Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

The truth, at last

After having been buried for almost fifty years.

The new film “Chappaquiddick” is, to date, the most brutal and honest account of what happened that night. But it’s also something else: an indictment of our collective hero worship at the altar of Brand Kennedy, which bred so much corrosive entitlement that surviving brother Ted, the family beta male, went home to sleep it off after leaving a loyal young staffer to die alone.

As portrayed by Jason Clarke, the young senator is a venal, self-pitying coward, thoughtless and remorseless, ambition his only care. He treats loyalists and groupies with equal contempt, and as the weekend begins, he toasts them all for “wanting to prove yourselves worthy of…the Kennedy name.”

The film depicts Ted as drinking and driving before his black Oldsmobile 88 flies off a small wooden bridge and into a pond, crash-landing upside down.

According to contemporaneous accounts, the tide was dead low, the water only 5 or 6 feet deep. Both of the passenger-side windows were blown out. Kennedy later testified that Mary Jo might have been hitting or kicking him in her frantic struggle to escape. He claimed to have gone back under for her six or seven times but there is no proof. He was seen at 2:25 a.m. in dry clothes by a hotel desk clerk.

When Mary Jo’s body was recovered the next morning, it appeared that she died not of drowning but suffocation. She likely lived for hours. There she had been, her head and neck jammed at a sharp angle up against the foot board, gasping through a small air pocket. Was she wondering where Kennedy was? Was she convinced he was on the verge of coming back for her? That he had gone to get help?

After all, who would leave someone in this situation alone? Least of all someone who had suffered so much loss so young?

Ted Kennedy passed by nearby lighted homes and the local fire department as he walked back to his inn, away from the pond he’d later claim was deep and at high tide. He slept that night as Mary Jo took her last breaths.

The next morning, Ted refused to appear at the scene when summoned, demanding that the chief of police come down to the station. There, the chief finds Kennedy behind the cop’s own desk, reading a carefully worded statement. He doesn’t mention Mary Jo by her full name because he doesn’t know how to spell “Kopechne.”

Ten hours had passed since the car went in the water.

But Ted’s only concern is that he’ll never be president. Criminal charges don’t concern him, nor does he ever consider he might go to prison. He is, after all, a Kennedy.

Ted flees the island, helps block an autopsy, and attends Mary Jo’s funeral wearing a fake neck brace. For a time, he considers blaming the dead girl and telling the police that she was driving. Instead he blames the bridge, he claims exhaustion, he tells The New York Times he has a concussion and is on sedatives until The Times reporter informs him no doctor would ever give sedatives to someone who’s concussed.

In the end, Ted Kennedy pled to nothing more than leaving the scene of an accident and received a suspended sentence of two months’ jail time. He would never be president, but he spent the rest of his life held in high esteem by the Democratic party. When he died in 2009, Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Kopechne were barely mentioned. Instead he was canonized by the Senate as its Liberal Lion, a fighter for the poor, the dispossessed and, yes, women.

The Kennedy family consists of unleavened scum almost to a man, and Ted was the scummiest of them all. Incredibly, though, the callous, self-serving negligence that caused Kopechne’s death was only the beginning of a long, storied career of abuse, immorality, criminality, and outright treason, from “waitress sandwiches” to innumerable dirty Senate deals to his clandestine trip to the Soviet Union to plead with Andropov for help in rigging the 1994 election and make him president.

The man was filth, a pustule, utter swine. He was a groteque perversion of the ideal of manhood, bereft of redeeming quality. If he ever committed a truly selfless or altruistic act, I never have heard of it. That his existence as a creature at liberty to indulge his every whim was tolerated by his fellows disgraces the very idea of human decency; that he never for a moment feared a legal reckoning of any kind for his loathsome depredations makes a mockery of any notion of justice and renders the principle of equality before the law a nauseating joke. That he remains a revered, cherished icon for the Democrat Socialist Party, their liberal-media handmaidens (who perpetuated the “Camelot” lie for decades, and still are), and Progressivists generally certifies their depraved iniquity better than any other single thing could.

Every man Jack of those diseased reprobates is well-slimed by the Kennedy sleaze. But Teddy still tops ’em all, and not by just a little bit. It’s great that the real story of Chappaquiddick is out there for mass-audience consumption at last. It’s appalling—and damning—that it only took fifty fucking years before it finally got done.

“The Lion of the Senate” lived far too long, and enjoyed a life spent wallowing in decadence, unearned affluence, privilege, and complete indifference to the harm he did to others without care or consequence far more than was just. If God could forgive him, then He is great indeed. Kennedy can roast in Hell for all eternity without succor or surcease for all me.

Share

The real thing

Steyn insists on accuracy and precision. He has a point.

As the purveyor of a family-friendly website, I have been reluctant to join in the popularization of the epithet “cuck” – as in “cuckold”, as in “cuckservatives”, etc. Yes, yes, as a practical matter, most mainstream conservatives are hopeless squishes who haven’t conserved a single thing and for whom, as I complained to John Oakley in Toronto the other day, no hill is ever the hill to die on. But cuck-talk’s not my bag, and, as a Chaucer fan, I dislike the way it advances the cyber-porn fetishist’s re-definition of “cuckold” – a man who is not only aware of his wife’s infidelity but turned on by it – as opposed to its ancient meaning, of an oblivious fool of a husband who discovers too late he’s now grown cuckold’s horns.

Nevertheless, I think we should make an exception to our general “cuck”-free-zone rule for the case of contemporary Britain, which is literally descending into the United Cuckdom – that is to say, an entire nation that sits back and accepts that its women are to be preyed upon. Eight days ago The Sunday Mirror reported on “Britain’s ‘worst ever’ child grooming scandal”. The headline editor’s sub-quotes are most prudent: This is the “worst ever” at the time of writing, but who knows what’ll come along next week?

When the child-sex crimes of lifelong BBC presenter Jimmy Savile were posthumously exposed, Commander Spindler of the Metropolitan Police piously announced:

Jimmy Savile groomed a nation.

But Savile’s old enablers at the Beeb and Spindler’s colleagues in the British constabulary are also grooming a nation. They’re grooming Britons to accept that the serial mass gang-rape of English girls is just a social phenomenon, part of the natural order – regrettable perhaps, but nothing to be done about it; and thus the mountain of human debris is merely a small price to pay for the benefits of vibrant diversity. Which means the real problem is these ghastly types boorish enough to draw attention to the sacrifice of English maidenhood to the volcano gods of multiculturalism.

And still the police and the social workers and the politicians and the media roll up their windows and drive away.

Oh, they can get worked up over ancient disc-jockeys who copped a feel on “Top of the Pops” in 1973 and thereby committed what the illiterate coppers call “historic” sexual abuse. But, in the face of truly “historic”, truly unprecedented sexual abuse of thousands of English girls day in, day out, year after year, all they can manage is a fatalistic shrug. “Cuckolds” in the contemporary sense is a good word for the British state’s attitude to what’s happening. So is “wittols”, the 16th century neologism for those who are aware that they’re being cuckolded and go along with it. It seems reasonable to assume that the mass sexual exploitation of young girls is occurring in every English town with even a modest (as in Rotherham) “Asian” population, boundlessly cocksure and assertive, and a feeble British officialdom too cowed and appeasing to resist. The real word for what is happening is evil – for a society that will not defend its youngest and most vulnerable girls is surely capable of rationalizing many more wicked accommodations in the years ahead.

Profoundly pathetic—and so far beyond contemptible that there really is no word for it.

Share

No

Just…NO. Not now, not ever.

Show of hands: Who thinks this stops, even slows down, once those mean old not-actually-assault weapons get banned? That liberals have taken a hard stand in favor of cowardice does not exactly fill one with confidence that once we give up our Second Amendment rights that we’ll be safer or freer.

Nor should it, seeing as how neither “safer” nor “freer” are goals for them. Quite the opposite, in fact.

The liberal elite is using its social and cultural ties to those at the helm of big companies to essentially blacklist the NRA, and thereby the tens of millions of Americans who support gun rights. But oppression is oppression whether it’s done by a government bureaucrat or a corporate one, and our principle of non-interference in business assumes business stays out of politics. But now National, Hertz, and others are cutting ties to the NRA, and liberals are advocating banks do the same. Their intent is clear – what they can’t do in politics they will simply do by not allowing the representatives of people whose politics they don’t like access to the infrastructure of society. And we’re not supposed to do anything about it because, you know, free enterprise and stuff.  You know, our principles.

No. They are exercising political power. We have our own political power, and we need to exercise it – ruthlessly.

He has several good ideas on how to go about that, none of which are all that likely to happen because the Republicans—and, sadly enough, Trump—are not NEARLY as solid on this as he thinks they are.

Which is not to say that at least SOME of them aren’t solid as a rock, mind:



That’s Georgia’s Lt Gov talking there; kudos, kudos, and more kudos to the man for his strong, unequivocal stand here. He’s clearly smart enough to know what dicking around with Lefty always buys those who succumb to the fatal temptation, and he ain’t having any. The alarming 2A turnaround signified by Trump’s declared intention to “ban” bump stocks is…well, baffling:

President Trump on Tuesday directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to craft new regulations to ban firearm modifiers including the “bump stock” used in the Las Vegas massacre, amid bipartisan calls to strengthen gun laws in the wake of recent shooting rampages.

During an event at the White House, the president announced he signed a memo ordering the regulations on “bump stocks” and told Sessions he wants new federal guidelines finalized “very soon.

I’d love to be able to convince myself that this is just another Trumpian rope-a-dope to gull the Left into another stinging defeat—Lord knows we’ve seen him do exactly that again and again, to our great delight—but I’m having trouble doing it this time. Maybe it will yet prove to be so, I dunno.

Be that as it may, I can’t see anything at all to be gained from such a maneuver on this issue anyway. Yes, bump stocks are useless toys, good for a few minutes’ amusement on the range and very little else, as anybody who ever used one knows. Getting rid of them wouldn’t deprive anybody of a whole lot; certainly, it won’t accomplish one damned thing when it comes to preventing mass shootings. A case can be made that they aren’t a hill worth dying on.

Nonetheless: we all already know that not one of the thousands of laws already on the books has ever prevented a mass murder. We know that one more law isn’t going to somehow magically do the trick. We know that almost all of what the Left screams about regarding guns in America is arrant bullshit—sinister fabrication when it isn’t ignorant tripe, stuff and nonsense when it isn’t outright deceitful. Their facts aren’t facts, their statistics are spurious, and their proposals will not accomplish what they claim are their goals…which aren’t their real goals anyway.

None of which even matters all that much anymore, because we also all know what the Left really wants. The few left among them who are well-meaning but hopelessly, stupidly wrong are rendered irrelevant by the vast majority who harbor nefarious designs on Constitutional liberty. From here on out they need to be slammed down immediately, as hard as possible, each and every time they propose ANY new “gun-control” measures. As Schlichter proposes, they need to be informed, beyond any possibility of doubt, that we will give them not one more inch. This far, no fucking farther.

The “debate” with them over our gun rights—false and fraudulent as it’s always been—is over, the negotiations finished, the case closed, the court out of session. If they find the result unsatisfactory, that’s just too goddamned bad. They’ve hoodwinked the RINOs enough times over the years with phony “compromises” in which they got everything they wanted while giving up nothing that they ought to be able to grasp right away what we mean when we say: NO COMPROMISE.

None. No means no. No compromise, no making nice, no playing footsie with double-dealing Leftists out to win it all by hook or by crook. No backing down. No give, no wiggle-room, no do-overs. No deal. LEFTY. GETS. NOTHING. Marta Hernandez, bless her stout gun-totin’ heart, says it well:

I’m done with leftist, gun grabbing trash that is incapable of conversation about policy without emotionalist histrionics, and whose first reaction to anyone who doesn’t toe the gun-grabber line is to insult their lineage and intelligence.

I’m done with ignorant statist Neanderthals who claim that you don’t need a gun because it won’t make a difference in a life-or-death situation, since after all Scot Peterson and his merry band of pusillanimous invertebrates had guns, and those guns didn’t help stop Nikolas Cruz, ignoring the fact that the bearer has to have the actual testicular fortitude to use said tools. I’m done with the hoplophobes sit on their high perch of cluelessness accusing those of us who disagree with them of disregarding the lives of children in favor of our so-called “toys” that don’t make a difference anyway.

They use traumatized children as tools to push their policies without regard for their lives or their safety, and then they have the raw nerve to accuse those of us trying to have an adult conversation about gun control of hating kids and not holding their lives dear.

