Why America Will Be Attacked Again Under Obama

By Daniel Miessler on January 22nd, 2009: Tagged as Politics | Security | Terrorism

obama_official_photo

So we’ve heard all the arguments about Republicans being strong on defense, and Democrats being weak in this area. This isn’t one of those arguments. It is true, however, that we will likely be attacked again, in the United States, as a result of Obama being President.

The reason for this is that terrorists don’t want a healer in power. Terrorists want to be hunted an oppressed; their ability to recruit and amass power feeds on feelings of unjust prosecution by the evil. So when Obama steps up and says, “It’s a new day; let’s talk.” he reduces the power of the terrorist leadership. He takes away, to a significant degree, the ability to claim that killing innocent people is the only option.

Terrorists loved Bush, and they wish McCain had won. Bush grew their ranks more than anyone before him. Sure, he did some damage to them as well, but they love to be injured by those their followers hate; it just makes them stronger.

In short, Obama’s openness and ability to reduce global hatred for the United States is a direct threat to the livelihood of terrorist leadership. As he begins making progress on his agenda there will be significantly less support for operations that harm the U.S., as we will once again be seen as a positive force rather than a negative one.

But there’s a solution for them–attack us again on our own soil. This will result in a very predictable series of events:

  1. It will (falsely) vindicate Bush by showing that his actions were for a reason. In short, the sentiment will be, “Well, whatever Bush did…at least he kept us safe.”
  2. This will lead to a forced, massively non-progressive swing by Obama. He’ll have no choice but to implement an approach very similar to Bush’s, which the world will hate and will lead to more power for the attackers.
  3. But this won’t be enough. At the end of Obama’s term, he’ll be replaced by a “strong conservative” who can “keep us safe”. And we won’t be attacked again during his term because his backward policies (like Bush’s) will once again grow their power.

It’s simple. We’re about to be played. Terrorists need someone like Bush in charge of the United States in order to further their own goals, and attacking us during Obama’s administration is the best way to bring that about.

So keep your eyes open. Not for a potential terrorist attack (you have a better chance of dying from a lighting strike). No, keep your eyes open for the reaction to it, if it happens. Our ability, as a nation, to see through such a tactic will be absolutely crucial. ::

  • http://westwood.fortunecity.com/dolce/636/cooperatistation.html TIMM

    Alright. Let's see if I can explain this in terms of my life experience.

    When I was 18, I was walking down a street. A big vicious dog came and barked at me. It wanted a fight. It was nipping at the air just past my heels.

    I ignored it. I walked all the way down the street until it turned around and went back to it's house.

    THIS POLICY DIDN'T WORK WITH THE TERRORISTS.

    Clinton tried it, at least three times, and that's with counting the two african embassies as one time.

    The first bombing of the WTC wasn't a barking dog. It was a biting dog. The embassies was another bite. The attack on the Cole was another bite. 9-11 was the biggest bite of them all.

    Whether Bush was a recruiting slogan for terrorists or not is immaterial. In fact, it's kind of insulting. At some point, America had to turn around and face the big biting dog. Honestly, it could have been Gore launching the invasion of Taliban Afganistan, and he would have been the symbol of the “Great Satan” for us to direct a collective regret for being in the dogs way.

    Obama has been given the West's seal of approval by getting Bin Laden's thumb down. And, yes, I am rooting for the chance that the throngs of hating maniacs across the world, of all faiths, to just take a break, go home, put up their feet and wonder what it was like to be productive towards a cause that fed their family.

    Are the hardcore of the terrorist leadership thinking the same thing? Hell no. That roving, raving minority of the fighters are going to try to keep the shadow army intact, morale up, and the hatred flowing. But for the rest, the groups weaving their way in and out of radicalism, I have some hope.

    Obama has been in office two days. His expected actions on the occupation of Iraq is in line with the agreement between the Bush administration and the government with Iraq, though it may possibly not reach that early expected extraction of soldiers until after the current 2011 deadline.

