is another man’s freedom fighter.”

According to director James McTeigue, “It depends on the regime you’re fighting against. It depends on whether you consider the founding fathers of America terrorists. Or Nelson Mandela. Or Che Guevara.”

Right. America’s founding fathers did not go around blowing up marketplaces, beheading innocent civilians (or soldiers); they didn’t call for assassination of people just because of a political opinion or cartoon. They didn’t protest by bombing groups of shoppers; they threw tea into the Boston Harbor. Mandela did not rape or “honor kill” women, and he did not walk into a disco or pizza place with a bomb belt on. And yes, Che Guevera was a terrorist (he murdered innocent people). In fact, Che was a totalitarian, the very type of person V is supposed to be against.

Some reviews have been more based on common sense, given the implied connections to our world. The New Yorker’s David Denby called V for Vendetta “a dunderheaded pop fantasia that celebrates terrorism and destruction.” Time writer Lev Grossman asked, “Who thought this was a good idea?” Kurd Loder called these reviews “grumpy.”

But Loder has more about the awkward (and imaginary and totally ridiculous I might add) Bush parallels:

In adapting his story, which was written back in the 1980s, the Wachowski Brothers have awkwardly imposed upon it a very contemporary, Hollywood-style anti-Bush agenda. There’s nothing wrong with doing this, of course ? millions may cheer. But the attempted visual link at one point between the Bush and the Nazi eras, and the Red State-baiting observation (not present in Moore’s original story) that the dictator Sutler started out as a devoutly religious conservative, are strained and ungainly. As Moore suggests in his interview, if the Wachowskis had had the courage of their convictions, they would have relocated the story to this country and mounted a full-frontal assault on their target. That would have been honest, at least.

The very attractive but disappointing Natalie Portman also defends the movie, asking “how do we define terrorism?” She seems to be on for the ride but at least not as nutty as Weaving.

What this is all about: The politics of victimhood and imaginary dictatorships

The parrallels to the Bush administration are ridiculous. Bush is not Hitler or Mussolini or Stalin. In America, you can protest, practice free speech, assemble and make an idiot out of yourself all you want. It’s offensive and disgusting to attempt to make such a correlation between the Nazi regime and people who believe in a higher power or like traditional values. I am sad at the loss of innocent life from the Iraq War, but the answer is not to defend killing of innocent civilians in Western countries: in fact, it’s evil. But Bush-bashing and comparing conservatives to fascists is not the only ignorant aspect of this movie. It’s just another example of the politics of victimhood.

It’s strange, but when real victims, like those of terrorism, or those of the perverted NAMBLA organization, are hurt, often leftists don’t rally around the victims for justice like conservatives do, but instead defend the perpetrator of the crime. They defend the terrorists, and they defend the criminal perverts (like ACLU did with NAMBLA, a criminal organization that advocates relations between adult men and boys).

Leftists also like to think of themselves as “overcoming oppression,” but without all the hard work of being under actual oppression to begin with. They also like to portray themselves as “brave,” but without offending anyone that would actually consider harming them for an opinion. Making a movie that bashes conservatives and compares them to fascists is not brave: in Hollywood, that’s called the status quo.

What is truly courageous? Making a documentary about a subject that can get you threatened (or killed, sadly), like Theo Van Gogh’s documentary about the oppression of women in Islam. He was shot and stabbed by an Islamic terrorist. Meanwhile, Hollywood’s leftist elite have not commented much on this horrific tragedy. Perhaps Hollywood could make a movie that portrays people living in fear of terrorism instead of fear of imaginary dictatorships: this would be based on reality. Instead, Hollywood makes movies about imaginary dictatorships to defend in real life the same method real fascists use today to intimidate people–killing innocent civilians.

——-

Here’s a mini-documentary about V for Vendetta. The YouTube.com version is online. It illustrates the insanity of defending terrorism and refusing to call the killers of innocent civilians “terrorists.” Please be aware that there is some disturbing footage of a crowd beating a “western sympathizer” and explosions of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. They are not for entertainment, which would be evil, but to show the true evil of killing innocent civilians. It talks about “living in fear,” but the actors and producers fail to realize that people live in fear of terrorism, not the fear of dictatorships. The only fascism that is real today is the fascism of terrorists.

According to an Associated Press article, Brazil may be “re-thinking its commitment to nonproliferation.”

As Iran faces international pressure over developing the raw material for nuclear weapons, Brazil is quietly preparing to open its own uranium enrichment center, capable of producing exactly the same fuel.

…

While Brazil is more cooperative than Iran on international inspections, some worry its new enrichment capability – which eventually will create more fuel than is needed for its two nuclear plants – suggests that South America’s biggest nation may be rethinking its commitment to nonproliferation.

While Brazil has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is planning to be able to produce more nuclear fuel than it will need, worrying some (If they do not plan on selling or sending enriched uranium to other countries, why make more than what is needed for the domestic nuclear plants?). Although most people regard Brazil’s nuclear energy program as peaceful, it’s enrichment program, secrecy and “reluctance to allow unlimited inspections” of its facilities has worried some.

“Brazil is beginning to be perceived as a country apparently wanting to re-evaluate its commitment to nonproliferation, and this is a big part of the problem,” said Jon Wolfsthal, deputy director for nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

The government-run Industrias Nucleares do Brasil S.A. has been conducting final tests at the enrichment plant, built on a former coffee plantation in Resende, 90 miles west of Rio de Janeiro. When it opens this year, Brazil will join the world’s nuclear elite.

I just finished a book titled “Hunting Al Qaeda: A Take-No-Prisoners Account of Terror, Adventure, and Disillusionment” about Special Forces Team 2085 of the Virginia National Guard and their missions (or lack thereof) in Afghanistan.? While there is some interesting information about the missions after 9/11, the book mostly deals with the bureaucracy and foot-dragging of some of the higher-ups.

While you certainly can’t have soldiers doing as they please and not getting approved from the higher-ups, this book points out how many Al Qaeda and Taliban were often missed because of red tape or foot dragging, and some were even released after they were captured, only to go back and start fighting American soldiers again. While this book is not as action-packed or written as well as Black Hawk Down, it is an informational read about the frustrations of some of the Virginia National Guard during this time.

It looks like Purdue University student Vikram Buddhi from India is in big trouble after calling for terrorism against America, calling for the killing of President Bush and many of his staff and “all Republicans,” and for the rape of American and British women. What an evil sicko. Read the article…

According to Fox News, it looks like some funds meant to combat terrorism are being appropriated to things like digital cameras:

Now, after September 11th, lawmakers handed out money freely and generously with little in the way of guidance or restrictions. Local and state officials, they often used the cash to fill a hole in their budgets, to start a pet project, or even reward political allies. Sometimes the cash is used for things that just do not seem relevant.

For example, Prince George, Maryland, they used $500,000 in anti-terror funds to purchase, guess what, Digital cameras.

read more…