So let me set things straight right here and right now.

I am the parent of two wonderful kids, both of whom are serving in this nation’s military. They both knew gun safety rules, and learned how to shoot by the time they were 8 years old. I certainly don’t need lectures from half-witted cock anvils who haven’t had the pleasure of raising responsible, intelligent children into independent, rational adults (mostly because they couldn’t get laid if they crawled up a chicken’s ass and waited) about how I should care for the lives of kids more than I do my guns.

I am a veteran, who has been deployed to a combat zone. I was never infantry, obviously, but I am skilled enough with firearms to have qualified with the M9, the M16A2, and the M4. I have also safely fired the SAW, the M2, and the M60 machine guns, as well as the M203 and the AT4. Most of us who have spent any time in the military have at some point, so I’m not anything special, but I’m pretty damn sure that I know more about firearms and their safe use than some screeching harpy, whose idea of serving its country is wearing a pussy hat on its pointy head and drinking box wine in solidarity with its wailing, shrieking, gibbering sister-shrews.

I’ve also fired Uzis, SKSs, AKs, M1 Garands, and simple shotguns safely and effectively as a civilian. An M1911 is my regular carry weapon, and believe me, I am willing to use it should my life or the lives of my loved ones be threatened by the violent goblins whom you strive to protect by disarming me and mine.

So let me set you straight on a few things, leftist gun-grabber trash.

Is my right to defend myself and stand up to tyranny more important than your invented “right” to “feel safe?” Damn straight it is!

She has plenty more—PLENTY—all of which you will very much enjoy reading. Her point is the only one we need to bother making from now on. It can be driven home with even more brevity, just as I did the other day. It is this: GO FUCK YOURSELVES.

You ain’t getting ’em. Period fucking dot.

Share

Dope, inside

More on the Broward Cowards. Much more…and worse.

I spent about 18 months in 2012, 2013 and 2014 investigating Broward and Miami-Dade school policies and how those policies transfer to law enforcement practices. My interest was initially accidental. I discovered an untold story of massive scale and consequence as a result of initial research into Trayvon Martin and his High School life.

What I stumbled upon was a Broward County law enforcement system in a state of conflict. The Broward County School Board and District Superintendent, entered into a political agreement with Broward County Law enforcement officials to stop arresting students for crimes. The motive was simple. The school system administrators wanted to “improve their statistics” and gain state and federal grant money for improvements therein. So police officials, the very highest officials of law enforcement (Sheriff and Police Chiefs), entered into a plan.

As soon as Miami-Dade began to receive the benefits (political and financial) from the scheme, Broward County joined on. The approach in Broward was identical as the approach in Miami-Dade. It’s important to remember, this was not an arbitrary change – this was a well-planned fundamental shift in the entire dynamic of how teenagers would be treated when they engaged in criminal conduct.

The primary problem was the policy conflicted with laws; and over time the policy began to create outcomes where illegal behavior by students was essentially unchecked by law enforcement. Initially the police were excusing misdemeanor behaviors. However, it didn’t take long until felonies, even violent felonies (armed robberies, assaults and worse) were being excused. The need to continue lowering the arrests year-over-year meant that increasingly more severe unlawful behavior had to be ignored. Over time even the most severe of unlawful conduct was being filtered by responding police.

We found out about it, when six cops blew the whistle on severe criminal conduct they were being instructed to hide. The sheriff and police Chiefs were telling street cops and school cops to ignore ever worsening criminal conduct. The police were in a bind.  They were encountering evidence of criminal conduct and yet they had to hide the conduct. There were examples of burglary and robbery where the police had to hide the recovered evidence in order to let the kids get away without reports.

The police would take the stolen merchandise and intentionally falsify police records to record stolen merchandise *as if* they just found it on the side of the road. They put drugs and stolen merchandise in bags, and sent it to storage rooms in the police department. Never assigning the recovery to criminal conduct. Stolen merchandise was just sitting in storage rooms gathering dust.

They couldn’t get the stuff back to the victim because that would mean the police would have to explain how they took custody of it. So they just hid it. To prove this was happening one of the officers told me where to look, and who the victim was.

At first I didn’t believe them. However, after getting information from detectives, cross referencing police reports, and looking at the “found merchandise”, I realized they were telling the truth. A massive internal investigation took place and the results were buried. Participating in the cover-up were people in the media who were connected to the entire political apparatus. The sheriff and police chief could always deny the violent acts (assaults, rapes, beatings etc.) were being ignored; that’s why the good guys in the police dept gave the evidence of the stolen merchandise. That physical evidence couldn’t be ignored and proved the scheme.

From 2012 though 2018 it only got worse. In Broward and Miami-Dade it is almost impossible for a student to get arrested. The staff within the upper levels of LEO keep track of arrests and when a certain number is reached all else is excused.

Well it didn’t take long for criminal gangs in Broward and Miami-Dade to realize the benefit of using students for their criminal activities. After all, the kids would be let go… so organized crime became easier to get away with if they enlisted high-school kids. As criminals became more adept at the timing within the offices of the officials, they timed their biggest crimes to happen after the monthly maximum arrest quota was made.

The most serious of armed robberies etc. were timed for later in the month or quarter. The really serious crimes were timed in the latter phases of the data collection periods. This way the student criminals were almost guaranteed to get away with it. Now. You can see how that entire process gets worse over time. Present corruption (the need to hide the policy) expands in direct relationship to the corruption before it.  This is where the School Police come into play.

Understanding the risk behind the scheme, it became increasingly important to put the best corrupt cops in the schools. *BEST* as in *SMARTEST*. Those SRO’s became the ones who were best at hiding the unlawful conduct. Again, over time, the most corrupt police officers within the system became the police inside the schools. These officers were those who are best skilled at identifying the political objectives and instructions.

Those “School Cops” also have special privileges.  It’s a great gig.  They get free “on campus” housing close to the schools they are assigned to etc.  They’re crooked as hell and the criminal kids how just how to play them. It’s a game. Also an open secret. A lot of it came out during an earlier *internal affairs* investigation. Unfortunately the behavior never changed because the politics never changed. It’s still going on. For years this has been happening and no-one cared. Crimes happen; students excused; victims ignored; etc. The Broward County School and Law Enforcement system is designed to flow exactly this way. It’s politics.

Only then a Parkland school shooting happened. For Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel this had to be an “oh shit” moment; but not for the reasons the media initially thought.

To adapt the old lady’s famous statement to fit this stinking, toxic shitpit of a scandal: it’s corruption all the way down. It’s also the reason we’ll never, ever give up our guns, no matter how fervently they shriek, wheedle, moan and try to deflect attention away from the real failure here.

During Wednesday’s horrible fiasco of a “Town Hall”, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel spelled it out:

What I’m asking the law makers to give police all over this country is more power.

I was sufficiently struck by the above to write it down – because it was clear even then that Sheriff Israel is an incompetent deployer of the power he already has. The scale of his department’s appalling failure in the Parkland massacre gets worse almost hourly. 

I said on Tucker’s show that the state had failed at every level – school district, county, federal. But Sheriff Israel’s performance is especially egregious. An honorable man would surely have tendered his resignation. On the other hand, sitting on stage, watching his voters jeer Dana Loesch and call her a “murderer”, the sleazy creep can be forgiven for concluding that with constituents this eager to be misdirected why not string along? Their fury should have been aimed at him – and he should have spent his hour on stage ducked behind a podium demonstrating the policy-compliant incident-long Broward County crouch.

I observed on TV that, given the situation with “refugees” in Germany and Scandinavia and so on, it was more likely that Europeans would rediscover their inclination toward self-defense than that Americans would surrender it. Any foreigners wanting to know why claims to leave it to an all-powerful state don’t resonate with half of America need look no further than Scott Israel.

Actually, it resonates with us quite powerfully—as an object lesson on the peril inextricably entwined with trading liberty for (false) security, as Progressivist would-be dictators demand.

Cry all you want, shitlibs. You aren’t getting them, not even one. That’s flat, and final. If you want them, you’re going to have to come and take them. Once more: we’re willing to die defending ourselves against you. Are you willing to die for your dreams of tyranny? Think hard—and then make your move, you whining, lying, gutless pussies. If you dare.

Our response to the phony, one-way “debate” over “gun control” has now been purified in the crucible of the Founders’ “long chain of abuses” to one very simple statement, a lone middle finger waved in defiance of the gun-grabbers: go fuck yourselves. There is nothing more that needs to be said.

Share

Last call for everything

Steyn notes a pathetic passing.

Last call for Sir John A Macdonald: The establishment at top right is a small trivial example of a profound sickness. Sir John’s Public House is a Scottish pub in Kingston, Ontario located in the building where Canada’s first Prime Minister once had his law office. On Tuesday, the publican changed the name and replaced the signs. It is no longer “Sir John’s Public House”, merely “The Public House”:

“Some of our customers and some of the native organizations in the Kingston area said that they could no longer do business with us. They said that it was no longer a safe place for them, and that the name ‘Sir John’s’ just brought back too many unhappy memories for their communities,” Fortier said.

What sort of ninny goes to a Scots pub looking for “a safe place”? I had an agreeable lunch there a couple of years back when passing through Kingston, but can’t say I’d be minded to return now it’s joined the ranks of the culturally craven. Instead of “The Public House”, why not something catchier like “Omar Khadr’s Public House”?

Why not something more realistic, like Khaled’s Dar Al Harb (no alcohol allowed)? But then we get down to cases, from a much less depressing era:

Pub names, unlike those of most other retail outlets, are explicitly intended to be a) distinctive and b) rooted in history. I don’t just mean all the familiar English ones like the George & Dragon and the Saracen’s Head, which are assuredly on the way out as Islamophobia-hate-crimes-in-waiting, but I’m also thinking of rarer coinages like the Hielan Jessie on the Gallowgate in Glasgow, named for Jessie Brown, wife of a corporal in the 17th Highland Regiment, who in the Indian Mutiny, after her husband was killed, rallied his surviving comrades to fight on by claiming to hear the approaching bagpipes of the 78th Highlanders. As a predecessor of mine at The Spectator reported in 1857:

Suddenly I was aroused by a wild unearthly scream close to my ear; my companion stood upright beside me, her arms raised and her head bent forward in the attitude of listening. A look of intense delight broke over her coun- tenance, she grasped my hand, drew me towards her and exclaimed ‘Dinna ye hear ‘it? Ay, I’m no dreamin’, it’s the slogan o’ the Highlanders! We’re saved!’ Then flinging herself on her knees she thanked God with passionate fervour.

Isn’t that a bit triggering for all those descendants of mutinous sepoys now running Glasgow corner shops?

The owner of Sir John’s Public House is like a lot of Canadians. He thinks it’s easy and painless to surrender the past. He doesn’t realize that, when you surrender the past, you’re also surrendering the future.

Or, to pare it down to its barest skin: when you surrender either, you’re…surrendering.

Share

Unmanned

Call it cowardice, call it passivity, call it the New Normal, call it whatever you like.

When another Canadian director, James Cameron, filmed Titanic, what most titillated him were the alleged betrayals of convention. It’s supposed to be “women and children first”, but he was obsessed with toffs cutting in line, cowardly men elbowing the womenfolk out of the way and scrambling for the lifeboats, etc. In fact, all the historical evidence is that the evacuation was very orderly. In reality, First Officer William Murdoch threw deckchairs to passengers drowning in the water to give them something to cling to, and then he went down with the ship – the dull, decent thing, all very British, with no fuss. In Cameron’s movie, Murdoch is seen to take a bribe and murder a third-class passenger. (The director subsequently apologized to the First Officer’s home town in Scotland and offered £5,000 toward a memorial. Gee, thanks.) Pace Cameron, the male passengers gave their lives for the women, and would never have considered doing otherwise. “An alien landed” on the deck of a luxury liner – and men had barely an hour to kiss their wives goodbye, watch them clamber into the lifeboats and sail off without them. The social norm of “women and children first” held up under pressure.

And then there’s Ben Guggenheim:

Millionaire ‘wouldn’t leave mixed-race valet who would have been denied place on lifeboat’

It was one of the most haunting tales to emerge from the Titanic disaster.

While others rushed to the lifeboats as the ship sank, millionaire Benjamin Guggenheim stoically sat sipping brandy with his personal secretary Victor Giglio, declaring they were ‘prepared to go down like gentlemen’.

‘No woman shall be left aboard this ship because Ben Guggenheim was a coward,’ he told a survivor.

Now THERE was a man worth admiring, behavior worth emulating, and a standard worth aspiring to. Today’s mewling, slope-shouldered, steer-cotted Pajama Boys…eh, not so much. Back to Steyn.