    However, if, for some reason, (that will invariably be attributed to Bush as a primary cause), there is another attack on American property, a direct attack on anything of our nation, Obama will have both Clinton and Bush administration policies to use as experience.

    Do you think it would be unjustified for Obama to respond to ANY achieved terrorist action with a military action?

    Bombing of a destroyer?

    Bombing of an oil rig?

    Embassy on foreign soil?

    Domestic economic institution?

    Central defense department?

    Lastly,

    “So when Obama steps up and says, “It’s a new day; let’s talk.” he reduces the power of the terrorist leadership.”

    Will the terrorists hang with Mr. O? Seriously, what are the chances that they even want to see eye to eye with Obama, to sit down with a cool pitcher of ice water, and hash over a list of demands?

    Oh, you'd be right if you said “They won't. It's not in their interests to cease the violence on both sides.” And what would we do to satisfy them? Um, we would have to, what, follow their way of life, I can only come up with. And not doing so comes with the penalty of, you got it, another bombing. More violence. More attacks. More bad press. And the “Great Satan” inflates like a balloon in the sky, making a bigger target, no matter what we do.

    I say, we do what is both right and in the best interest of America. I say Obama returns volley, not eye for an eye, but, like he said, to use a surgeon's scalpel.

    I've said this before, I'm rooting for our new president. I didn't vote for him, I don't expect him to follow fiscally conservative policies based on his affiliations and his stated promises, not to mention his casual use of political convenience and privileged prerogative, yet his potential is great enough to do not what is popular, but what is required for our nation's prosperity.

    Who knows, maybe you guys got it right. Maybe he has something I'm not seeing. Think of it this way, you and I are in the same boat now, and I'm rooting for your boat.

    -=T=-

  • arthur doohan

    Absolutely correct, Daniel – but how many of your fellow Americans have learned that lesson? Your new President may be of that wiser cast of mind but your culture is still obsessed with winning and negotiating doesn't look like winning to 'plumbers'…..

    Good luck.

  • S

    Great response TIMM. I agree wholeheartedly and couldn't have said it better.

    -S

  • Jon

    i think you are right. also, dragging an empire into a guerrilla war in iraq, afghanistan and other remote locations is a great way to bring it down and eventually get them out of your hair forever. The “terrorists” can take out million dollar equipment with thousand dollar weapons. This leverage will drive the empire bankrupt and force it to leave, which I think is their ultimate goal. They just want us the hell out of their streets and homes, destroying their lives.

  • http://risktical.com Chris Hayes

    Interesting post. I would challenge you to be more specific about which terrorist threat you are more concerned with. Domestic or foreign. If foreign, are you really referring to terrorists motivated by their beliefs in Islam? Otherwise, I agree – there will be another terrorist attack on our soil – especially if you look at the general definition of terrorist. I am assuming, you are referring to terrorists motivated by their Islamic beliefs. With that assumption, I would offer the following:

    1. I do think that with Obama being the President that the probability of a foreign terrorist attack on within our borders could be further reduced. I do think that it is possible to soften the rhetoric while strengthening the intelligence capabilities.

    2. Islam is more then a personal belief system – it is a way of life – that includes personal beliefs as well as government. Some of the US response towards Islam in general has deepened the divide because it does not take into account Islam as a whole.

    CH

  • John

    Obama knows all this. His IQ is higher than yours.

  • Adrian Bool

    But America did not only attack the terroists; they did not limit themselves Al Quaeda and Teliban forces principally in Afaganistan – they invaded Iraq which had no terriost associations at that time and was not at all involved with 9/11.

    The equilivent with your dog analog would be that the dog bit you; you kicked the dog and then tore apart the cat that just happened to live in house next to the dog.

  • http://westwood.fortunecity.com/dolce/636/cooperatistation.html TIMM

    “Saddam Hussein's Support for International Terrorism

    ——————————————————————————–

    Iraq is one of seven countries that have been designated by the Secretary of State as state sponsors of international terrorism. UNSCR 687 prohibits Saddam Hussein from committing or supporting terrorism, or allowing terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Saddam continues to violate these UNSCR provisions.