At the École Polytechnique, there was no social norm. And in practical terms it’s easier for a Hollywood opportunist like Cameron to trash the memory of William Murdoch than for a Quebec filmmaker to impose redeeming qualities on a plot where none exist. In Polytechnique, all but one of the “men” walk out of that classroom and out of the story. Only Jean-François acts, after a fashion. He hears the shots…

…and rushes back to save the girl he’s sweet on?

No, he does the responsible Canadian thing: He runs down nine miles of windowless corridor to the security man on duty and tells him all hell’s broken loose.

So the security guard rushes back to tackle the nut?

No, he too does the responsible Canadian thing: He calls the police. More passivity. Polytechnique’s aesthetic is strangely oppressive – not just a “male lead” who can’t lead, but a short film with huge amounts of gunfire yet no adrenaline.

Whenever I write about this issue, I get a lot of emails from guys scoffing, “Oh, right, Steyn. Like you’d be taking a bullet. You’d be pissing your little girlie panties,” etc. Well, maybe I would. But as my compatriot Kathy Shaidle put it:

When we say ‘we don’t know what we’d do under the same circumstances’, we make cowardice the default position.

I prefer the word passivity – a terrible, corrosive, enervating passivity. Even if I’m wetting my panties, it’s better to have the social norm of the Titanic and fail to live up to it than to have the social norm of the Polytechnique and sink with it.

The New Progressivist Man ain’t much of one, if you ask me. I shudder at the very thought of my daughter ever ending up with one of these twee, degenerate little pantywaists.

But the devolution of men, real men, into feeble, whimpering little milksops is yet another one of those things that was neither accident nor coincidence. It was done to us on purpose, with malice aforethought: the howling denigration of all things manly, the shrieks of “toxic masculinity” we hear so much of nowadays, didn’t begin yesterday. It all started as a quiet but steady drumbeat, just background noise at first, and built to the current crescendo over decades.

Pajama Boy, after all, makes a much more malleable and complacent little Ward O’ The Almighty State, you know, and is unlikely in the extreme to ever offer the slightest resistance to its encroachment. In fact, he’s way more likely to demand it instead; to him, the prospect of the Big Nanny superstate isn’t disturbing but comforting.

Share

Under siege

One will win, and the other…will lose.

Students at a major Catholic university are upset at the school’s emphasis on Christmas, saying they wish other religious holidays would receive equal attention on campus.

Gee, wonder which students THOSE would be.

At Loyola University Chicago, Muslim students told The Loyola Phoenix that they wish Muslim holidays would receive the same attention as Christian holidays, despite Muslims accounting for less than five percent of the student population.

Imagine my surprise.

In fact, Catholics comprise 60 percent of the 2016 freshman class, though the school does not specify the number of students who are Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, or other Christian denominations, merely noting that 40 percent have a religious affiliation other than Catholic.

According to the Phoenix, there are approximately 800 Muslim students at the university, which accounts for less than five percent of the university’s 16,673 students.

Sajid Ahmed, prayer coordinator for the Muslim Student Association (MSA), told the Phoenix that Eid al-Fitr, the Muslim holiday celebrating the end of Ramadan, is “a bit dampened” at Loyola.

As it damned well ought to be.

“At home it’d be a big family thing, dress up and go to the mosque. We’d spend the day together and celebrate…compared to that, college Eid has been less,” Ahmed said.

If you find that so troubling, then what the fucking fuck are you doing at a Christian, Western college, Mohammed Al Camelhumper? You want to see Muslim holiday celebrations taking precedence over Christian ones—and don’t kid yourselves folks, that is EXACTLY what this little immivader wants—then shag your ass right on back home where you belong.

But remember when I said one would win and the other would lose? Well, here’s your first clue on which way it’s probably going to go long-term:

However, Bryan Goodwin, associate director of the student complex, noted that Loyola already takes steps to make its festivities more inclusive, such as displaying banners that say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas,” and expressed willingness to recognize any religious holiday upon request.

And that right there is the sort of rock-ribbed, ringing defense of the most revered of Christian holidays that’s going to see Western Christians conquered, subjugated, and eventually forgotten before they can tearfully bleat, “Can’t we all just get along?”

(Via Insty)

Share

“Can’t Kill Enough to Win?”

Well, can we at least TRY?

Those given the awful task of combat must be able to act with the necessary savagery and purposefulness to destroy those acting as, or in direct support of, Islamic terrorists worldwide. In 2008, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Navy Admiral Michael Mullen said, “We can’t kill our way to victory.” Ever since, many have parroted his words. But what if Admiral Mullen was wrong? The United States has been at war with radical Islamists four times longer than it was with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War II. And those previous enemies were far more competent and aggressive than the terrorists. It is time to kill a lot more of them.

Okay, we’re off to one hell of a good start as far as I’m concerned. But there’s a problem right out of the gate here—a big one—and I suspect a good many if not most of you can already guess what it is.

In addition to the overabundance of ill-trained lawyers in the force, leaders are giving too much credence to people and organizations (such as Amnesty International) with distorted views of how wars ought to be fought rather than how they truly are. For instance, the concept of proportionality under international law has nothing to do with making war a “fair fight” or using “minimum force.” Sadly, however, such human rights law language has crept into U.S. military standing rules of engagement (SROE), despite warnings from sage counsel such as international and operational law expert W. Hays Parks.

In the mid-1990s, a small cadre of combat-experienced officers began to militate against overly restrictive rules of engagement and tactical directives. They advocated that if U.S. military forces must fight in such environments these warriors should at least have the same protections that U.S. constitutional law provides police officers in the United States. This still has not happened. Sixteen years and thousands of U.S. military lives have been lost, and the military still is plagued with obtuse rules of engagement and soul-crushing investigations into every action.

While the United States may not be following the full-on nation-centric strategy of Alfred Thayer Mahan to fight terrorists today, it ought to use the military primarily to forward its national interests. And that ought not be a strange or unsavory concept to any U.S. warrior or citizen.

The military’s leadership has a responsibility to push back hard when told to do anything that would dilute the fundamental responsibility to win wars. For the past two decades, the U.S. military has put more effort into combating climate change and training to prevent sexual harassment than it has into training warriors to kill the enemy.

I wrote a post the other day lamenting the sad state of the “most powerful military in the world,” which Aesop responded to at length in the comments. It’s worth examining the arguments he makes out front here a bit, I think:

We now have an army and navy nearly as small as what we had on hand around the Great Depression.

And the armed might we wielded as recently as 1990 was barely a patch on the machine we dismantled in 1946, after doing the heavy lifting to win two world wars.

That’s what happens when you cut defense spending precipitously, plow the money into stock bubbles, housing welfare, etc., and in the process crash the economy hard twice.

And between the two bubbles, we squandered a serviceable but barely adequate military on adventurism and asinine you-break-it, you-bought-it “nation building” in two of the most illiterate and utterly worthless sh*tholes on the face of the earth. We traded a family cow’s worth of military power for the magic beans of Middle Eastern democracy, and we don’t even have a beanstalk to show for it afterwards. Just a dead giant.

But we burned out the troops, burned up their airplanes, wore out their weapons, and mothballed our rusted navy, because affirmative-action generals like Colon Powell never read Alfred Thayer Mahan.

What you see now is what happens when you entrust leadership to idiots, in an organization dedicated to the Peter Principle as a promotion tool.

Militaries cost money and brains, and both Congress and the Pentagon have been short on both for decades. And there’s no easy fix for that, either place.

This is all perfectly true, sure enough. But it seems to me that the biggest problem of all is the American people, or all too many of them at least. They seem to lack the will to commit to backing their military forces all the way to complete victory; they’re soft, coddled, and insulated from the realities not just of war, but of military service itself. The concept of what victory in war might even amount to is foreign to them, and it’s near certain that the sacrifice, the real price, of victory is too.

In fact, most Americans are almost completely isolated from their military, from the soldiers themselves; a historically low percentage of the populace is personally acquainted with someone in uniform, or even with someone else who is. The idea of putting on a uniform and picking up a rifle for a hitch in service themselves seems wholly alien to them, and ludicrous. One might as well suggest that they grow gills and flippers and swim the Atlantic without coming up for air. Y’know, tomorrow morning.

As has been pointed out here before by other commenters, this state of affairs goes beyond lamentable and crosses handily over into being outright dangerous. Naturally, it’s not true of everyone; I suspect that this alienation is most prevalent by far in the big-city enclaves of the Left, and the college campuses that breed and nurture Progressivist drones by the thousands. I’d guess it would be a lot less so out in the great heartland of the country, the South generally, and the towns surrounding military bases. Such locales generally have a great respect and a high regard for their soldiery, and became far less circumspect about expressing those sympathies openly once 9/11 sort of granted permission to harbor them again.

All of which indirectly brings me to the problem I mentioned up top, which is with this statement: “…destroy those acting as, or in direct support of, Islamic terrorists worldwide.” That’s fine as far as it goes, and would amount to at least a good start if nothing more. But what of the millions upon millions of Moslems who are supportive of jihad without openly declaring it; who believe in the supremacy of sharia law, but who aren’t necessarily willing to commit acts of terrorism or offer material support themselves beyond, say, financial contributions to their local “moderate” mosque, from whence the money make its circuitous way into the hands of the jihadists who depend on it?

These are the “moderates” touted endlessly by our media and politicians, but according to poll after poll after poll, their beliefs aren’t anything most of us would label “moderate.” While they may not constitute a clear majority of Moslem “immigrants” just yet, they are nonetheless legion. And they have deliberately been seeded throughout the West in unsuspecting communities who are carefully kept in the dark as to the nature of their beliefs and activities, and are oblivious to the threat posed by them.

None of which even begins to address the additional problem of “refugees” from the Middle East, who ain’t necessarily coming because they dig them some freedom, tolerance, and democracy, bub (been a good, long while since I saw any of that “Democracy, whiskey, sexy!” signage being waved around by anybody at all, I’ll say that much). We aren’t told how many of them there are; that’s something our rulers don’t think we ought to know. It’s doubtful anybody, in government or out, knows where they all wind up. The government is probably way more meticulous about tracking YOUR whereabouts than they are theirs.

So considering all that, how much chance do you think there is of our ever making effective war on Moslem terrorism, and of truly winning such a war? How would we even go about such a thing? The ideas presented in the first linked piece above are good ones; I’m wholeheartedly in favor of all of ’em, and plenty more besides. But I bet Hell will freeze over good and damned solid before we ever see a one of ’em done.

Share

The Great Treason

Liberalism delenda est.

The press conference that NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and NY Governor Andrew Cuomo held after the ISIS-directed mass murder by “Diversity Scratch-Off” winner Sayfullo Saipov was a master class in inculcating a gullible urban herd to helplessness, passivity, insane misattribution of danger, and un-American government dependence in response to murderous jihad.

There’s a Southern saying for hypocrites like Bill de Blasio: he’s slimier than a bowl of boiled okra. The mayor began with a phony request to be allowed “to be frank” and, with a mask-like expression, stated the obvious: “It was an act of terror.” He used the word “terror” once, and never said “Islamic,” “ISIS,” “terrorist,” “terrorism,” or “war,” but he employed the vague, minimizing terms “tragedy” and “loss” for the rest of his remarks. Cue the firm resolve face: “We know that this action was intended to break our spirit.” No, Billy, your words are intended to break our spirit; Saipov intended the glory of killing as many infidels as possible.

De Blasio continued, “But we also know New Yorkers are strong. New Yorkers are resilient. Our spirit will never be moved by an act of violence, an act meant to intimidate us.” Remaining unmoved when religious fanatics are slaughtering you is not resilience; it is mental illness. His face reset again as he regurgitated the cynical cliché about worthless watchfulness, termed vigilance. “Be vigilant, Live by ‘If you see something, say something.'”

And then get your ass sued into penury for Hate Crimes and Bigotry and Disrespecting One Of The World’s Great Religions and whatever else the Badthink Gestapo can come up with. Thus:

Under de Blasio’s direction, and the demands of the vile Linda Sarsour, the informed, skilled vigilance of the NYPD was stopped, and the responsibility to say something was diffused among diversity-addled shleppers terrified of being labeled Islamophobic. In 2014, de Blasio shut down the Demographics Unit, which secretly surveilled places suspected of fostering weaponized Islamism. By “be vigilant,” de Blasio means that New Yorkers should live in helpless trepidation everywhere, all the time. And if they focus attention on the relevant demographic, young Islamic males, then they are bigots.