    In 1993, the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) directed and pursued an attempt to assassinate, through the use of a powerful car bomb, former U.S. President George Bush and the Emir of Kuwait. Kuwaiti authorities thwarted the terrorist plot and arrested 16 suspects, led by two Iraqi nationals.

    Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians.

    Iraq shelters several prominent Palestinian terrorist organizations in Baghdad, including the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), which is known for aerial attacks against Israel and is headed by Abu Abbas, who carried out the 1985 hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro and murdered U.S. citizen Leon Klinghoffer.

    Iraq shelters the Abu Nidal Organization, an international terrorist organization that has carried out terrorist attacks in twenty countries, killing or injuring almost 900 people. Targets have included the United States and several other Western nations. Each of these groups have offices in Baghdad and receive training, logistical assistance, and financial aid from the government of Iraq.

    In April 2002, Saddam Hussein increased from $10,000 to $25,000 the money offered to families of Palestinian suicide/homicide bombers. The rules for rewarding suicide/homicide bombers are strict and insist that only someone who blows himself up with a belt of explosives gets the full payment. Payments are made on a strict scale, with different amounts for wounds, disablement, death as a “martyr” and $25,000 for a suicide bomber. Mahmoud Besharat, a representative on the West Bank who is handing out to families the money from Saddam, said, “You would have to ask President Saddam why he is being so generous. But he is a revolutionary and he wants this distinguished struggle, the intifada, to continue.”

    Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret terrorist training facility in Iraq known as Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations.”

    http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:1exHlH5IBs…

    ——————–

    AND

    US Removes 550 Tons Of “Yellow Cake” Uranium From Iraq

    ABC News

    July 5, 2008

    The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

    The removal of 550 metric tons of “yellowcake” — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam’s nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.

    What’s now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad — using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine.

    “Everyone is very happy to have this safely out of Iraq,” said a senior U.S. official who outlined the nearly three-month operation to The Associated Press. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

    While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called “dirty bomb” — a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material — it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment.

    The Iraqi government sold the yellowcake to a Canadian uranium producer, Cameco Corp., in a transaction the official described as worth “tens of millions of dollars.” A Cameco spokesman, Lyle Krahn, declined to discuss the price, but said the yellowcake will be processed at facilities in Ontario for use in energy-producing reactors.

    “We are pleased … that we have taken (the yellowcake) from a volatile region into a stable area to produce clean electricity,” he said.

    The deal culminated more than a year of intense diplomatic and military initiatives — kept hushed in fear of ambushes or attacks once the convoys were under way: first carrying 3,500 barrels by road to Baghdad, then on 37 military flights to the Indian Ocean atoll of Diego Garcia and finally aboard a U.S.-flagged ship for a 8,500-mile trip to Montreal.

    And, in a symbolic way, the mission linked the current attempts to stabilize Iraq with some of the high-profile claims about Saddam’s weapons capabilities in the buildup to the 2003 invasion.

    Accusations that Saddam had tried to purchase more yellowcake from the African nation of Niger — and an article by a former U.S. ambassador refuting the claims — led to a wide-ranging probe into Washington leaks that reached high into the Bush administration.

    Tuwaitha and an adjacent research facility were well known for decades as the centerpiece of Saddam’s nuclear efforts.

    Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

    U.S. and Iraqi forces have guarded the 23,000-acre site — surrounded by huge sand berms — following a wave of looting after Saddam’s fall that included villagers toting away yellowcake storage barrels for use as drinking water cisterns.

    Yellowcake is obtained by using various solutions to leach out uranium from raw ore and can have a corn meal-like color and consistency. It poses no severe risk if stored and sealed properly. But exposure carries well-documented health concerns associated with heavy metals such as damage to internal organs, experts say.

    “The big problem comes with any inhalation of any of the yellowcake dust,” said Doug Brugge, a professor of public health issues at the Tufts University School of Medicine.

    Moving the yellowcake faced numerous hurdles.