Cuomo seized on one of the benefits of terrorism: a reason to strengthen the power of the police state over law-abiding citizens. “We will be vigilant. More police everywhere. You’ll see them in airports. You’ll see them in tunnels. It is not because there’s any evidence of any ongoing threat; it is just out of vigilance and caution.”

Cuomo then articulated the fundamental principle of the Great Treason: there is no such thing as Islamic terrorism. He said, “And the truth is New York is an international symbol of freedom and democracy. That’s what we are and we are proud of it. That also makes us a target for those people who oppose those concepts.” You see, Saipov was involved in a political protest against Jeffersonian democracy, not in Islamic terrorism. That’s because, according to the likes of de Blasio and Cuomo, there is no affirmative ideology of Islamic terrorism from the Quran or a mosque or ISIS, or even the dreadful shadow that may pass over the human heart, blocking out Light.

Cuomo concluded, “We’ve lived with this before, we’ve felt the pain before, we feel the pain today, but we go forward together, and we go forward stronger than ever.” He closed with “Don’t let them change us or deter us in any manner, shape, or form.”

In other words, change nothing; do nothing.

Ah, but as Steyn keeps pointing out, the fools and knaves charged with defending the nation have already changed us, with their bollards, their blockades, their useless TSA harassment, their militarized-police presence on every street corner, their rapidly-metastasizing Surveillance State snooping on our every move. All of which has gotten us precisely this: terrorist attacks on this country have gone from a couple of major incidents over the course of a decade (1993-2001) to a regular, bi-monthly occurrence, with no end in sight.

This is neither progress nor victory. The shock we all felt on the morning of 9/11/01 has been supplanted by a feeble resignation, acquiescence, and a deep-seated sense of futility and helplessness as we wait for each successive blow to fall on us with passive dread. There’s a certain sense of grim, workaday routine to it all now. This isn’t “resilience”; it’s acceptance, which for all intents and purposes is synonymous with surrender.

The hell of it is, WE aren’t the problem. Violent, uncivilizable Moslem immivaders are. As such, the feckless shitwits we’re pleased to misnomer “leaders” ought to be demanding that THEY change, not us, and either abandon their commitment to a vicious, anti-human ideology that demands atrocity against the infidel—or be forcibly contained within the borders of their hellish shitrapies, by every means available to us up to and including relentless, merciless, total war against them.

A people possessed of any shred of self-respect and righteous will would be less focused on mourning their dead than on avenging them. Until we stiffen our spines enough to make that transition, all the piss-soaked blather about our “courage” and “strength” from our contemptible Ruling Class betrayers is nothing more than whistling past the graveyard, and will not forestall even one attack against us.

Share

Blood on their hands?

You betcha.

Sayfullo Saipov moved his being and the truck it was in over the bodies of New Yorkers leaving tire tracks over corpses. The Manhattan attack, like every Islamic attack before it, could have been stopped. But the NYPD’s hands had been tied. And the left had done the tying. It defended every Islamic terrorist that the NYPD had arrested. And prevented the NYPD from investigating mosques and radicalization.

Now it has what it really wanted. Dead Americans. And it has their blood on its manicured fingers.

The Uzbeki Islamic terrorist had listed an address in Paterson, New Jersey. The NYPD had come under attack for conducting surveillance in New Jersey. One of the targets was a mosque in Paterson. The Uzbeki Muslim terrorist also links back to Florida. The media has largely ignored or tried to cover up the string of Islamic terrorist attacks linked to Florida, from the Pulse Massacre in Orlando, to the latest Islamic terrorist plot to bomb the Dolphin Mall on Black Friday.

Sayfullo Saipov had come here in 2010. In that short amount of time he managed to amass criminal records in Pennsylvania and Missouri for traffic offenses. After stints in at least three other states, he went on a killing spree that took eight lives and wounded as well as traumatized countless others.

Dem leaders in New York are already rolling out the standard messages urging everyone to go back to life as usual. Mayor Bill de Blasio called the attack “cowardly”. But the attack wasn’t cowardly. It was vicious and murderous. It’s Bill de Blasio and the other politicians who crippled the NYPD because they were afraid of political pressure from Linda Sarsour and CAIR who are the real cowards.

They are cowards with blood on their hands.

The New York media’s first response after the attack was to try and blame road rage. Before long, you will see it running the standardized “Muslims fear backlash” stories that are a staple of every effort to sweep the latest Islamic terrorist attack under the rug along with the blood and the bodies.

Islamic terrorists like Sayfullo Saipov are able to do what they do because they have a long list of collaborators like the ACLU, Democrat politicians, Federal judges and the mainstream media.

Well, hey, defending ourselves properly against jihadist immivaders is apparently “not who we are.”

Share

Fool Kill me once…

Aesop has a suggestion, and it’s a good ‘un.

Islam is incompatible with Western democracy. You can believe the Diversity Bandwagon, or just believe your lying eyes from every spot they foul around the world.

99.something percent of rapes in Scandinavia – Norway, Sweden, Denmark – are perpetrated by Muslim invaders there.

They’ve burned London and Paris, several times apiece. (Reference what we did, collectively, when the Nazis did this. I’ll wait.)

Nearly every current war in the world is traceable to either Muslims vs. other Muslims, or Muslims vs. Anyone Else, because they don’t work and play well with others, and haven’t since 610 AD.

Proof of the frog-in-a-frying-pan theory is that if this truck attack had taken place on the 9/11 anniversary, let alone on 9/12/2001, New Yorkers would have rounded up every Muslim in the Five Borough by hand, and deported them bodily into the Hudson River, with transmissions and engine blocks tied to them to help kickstart their auto repair businesses back in Dirkadirkastan. And the fires from burning mosques in the city would be visible from space, and keeping homeless people warm for days. Because NYFC residents are givers like that.

Instead, they’re wringing their hands, cowering in fear, and listening to DeBlovio burp out platitudes. Instead of going all Tony Soprano, and taking care of business.

You had WTC I, WTC II, and now this. Three strikes and you’re out, boys and girls.

The D.C. Snipers, Ft. Hood, Orlando, San Bernardino, Nashville, Boston, and NYFC three goddam times. Shall we wait for four, or fourteen, just to be absolutely sure???

And those are just the bigger incidents, we’re not even talking about the onsie-twosie incidents. Let me know when the penny drops.

(I know the “fool me once, fool me twice…” aphorism. How does it go after 27 or 57 times…?)

If you’re in a cage with a hungry tiger, you either get a gun, or you crawl into his food bowl.

It’s time to put Islam into the same box as Carthage after the Third Punic War.

For the historically curious, look up the results of the Fourth Punic War.

I’m all for it. But you’ll pardon me, I’m sure, if I don’t hold my breath waiting.

Share

“The Uber of Islamic terrorism”

They’re here, they’re severe, get used to it.

Dismissing the terrorists who have been killing for ISIS in the West as “lone wolves” misses the point.

The Islamic terrorist who goes on a stabbing spree in London or a shooting spree in Orlando is no more a “lone wolf” than an Uber driver who picks up a passenger is just some random eccentric. They’re parts of a distributed network that is deliberately decentralized to better fulfill its central purpose.

CVE and other efforts to tackle “online extremism” fight messaging wars that ignore the demographics. But our targeted strikes on ISIS ignore demographics in the same way. We keep looking at the trees while missing the forest. But the forest is where the trees come from. Muslim terrorists emerge from an Islamic population. They aren’t aberrations. Instead they represent its religious and historic aspirations.

ISIS and Islamic terrorists aren’t going anywhere. Defeating them through patronizing lectures about the peacefulness of Islam, as Obama’s CVE policy proposed to do, was a futile farce. Bombing them temporarily suppresses them as an organized military force, but not their religious and cultural origins.

As long as we go on seeing Islamic terrorism as an aberration that has no connection to the history and religion of Islam, our efforts to defeat it will be pinpricks that treat the symptoms, but not the problem.

Only when we recognize that Islamic terrorism is Islam, that the crimes of ISIS and countless others dating back to Mohammed were committed to achieve the goals of the Islamic population, will we be ready to face the war that we’re in and to defend ourselves against what is to come not just in Iraq or Afghanistan, but in America, Australia, Canada, Europe, India, Israel and everywhere else.

We are not fighting a handful of Islamic terrorists. We are standing in the path of the manifest destiny of Islam. Either that manifest destiny will break against us, as it did at the Gates of Vienna, or it will break us. The attacks were once yearly. Now they are monthly. Soon they will become daily.

Every attack is a pebble in an avalanche. A pebble falls in Brussels, in Fresno, in Dusseldorf, in New York, in Munich, in London, in Garland, in Paris, in Jerusalem, in Mumbai, in Boston and in more places than anyone can count. We are too close to the bloodshed to see the big picture. We only see the smoke and hear the screams. We see the boats bringing armies into Europe. We see refugees fill our airports.

Those are the trees, not the forest: the pebbles, not the avalanche. Those are the battles, not the war.

It’s a war we’re losing, and badly. Not because of them, but because of us.

So two hours after the attack, Governor Cuomo, Mayor de Blasio and other New York bigwigs assembled for the usual press conference to give the usual passive shrug – this is the way we live now, nothing to be done about it, etc, etc. Every so often in New York, as in London as in Stockholm as in Berlin as in Nice as in Brussels as in Paris as in Manchester as in Orlando, your loved one will leave the home and never return because he went to a pop concert or a gay club or a restaurant or an airport, or just strolled the sidewalk or bicycled the bike path. “Allahu Akbar”? That’s Arabic for “Nothing can be done”. So Andrew Cuomo ended with some generic boilerplate about how they’ll never change us:

We go forward together. And we go forward stronger than ever. We’re not going to let them win…We’ll go about our business. Be New Yorkers. Live your life. Don’t let them change us.

But they are changing us. I’ve written before about what I’ve called the Bollardization of the Western World: the open, public areas of free cities are being fenced in by bollards, as, for example, German downtowns were after the Berlin Christmas attack, and London Bridge and Westminster Bridge were after two recent outbreaks of vehicular jihad. This is a huge windfall for bollard manufacturers – Big Bollard – and doubtless it’s a huge boost for the economy, if your town’s nimble enough to approve the new bollard plant on the edge of town, or if your broker is savvy enough to divest your tech stocks and go big on the bollard sector. As I write, Geraldo is on Fox demanding to know why this bike path wasn’t blocked off with concrete barriers.

Why? Why does every public place have to get uglified up just because Geraldo doesn’t want to address the insanity of western immigration policies that day by day advance the interests of an ideology explicitly hostile to our civilization? Instead Geraldo wants to tighten up vehicle rental. Why? Why should you have to lose an extra 15 minutes at an already sclerotic check-in counter because Hertz and Avis and UHaul have to run your name through the No-Rent list? Why should open, free societies become closed, monitored, ugly, cramped and cowering?

And now eight people are dead and dozens more injured – at the hands of a guy who came here in 2010 because he won a Green Card in the so-called “diversity lottery”. Why was that stupid program not suspended on September 12th 2001?

Because even 3,000 dead cannot be allowed to question the virtues of “diversity”. The other day, the Australian government lost its working majority because, thanks to the usual boneheaded jurists, an Aussie-born citizen who chances also to share, say, New Zealand citizenship is deemed to be ineligible to sit in Parliament. [UPDATE: See my note to our Oz commenter below.] Er, okay, whatever. But at the same time we’re assured that an Uzbek or a Somali or a Yemeni becomes a fully functioning citizen of a free, pluralist society simply by setting foot on western soil. That’s not so. And the price of maintaining the delusion is blood on the pavement.

And so, on a buckled, broken bicycle on the Hudson River Greenway, the wheel comes full circle. America and every other major western nation thought the appropriate response to 9/11 was to show how nice we are by dramatically increasing the rate of mass Muslim immigration. Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov was among the many beneficiaries of the west’s suicide by virtue-signaling. “Sayfullo” is a Central Asian rendering of “Saifallah” – or “Sword of Allah”. Hmm, what a fascinating name! Do you think whichever brain-dead bureaucrat who gave Sword of Allah’s online Green Card application the once-over (assuming anyone did) so much as gave the name a second glance? And so, because we did not take an act of war seriously in 2001, we are relentlessly harassed and diminished by unending micro-jihad – in Copenhagen, in Toulouse, in San Bernadino, in Calgary, Barcelona, Parsons Green…and now on a bike path 300 feet from where we came in sixteen years ago.

The simple truth is, despite Cuomo’s and Red Bill DeBlahBlahBlahsio’s tepid, meaningless platitudes about how “cowardly” the victorious jihadists are, WE’RE the real cowards. We’re too gutless to call the enemy by his proper name; too contemptuous of and embarrassed by the ahistorical success of our own civilization to bother defending it, too terrified of being called names by the Treasonous Left to keep these villainous savages outside our borders. We’ll far more vigorously defend vacuous, juvenile, and demonstrably false fantasies about “equality” and “diversity” than we will our own homes, families, borders, and fellow Americans.

And yes, that includes all of us, not just the Left and our our panty-soaking “leaders.” How many times have you heard security hawks (yes, me included) talk about how, if our “leaders” won’t do their jobs and defend us, we’ll take matters into our own hands? How many empty threats have we all made about some vague critical mass being reached when all of a sudden we’ll collectively go medieval on the Muslim world, bombing them into oblivion, clamping down on them domestically, even gunning them down whenever they’re seen to make a threatening move against innocent civilians?

None of it ever happens, and none of it ever will. As with tough-guy blabber about a second Civil War, we’re going to go right on talking big as bright red lines are crossed one right after another…and not doing jack shit about any of it. Oh sure, we’ll bluster on our internet forums and blogs, but that’s all we’re ever going to do. Yeah, yeah, “history shows” that the West will eventually rouse itself from its stuporous torpor and rise up against the barbarian onslaught, just as it did at Poitiers and the Gates of Vienna—both of which were a long damned time ago, neither of which the huge majority of effete Western pussies have any knowledge of at all. We’re far more “civilized” than those stout Europeans were then, don’t you know; Western Civ seems to be all out of Charles Martels just at the moment, and we aren’t making any new ones. Even Steyn, astute and historically literate as he is, is guilty of this kind of bootless bluster:

So now eight grieving families and dozens more who’ll be living with horrific injuries for the rest of their lives are told by Cuomo and De Blasio and the rest of the gutless political class behind their security details that there’s nothing to do except to get used to it.

I don’t want to get used to it – and I reiterate my minimum demand of western politicians that I last made after the London Bridge attacks: How many more corpses need to pile up on our streets before you guys decide to stop importing more of it?

The answer is, they will NEVER stop importing more of it; the corpses will go right on piling up, and we already HAVE “gotten used to it.” Which makes the real question: what are you gonna do about it if they don’t? Besides “demand” something your chances of ever getting hover somewhere between “none at all” and “don’t make me laugh”?

The answer to that one is as clear as glass: not one damned thing, that’s what.

I’m no Bill Maher fan by any stretch, but he’s been consistently right about Moslem terrorism pretty much from day one, including a statement from early on that he caught a whole lot of grief for at the time:

Within hours of the attacks, President Bush twice used the c-word to describe the terrorists’ plot. In a statement at an Air Force base in Louisiana, he declared, “Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward…Make no mistake: the U.S. will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts.”

The House and Senate soon followed suit. A joint resolution passed the next night labeled the suicide hijackings as “heinous and cowardly attacks.”

An alternative view came from Bill Maher, host of the ABC late-night talk show Politically Incorrect. “We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That’s cowardly,” Maher said on the show last week. “Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it’s not cowardly.”

He was right then, and time has only reinforced the veracity of his views since. A jihadist who launches an attack against his enemies in the full expectation of dying in the commission of his atrocity might be nuts, but a coward he surely ain’t. He is possessed of a moral courage we pampered, weak-kneed Westerners can’t even comprehend anymore, much less match: he has principles which he will willingly, even gladly, lay down his life defending and advancing. We possess nothing of the sort. He will put his body in the line of fire and risk his continued existence for his ideals, hideous as those ideals are; we will condescend only to send our hired soldiers—the last repository of real valor in the West—to patrol Muslim shitholes with empty magazines and don’t-shoot ROEs, and countenance the launch of an occasional ineffectual drone strike from air-conditioned trailers in Oklahoma, call that a “win,” and retire back to our sofas for a little sportsball-watching to recover from our “efforts.”

Every time we hold hands and sing Kumbaya with tears running down our cheeks in the wake of this week’s act of “lone wolf” war, we roll over and show our soft yellow bellies to a vicious and implacable enemy eager to get at them and tear them to pieces, both figuratively and literally. This can only end one way: with what little guts we have ripped right out of us and lying stinking and steaming on the sidewalk, to eventually be washed away by a tide of history that cares not one whit about who wins or loses—leaving us exposed to posterity’s judgment as unpitied sacrifices in a contemptible, half-assed struggle.

Victory has to be earned. We’re losing, because we deserve to. Harsh as it may seem, humiliating as it no doubt is, it really is as simple as that. New Yorkers, Parisians, Londoners, all of us—we will continue to mewl, and crawl, and beg for a mercy that is not forthcoming, no matter how piteously we may weep. Some of us will continue to bluster and rage impotently; I surely will, I admit, for whatever that’s worth. No matter; in the end, “history’s unmarked grave of discarded lies” will be big enough to encompass us all.

Share

Pathetic is the new normal

Another Muslim terrorist attack that has nothing to do with *cough cough ALLAHU AKHBAR cough cough* Islam, this time in NYC. Candlelight vigils, weeping, huge piles of flowers and teddy bears, “Love trumps hate,” “you will never defeat/divide us,” and empty boasts of being “New York Strong!!” immediately to follow. The FBI will remain baffled as to motive.

Eight dead, not one of whom will be avenged. We’ll have ourselves a good cry, congratulate ourselves on our “strength” and “courage,” and hunker down to wait for the next one…while importing as many more of these savages as we can possibly manage. Ace makes a good point: “It will be interesting to see if he came from a country on Trump’s travel ban list — whose operation remains blocked from going into effect by liberal judges.

Lather, rinse, repeat. Over and over, ad nauseum.

Update! I think I speak for all of us when I say that the real victims here are the jihad-sympathizing Muslims who might be made the slightest bit uncomfortable by the awful prospect of the kind of Islamophobic retribution that has never yet happened, but is always a looming imaginary threat.

An incident occurred today in New York that even progressive Mayor Bill de Blasio couldn’t pass off as workplace violence. A truck plowed into a bicycle-only lane on a busy street in Manhattan. The City of New York determined that the truck attack that  left at least eight people dead was indeed an “act of terror.”

But meanwhile, CNN once again showed where its priorities were. As news broke that the driver was shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he attacked these people, Jake Tapper wanted to remind his audience that “The Arabic chant ‘Allahu Akbar,’ God is great… sometimes said under the most beautiful of circumstances, and too often we hear it being said in moments like this.” Sure, he did finish the sentence by talking about how we have heard this chant in moments of horror, but why even say the first part? Liberals like him always think they have to remind people that there are Muslims who are good — that ‘Allahu Akbar’ can be beautiful.

Of course they do. They’re constitutionally incapable of neglecting an opportunity to lecture the rest of us while simultaneously congratulating themselves on their innate superiority to us benighted schlubs.

Yet again: if we’re ever to have a hope of defeating the Muslims, we’re going to have to defeat the “liberals” first.

Share

RIP, BSA

Aesop knows Full Convergence when he sees it. And he knows what’s behind it, too.

Surrendering completely to the hopelessly polluted cultural tides, the Boy Scouts of America announced they will start letting girls into the organization next year.

Of course this is an asinine, self-destructive, and completely wrong move for the organization, but it’s just another proof that it needs to crawl under the porch and die.

First is was the atheists pushing back against reverence, then it was the gay Scouts and NAMBLA would-be scoutmasters pounding out any notion of a scout being “morally straight”.

Both of those are a problem for a post-Christian society run by the most toxic iteration of secular humanism, and now we can add feminism to the list of afflictions.

Because a large swath of bitter, ugly, misandrists is perpetually offended at the idea of boys being boys, and growing up to become men. “We can’t be having any of that.” they say with an upturned nose, and a chip the size of Gibraltar on their shoulder. In a way, it was inevitable, as fathers have been relentlessly pushed out of the home by one-sided divorce courts where due process goes to die, aided and abetted by no-fault divorce, and most boys are lucky if they even know their own father, let alone have one around to go to a scout troop meeting or outdoor adventure.

We can’t let boys be boys, and we certainly can’t have them hiking, running, building muscles and healthy bodies, climbing rocks, shooting bows and rifles, and slingshots, learning responsibility, self-reliance, masculine strength, personal and physical courage, whether on a swim across a lake, or learning to save lives at the pool or when someone is injured, or learning how to do 87 different things to such a degree that most Eagle Scouts should probably be given a college associate’s degree on the spot. They’ll get all self-assured, they’ll tussle, they’ll skin their knees, break some bones, get dirt on the carpet, and generally become the men that women of today still long for (in vain, mostly) if the ratings for Mad Men and Daniel Craig’s rebooting of 007 back to Connery levels were any indication. The sisterhood won’t allow that, for it swims upstream against the currents of the depraved culture, and one glimpse of it undoes hour of tedious lectures on diversity and metrosexuality, while making the buckets of Ritalin and Prozac and Paxil heaped into and hurled at normal, healthy school-age boys a total waste of money.

We have a society of harpy man-hating women, and pussified metrosexual males, that go pale at the thought of raising boys who’d climb mountains, sail around the world solo, join the military and kill people and break things, find buried treasure, hunt pirates, or go to the moon. Only women and people of color should do that, because they’re better than the rich white old male patriarchy that carved the greatest nation on earth out of harsh wilderness with two hands, a strong back, a sharp mind, and guts. Oh, and while we’re at it, stop singing the praises of your mother country. It triggers the snowflakes.

Society now wants boys to shut up, check their privilege, wallow in their race guilt, genuflect to defective dystopian savages, and go sit on the couch in their footie pajamas sipping cocoa. Not bring groceries to a widow and her kids, or mow an old woman’s lawn, or – God forbid! – go to church or synagogue and read a Bible.

We can’t have them building things, building strength, building their minds, building their confidence, and learning to Be Prepared. O hell no! They need to learn to depend on government, and its endless soul-sapping bureaucracy, to let it be the same fount of plenty it is for millions of welfare moms married to the government in fatherless homes, once a rarity, but now, the near-universal norm across all races and every level of economic status.

And the same things that have pussified the rest of society will now become the norm in the troops, as they have in the military, and business, and school, and churches, and in short order, only the pussified priggish beta males will be left there, along with the militant recruiting LGBTEIEIO contingent, and in a few short years, everything the girls who wanted into the Boy Scouts to find will have been driven out of it, by the herds of clueless feral shitting and scratching-up-everything hens that they are, like their mothers before them were.

The men will leave, and the boys, forced into a game where they can’t win, will quickly lose interest, and quit in droves. And so, a once-proud and honorable organization, that had raised millions of exceptional scouts into Star, Life, and Eagle Scouts, and millions more boys into simply decent, confident, and competent men, will fade into obscurity and irrelevance. Which, after all, was the whole point of the exercise driving all the pressure on them in the first place. Mission Accomplished, ye shitweasels of cultural decay, you’ve felled another oak, and rotted another pillar of society.

Ah, but all is not lost. After the final Moslem victory over us, the harpies will be subjugated, LGBTTSTVTPXQ39 will be mouldering in mass graves, the Commie Left will be cowed and its media propaganda arm silenced, and the rest of us will be forced to toughen up a great deal if we’re to manage any sort of effective resistance at all. The BSA won’t be a part of that, alas. But I’d bet a good many troopers from the Old Scouts will.

Share

Let’s ban all the things!

Just give ’em time to figure it out. They ARE pretty thick, you know.

After Vegas, the gun control memes and myths come out. It doesn’t matter how wrong they are, they will echo in the mediasphere and then the talking points will leak into everyday conversations. 

“Guns are uniquely lethal.” 

Last year, a Muslim terrorist with a truck killed 86 people and wounded another 458. 

Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, the Tunisian Muslim killer, had brought along a gun, but it proved largely ineffective. The deadliest weapon of the delivery driver was a truck. Mohammed, who was no genius, used it to kill more people than Stephen Paddock would with all his meticulous planning in Vegas.

Do we need truck control? 

Let’s not be giving the tiresome bags of fascist shit any bright ideas, Daniel. After all, they’re working as hard as they can to eliminate the combustion engine already.

Share

Imagine there’s no Heaven

It’s easy if you try. And it will cost you in the long run.

Belief systems describe a people. The ancient Egyptians had a highly complex belief system like many ancient people. Their religion, however, was unique in that it was entirely focused on the afterlife. They did not make sacrifices and pray for the here and now. They built monuments, complex burial systems and temples in order to prepare the living for the after life. There is a good argument that this focus on the after life is what allowed the Egyptians to keep their culture going for 3,000 years.