    Diplomats and military leaders first weighed the idea of shipping the yellowcake overland to Kuwait’s port on the Persian Gulf. Such a route, however, would pass through Iraq’s Shiite heartland and within easy range of extremist factions, including some that Washington claims are aided by Iran. The ship also would need to clear the narrow Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Gulf, where U.S. and Iranian ships often come in close contact.

    Kuwaiti authorities, too, were reluctant to open their borders to the shipment despite top-level lobbying from Washington.

    An alternative plan took shape: shipping out the yellowcake on cargo planes.

    But the yellowcake still needed a final destination. Iraqi government officials sought buyers on the commercial market, where uranium prices spiked at about $120 per pound last year. It’s currently selling for about half that. The Cameco deal was reached earlier this year, the official said.

    At that point, U.S.-led crews began removing the yellowcake from the Saddam-era containers — some leaking or weakened by corrosion — and reloading the material into about 3,500 secure barrels.

    In April, truck convoys started moving the yellowcake from Tuwaitha to Baghdad’s international airport, the official said. Then, for two weeks in May, it was ferried in 37 flights to Diego Garcia, a speck of British territory in the Indian Ocean where the U.S. military maintains a base.

    On June 3, an American ship left the island for Montreal, said the official, who declined to give further details about the operation.

    The yellowcake wasn’t the only dangerous item removed from Tuwaitha.

    Earlier this year, the military withdrew four devices for controlled radiation exposure from the former nuclear complex. The lead-enclosed irradiation units, used to decontaminate food and other items, contain elements of high radioactivity that could potentially be used in a weapon, according to the official. Their Ottawa-based manufacturer, MDS Nordion, took them back for free, the official said.

    The yellowcake was the last major stockpile from Saddam’s nuclear efforts, but years of final cleanup is ahead for Tuwaitha and other smaller sites.

    The U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency plans to offer technical expertise.

    Last month, a team of Iraqi nuclear experts completed training in the Ukrainian ghost town of Pripyat, which once housed the Chernobyl workers before the deadly meltdown in 1986, said an IAEA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decontamination plan has not yet been publicly announced.

    But the job ahead is enormous, complicated by digging out radioactive “hot zones” entombed in concrete during Saddam’s rule, said the IAEA official. Last year, an IAEA safety expert, Dennis Reisenweaver, predicted the cleanup could take “many years.”

    The yellowcake issue also is one of the many troubling footnotes of the war for Washington.

    A CIA officer, Valerie Plame, claimed her identity was leaked to journalists to retaliate against her husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, who wrote that he had found no evidence to support assertions that Iraq tried to buy additional yellowcake from Niger.

    A federal investigation led to the conviction of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice

    http://patdollard.com/2008/07/ap-exclusive-us-r…

  • icepyro

    Timm brings up an interesting point, however I believe there is a middle ground to both sides. My sister owned a rottweiler. Our busy lives kept us from properly paying attention to him (and rottweilers demand a lot of attention). He started chewing/scratching up stuff he knew he wasn't supposed to, even window sills. At first we tried to discipline him, but that didn't seem to work, it seemed to encourage since at least then he was getting attention. Then we tried ignoring him, but that didn't work either as he would just spend his time finding what bugged us the most until we couldn't ignore him. In the end, we made time in our busy lives to properly play with him, and if he did pick up something he should not have, then we would get a toy and trade him.
    My point here is as Daniel points out, punishing only makes them stronger, and as TIMM points out, we can't ignore them and hope they leave us alone. We need more. We need to be part of this world. We need to interact. Not say 'stop the WMD stuff and then we will talk'. We need not to say 'get these people out of your country and we will talk'. We do need to say let's talk about how we can make peace. I don't trust these people what do you know about them? Are you allowing them to do this because you don't like us or because you don't know what they are up to? If any nation is harboring terrorists, let's ask them and the rest of the world why that is and whether we support that. Yes its a precarious balance, but to tell people to do something without authority nor respect is a mistake in the same way that to tolerate other countries trying to tell us what to do is a mistake.
    They will hate us, they will likely attack us, but we can prevail as long as we do not allow ourselves to be run by these people or their tactics. If other countries see that America does in fact respect them, they will respect and support us and that will be what makes the difference.