On the other hand, the Greeks were not very concerned about the after life. Their focus was on the here and now. The gods interfered in the lives of men, so it made sense to focus devotion on swaying the gods to act on your behalf or against the interests of your enemies. The Greeks did have the concept of an afterlife, but it was not the focus of their belief system. Immortality for man was possible by having sons, who would carry his name, or dying for his polis, which would live on and remember his name.

The Greeks may have been more concerned with the present, when it came time to worshipping the gods, but they had a nice long run, roughly 1000 years. It was not as if they were hedonists, living only in the moment. Even so, this focus on the now had some odd results. For instance, we know just about every Egyptian ruler and his deeds. We even have some of their corpses. The Dorian Greeks, on the other hand, burned their kings, as well as any record of them. We know nothing about them as a result.

This brings up an important point about our present age. The cult of Gaia, for example, is long on rhetoric about the future, but its focus is on present virtue. The greens are not trying preserve the environment for future generations. They are hoping their efforts snuff out future generations. The same is true of anti-racism and multiculturalism. These are all about the present. Calling them suicide cults is useful rhetoric, but in fact our virtuous rulers don’t think past tomorrow. it’s all about grace today.

This is particularly true with regards to migration. Nationalists like to cook up complex theories as to why our rulers are wedded to the idea of mass immigration. Some say it is cheap labor. Other say it is cheap votes. Still others see it as spite. All of those things are true, but the real motivation is virtue. Instead of a public ceremony where they sacrifice a bull or consecrate a church, inviting in the poor and downtrodden is the big public act of virtue. The consequences are down the road. The grace is today.

It’s not just vanity. We are the first people to have no conception of an afterlife. Even the Greeks believed in the after life and they believed there was judgement of souls. They may not have made that the focus of their faith, but they still believed there was something beyond this life. This spiritual hopelessness of Western elites may be why the Cloud People couch everything in terms of personal fulfillment and self-actualization. It is a way of crossing the River Styx without actually believing in it.

The nuttiness of modern elite culture may simply be a neurosis arising from the conflict between the natural, bone deep desire of man to be remembered, colliding with the lack of any reason to be remembered. Even the humblest of men will carve his name into a tree or scratch his name on his prison wall. “I was here” is the primal scream. Today, that impulse has no cultural vessel into which it can flow. The lonely barren spinster yells “I was here” and the only thing that happens is the cat stirs and then goes back to sleep.

Personally, I think the Progressivist need to sanctify their every least impulse to adolescent rebellion and self-indulgence is at the heart of it. Neurosis it surely is, but nobody could call it minor except in the purely personal sense, given the destructive effect it’s had on an entire culture.

Share

Happy 9/11 Day!

The day the world changed. And then, very quickly, changed right back again.

TOM CLANCY WAS RIGHT: (Reposted from earlier today) And we’re living one of his scenarios right now. Not much is known for sure, but it’s obvious that the United States is the target of a major terrorist assault. There’s a lot of bloviation on the cable news channels, most of which will turn out to be wrong or misleading later. Here, for your consideration, are a few points to be taken from past experience:

The Fog of War: Nobody knows much right now. Many things that we think we know are likely to be wrong. 

Overreaction is the Terrorist’s Friend: Even in major cases like this, the terrorist’s real weapon is fear and hysteria. Overreacting will play into their hands.

It’s Not Just Terrorists Who Take Advantage: Someone will propose new “Antiterrorism” legislation. It will be full of things off of bureaucrats’ wish lists. They will be things that wouldn’t have prevented these attacks even if they had been in place yesterday. Many of them will be civil-liberties disasters. Some of them will actually promote the kind of ill-feeling that breeds terrorism. That’s what happened in 1996. Let’s not let it happen again.

Only One Antiterrorism Method Works: That’s punishing those behind it. The actual terrorists are hard to reach. But terrorism of this scale is always backed by governments. If they’re punished severely — and that means severely, not a bombed aspirin-factory but something that puts those behind it in the crosshairs — this kind of thing won’t happen again. That was the lesson of the Libyan bombing.

“Increased Security” Won’t Work. When you try to defend everything, you defend nothing. Airport security is a joke because it’s spread so thin that it can’t possibly stop people who are really serious. You can’t prevent terrorism by defensive measures; at most you can stop a few amateurs who can barely function. Note that the increased measures after TWA 800 (which wasn’t terrorism anyway, we’re told) didn’t prevent what appear to be coordinated hijackings. (Archie Bunker’s plan, in which each passenger is issued a gun on embarking, would have worked better). Deterrence works here, just as everywhere else. But you have to be serious about it.

As Glenn says, these predictions have held up dismayingly well—which has demonstrated just how “serious” we really were, and remain. Now, hopelessly enmired in two bootless attempts at nation-building, trying to establish “democracy” and “freedom” in places where the primordial inhabitants want nothing to do with either, we’re reminded of just how much of the latter we’ve abandoned ourselves, and just how thoroughly we’ve shit on the former.

Now we’ve learned how to “absorb” another Muslim terrorist attack on our own soil every other month or so. We docilely stand in hours-long lines while watching the TSA crotch-grope grandmas from Wyoming or Mississippi at our airports while letting visibly belligerent, thobe-clad, military-age Muslim males pass unmolested; sit idly by while Leftist morons (including women and gays, hilariously enough) trash Christianity while insisting we “respect” Islam as one of the world’s “great religions” in the next breath; have had to endure a Republican President lecture us all on how Islam is a “religion of peace”; have been unctuously instructed that we are NOT to refer to Islamic terrorism as anything more sinister or preventable than “man-caused disasters”; are treated to the ludicrous and sad spectacle of the FBI declaring itself “baffled” after each and every ALLAHU AKHBAR-yodeling terrorist atrocity as to what could POSSIBLY have been his motivation for it; are treated to insulting declarations of concern over Muslims as the real victims after each incident, because of “Islamophobia”; and import them by the millions into the very heart of the West without asking for even the most token or insincere nod towards assimilation or respect for our culture from them.

And the Muslim call to prayer—”the most beautiful sound in the world,” according to our previous President—is heard over more American cities with every passing day, doing what it always does in every part of the world in which it’s been allowed to ring out unattenuated by staunch resistance: drowning out the shrieks of the murdered, muffling the sound of freedom, and giving voice to the barbaric hooting of the victors as they gloat over those they’ve vanquished.

Mission accomplished. Looks like we’re all “America Strong!™” now.

Share

Doorbells? DOORBELLS?

Seriously? I mean, seriously?

These delicate little neurotics are afraid of fucking doorbells now?

Damned if I’da told it.

Mr. Walia, 19 years old and a computer science major, says he just isn’t comfortable ringing them. He and his friends have become so accustomed to texting one another upon arrival, he says, that the sound of a doorbell feels like an unexpected jolt.

“Doorbells are just so sudden. It’s terrifying,” says Tiffany Zhong, 20, the founder of Zebra Intelligence, which helps companies conduct custom research and gather insights on people born in the past two decades.

Um. “Terrifying”? Really? Good Lord.

There’s no published research about doorbell phobia, but it’s a real thing. In a poll by a Twitter user earlier this month that got more than 11,000 votes, 54% of respondents said “doorbells are scary weird.”

Some millennials and Gen Zers say they won’t even consider answering a ring at the door until they’ve checked the security camera.

The doorbell freak-out reflects the ascendance of mediated communication, which means people interacting through technological devices rather than directly. It’s not so much about screen time versus face time as it is a merger of the two.

Smartphones provide extra information thought by users to be vital to day-to-day interactions. Without smartphones to help, encounters can feel fraught.

“Typically, doorbells are for outsiders,” says Ms. Zhong, whose LinkedIn profile describes her as a “teen whisperer.” “A text signifies it’s a friend.”

God help us if we as a nation ever have to rely on no-ball pisspots like these to, say, storm the beaches at Normandy or something. What might be even worse than publicly admitting something as humiliating as this, though, is that the wilted little hothouse flowers don’t even have sense enough to be ashamed of their tremulous lunacy, and don’t seem to care who knows what gutless little feebs they are.

On the other hand, though, I guess in light of this it’s easy enough to see why they’re all so terribly frightened of Trump. I imagine that, should they ever so much as see a picture of Patton, they’d all just fall over dead from the quivering fantods.

I repeat: good Lord.

Share

Can’t appease them, can’t accommodate them, shouldn’t try

Worse than a waste of time.

I’m gonna tell you this. It isn’t gonna be over. This is not gonna stop, the haranguing. And what does that mean? It means even though the president gave these groups that have been bellyaching the exact words they want to hear, they’re not going to stop, which means they’re actually after something else. And whatever it is, it isn’t peace, and it isn’t justice, and it isn’t freedom, and it isn’t tolerance in America. And they’re going to continue because their objective is to totally turn things upside down. They’re not interested in resolutions.

And on the other side of this where you have the Nazis and the white supremacists, they’re told every day that they’ve benefit from white privilege. That’s the latest rage on campus, white privilege, understanding your whiteness, understanding the problem. These people can’t even find jobs, for crying out loud, and they’re being told they’re benefiting from white privilege, so they’re ticked off. And there are people benefiting from both sides of this being ticked off. Find them. Find who benefits here. Financially, politically, however it happens, somebody is benefiting, somebody wants these kinds of things to happen.

There IS no appeasing or placating them; even this wouldn’t do it.

I’ll tell you what else let’s do. Let’s not stop at Robert E. Lee statues. Let’s ban Gone With the Wind. Let’s ban the book, and let’s make sure the movie can no longer be purchased, rented, or exhibited anywhere. We will get rid of not just Robert E. Lee. We’ll tear down anything that tells anybody where Gettysburg is and what happened there. (interruption) Well, now wait. No, Gettysburg will stand.

Gettysburg will stand ’cause that’s where they had their lunch handed to them, so Gettysburg will stand. But we’ll go all the way back to Lincoln. We’ll take Lincoln’s name off of Mount Rushmore and we’ll put Trump up there. (I’m only kidding.) But, I mean, let’s do this. Let’s get rid of all of these outdoor signs of the nation’s injustice and unfairness. Get rid of everything so that American slavery is never known to have existed in any way. All monuments, all battlefields, all reenactments will be erased.

We shut down any restaurant that serves chicken fried steak, that serves biscuits and gravy. I mean, anything that can be traced back to that evil heritage of the Confederacy. Get rid of all of it! That would make everybody shut up, right? That would just silence everybody about the inherent evil of the United States related to slavery. Make it disappear, and then everything would be okay, right?

Of course not. But therein lies the beauty of it, if there’s any to be found: the Left has been reduced to a constant state of abject, perpetual misery and fear. Consider: they’re afraid of internal combustion engines. They’re afraid of guns. They’re afraid of the naturally-occurring and unalterable condition of climate change. They’re afraid of storms, and believe they must certainly herald planet-wide doom and disaster. They’re afraid of violence—when they’re not perpetrating it themselves, usually in massive groups against a handful of people.

They’re afraid of red meat. They’re afraid of genetically modified vegetables, even though every vegetable currently extant is genetically modified to one degree or another. They’re afraid of literature that contains words or concepts they disapprove of. They’re afraid of large corporations, especially pharmaceutical companies. They’re afraid of tobacco. They’re afraid of the Russians—for now. They’re even afraid of their own bloated government, in those periods when they’re not actually in control of it.

They’re afraid of Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh, Republicans, and conservatives generally. Deathly afraid. It’s why they hate them all so implacably, of course.

They’re afraid of coal-fired power plants—and nuclear ones too, and pretty much any other kind that can actually provide enough energy to be effective. They’re afraid of cops. And soldiers. And Christians. Deep down, they’re actually afraid of Muslims too, which is why they so obsequiously suck up to them. In truth, they’re actually deathly afraid of men—the ones they haven’t emasculated, feminized, and steercotted, that is. The ones they have managed to de-ball, they’re contemptuous of. Which is an especially fine sort of poetic justice if you ask me.

Strangely, the one thing they don’t seem afraid of is Nazis. But then, since 1945, there’s always been too few of those around to really matter much anyway. Being so close together ideologically, maybe there’s a familiarity there that they find comforting, who knows.

With all that fear and angst driving them, they’ll never run out of things for their Big Daddy Government to protect them from. Which is exactly where their tremulousness becomes OUR problem, too. But it’s also what makes observing their now-daily nervous breakdowns so much fun.

Can you smell it update! A certain stench is a-rising.

Details remain thin. It is not clear, for example, how many alt-right demonstrators were there, though many reports indicate that they were substantially outnumbered by counter-demonstrators, largely drawn from the same crowd that has been rioting at the drop of Donald Trump’s name since November 9.

So, obviously, this was a fraught moment. But what would have been the outcome had the police and the Virginia National Guard—both on hand in strong numbers—done their duty, enforced properly obtained demonstration permits, and preserved the right of the warring parties to make their respective points without being physically attacked, one by the other and vice versa? It’s worth remembering that Charlottesville did everything it could to prevent the demonstrations, issuing permits only after being sued by the ACLU. And when push came to shove—literally—on Saturday, police and National Guardsmen were to be found only on the periphery of the brawling. Indeed, the Virginia ACLU reported that police were refusing to intervene unless specifically ordered to do so.

Almost at first contact, Charlottesville mayor Michael Signer and Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe declared a state of emergency and cancelled the demonstrators’ permits, whereupon police began funneling the alt-right protestors away from the designated demonstration site—and, some reports have it, toward the counter-protestors. The carnage followed in short order. Whether the breakdown in police protection was purposeful—that is, intended to quash a constitutionally protected demonstration and provoke a violent confrontation—is a question unlikely to be pursued in Virginia’s present political environment. As partisan eye-gougers go, Governor McAuliffe, a Democrat, is near the top of the list; Mayor Signer, also a Democrat, seems to be cut from the same cloth.

But deliberate or not, the effect was the same: when the sun went down over Charlottesville Saturday, the First Amendment was lying in the dust, and the civic ties meant to bind all Americans were just that much weaker.

Thanks to the unbridgeable chasm between Statists and lovers of liberty, those civic ties are all but extinct anyway, and rightly if tragically so. The First Amendment, along with the rest of the Constitution, isn’t far behind. Scapegoat them all you may like, but it wasn’t the Nazi boobs who killed ’em off, either. As Limbaugh says above, somebody wanted this to happen, and from the official maneuvering before and during it seems to be fairly clear who. The question we need to be asking is: why?

(Via Insty)

Share

What’s been going around is now coming around

Reprisal? Good. It’s high time.



Via WRSA. I was listening to NPR earlier today, and they were waxing all horrified and apoplectic over this HATEFUL HEINOUS RIGHTWING EXTREMIST ACT OF HATEFUL HATE; the liberal dweebs, normally way more reticent about such things, didn’t seem to have any trouble at all calling it “terrorism,” either. In fact, they sorta went out of their way to. Nosirree, no “man-caused disaster” euphemizing here, not this time. Then they asked one of the attendees of this notoriously jihad-proselytizing mosque how they felt, and the termite blubbered and moaned about how he “doesn’t feel safe going to the mosque,” and how just truly awful and unfair that was.

And I repeat: GOOD. I WANT you scum-sucking jihad supporters scared. I want you so terrified of what the West might do to you in retaliation after each and every atrocity committed against us in the name of Islam that the very thought of it makes you piss rivers down your fucking leg. Because it’s quite clear that this shit is never going to stop until you are—or until we’re all dead, or converted to Islam ourselves.

That last ain’t happening, bucko, I promise you that. So out of the two remaining options, well, the second is no good either, no matter what the voices in your head keep telling you; we’ll get serious at last about destroying your primitive asses long before you can manage to pull that one off, I assure you. Seems to me that the first is the only workable or desirable one all the way around. Failing that, you can just shag your ass on back to the Middle East toot fucking sweet, where you can yodel to Allah, subjugate your women, kill all your gays, and just generally murder each other in job lots all you like, for all we in the West care.

I’ll repeat this again, too: exactly WHERE is the demand for importing more of these near-people coming from? What do we need that only they can provide?

I’ve seen some articles here and there speculating that there might be more to this than meets the eye; for one thing, the attack did NOT take place in front of the mosque, but actually a pretty fair way down the street from it. If the normal pattern holds true, the facts we wind up with in the end just might bear little to no resemblance to what we’re being told now by the lying liberal press. But for now, as far as I’m concerned the attacker is a fucking hero.

None of us ever wanted this war; none of us wants to have to kill anybody, really. But war is being made on us, and the “leaders” we trust to defend our nations refuse to do so. The whole thing is a shame and a disgrace. So I’ll just be damned if I’m going to act all prim and sanctimonious over some guy finally standing up and taking the fight to them for a change, and doing something that stands a lot better chance of giving them pause than an occasional drone strike against some yahoo or other out in barren nowhere.

Such a thing as this attack really shouldn’t be too shocking to anybody with a lick of sense; because of our squeamishness about naming the enemy, it was inevitable. Some of us have been saying so for years. Yes, I’m sure that a few innocent folks could possibly have been caught up in this attack, and that’s certainly regrettable. So you wanna tell me what crime the victims of Muslim terrorism are guilty of—and why our sympathies ought to lie more with their murderers than with them?

Update! Steyn expands on a theme:

Meanwhile, we have the latest daily horror from London, a city the late Alan Jay Lerner, author of My Fair Lady, chose to emigrate to because, he told me, it was “the most civilized place on earth”. On Sunday at midnight, a non-Muslim man drove a vehicle into a crowd of Muslims leaving the Finsbury Park mosque in what appears to be an attempt to reenact the London Bridge attack: same time (late at night), same weapon (white van), but this time targeting nocturnal believers rather than nocturnal hedonists. It is not perfectly symmetrical: Mayor Sadiq Khan is apparently being more circumspect about issuing his usual reassurance that being run over by white vans is just a part of daily life in a great “global city”. But Theresa May has swung into action and “held a COBRA” – the super-butch acronym of near Bond cool for a meeting of UK security honchos. Of course, COBRA sounds less impressive and SPECTRE-esque if you’re holding one every other day, as alas Mrs May presently is.

But, just as the Caesar seizure is attracting more attention than “antifa” thugs shutting down Charles Murray or Ann Coulter or attacking newspaper columnists at a book launch of which they disapprove, so it seems likely that in the long run Mrs May et al will attach greater significance to this long anticipated “Islamophobic backlash” than to mere humdrum terror attacks like Manchester, Westminster Bridge and London Bridge. If a fellow goes all Allahu Akbar at the cenotaph in Ottawa or Ohio State University or a coffee shop in Sydney, well, he was a bit of a loner, had a few mental-health issues, difficult family background, etc. No wider significance or pattern can be discerned: as Tip O’Neill would say, all jihad is local. But, if some guy rides his van up on the sidewalk in Finsbury Park, that will doubtless be emblematic of an epidemic of right-wing hate, and Facebook, Google & Co need to do a better job of policing social media. So expect more fulminating clerics to fall afoul of Facebook – if they’re Catholic. J K Rowling is already having a lively morning on Twitter, laying the victims of Finsbury Park at the feet of Katie Hopkins, Nigel Farage and the Fleet Street tabloids. As Douglas Murray responds in The Spectator:

Here’s a test. Yesterday the annual Khomeinist ‘Al-Quds Day’ parade took place in London. The march calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and in our allegedly zero-tolerance-to-terror city of London supporters of the terrorist group Hezbollah openly paraded with the terrorist group’s flags. What twist of popular logic allows that people waving the flags of a terrorist group in London on Sunday have no connection with terror, but that a van-driver committing an act of terror later that same day should be blamed on Nigel Farage?

Why, because Progressivists, of course. But Steyn has a much larger point to make here, and make it he damned sure does. I’ll do a little expanding on the point myself when the opportunity presents itself.

Share

Foolish inconsistencies

The hobgoblin of dhimmi minds.

According to the slogans, the Democratic Unionist Parity is a “hate” group because it is “anti-gay, anti-green, anti-women”. That’s to say, they’re opposed to same-sex marriage, abortion, and take a relaxed view of the impending climate apocalypse.

Oh, my.

Theresa May’s more recalcitrant friends in the DUP think gays are godless sodomites who’ll be spending eternity on a roasting spit in hell. Jeremy Corbyn’s more recalcitrant friends are disinclined to wait that long and would rather light them up now – or hurl them off the roof. Hamas, which Mr Corbyn supports, is fairly typical. Sample headline from Newsweek:

Hamas Executes Prominent Commander After Accusations Of Gay Sex

Doesn’t that make Hamas an anti-gay “hate group”? Well, no. You can bet that 90 per cent of the Google activists in the street protesting Theresa May’s ties to people who think men who love men shouldn’t be permitted to marry are entirely relaxed about Jeremy Corbyn’s ties to people who think men who love men should be burned alive or tossed off tall buildings.

So all those ninnies in the streets of London protesting 300,000 Ulster haters they’d never heard of twenty minutes earlier are surrounded by two-and-a-half million haters every day of their lives – in the Tube, in the restaurants, in the shops and offices of their supposedly vibrant, progressive metropolis.

Now why do you think that is? Could it possibly be connected to the fact that London is more “diverse”? As Douglas Murray points out in his soberly provocative new book The Strange Death of Europe, by the 2011 census in 23 of the capital’s 33 boroughs so-called “white British” people were in a minority. (You can bet it’s even more boroughs now.) And you can’t help noticing, sauntering around, say, Tower Hamlets, that the more “diverse” the community gets the fewer gays you see, and uncovered women, at least after dusk and walking about unaccompanied. It’s not quite the “Gay-Free Zone” promised by the posters of the Sharia Patrols, but it’s getting there.

So, if you think Ulster’s homophobic now, wait till its population is as multicultural as London’s. Boy, that’ll be a real vote bonanza for the DUP haters, right? Except that, by then, Jeremy Corbyn will be posing in Fermanagh and Tyrone villages beaming next to body-bagged crones and full-bearded imams.

Thirteen years ago in The Spectator I wrote the following:

A few weeks back I was strolling along the Boulevard de Maisonneuve in Montreal when I saw a Muslim woman across the street, all in black, covered head to toe, the full hejab. She was passing a condom boutique, its window filled with various revolting novelty prophylactics, ‘c*m rags’, etc. It was a perfect snapshot of the internal contradictions of multicultural diversity. In 30 years’ time, either the Arab lady will still be there, or the condom store, but not both. Which would you bet on?

We are not yet halfway through that thirty years, but the condom boutique has gone. And in Canadian citizenship ceremonies the Muslim woman can now take her oath of allegiance wearing the full body-bag – while Justin Trudeau marches in the LGBTQWERTY Pride Parade. Like I said: In the medium run, which would you bet on? Forty per cent of five-year-olds in Germany are of “non-European” extraction: What do you think their attitudes to gays and women will be in twenty years’ time? Or are you hoping you can hold the line on the “anti-green” thing and they’ll still support the Paris Accords?

To reprise another old line of mine, the fools prancing in the London streets denouncing a benign and harmless Democratic Unionist Party are auditioning to be Islam’s prison bitches. But they’ll be obsessing about the last socially conservative right-wing redneck on earth even as the haters all around consume them.

They hate that poor lone redneck far more than they ever will any member of one of their precious perpetual-victim groups. And they’re unhinged enough that I very much doubt they’d be capable of rethinking things even as their pet Muslims were sawing their heads off with a rusty Ginsu in Trafalgar Square at high noon.

No, seriously, y’all, I mean it: the Muzzrats are shooting them, stabbing them, clubbing them, blowing them up, running them over with cars and trucks, gang-raping them to death, setting them on fire—you name it, any depraved MO the most diseased mind can conceive, they’ve done it by now. And most of the twits still prefer to whine about Trump, and blame it all on him. Their response to this ongoing assault isn’t a stiffening of the spine and a renewed resolve to defend their civilization against a savage would-be conqueror whose core values they’d find hideously offensive in, say, a white Welshman—but a piteous mewling, a weakening of the knees, and a renewed determination to root out and denounce a single case of naked “Islamophobia,” anywhere at all, should they ever find one.

It’s contemptible, is what it is, and my sympathy for them is becoming very, very limited indeed by now. I must admit, it makes it hard to muster the outrage to write about these attacks at all these days.

When I started this site, as you CF lifers will no doubt recollect, I named it what I did not because of my rage over the 9/11 attacks themselves, but over what I knew the “liberal” response was going to eventually be. But even I never really imagined they’d plumb the despicable depths they’ve sunk to now. And as I keep saying: nobody needs kid themselves for a minute that it’s only the Brits we’re talking about here, either.

If it’s “auditioning to be Islam’s prison bitches” they really want, well, I’m just about ready to help Ahmed turn the key on that lock myself by now. If I could only get him to agree not to throw me in there with their sorry asses.