  • http://www.artformfunction.com Michael

    So your argument is that because Obama is going to weaken the terrorists with his peacemaking, this is going to cause the terrorists to attack. The logical extension of this idea is that the more harmony Obama creates the more likely he is to cause an attack.
    Of course this ignores the fact that without a hateful lunatic in the Whitehouse there is a good chance that people will be much less inclined to join terrorist orgs and more likely to turn them in, which should decrease the likelihood of an attack. Also, if you consider the possibility that the terrorists are pissed off for a reason (infidels in holy lands…), maybe removing the reasons may have a beneficial effect.

  • dapxin

    Ok. I dare to introduce a bit of foreign point of view to this.

    Your assessment of the risk quotient for obama is pretty.

    For someone that grew up in a remote city in Africa, and has lived long enough in london to claim understanding the way the west works, george Bush was a gigantic error, for the American phenomenon. But thats history.

    There is a problem with lunatics, hiding over Islamic umbrella's to make a case, and that is they are not prepared to understand, let alone negotiate.

    But, the advantage to the policy Obama suggests, to America is, it grants you lot the higher ground:- such that, should there be ever the need to perform “surgical strikes” on people, the rest of the world that's got thier normal heads will be prepared to follow the American troops.

    Post 9/11, George Bush probably had nearly as unilateral, a support as Obama has right now, in the pursuit of terrorists ! scrach Lunatics.

    By Iraq, + the manner of lies n lies, that it was done with, + the torture, Bush effectively threw the goodwill away.

    Cut it short:- ” A tiger does not need to proclaim its tigeri-tude”. The ultimate challenge, is for America to take the lead, where it has always lead, the frontline in moral + technological projects with a view to reducing America's direct reliance/interest/meddling in local affairs elsewhere……

    I think Americans in general would do themselves a bit of favour, by seeking to understand the presence of other dynamics and people in the world…

  • http://dmiessler.com/ Daniel Miessler

    I'm talking about attacks on our soil, in order to undermine Obama.

  • http://dmiessler.com/ Daniel Miessler

    It doesn't matter what Obama knows; what matters is what the American public knows.

  • http://dmiessler.com/ Daniel Miessler

    The argument is that threats to their power structure (i.e. people not hating America as much) require them to take action. And attacking America will force America to be an asshole, which will increase the amount of hatred for America. Which is what terrorists want.

  • http://dmiessler.com/ Daniel Miessler

    Here's what I'm saying: when we are good and positive and just in America, then the whole world fights terrorism for us, but when we're pompous imperialists the terrorists get stronger due to the world not caring if we are attacked. It makes it easier for them to operate.

  • Pingback: Cross Site Scripting » Blog Archive » Why America Will Be Attacked Again Under Obama | Dmiessler.Com

  • dapxin

    Yeah, but people not hating America so much means their jobs are harder, but America will need to keep one eye open always…

  • raul

    this article is stupid

  • Ramfellow

    Idont know what your talkin about but we were attacked on 9/11!!QWE have been periodically attcked and war waged against us by these TERRORIST! Before 9/11 !!When the peanut frmer wimp Carterwas president they got away with everything .Bush was good at one thing .That was recognizing an the war on us by terrorism and protecting our country first.While all the DEMS were doing all they could tro see our country lose the war in IRAQ Again We were attacked !We didnt invite them here to kill and blow up the Twin towers.Now that we have a guy that we dont really know is a natural born US citizen,as president and also a Muslim ,leads me to believe they will attack becuase he dosent have a clue and is weak in foriegn policy or he he is really aligned with them !Either way he is gonna fail in protecting our country from another attack .Ill blame all that dies in that attack or attacks on O Bama and all the idiots who voted for him and his telepromter

  • Sheeraz Ali

    America will not be attacked just think positive! Why should America fear the world when it created the modern world? USA must not abuse power with its great arms arsenal and go around kill thousands of people with its airforce and navy but rather hold dialogues. America is a christian country and the messiah christ preached the gospel of love but i someone has to police the world and today it is america tommorrow it could china & india but please for GODS sake dont spill blood. You may question who is this individual telling us americans what to do well i am neither a prophet like moses to the court of pharoah and nor am a holy man but an ordinary muslim. I know we all make mistakes and we cant pass every exam with an A grade but we should put sanctions on the TALIBAN not bomb them because we are killing innocent people. America has the power to change the world dont force people to adopt your idealogy but spread your religion/idealogy through peaceful mean via aid, reasonning, open dialogue and UN monitoring of dangerous weapons just like you are dealing with evil iran at the minute. Know God Bless America and Salam & peace.

  • Sheeraz Ali

    America will not be attacked just think positive! Why should America fear the world when it created the modern world? USA must not abuse power with its great arms arsenal and go around kill thousands of people with its airforce and navy but rather hold dialogues. America is a christian country and the messiah christ preached the gospel of love but i someone has to police the world and today it is america tommorrow it could china & india but please for GODS sake dont spill blood. You may question who is this individual telling us americans what to do well i am neither a prophet like moses to the court of pharoah and nor am a holy man but an ordinary muslim. I know we all make mistakes and we cant pass every exam with an A grade but we should put sanctions on the TALIBAN not bomb them because we are killing innocent people. America has the power to change the world dont force people to adopt your idealogy but spread your religion/idealogy through peaceful mean via aid, reasonning, open dialogue and UN monitoring of dangerous weapons just like you are dealing with evil iran at the minute. Know God Bless America and Salam & peace.

  • hope

    no 1 lyks obama that much we all wish mccain won bc he would have ran this state better

    • Wcwajga

      “No one” likes Obama? I do. Give me ONE good reason you don’t and I might just change my mind. Not likely.

      • guest

        Wcwajga..i don’t like lier’s and Obama has done nothing but lie. There are video’s of obama saying one thing in the a.m. and just the opposite in the p.m. Have you read about what’s in obamacare? Did you know there is dhimmiee(sp) in it. That means you and i will pay a tax on hc..muslims are exempt.What kind of man supports a kenya cousin who because he lost a political office encouraged his minion’s to burn down christian churches with ppl. in it. Obama’s cousin allowed much bloodshed in his name and obama supported him. And under socialism everyone is impoverished..only the elite have it all. They will take your taxes and more to first make them rich and fat and then spread it around where nothing is left for you and your family.If you beleive obama’s lies then you are in for a painful and rude awakening. Obama thinks of the american ppl. as enemies.

  • Rln

    America deserves another attack! The sooner the better!

    • Wow

      That’s the stupidest I’ve ever heard.

  • wcwajga

    This is ridiculous. YOU try running our country before putting down any of the leaders among us. At least you’ve been given the right to sit behind your computer and type such things. Sore loser. McCain didn’t win. Suck it up and support your president or your damn right nobody else will. NOTHING to do with Obama. Hell, you’re probably just mad he’s black. What did you expect McCain would’ve even done differently?

  • Dean

    America and Britain will be attacked again in the wake of osama bin ladens death. The muslims will want revenge. And they will get it. The celebrations of bin ladens death are very premature. What next?, a double attack on Washington and London? This could be a pretty bad backlash. But atleast that fucker is dead.

  • damian90

    arizona we are under attack right now we have no elictricity from new mexico, colorado, arizona and california, all the southern states. farewell.

  • Vanbomel1

    I totally believe the United States will be attacked again and there isn’t a damn thing we can do to stop it.

  • Jpjinco

    I will not vote for Obama in 2011 I will vote for someone like bush back in office


Top

Popular

Information Security / Technology

Politics

Philosophy & Religion

Technology & Science

Culture & Society

Miscellaneous

Arguments

Projects

Collections

Twitter

What I'm Reading

Favorite Books and Essays

Top Blog Categories

Inputs