Share

Lessons? What lessons?

Before too long, we’ll have a Second Civil War to blithely ignore the lessons of.

There’s a tried and true American approach to suppressing terrorism, and it worked quite well during Gen. Sherman’s 1863 Kentucky campaign and Gen. Phil Sheridan’s subsequent reduction of the Shenandoah Valley. We don’t have to be particularly smart; we merely have to do some disgusting things. Sherman and Sheridan suppressed sniping at Union soldiers by Confederate civilians by burning the towns (just the towns, not the townsfolk) that sheltered them. In other words, they forced collective responsibility upon a hostile population, a doctrine that in peacetime is entirely repugnant, but that in wartime becomes unavoidable. By contrast, the peacetime procedure of turning petty criminals into police snitches has backfired terribly. No doubt we will learn that the perpetrators of tonight’s horror at London Bridge were known to police, like the Manchester Arena suicide bomber and most of the perpetrators of large-scale terrorist acts in Europe during the past several years. (Update: “At Least One London Bridge Terrorist Was a ‘Known Wolf'”) The remedy is time-tested and straightforward. We merely require the will to apply it.

Yeah, well, that’s gonna be a problem right there. Best we just go on with the “cower in place” strategy for a long while yet. We can all keep comforting ourselves each time a few dozen more of us are slaughtered by having a good cry; it seems to be working well for blithering idiots all over the world so far, right?

Like Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, who burned a great swath through Georgia and the Carolinas, Sheridan believed that war is won not just by killing soldiers but by denying them support from a broader civilian population.

Actually, it’s worse for us than that: Sherman believed, and explicitly stated, that wars were won only when the spirit of the opposition, both military and civilian, was utterly and entirely broken—their will to resist crushed right out of them—and not one moment before. He and Grant both proved, along with a lot of other leading officers throughout history, that competence in warfare is less a matter of intelligence and more a matter of brutal, implacable resolve.

In other words: it all comes down to will. The will of our enemies to conquer us must be bested by our own will to defeat them. So far there’s absolutely no sign at all that that’s the case. We lack the fortitude to even call the enemy by his proper name; for us to even be discussing defeating him is very nearly an obscenity.

DOOMED update! It’s laugh or cry, folks.


metro-police-warning.jpg

That last bit is especially poignant; since Brits long ago allowed their government to disarm them, they’re now reduced to throwing chairs and bar glasses at their Muslim tormentors. It bears repeating: before we can defeat the Muslims, we will first have to crush the Left, and nullify its malign influence on our lives. That’s every bit as true here as it is there, and everywhere else.

Share

LONDON STRONG!!

Get out the flowers, the John Lennon records, and the crying towels.

Three Jihadi terrorists were shot dead by armed police after killing six people and injuring 48 others in a horrific van and knife rampage in central London last night.

The men, described as being ‘of Mediterranean origin’, mowed down up to 20 revellers as they hurtled across London Bridge at 50mph before they got out and began ‘randomly stabbing’ people in nearby Borough Market.

Attackers used 12-inch hunting knives to attack revellers at busy bars and restaurants in the market, sending dozens fleeing for their lives.

Witnesses said the gang, who had metal canisters strapped to their chests, smashed pub windows and reportedly cut the throats of drinkers. A ‘dark-skinned’ man in a red tracksuit ‘calmly’ stabbed a man three times. Another victim was reportedly stabbed five times in the chest.

The male suspects were shot and killed by armed police in Borough Market within eight minutes of the first call. One of the men was seen wearing an Arsenal football shirt in a photo taken by a witness at the scene. 

Oh well, obviously a “domestic,” “home-grown” terrorist, then. Why, they’re all as English as Shepherd’s Pie. No Islam to see here, folks, let’s all move on, shall we?

Theresa May called the events in London a ‘potential act of terrorism’ after reports of a van hitting pedestrians, stabbings and armed police firing shots around the London Bridge area.

‘Following updates from police and security officials, I can confirm that the terrible incident in London is being treated as a potential act of terrorism,’ May said in a statement.

Which means…what, exactly? That you will immediately prosecute anyone who uses the word “Muslim” in connection with this attack? That you will issue a strongly-worded, unequivocal denunciation of “Islamophobia,” and will pledge to hunt to the ends of the earth anyone hateful and bigoted enough to participate in anything remotely construable as a “backlash”? That you will daintily avert your eyes from reality once again, and crawl on your fucking face over a mile of broken glass to make sure that no Muslim anywhere on earth is made to feel the slightest discomfort or inconvenience from the latest atrocity committed in the name of their vile “religion”?

‘The men said “This is for Allah” as they left the van and attacked victims. There were definitely three people sitting at the front of the van,’ witness Eric Seguenzo told BBC News.

Well, clearly then, we will probably never understand what motivated them. Or at least will never muster up the balls to say out loud what we all already know.

Fools. Bloody feckless fucking fools.

Counter Terrorism Command have launched an investigation and anybody who has images or film of the incident have been asked to pass those to police by uploading it at www.ukpoliceimageappeal.co.uk.

‘Our thoughts are with all those involved and those responding to both incidents. Those who are concerned about a loved one can contact the Casualty Bureau on 0800 0961 233,’ police said in a statement.

Oh, absolutely. Probably best to check in once a week or so, really. You never know when rampant Islamophobia might drive some poor, innocent Muslim to justifiably lash out against his tormenters. Poor devils, they’re the real victims here, eh wot?

Police advised people who live within the London Bridge cordon to stay somewhere else on Saturday night if they could.

But of course: flee your homes, run for your lives, it’s perfectly reasonable. But honestly: shouldn’t Londoners consider moving somewhere else entirely? Like, say, Alaska? Antarctica? A Caribbean island, maybe? That way they won’t have to worry about perturbing any poor innocent Muslims at all, and provoking them into more bloody mayhem.

Gerard Vowls, 47, who was in a pub near London Bridge, said he threw chairs and glasses at the attackers in a bid to stop them entering.

He told The Guardian: ‘They kept coming to try to stab me – they were stabbing everyone. Evil, evil people.’

Bingo. Nuff said. Hats off to this guy for fighting back as best he could instead of begging forgiveness and “celebrating diversity.” Now what are the rest of you Londonistan saps going to do about it?

I repeat: break out the crying towels, the candles, the flowers, the Lennon records—all the greasy detritus smeared around by cowardly morons unwilling to face reality as they put on another pathetic show of “strength” and “unity.” Get ready to hear the phrase “London Strong!” repeated ad nauseum. Brace yourself for yet another round of “they will never divide us” bleating. And allow me to say yet again: they do not give a single shit about “dividing” anybody. They only want to kill you—as many of you infidels as they can possibly reach, again and again and again, for as long as you keep bringing them into your country and letting them get away with it.

Share

Division

There is a great divide, all right.

You non-experts might think this a fairly crude sleight of hand – that concerns about “division” is a not so subtle way of suggesting that the real problem isn’t guys like Salman Abedi waiting with his nail bomb at the exit to the pop concert, but divisive types like you querying whether it’s prudent to keep importing more and more Islam into the western world. Well, screw you: if you disagree that the real danger here is the sowing of division, you’re just sowing even more division.

Pace The Toronto Star, I’m not sure it is “stating the obvious” to say that Monday’s attack was meant to “sow division”. What’s going on in Britain and Europe occurs because division has already been sown. It was sown by a careless political class that insisted there could be no questioning of a reckless demographic experiment. It is being reaped, as the division-sowing pop star Morrissey has divisively noted, by the political class’ hapless citizenry.

Britain is “divided”, perhaps fatally. It’s not so much the comparatively small numbers of suicide bombers, or even the support group of family and friends – the dad who works at the mosque pending his return to the battlefield, the sister who congratulates him on entering Paradise, the sister’s schoolmates who drop out to be become brides of Isis, the bomb-maker who lives down the street, the other friends and family who turn a blind eye to it all. Beyond all that is the larger comfort zone of “British” Muslims who support the ultimate goal of Salman Abedi – an Islamic state where once was England – and for the most part live their daily lives as if it’s already here. “Britain” has no purchase on them, and its “values” command no allegiance – even though, lest they give offense, non-divisive officials are careful never to spell out precisely what those “values” are”. Easier to chant the approved abstractions, and warn against the non-approved ones: Diversity good, division bad.

But in Britain and Europe they sowed diversity and reaped division. Tthe ever widening division was sown by Mrs May and M Juncker and Frau Merkel and all the others who insist on importing more Abedis and more of those who turn a blind eye to the Abedis, day by day, year on year. Only when that ends can there be even the possibility of healing the division.

I still maintain that at least as important is the division between those of us who appreciate and are grateful for our precious Western cultural inheritance and the Progressivists who loathe and despise it, and wish to see it not defended but brought low—so much so that they’re willing to make common cause with primordial Muslim savages who will happily slaughter every last transgendered feminist gay libertine among them the moment the opportunity presents itself. Thus I repeat: until we defeat the Left, we can’t even begin to hope to eliminate the threat posed by the jihadists.

It’s Steyn, so of course you’ll want to read it all. Oh, and the Morrissey post Mark mentions is damned brilliant; I had intended mentioning it before now, but I’ve spent the last few days trying to install a washer connection and wire up a dryer while replacing a couple of fuel injectors in the car, so I didn’t get to it. Here ya go, and bless his heart; I was never a fan of Morrissey’s music, honestly, but an acquaintance of mine is his guitarist, and he’s a hell of a rockabilly player in his own right, and so all things considered I am willing to reconsider my previous position.

Ahem. How’s that for wandering far afield in a single paragraph, eh? Maybe next year Doug can include a category for Best Digression in the Blog Awards.

Share

Division

There is a great divide, all right.

You non-experts might think this a fairly crude sleight of hand – that concerns about “division” is a not so subtle way of suggesting that the real problem isn’t guys like Salman Abedi waiting with his nail bomb at the exit to the pop concert, but divisive types like you querying whether it’s prudent to keep importing more and more Islam into the western world. Well, screw you: if you disagree that the real danger here is the sowing of division, you’re just sowing even more division.

Pace The Toronto Star, I’m not sure it is “stating the obvious” to say that Monday’s attack was meant to “sow division”. What’s going on in Britain and Europe occurs because division has already been sown. It was sown by a careless political class that insisted there could be no questioning of a reckless demographic experiment. It is being reaped, as the division-sowing pop star Morrissey has divisively noted, by the political class’ hapless citizenry.

Britain is “divided”, perhaps fatally. It’s not so much the comparatively small numbers of suicide bombers, or even the support group of family and friends – the dad who works at the mosque pending his return to the battlefield, the sister who congratulates him on entering Paradise, the sister’s schoolmates who drop out to be become brides of Isis, the bomb-maker who lives down the street, the other friends and family who turn a blind eye to it all. Beyond all that is the larger comfort zone of “British” Muslims who support the ultimate goal of Salman Abedi – an Islamic state where once was England – and for the most part live their daily lives as if it’s already here. “Britain” has no purchase on them, and its “values” command no allegiance – even though, lest they give offense, non-divisive officials are careful never to spell out precisely what those “values” are”. Easier to chant the approved abstractions, and warn against the non-approved ones: Diversity good, division bad.

But in Britain and Europe they sowed diversity and reaped division. Tthe ever widening division was sown by Mrs May and M Juncker and Frau Merkel and all the others who insist on importing more Abedis and more of those who turn a blind eye to the Abedis, day by day, year on year. Only when that ends can there be even the possibility of healing the division.

I still maintain that at least as important is the division between those of us who appreciate and are grateful for our precious Western cultural inheritance and the Progressivists who loathe and despise it, and wish to see it not defended but brought low—so much so that they’re willing to make common cause with primordial Muslim savages who will happily slaughter every last transgendered feminist gay libertine among them the moment the opportunity presents itself. Thus I repeat: until we defeat the Left, we can’t even begin to hope to eliminate the threat posed by the jihadists.

It’s Steyn, so of course you’ll want to read it all. Oh, and the Morrissey post Mark mentions is damned brilliant; I had intended mentioning it before now, but I’ve spent the last few days trying to install a washer connection and wire up a dryer while replacing a couple of fuel injectors in the car, so I didn’t get to it. Here ya go, and bless his heart; I was never a fan of Morrissey’s music, honestly, but an acquaintance of mine is his guitarist, and he’s a hell of a rockabilly player in his own right, and so all things considered I am willing to reconsider my previous position.

Ahem. How’s that for wandering far afield in a single paragraph, eh? Maybe next year Doug can include a category for Best Digression in the Blog Awards.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix