Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Unwon wars, filled graves

WRSA gives us a steer to an oldie but still-relevant goodie from Codevilla explaining why we no longer win wars, and never will again.

The shape of U.S. foreign policy for most of the 20th century and into our own time was set by Progressive Republican statesmen, Elihu Root and Henry L. Stimson. They believed that military action should be pursued, if at all, for international peace and order, not to advance specifically American interests. Their colleagues—Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas Murray Butler, and David Starr Jordan (Herbert Hoover’s mentor)—were outright pacifists. Democrats Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Cordell Hull (FDR’s secretary of state for almost 12 years, longer than any American has ever served in that office), and their successors, Dean Acheson and Harry Truman, turned the idea of international order into realities: the League of Nations, United Nations, and subsequent permanent alliances embodying “collective security.” That ruling Progressive consensus has determined America’s military objectives ever since, and largely deprived America of peace.

By 1950, polite society—which excluded the American people’s vast majority—was well-nigh unanimous that victory and peace, as well as the very notion of an overriding, peculiarly American national interest, were concepts that belonged to the age of the dinosaurs. Military officers however were mostly dinosaurs, the most prominent of whom was General of the Army Douglas MacArthur. His conquest of the western Pacific in World War II, followed by the 1950 masterstroke that reversed military defeat in Korea, had captivated American opinion. By firing MacArthur in April 1951, President Truman began to enforce polite society’s wisdom on the military. By the end of the Vietnam war some 20 years later, that wisdom about war and peace conquered the Democratic Party wholly, spread to much of the Republican Party, and to the senior U.S. officer corps, too. Hence, since 1951, America’s renowned generals—Matthew Ridgway, William Westmoreland, Colin Powell, and David Petraeus—have brought only stalemate, defeat, waste, and more war, while drawing down the nation’s reservoir of respect.

As you might expect, our slow slide from WW2 victory into hapless, floundering futility was instigated by a dithering Democrat president more concerned with political appearances than winning wars; he tied the hands of a competent general, refused to clarify his wartime goals when directly asked, then saw to it that the general was smeared as an over-ambitious dictator-in-waiting with political ambitions of his own—an unjust tarring, helped along by a partisan mainstream media, that has stained his reputation to this very day.

Washington’s “responsible officials,” up to and including Truman, refused to take responsibility for ordering any course of action whatever. Brands gives the fuller account. MacArthur, the option of victory having been denied, asked, “Is the present objective of United States political policy to maintain a military position in Korea—indefinitely, for a limited time, or to minimize losses by evacuation as soon as it can be accomplished?” Brands writes, “Dean Acheson read MacArthur’s letter with astonishment,” saying afterwards that MacArthur was “incurably recalcitrant and basically disloyal to the purposes of his commander in chief.” But what were these purposes, and how did they translate into how and why American draftees were dying?

Truman, on advice of his counselors, had resisted bipartisan calls for a declaration of war. Such a request would have forced his administration to define and submit its objectives to a vote by both Houses of Congress. But by creating the fiction that the war was by, of, and for the United Nations, Truman et al. believed they were gaining flexibility, which is of great strategic value—but only to leaders who know what they’re doing. But Truman and his advisors did not, so their flexibility and disunity acted like a sail in the winds of events.

Truman, after convening the National Security Council, also chose not to answer MacArthur’s request for orders. “This present telegram is not to be taken in any sense as a directive. Its purpose is to give you something of what is in our minds.” U.S. troops’ successful resistance would demonstrate that aggression does not pay and would encourage others to believe in America’s pledges of assistance. “We recognize, of course, that continued resistance might not be militarily possible with the limited forces with which you are being called upon to meet large Chinese armies…if we must withdraw from Korea, it [must] be clear to the world that that course is forced upon us by military necessity.” Translated from bureaucratese, the message was: hold on with the forces and restrictions you’ve got, regardless of how many American lives it costs.

And cost it did. Some three fourths of the Americans killed in Korea died after the U.S. government stopped trying to win the war. Since Truman’s decision taught the world that no-win wars were now the American ruling class’s modus operandi, the cost of three later generations’ wars, including the incalculable toll of domestic decay resulting from Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, should also be added in.

And so Truman, despite such scurrilous waffling and weaseling, goes down in history as “Give ’em hell Harry”—a tough, flinty-eyed president and CinC, who brooked no nonsense when it came to defending the Constitution and the nation—while MacArthur is remembered as an egotistical megalomaniac—a blustering, incompetent would-be despot whose reach, thankfully, far exceeded his grasp. Truman’s record, now pretty much buried for all practical purposes, speaks for itself; let MacArthur’s own parting words speak for him:

MacArthur returned from Korea to a conquering hero’s reception: ticker-tape parades and a speech to a joint session of Congress. The pledge he made and kept to “just fade away” belied the contention that he had tried to usurp the Constitution, and bolstered the two warnings he left his fellow citizens. First, “In war, there is no substitute for victory.” Forgetting something so very basic had been no mere mistake, but a symptom of moral decay. Hence his other warning: “History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

And we haven’t won a war since—not because we can’t, but because we won’t. And until and unless that changes—stipulating, of course, that we should always be very damned careful and conscientious about doing so in the first place—we damned well need to make sure we don’t get into any more of them.

Share

Lock. Her. UP

No, not Hillary!™ this time. Well, okay, her too.

A student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill was arrested for larceny last month after she was caught on video taking a sign belonging to pro-life activists. The arrest arrives just days after the arrest of a UNC-Chapel Hill student accused of physically assaulted a pro-life activist after allegedly getting angry over his sign.

After which, hilarity ensues.

“Look, sir, I’m not trying to get arrested,” said the student to the officer, after he had informed her that she was being detained for larceny.

“I cannot believe these are the people who you protect,” continued the student, referring to the pro-life activists.

“I’m not trying to protect anyone, but I do have to enforce the law,” responded the officer, “That’s just how it is.”

“Do you see us being subjected to this shit?” said the student, gesturing toward the pro-life signage.

What I see is a sniveling, overprivileged dumbass OUTRAGED!™ at being “subjected” to any opinion that differs from her own.

“They have a right to be here,” said the officer, “If you don’t like their views, you can go away, you don’t have to watch it.”

“It doesn’t matter how much you ignore them, they’re gonna come back, and they’re gonna come back again, and this is why women have such a problem getting abortions in North Carolina, and y’all just let them get away with this shit,” said the student, “I cannot believe y’all let this happen.”

Since when have women had any problem at all getting as many abortions as they want, as often as they want, in North Carolina or anyplace else, you baby-murdering bitch?

“Take your backpack off, turn around, and put your hands behind your back, you’re under arrest for larceny,” said the officer.

“I cannot believe this is happening,” said the student upon realizing that she was under arrest, “is there something else that I can do?”

“No, I just told you you’re under arrest,” replied the officer, “I cannot un-arrest you.”

And then the piteous weeping starts, which is a pure delight to watch. If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. As Ace likes to say: LOL get fucked. More:

The student grabbed the sign from Austin Beigel, a peaceful protester, and walked off with it – not realizing that an officer would meet her at the end of her path.

“Did you steal their sign?” the officer asked the feminist.

“I just moved it,” she responded.

“Well you took it,” the officer confirmed.

The young feminist then had the nerve to ask the officer why she was being detained. With a look of disbelief on his face, the officer responded, “Uhh…larceny. You stole his sign.”

I’m sure you can guess what happened at this point: the student pulled out her cherished “victim card.”

“I moved it 50 yards,” she said as she tried to weasel out of the situation.

“I don’t care if you moved it one foot,” the officer responded before he gave a needed lesson in ethics. “You don’t have the right to take someone’s property. Period. I don’t care what the circumstance is.”

“I know you may not agree with what’s being said,” he continued. “But you don’t have the right to take someone’s property. Okay?”

One would hope that Little Einstein would be capable of learning this vitally important lesson. Unfortunately, one’s hope would be in vain; the fascist cunt will doubtless be carefully nursing a grudge over how horribly she was “victimized” for the rest of her days, self-righteously blibbering on to anybody willing to listen about her “courageous” and “heroic” days of protest and oppression.

Yeah, tell me again about how we can live peaceably among shitbrains so thoroughly and irredeemably wrong about what free speech, tolerance, and civility are all about, whydon’tcha.

Why is that these leftists think they can commit stupid acts without facing the just consequences of their actions?

Because they’ve been allowed to do exactly that for way too long, that’s why.

Share

Cheney V2.0?

More rich, buttery Barr goodness.

Barr is the new Dick Cheney: a stocky, bespectacled, confrontational, blunt, intelligent, unapologetically conservative, experienced, and high-powered official who believes in and fights for the office of the president. Just as Democrats loathed Cheney as a bugaboo manipulating President George W. Bush to further the interests of Halliburton, they attack Barr as a dishonest factotum of President Trump’s. The qualities that drove Democrats batty over Cheney—his inscrutability, his cleverness, his asperity, and above all his success—make them incensed about Barr. These happen to be qualities Republicans find appealing.

What’s behind conservative support for Cheney and Barr is their lack of embarrassment. Most Washingtonians, no matter their party, find it important to be held in esteem by the city’s tastemakers, who are overwhelmingly liberal. Not these two. The classic Cheney moment was his 2004 exchange with Pat Leahy on the Senate floor. Cheney complained that Leahy had called him a war profiteer. Leahy responded that Cheney had said he was a bad Catholic. So Cheney ended the conversation by telling Leahy to perform a physically impossible four-letter act. “You’d be surprised at how many people liked that,” Cheney recollected in a 2010 interview. “It’s sort of the best thing I ever did.” He’s selling himself short.

Republican fans of Barr circulated clips of his Senate appearance Wednesday even as media coverage of his testimony was uniformly negative. No Democrats are held in less esteem by conservatives than the ones on the Judiciary Committee. They will never live down their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Trump supporters nodded in agreement when Barr said the controversy over his March 24 description of the Mueller report is “mind-bendingly bizarre.” They chuckled when he said Mueller’s March 27 letter to him was “a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff members.” They guffawed when Barr described the verb “spying” as “a good English word.” They cheered when Richard Blumenthal asked for notes Barr had taken of his phone conversation with Mueller and Barr told him no. “Why should you have them?”

Where his predecessor was genial and deferential to Congress and the press, Barr is disdainful and combative. At his April 18 press conference before the publication of the Mueller report, a CBS reporter asked Barr if his use of the word “unprecedented” to describe the circumstances of the Russia investigation was “quite generous to the president and his feelings and emotions.” Barr replied, “Is there another precedent for it?” “No,” the reporter acknowledged sheepishly. Another reporter wondered, “Is it an impropriety for you to come out and sort of spin the report before people are able to read it?” Barr said, “No,” and left the room. Lib owned.

Some out there are reminding us of something we all already know: that the chances of top-level malefactors like HILLARY!™ and Ogabe ever facing justice remain slim, and I can’t disagree. Nor do I anticipate meaningful reform of dangerously powerful and corrupt federal bureacracies from Barr’s efforts. Nonetheless, it sure is enjoyable to watch Barr roughly manhandle the Democrat-Socialists, making them squirm like a salted slug on a hot sidewalk. Elsewhere, Lindsay V2.0 scores a stinging, smarting hit himself, calling Mr Integrity out for his weaselly manipulation.

I am filing this story in the “put up or shut up” category of invitations. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham Friday morning sent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller inviting him to testify about the phone call he had with A.G. Barr following the letter Mueller sent to Barr about the summary of findings the A.G. issued, pending release of the full report. That letter, purportedly meant to be private, nonetheless was leaked right before Barr testified before Graham’s committee and was used by Democrat members to criticize the A.G.

Mueller knows that Barr had him on a speakerphone, with witnesses present and taking notes. (Incidentally, what does that tell you about the actual regard in which Barr holds Mueller — a man he has known for decades?) Reportedly, during the conversation, Barr asked Mueller if there were any inaccuracies and was told by Mueller, no.

Meanwhile, the Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee is negotiating with Mueller over possible testimony. Just a guess: They are not demanding that staff members be given a half-hour to question Mueller.

The last line in Graham’s beautifully direct request to get all the cards on the table: “Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General.” Time to fish or cut bait, Slippery Bob.

Update! Gerard posts a Solzhenitsyn quote made all the more poignant by current events.

In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.

We are also dishonoring our own integrity and posterity, thereby sowing the seeds of bloody strife, upheaval, and misery for those new generations sooner or later, as faith in the system and justice itself crumbles into ruin.

Obstruction update! Via Insty: “Barr is investigating Democrats. Democrats call for Barr to resign. According to Nadler, that’s obstruction of justice!” But it’s more than just that. It’s also this:

Don’t fool yourself. This latest assault on Attorney General Barr is a coordinated hit job cooked up between the media, the special counsel, and their allies in Congress. And it has only one purpose, to stop or slow Barr’s inquiry into the gross abuses leading up to the effort to spy on the Trump campaign.

I explained exactly why Mueller defied Barr here: “By salting the report with grand jury information that required redaction, Mueller guarantees the president remains subject to the innuendo and suspicion that comes with unnecessary secrecy.” In other words, it was a dirty trick. Open your eyes, Mr. Attorney General, because they’re coming for you now.

Oh, he seems like a smart enough fella. I’m pretty sure he already knows.

Coordinating with their allies in the media and the Senate, Mueller has attempted to set-up the attorney general. Barr was asked whether he knew why Mueller’s team was upset with the attorney general’s summary. He said he did not know what their concerns were. That was a truthful statement. But Sen. Patrick Leahy has attempted to use Mueller’s leaked letter to argue that the attorney general lied to Congress when he said he didn’t know what was of concern to Mueller’s team. The attorney general gave a factual and able explanation for the ginned up discrepancy.

What is Mueller’s endgame here? Impeachment? Don’t be ridiculous.

To answer that question, go back and look at where the Mueller people were standing on the night that Donald Trump shocked the world by upsetting Hillary Clinton. Robert Mueller left a $3.4 million partner job with WilmerHale, the same law firm that had just won a lawsuit for the Clinton Foundation, keeping Clinton emails secret. The Mueller probe provided former Clinton Foundation attorney Jeannie Rhee with the opportunity once again to protect Clinton by making sure the word “Fusion” never appeared in the Mueller report and by steering the Papadopoulos prosecution to help obscure the role of the Clinton-financed dossier in the hoax. The end-game is to continue to protect the coup plotters and deep-state bad actors who have used surveillance of Americans in much the same way the Soviets used it in Eastern Germany.

This is high stakes stuff. If the elites can continue using intelligence and law enforcement to interfere in American elections, they will eventually get good at it and we will lose our republic. The deep state allies are fighting like the “Unsullied” protecting the gates of Winterfell to cover for the bad actors still fumbling for their golden parachutes. Bottom line, the report, these new leaks, they’re just desperate attempts to delay the reckoning. The attorney general is now subject of a campaign of smear and intimidation and he must be protected so he can hold these villains to account.

Seeing as how the Clintons are up to their necks in this, Barr needs more than merely political protection; he should consider putting some serious private security on the payroll, lest he be found on a DC park bench after having committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head seventeen times.

Share

Paying the Danegeld

It’s lights out for Once-Great Britain.

Subway removes ham and bacon from nearly 200 stores and offers halal meat only after ‘strong demand’ from Muslims
Fast food giant Subway has removed ham and bacon from almost 200 outlets, and switched to halal meat alternatives in an attempt to please its Muslim customers.

It has confirmed turkey ham and turkey rashers will be used instead in 185 of its stores, where all the meat will now be prepared according to halal rules.

The chain, which has around 1,500 outlets across the UK, explained its decision by saying it had to balance animal welfare concerns with ‘the views of religious communities’.

Why don’t you pathetic cowards just tell it like it is: it’s just the one “religious community” you’re appeasing here.

A Subway spokeswoman told MailOnline all halal meat served in the participating branches is from animals who were stunned prior to slaughter.

She said: ‘The growing popularity of the Subway chain with the diverse multicultural population across the UK and Ireland means we have to balance the values of many religious communities with the overall aim of improving the health and welfare standards of animals.

‘We put a programme into place in 2007 to ensure that the population demographic is taken into account when new store openings are considered in order that we meet consumer demand in each location.’

Translation: “Now that Old Blighty has immivasioned itself into just another Muslim-majority shitrapy, we must adjust our menus in accordance with the requirements of sharia law.”

Welcome to your new nation, Englishters. May you have joy of your choices. And may the US wake the fuck up and get off your dark path before it’s too late for us, too.

(Via VP)

Share

Losers, by choice

Kurt unloads so resoundingly on Conservative Inc, I just…can’t even.

Now, it’s not really fair to imply that the Never Trumpers hate Trump solely because he’s vulgar and crude – or, as normal people see it, unwilling to meekly take the guff the Never Trumpers’ country club class pals dish out like a proper gentleman should. They do find him aesthetically displeasing, but it also gnaws at them because every time he stands up to the garbage Democrats, the garbage press, or the garbage jerks and pervs of Hollywood, his refusal to knuckle-under reminds Team Fail that they don’t have the stones to do the same. He shames their cowardly weakness.

It’s clear, in retrospect, that George W. Bush’s supine acceptance of the abuse the elite heaped upon him was not because he was too classy and too decent to respond in kind. Since Obama left office and he rediscovered his vocal cords, Bush has had zero problem trashing Trump and Trump supporters who, like many of us, stood by Bush in the ’00s while Bush was treading water in a sea of mediocrity. No, it’s clear that W was afraid to fight back against fellow members of the ruling class. He cared about being part of the club. Not The Donald. Trump, by fighting, demonstrates that the establishment GOPers are weak. And it eats at them.

But besides providing a manly contrast to their own gimp-like submission to the leftist establishment, Trump infuriates the Never Trumpers for another reason. He’s kicked them out of their comfy sinecures. One of Trump’s magical powers is to make his enemies reveal their own grift complicity, and boy, have they ever. As a result, while once the mandarins of Conservative, Inc., traded on their insider influence and privilege, under Trump they are outsiders. Copies of the Weekly Standard used to be all over the Bush White House. Now, if its inept crew had not slammed it into an iceberg, you would be lucky to find a few pages at the bottom of Barron’s pet iguana’s cage.

Bill Kristol, Max Boot, and all the rest are nobodies, relegated to occasionally joining CNN panels and fighting with Ana Navarro over the doughnuts in the green room. Where’s Bob Corker now? Jeff Flake hasn’t even got an MSNBC gig; I think last week he was the dude who offered to supersize my order.

Pretty stinging bitch-slaps on Bush and the rest of the Koup Klux Klowns, to be sure. But just wait till you get a load of what he has in store for poor ol’ Mittens.

They are reduced to occasionally popping up on Twitter to inspire a session of Weakheart Whack-A-Mole from actual conservatives. Just look at Senator for Some Reason Mitt Romney. The guy I am sorry I voted for in 2012 is always eager to say something prissy about the president to try to please the same people who, back in 2012, accused him of being a racist and giving a lady cancer. For his obedience, he gets a tasty treat and a pat on the head, like the good doggie he is. But everyone knows that if the elite ever thought that the Distinguished Gentleman From Whatever State He Thinks He Can Get Elected In Next might actually pose a threat to the status quo, he’d be figuratively caged up and driven to Canada on the roof.

As Jed Clampett always said: WEEEEEEEELLL DOGGIES! Schlichter really outdoes himself with this bilious, incendiary masterpiece; I must say, I can’t recall ever coming closer to just saying to hell with fair use and reposting the whole dang thing. But I’ll restrain myself, so you can click on over and revel in every righteous word of the original.

Share

Punches: unpulled

Looks like the Somali Sleeper stepped in it this time, but good.

Omar-NYP.jpg

Real American Dan Crenshaw spikes the Muslim terrorist-loving bitch Ty Cobb style:


Note well that she mentions “love and commitment to our country” that “should never be in question”, and she’s absolutely right—I don’t question her love of country. It’s just that I don’t believe for a second that the USA is her country; Somalia is, and as the Koran requires, Islam will always trump even that. The woman is here illegally, by virtue of a sham marriage to her own brother. Not only should she not be in Congress, she should by all rights be deported. Yesterday would not be too soon to suit me. But by fair the most damning slam of them all against the evil bint is this one:

She dismissed thousands of people being murdered like it was an everyday occurrence when she said “some people did something.”

On 9/11/01 my son, firefighter Jimmy Riches was murdered along with close to 3,000 American citizens by Muslim terrorists.

I rushed to Engine 4 in Lower Manhattan when I heard what was happening. That’s where my son worked.

As I came over the Brooklyn Bridge, the towers had both already fallen. All the rigs at the firehouse were gone, so I knew they were all at the World Trade Center.

When I got there, I saw the death and destruction — people lying there dead and mangled.

We picked up the bodies and saw how gruesome it was. Those people died a horrible death.

We were there for 9 months picking up body parts, pieces.

We found my son’s body six months later, March 5, 2002. He was at the North Tower. We got to bury him.

People talk about closure, but that’s not closure. I’ll never get closure until my son walks through that door again.

My son died doing his job, helping others in distress. The American public said NEVER FORGET 9/11!

Now, we have people who were working down there getting sick and dying. It hasn’t ended.

There’s still 1,000 bodies that have never been recovered. It’s very sad that she could make such light of it.

Sad? Sorry to have to say so, ma’am, but I’m afraid it’s one helluva lot worse than that. It’s disgraceful, is what it is.

Worse still, it’s all on us—all of it.

The fact is, we HAVE forgotten. Omar’s galling, illegitimate presence here—dancing right past the still more abhorrent fact that SHE FUCKING GOT ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS—is all the proof anyone should ever need of that forgetfulness. I can’t imagine anything more mortifying, reprehensible, and just plain inexcusable than that reality—a blot on the honor of every American who was alive and old enough to remember that nightmarish morning.

Several years ago, after many years of having done some sort of annual 9/11 remake of the CF main page to commemorate the attacks, I stopped even mentioning the anniversary at all. Somewhere along the line I realized, in morbid horror and shock, that we had indeed forgotten; that, in our blithering PC stupidity, we had not only stubbornly refused to learn the lessons of the attacks, we lacked even the guts or honesty to name the real motivation behind them—a moral failure that still plagues us to this very day. Our contemptible abdication of nerve and integrity is demonstrated with each new charade of official befuddlement as to motive from law enforcement, political “leadership,” and Enemedia following yet another murderous Muslim attack someplace.

We The Peepul also dishonored our dead and ourselves when we sat still for the Ogabe junta’s alacritous and semi-clandestine resettlement of hordes of phony Muslim “refugees” in communities throughout heartland America, allowing the (ahem) “fundamental transformation” of the very fabric of American society without complaint or demur. In the end, we have to shamefacedly confess that we got saddled with the likes of Omar for no reason other than our own tremulous complacency. Which means that Omar and her loathsome ilk are here to stay, and will henceforth have to be dealt with on their own terms and not ours. Worse yet, that we deserve them.

All American update! More righteous rage from the Post.

Some people did something? Wow. What a way to describe the heinous surprise attack on America that claimed 3,000 lives.

Especially when Omar’s focus was Muslim rights: That made it all the more vital to note that the terrorists acted in the name of Islam — as self-described “jihadists” in a war against America, Israel and the West. To call them merely “some people” is to deny a cancer festering in the world Muslim community.

Allow me to rephrase that last, in the interest of precision and accuracy: Islam is a cancer festering in the world community. If Muslim terrorists would stick exclusively to slaughtering each other in the privacy of their own shithole nations, nobody would give much of a shit about them. It’s mainly the Koran-mandated effort to wage jihad on infidels throughout the world that the rest of us have a problem with.

She went further: “Many people expect our community to feel like it needs to hide every time something happens.” Again, by “something happens,” she means (but won’t say) “when Muslims commit acts of terror.”

No one expects Muslims to “hide” after an attack by Islamist terrorists. No group should be blamed for the deeds of a few of its members. But defeating terrorism requires facing the facts of who’s behind it and why.

And “facing the facts” requires that we recognize that it’s far, far more than just “a few” Muslims who support global jihad…even right here in the States.

Instead, Omar claimed Muslims are being “terrorized” by the nation’s response to 9/11.

By the way: CAIR wasn’t founded post-9/11, but in 1994. And the feds later named it an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to steer US funds to the terror group Hamas.

Yet Omar upped the obscure-the-facts ante Wednesday, declaring criticism of her “some people did something” line to be “incitement,” on the grounds that she has received death threats.

Huh? She’d rightly be outraged if anyone minimized those threats as merely “some words from some people.”

Omar’s cavalier brushing off of the murder of thousands of innocents on 9/11 should shock all Americans, Muslims included.

Yep. And it ought to open their blind eyes as well, and thoroughly piss them off. Unfortunately, the vile woman got some needed support from an unsurprising source.

At the end of yet another controversy-filled day, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) sat down with Stephen Colbert on The Late Show and tried to show the world she’s not actually as scary as Fox News wants you to think she is.

Contrary to this liberal muttonhead, I very much doubt that many of us find Omar “scary.” We find her offensive, noxious, and intolerable.

When you have people on Fox News question whether I am actually American or I put ‘America first,’ I expect my colleagues to also say, ‘That’s not OK’ and call that out,” she continued, referring to comments earlier Wednesday morning from Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade. To those who question her loyalty to America, Omar said, “I took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I am as American as everyone else is.”

You are no such thing. You’re an America-hating adherent to a pseudo-religion that openly demands our destruction and subjugation. Your insensitive, outrageously offensive remarks damned well ought to lead people to be skeptical about your loyalties, along with your assumed “right” to be here at all. You came to this country illegally, under false pretenses. You ought to be sent back to Somalia, permanently and with a quickness.

One recent comment that got Omar in trouble was when she referred to Trump adviser Stephen Miller as a “white nationalist.” That made Colbert aware of the double standard she referred to when he thought to himself, “Haven’t I said that?”

“You see this outrage when I speak the truth,” Omar said in response. “Everybody else’s truth is allowed, but my truth can never be.”

“Your truth” is false, therefore there is no obligation to honor it, indulge it, or tolerate it on anyone’s part. Fuck you, go home, drop dead.

Share

Lost world

Or, how to cow and pussify a nation, and keep it that way.

8 Fun (and Possibly Dangerous) Activities Enjoyed by Past Generations That Today’s Kids Will Never Experience
Children are more coddled and protected than ever in 2019. For kids, it’s oppressive. I know mine listen to my stories of summers full of freedom and independence, running around the neighborhood all day until dark, with wide-eyed envy. These days, kids are hardly free to do anything we could back in generations past.

And yet we marvel in gobsmacked disgust at where in the world such a wretched, emasculated, pitiful twerp as this might possibly have come from:

PajamaPussy.jpg


Somewhere, the Boys of Pointe Du Hoc are weeping. Onwards.

7. Ride in cars without seatbelts

When I was a kid we had a station wagon with blue vinyl bench seats. There were no seatbelts. When we were infants, my mother put us in a laundry basket on the passenger side front seat. When we got bigger, we sat in the back, bouncing around like ping pong balls. We survived several accidents like this. I don’t know how. I vividly remember my face smashing into the back of the bench seat in the front on a few occasions when my mother stopped short, and one scary black ice scenario where we all felt like we had crushed ribs from being flung against one another too hard. While it’s not recommended, there was a freedom and joy about driving that we don’t have anymore in our boosters and five-point harnesses. Gone is the joy of climbing into the back of the station wagon to play cards with your sister on sleeping bags or waving endlessly at the poor guy behind you. Gone is the ability for kids to get comfy and take a good nap on the floor stacked with pillows. It makes me sad that on a twenty-hour car trip my kids are locked into seats with bad neck support, getting numb legs. And while we all know seatbelts are better, and I wouldn’t take my kids out of them, I still wish they could experience a cross-country trip like we did. It might have been stupid and dangerous, but it was a hell of a lot of fun.

It wasn’t all that stupid, and it wasn’t all that dangerous either. Otherwise, how could so very many of us—the OVERWHELMING majority, actually—possibly have survived to adulthood? Megan, I love ya and all, but you’re betraying the lasting effectiveness of your own lifelong obedience training by asserting that it was. Yeah, yeah, the world has changed, technology has advanced by leaps and bounds, all that jazz; I get that, I really do, and I acknowledge that a great many of those societal shifts have been for the better.

But still: allowing ourselves to be panicked into general stampede by the Nanny State’s distressing tales of fatal risk besetting us at every single turn is how we got ourselves herded into the collectivist corral in the first damned place. Don’t think for a minute that it wasn’t on purpose, either. It always sickens me to hear otherwise intelligent, perceptive people say things like this in blithe acceptance of the cultural conditions imposed on us by the nefarious Progtards, as if there was no sensible alternative but to accept their premises without demur.

There are seven more of these, and all in all it’s a sad thing to read for an old fart like me.

Share

Book burners gotta burn books

How you lose a war. Not that what we’re talking about with our endless War On Something Or Other in Muslim shitholes actually IS one, mind.

On January 7 of this year, I published an article at PJ Media about Amazon removing doormats featuring Qur’an verses from sale because the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) found them offensive. In that article, I asked:

How long will it be before Hamas-linked CAIR starts demanding that books that criticize jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others also be dropped by Amazon?

The answer turned out to be 51 days.

It’s the British government and the BBC, rather than CAIR, that are likely behind this, but Amazon has just dropped the book Mohammed’s Koran by the renowned British activist Tommy Robinson and Peter McLoughlin — and apparently only because its censors dislike Robinson. In the last two weeks, Robinson spectacularly embarrassed the BBC by exposing the bias and dishonesty of its reporter John Sweeney. The retaliation has been swift and severe: Robinson has been banned from YouTube and Facebook, and now his book has been withdrawn from sale.

This is an extremely ominous development. Amazon and Barnes and Noble — which is also not carrying this book — have a virtual monopoly on book sales. When these two giants refuse to carry a book, that book effectively does not exist. If they are now going to ban books that are critical of Islam and opposed to jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others, then an Islam-critical perspective will be almost impossible to find anywhere.

Which is the whole idea.

Mohammed’s Koran is critical of Islam’s holy book. It endeavors to illustrate how violent jihadists justify their actions by referring to Islamic texts and teachings — and that’s all. Robinson and McLoughlin call for no violence. Their book is accurate.

Anyone who has written a book that is critical of anything should read the writing on the wall and realize that once this censorship begins, it won’t end with Tommy Robinson or Qur’an-critical books. But they won’t. PEN, the international organization that is supposedly dedicated to defending the freedom of speech, is made up of hard-Leftists who won’t utter a whisper in defense of Tommy Robinson’s book, or a murmur of protest that it is not allowed to be sold.

They don’t realize that what is being done to him can be done to them. But it will be.

Ahh, but will it really? By whom, pray tell? Because I’ve seen little or no indication to date that the Fascist Left faces any opponent willing to turn their own despicable tactics back on them.

Update! Okay, so there are some admirable exceptions to that last statement of mine:

A rapidly growing number of counties in at least four states are declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, refusing to enforce gun-control laws that they consider to be infringements on the U.S. constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Organizers of the pro-gun sanctuaries admit they took the idea from liberals who have created immigration sanctuaries across the United States where local officials defy the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce tougher immigration laws.

Now local conservatives are rebelling against majority Democratic rule in the states. Elected sheriffs and county commissioners say they might allow some people deemed to be threats under “red flag” laws to keep their firearms. In states where the legal age for gun ownership is raised to 21, authorities in some jurisdictions could refuse to confiscate guns from 18- to 20-year-olds.

The sanctuary movement is exposing the rift between rural and urban America as much as the one between the Republican and Democratic parties, as small, conservative counties push back against statewide edicts passed by big-city politicians.

Kick it up to a national scale and that last paragraph provides as good a lesson as any on why we have an electoral college, and why it must be—MUST be—vigorously, even fiercely defended.

Share

Three questions

If the Invade The World types can’t answer ’em, then they can’t go. Well, unless they go themselves.

The key, you see, is in the question’s framing. The question asked is so vague and diluted that it is almost meaningless. It asked: Would Americans support the deployment of U.S. troops “to fight against violent Islamic extremist groups in Iraq and Syria”?

Well, of course, no rational individual would oppose that. But that doesn’t really give you much. Imagine if this same question was turned on its head, to “Would you support and pay taxes to champion the open-ended deployment of your cousin or colleague from Michigan to see that the Turks and Kurds don’t fight over Manbij?” The answer would be a lot more complicated.

With that in mind, let us do a simulation, and discuss some key questions to ask any time someone is suggesting a foreign intervention.

I’ll leave the first two alone and let you go look for yourselves; the most important one, and the one whose resoundingly-obvious answer renders the other two questions superfluous, is this one:

3. Do We Have the Requisite Brutality to Finish Any Insurgency?

And the answer resounds equally: No. No, we do not. We haven’t, not since WW2. There are more reasons for that than one might think: yes, we’re soft, spoiled—our resolve evaporated, our fighting spirit sapped.

But that’s hardly our only problem. As a nation, we haven’t agreed for years on why any war might be worth fighting, much less winning. We don’t even agree anymore on our national identity and purpose, ferchrissake. We barely even qualify as a nation at all by now, and that condition is getting worse instead of better. So how could we possibly reach agreement on what might constitute our legitimate national interests, much less whether they needed to be defended by making war in any given circumstance? Or ever?

Neither will we agree on who our enemy might be. Even in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, heinous as they were, our tremulous national unity lasted all of a week, tops, before the Left started in moaning that we had brought it on ourselves, that America had it coming. We had protests in our larger cities against seeking violent, decisive retribution against bin Laden and al Qaeda before the first American troop transport was gassed up. As Reynolds always said: they weren’t anti-war, they were on the other side. And they worked awfully hard to see the war lost before it had even started.

Yes, Dubya certainly screwed the pooch by transforming the WoT from a punitive war intended to destroy a direct, possibly existential threat into a misguided, futile attempt to establish democracy and freedom in parts of the world whose primitive inhabitants were—and remain—implacably hostile to both. But given our own schizophrenic national psyche; our flabby, weak-willed national character; and our intractable domestic divisions, I can’t see any way that Bush could have eked out anything resembling true, final victory. Once we went from “shock and awe” to Welcome Wagon mission, the endless mess we’re now mired to the axles in was the only way the thing was ever going to wind up.

And that was because the American war-focus had shifted from crushing the enemy to placating the American public. That happened long ago; admittedly, it wasn’t something that anybody could have avoided.

In fact, the very concept of “limited war” sort of gives the whole game away; it’s almost by definition a formula for precisely the sort of pointless, interminable floundering that has been the defining characteristic of America’s wars since the Korea botch.

This is the most important question one can hear in talks in strategic circles. A recent research paper, for example, suggests that the Western way of a counterinsurgency operation is simply not brutal enough to end insurgencies permanently. Post-WWII, the rules of engagement by Western military forces broadly follow the dictates of human rights. It’s broadly because sometimes it gets impossible, like the evacuation operations in Raqqa.

But overall, the dogma is one of winning “hearts and minds”—that is, setting up institutions—to counter insurgencies. Research suggests otherwise. Of the recent successful counterinsurgency operations, the ones that succeeded, like against the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, Malaya by Great Britain, Punjab by India, and Grozny by Russia, didn’t aspire to win hearts and minds, but a more medieval, “Carthage must be destroyed” clean-up operations with minimal respect to rights-based engagement.

The sorry truth is that, with half the damned country so witlessly soft-hearted and -headed as to be unable to countenance enforcing border security without openly sobbing over the heartlessness and injustice of it all; with a Progressivist media apparatus eager to pump out daily dollops of propaganda reinforcing our national self-doubt and self-loathing, to portray American military personnel as bloodthirsty ogres and our enemies as poor, put-upon victims of American oppression and greed; and feckless, self-serving political “leadership” unwilling to put aside their own petty interests and career-advancement in order to defend the nation they falsely swear an oath to protect, the idea of our going to war for any reason at all ought to be horrifying to any sane person.

Share

Times a million billion gajillion

This. This right here.

It’s Time These Bastards Got A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
In case you weren’t aware of it, an AntiFa mob stormed Fox News personality Tucker Carlson’s home yesterday evening and tried to break in, ruining his oak front door in the process. They screamed and chanted outside, terrorizing his wife and children, for some time. Here’s left-wing shill, ignorant, bigoted, generally despicable waste of flesh Matt Yglesias’s reaction:

I think the idea behind terrorizing his family, like it or not as a strategy, is to make them feel some of the fear that the victims of MAGA-inspired violence feel thanks to the non-stop racial incitement coming from Tucker, Trump, etc. https://t.co/hmBTBtcTBM
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) November 8, 2018

I agree that this is probably not tactically sound but if your instinct is to empathize with the fear of the Carlson family rather than with the fear of his victims then you should take a moment to reflect on why that is.
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) November 8, 2018
(link to this transcription here—M)

I want this bastard to suffer. Does he have a family, or is he just another left-wing cocksucker who would never undertake the responsibility of a wife and children?

They must taste their own medicine, or the harassment will never stop.

Precisely so. These villainous scum need to be hurt, and badly. But until such time as enough of us reach the tipping point and start truly taking care of business in the only way remaining to us that will actually work—ie, harming them physically, punching back twice as hard, and, in the most egregious case, deleting these vile cocksuckers entirely—this will suffice:

Yglesias, who co-founded Vox and is a senior correspondent there, was widely criticized for his tweets, including by me. (Disclosure: Yglesias was my colleague at Slate from 2011 to 2014.) By Thursday night he had deleted them.

Before he did, however, at least one Twitter user responded by posting Yglesias’ own home address in a reply thread. The implied threat was clear: Yglesias had failed to denounce the harassment by left-wingers of a conservative media personality at his home, so now he and his family deserved the same treatment.

My favorite part? This whine:

At least two users, one of them Yglesias himself, said they reported the tweet to Twitter. Twitter responded to both by saying that the tweet didn’t violate its rules, and took no action. In an email that was forwarded to Slate, Twitter wrote: “Thank you for your recent report. We have reviewed your report carefully and found that there was no violation of the Twitter Rules regarding the posting of private information.”

And so Yglesias’ private information remained on Twitter, endorsed by Twitter, throughout Thursday afternoon, overnight, and well into Friday morning. One of the users who had reported the doxing tweeted about it and tagged CEO Jack Dorsey. Still nothing happened.

At 11:20 a.m. Friday, I emailed Twitter’s public relations department to ask for comment on the decision to allow Yglesias’ doxing. By noon, a Twitter official responded that the company was looking into it. When I checked minutes later, the tweet was no longer online.

Aww, did poor widdle Wefty get a solid dose of him’s own bullshit crammed right down his fucking throat?

Well, GOOD. Fuck you. War. To the fucking knife, until not ONE of you commie carbuncles is left standing. Not. One.

Francis is perfectly correct above: none of this shit—Antifa harrassment, #BlackLiesMurder riots, bike-lock beatings, Democrat Socialist election thievery, Enemedia lying and manipulation, serious liberal-mob threats, Deep-State coup attempts at overthrowing a duly-elected President, NONE of it—stops until our enemies suffer real consequences for their effrontery. And I do mean suffer, very damned literally. Until then, all our complaints are nothing more than wind.

Update! Steyn, a good friend of Tucker’s, weighs in.

On Wednesday night Tucker Carlson was subject to an outrageous thug assault on his home by pampered decadent “anti-fascists” and “anti-racists” who have no idea what those words mean – and that, when you’re battering on a front door and forcing the woman inside to hide in the pantry in terror, you’re the fascist.

They need to get themselves a good, hard taste of the real deal to wise their stupid, whimpering, melodramatic asses up. If we really WERE fascists, they’d all be dead already. And if they don’t figure out the advisability of leaving us the hell alone, they’ll soon end up that way anyway.

This is an appalling reflection on where our politics is headed. In recent years I’ve seen enough friends in Europe forced out of public life and into hiding by Islamic fanatics in the cause of their lunatic caliphate. To see the same template adopted by 28-year-old Navel-Gazing Studies resistance poseurs is pathetic but disturbing nevertheless. Did they mean to assault him and his family? Or were they just mouthing off? Well, they broke an oak door. But, in any case, that’s not a calculation that should be forced on even as decayed a public discourse as ours.

“An appalling reflection” it sure is…but here we are. We didn’t do it; certainly, none of us are any happier about this sorry state of affairs than Steyn is, and devoutly wish things were different. But if we have to fight them, then we have to be sure we win, and unfortunately that means doing things we’d much rather not have to do.

So be it.

These are not the poor and downtrodden: The poseur resistance is largely what Americans call “upper middle-class”, for whom identification, arrest, trial and conviction would have serious consequences. We will see whether the District of Columbia has the will to do that – or, as in other US cities, whether they’re content to cede the streets to the paramilitary wing of Media Matters.

Steyn pulled that last punch a mite; seeing as how the time for that sort of courtesy is well behind us, I feel I must correct him: they are NOT “the paramilitary wing of Media Matters.” They’re the paramilitary wing of the Democrat Socialist Party, just like the Klan used to be. Media Matters is a branch of the propaganda wing of the Democrat Socialist Party, see. The Democrat Socialist Party is the bumbershoot all those wholly-owned subsidiaries currently cower under, the parent conglomerate governing MarxoSedition Inc and all its affiliated offshoots, partners, and unindicted co-conspirators.

In all things, precision, Mark, ol’ boy.

Share

Easiest whodunit in history

Imagine my surprise.

It Looks Like Maxine Waters’s Staff Doxxed Several Gop Senators During The Kavanaugh Hearing

Of course they did. Not Maxine herself, obviously; she’s far too fucking stupid to even begin to know how to do such a thing. In fact, if you told me Waters even knows what a computer is, much less how to use one, I’d insist on some pretty solid verification before I’d believe it. The curious thing to me, though, is this:



Notice anything there? Somebody blocked out the address and phone numbers. Now I may be wrong, but it seems to me that extending a consideration and security to this mangy, mule-faced shitlib that she actively sought to strip from others with malicious intent is…I dunno, self-defeating, shall we say?

Yeah, I know, I know, mustn’t sink to her level and all that happy horseshit. Well, sorry folks, but screw her, and I do mean hard. Live by the Doxx, die by it, I say; let her suffer the exact same indignity, inconvenience, terror, and risk of physical harm she tried to inflict on others who hadn’t done one damned thing to deserve it, and nothing whatsoever to her personally. I’d wager that after a week or two of death threats, flattened tires, harrassing phone calls around the clock, and flaming bags of dog shit left on her porch in the wee hours, she’d think very damned carefully before committing such an extremely vile and dastardly act again. It’s the only way she’ll learn.

As long as evil cretins like her—and her boss—view abiding by reasonable rules and standards not as a token of civilized behavior but as a weakness to be exploited, they need to have their noses rubbed in their own shit same as you would when housebreaking any other unruly cur. If they prove stubborn or if proper training is beyond them, they should be put outdoors in a secure pen lest they render the house unliveable with their disgusting filth.

Reap what you sow, bitch. You deserve no less. You and your obnoxious ilk are all too fond of yapping sanctimoniously, endlessly, about “justice,” but real justice is the last thing in the world you’d ever want visited on yourselves.

Share

The Muslim exemption

Are you living in a Muslim-enslaved country? If your answer is “no,” just how sure are you about that?

It’s the scene every Friday at the cafeteria of Valley Park Middle School in Toronto. That’s not a private academy, it’s a public school funded by taxpayers. And yet, oddly enough, what’s going on is a prayer service – oh, relax, it’s not Anglican or anything improper like that; it’s Muslim Friday prayers, and the Toronto District School Board says don’t worry, it’s just for convenience: They put the cafeteria at the local imams’ disposal because otherwise the kids would have to troop off to the local mosque and then they’d be late for Lesbian History class or whatever subject is scheduled for Friday afternoon.

The picture is taken from the back of the cafeteria. In the distance are the boys. They’re male, so they get to sit up front at prayers. Behind them are the girls. They’re female, so they have to sit behind the boys because they’re second-class citizens – not in the whole of Canada, not formally, not yet, but in the cafeteria of a middle school run by the Toronto District School Board they most certainly are.

And the third row? The ones with their backs to us in the foreground of the picture? Well, let the Star’s caption writer explain:

At Valley Park Middle School, Muslim students participate in the Friday prayer service. Menstruating girls, at the very back, do not take part.

Oh. As Kathy Shaidle says:

Yep, that’s part of the caption of the Toronto Star photo.

Yes, the country is Canada and the year is 2011.

Just so. Not some exotic photojournalism essay from an upcountry village in Krappistan. But a typical Friday at a middle school in the largest city in Canada. I forget which brand of tampon used to advertise itself with the pitch “Now with new [whatever] you can go horse-riding, water-ski-ing, ballet dancing, whatever you want to do”, but perhaps they can just add the tag: “But not participate in Friday prayers at an Ontario public school.”

Some Canadians will look at this picture and react as Miss Shaidle did, or Tasha Kheiriddin in The National Post:

Is this the Middle Ages? Have I stumbled into a time warp, where “unclean” women must be prevented from “defiling” other persons? It’s bad enough that the girls at Valley Park have to enter the cafeteria from the back, while the boys enter from the front, but does the entire school have the right to know they are menstruating?

But a lot of Canadians will glance at the picture and think, “Aw, diversity, ain’t it a beautiful thing?” – no different from the Sikh Mountie in Prince William’s escort. And even if they read the caption and get to the bit about a Toronto public school separating menstruating girls from the rest of the student body and feel their multiculti pieties wobbling just a bit, they can no longer quite articulate on what basis they’re supposed to object to it. Indeed, thanks to the likes of Ontario “Human Rights” Commission chief commissar Barbara Hall, the very words in which they might object to it have been all but criminalized.

Islam understands the reality of Commissar Hall’s “social justice”: You give ’em an inch, and they’ll take the rest. Following a 1988 cease-and-desist court judgment against the Lord’s Prayer in public school, the Ontario Education Act forbids “any person to conduct religious exercises or to provide instruction that includes religious indoctrination in a particular religion or religious belief in a school.” That seems clear enough. If somebody at Valley Park stood up in the cafeteria and started in with “Our Father, which art in Heaven”, the full weight of the School Board would come crashing down on them. Fortunately, Valley Park is 80-90 per cent Muslim, so there are no takers for the Lord’s Prayer. And, when it comes to the prayers they do want to say, the local Islamic enforcers go ahead secure in the knowledge that the diversity pansies aren’t going to do a thing about it.

Which is why eventually the sane people are going to rise up against those pansies and overthrow their pussy-ass PC tyranny. Trouble is, by the time they do, it’s going to be too late…if it ain’t already, that is.

Share

News you can—and damned well should—use

Matis helpfully provides it:

The Red Hen Restaurant in Lexington, VA phone number is 540-464-4401

And the phone number for the MXDC Cocina Mexicana is 202.393.1900

Sure would be a shame if both restaurants were to receive calls around their dinner hours, even if those calls were wrong numbers. Now it’s not right to be abusive, nor to repeatedly call their number. But one call each from one million people might possibly send them a message.

It just might at that. And my oh my, but look at how the Doxxin’, SWATtin’, Boycottin’, Goosesteppin’ Left screams when they get even the smallest dose of their own medicine:

Kathy Griffin@kathygriffin
A small business owner makes a decision that she doesn’t want a liar who contributes to the hate in this country to dine at her establishment and Sarah from her official White House account attacks her. Punching down is what the White House does.

Andrew Kirell (@AndrewKirell
Very big and respectful of SHS to openly name and shame the restaurant—knowing full well what targeting people will now do—because she got her fee-fees hurt.

Ricky Gervais@rickygervais
 I’m sure official White House accounts aren’t for leaving bad restaurant reviews.

Choke on it, you ratbastard little pricks. You got a lot more coming than just this, and I for one hope you get it, to the last bitter dregs. Meanwhile, one of Vox’s commenters links to an old but evergreen Coulter rip:

Liberals are not like most Americans. They are the biggest pussies on Earth, unless they know their victim can’t respond. They’re city-bred weaklings who didn’t play a sport and have never been in a fight in their entire lives. Their mothers made excuses for them when they threw tantrums and spent way too much time praising them during toilet training. 

Only a sad leftist with a crappy job could be so brimming with self-righteousness to harangue a complete stranger in public. 

A liberal’s idea of being a bad-ass is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can’t afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger’s face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall. 

They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people’s manners. I know I’ll be safe because this person has better manners than I do.

When someone does fight back, liberals transform from aggressor to victim in an instant, collapsing on the ground and screaming bloody murder. I’ve seen it happen in a nearly empty auditorium when there was quite obviously no other human within 5 feet of the gutless invertebrate. 

People incapable of conforming to the demands of civilized society are frightening precisely because you never know what else they’re capable of. Sometimes — a lot more often than you’ve heard about — liberals do engage in physical violence against conservatives…and then bravely run away. 

Michael Moore and James Carville can stroll anywhere in America without risking the sort of attack the Beck family experienced. But all recognizable conservatives are eternally trapped in David Dinkins’ New York: Simply by virtue of leaving their homes, they assume a 20 percent chance of being assaulted.

These liberal pukes have never taken a punch in their lives. A sock to the yap would be an eye-opening experience, and I believe it would do wonders. They need to have their behavior corrected.

Goddamned skippy they do. One of the reasons milquetoast “conservatives” have found themselves left behind by a fed-up American majority is their priggish insistence on “not sinking to their level.” This supposed high-mindedness is symptomatic of a another brand of cowardice than the one Coulter blasts above; different, a little, but working hand-in-glove with it anyway. I’ll close out with a truly heartening quote from another of Vox’s commenters:

Gave them a call to ask if their fish was fresh. The number was unavailable. I wonder why.

Get woke, go broke, motherfuckers. Let prissy GOPe losers fret about “proportional” responses, about the appropriateness of “punching twice as hard.” When you’re caught up in a gutter brawl you punch back just as hard and as often as you’re able, and you don’t waste a moment worrying about whether or not that might be “fair” or “gentlemanly.” If you ain’t gonna fight to win, you’re better off not fighting at all.

THAT’S how you do it update! Almost forgot to include another evergreen gem:




Naturally, the “Civility Now!” cucks screamed bloody murder over this at the time. But I loved it then, and I still do. What’s maybe more interesting than anything else, though, is how it all worked out in the end.

Share

Desaparicido

Hey, remember when this sort of thing happened mainly in Third World commie dictatorships? Oh wait

The arrest of British free speech activist Tommy Robinson has sent shockwaves across the Anglosphere. The United Kingdom, once dedicated to the values of freedom, has taken a path toward authoritarian government and away from freedom. The once great nation, which created the Magna Carta and once commanded an empire, is now the land of tyranny. Unless the British people love their freedom enough and fight this injustice in fierce fashion, it will remain a land silenced by intimidation and fear.

Robinson, a former member of the English Defense League whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being unfairly persecuted by the U.K. government.  Robinson’s “crime” was that he yelled questions outside Leeds Crown Court and named the alleged defendants, like any other reporter. So what? The state broadcaster, the BBC, and the mainstream media had already named them. Why was he arrested, and why were they not arrested?

If gangs of white men had spent decades torturing and raping little Muslim girls and a justly outraged Muslim reporter were covering the case, in a similar manner as Robinson, would he be arrested?

We all know that the answer is “no,” and we know why. The U.K. is so invested in its politically correct multiculturalism diversity project that it has applied a different treatment of Muslims under the law, which accepts the diversity of legal systems and places the country on a path toward ruin.

Americans should be highly concerned over this case, because the same type of “hate speech laws” used against British citizens are currently being advocated in the U.S. Senate, by Marco Rubio (R), Kamala Harris (D), Susan Collins (R), and Dianne Feinstein (D) and a long list of others. Hillary Clinton pushed the same laws in 2012 and 2015 and 2017. Three similar unconstitutional laws aimed at our First Amendment rights were advanced in our Congress, after being drafted by Emgage USA and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, two Islamic organizations and defenders of designated terrorist organizations and their supporters, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. The passage of any such anti-freedom of speech bill would place our country on Britain’s same ruinous path.

I only wish I could say I find any of that surprising. With just this one grotesque crime against liberty and decency, the Brits have moved themselves from “pitiable” right into the “despicable” column. There could not be a more revolting statement than the one the British government has just made with this outrage: that they much prefer tolerating and protecting Muslim child-rape gangs to safeguarding freedom of speech. But I can’t say I’m much surprised by that either; as noted, we have no shortage of Moonbat Lefties (and gutless RINO sellouts, sadly enough) right here in the States who feel the same way about it.

The very idea of “hate speech” laws is an abomination which of right ought to be intolerable in even a half-free country. Once-Great Britain is well and truly finished; it will soon begin to live up to its “Old Blighty” nickname in ways its benighted subjects never imagined. I don’t pity them; they deserve their ignoble fate, having earned it many times over. But there’s a small, guttering spark yet flickering in some of them:

In a land that once could proudly state, “The sun never sets on the British Empire,” the torch of freedom has been extinguished. It’s a land divided by diversity that has now descended into the darkness of tyranny.

If the globalists in both American parties and the U.S. State Department have their way, America will be next.

Tommy Robinson represents a large segment of Britain’s people, with over 500,000 signatures on a petition already to “Free Tommy.” The people sent a clear message on Saturday, May 26, 2018, that they have had enough, as thousands of British people stopped traffic, chanted, and pressed the gates of 10 Downing Street and threw bottles at machine gun-toting policemen. Their anger hung thick in the air, because they want Robinson, at the very least, to be released from prison and allowed to get back to his life and enjoy the same protection and human rights and dignity as Anjem Choudary, the terrorist-supporter, was afforded by the authorities. Short of this, the summer in Britain will turn out to be a season of riots and civil strife, awaiting the spark that moves the good and decent Brits – of a long ancestry dating to 1066 and William the Conqueror – to fight furiously to make their land free once more.

Well, possibly, I guess, and I wish those folks well. But I have little expectation of any such thing, and none at all that it might be successful. They can anticipate neither succor nor sympathy from these shores; we face a grim enough struggle ourselves, with victory by no means assured.

Share

Rule Rot, Britannia

Beyond disgusting, beyond despicable.

You can say a lot of things about Tommy Robinson, but he’s one of the embarrassingly small number of Britons who recognizes the horror inflicted on those young and vulnerable girls on the receiving end of “diversity” and seeks to do something about it.

So on Friday he was outside the Crown Court in Leeds. He was not demonstrating, or accosting or chanting, or even speaking. He was just pointing his mobile phone upon the scene from a distance. Within minutes, seven coppers showed up in whatever they use instead of a Black Maria these days, tossed him inside it and drove off. In other words, these were not “investigating officers” called to the scene: They showed up with the intent to take him away. Within hours, he was tried, convicted and gaoled – at HM Prison Hull, a Category B chokey, or one level below maximum security. The judge in the case, one Geoffrey Marson, spent all of four minutes on trying, convicting and sentencing Robinson. It is not clear whether that leisurely tribunal included his order expressly forbidding “any report on these proceedings” (the case is Regina vs Yaxley-Lennon because that’s Robinson’s real name).

Which is why, all the way over in Sydney, Messrs Dean and Cameron were being so vague and cautious. In Britain itself, early online reports at The Mirror, the Scottish Daily RecordThe Birmingham Mail and elsewhere vanished instantly, and silence has been maintained, especially on radio and TV, ever since.

Every last one of those media outlets have disgraced themselves and destroyed whatever credibility they might once have had. Every damned one.

The justification for this is Robinson’s previous conviction in a previous Grooming Gang of the Week case at Canterbury Crown Court. On that occasion, the judge sentenced him to three months’ imprisonment suspended for eighteen months. That was almost exactly a year ago – so, suspension-wise, he came up six months short when the plods collared him on Friday. That doesn’t explain why Judge Marson in Leeds added an additional ten months (ie, he quadrupled his sentence) and disregarded a point that Judge Norton last year took into account – that the British state insists on banging up Robinson in gaols full of Muslim blokes who violently assault him. In Canterbury, Her Honor was sympathetic – up to a point:

I accept what Mr. Kovalevsky [Robinson’s barrister] tells me about the dangers that you might face were you to be sent into immediate custody. I have to say it is on a knife edge so far as I am concerned because a very large part of me thinks so what? you could be put into protective custody.

Given that Judge Marson devoted a full four minutes to his drive-thru trial on Friday, I seriously doubt whether 25 seconds of that was devoted to any consideration of “protective custody”. Indeed, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the British state would quite like it if Robinson were to be offed in HMP Hull.

Of course they would. He makes them uncomfortable by simply telling the inconvenient truth.

The British state sentenced Mr Robinson to eighteen months in jail for misrepresentation on a mortgage application. At HMP Woodhill he was savagely attacked by the Muslim gangs who operate with impunity in many UK prisons.

Soon enough, they’ll be operating with impunity throughout the entire country. And truthfully, I look forward to that day; it’s no more than the filthy, gutless bastards deserve.

Rod Liddle notes another aspect – the contrast between the urgency of the flatfeet when it comes to Tommy Robinson and their utter lethargic indifference when it comes to the young women I spoke to in Rotherham and the thousands of others like them in Leeds, Telford, Oxford, [Your Town Here]… West Yorkshire Police in Leeds are not to be confused with South Yorkshire Police in Rotherham. The latter are institutionally corrupt and depraved. As I told Mark Steyn Club members last year of my meeting with the victims of Rotherham:

To Mad Ash and his fellow ‘Asians’, the likes of Jessica and Katie are ‘white slags’. To Her Majesty’s Constabulary, they’re mere ‘Paki-shaggers’, and thus unworthy of valuable police resources. The girls recall the night Mad Ash’s brother Bannaras was in his car having sex with a twelve-year-old. A ‘jam sandwich’ – a police cruiser – pulled up alongside, and the officer rolled down the window. ‘She’s just sucking my c**k, mate,’ said Bannaras Hussain.

The cops drove away…

It is striking to read Judge Norton’s sentencing remarks from last year (Judge Marson’s do not appear to be available: he rules in darkness). Her Honor huffs and puffs about Mr Robinson referring to “Muslim paedophiles” and “Muslim child rapists”. I can appreciate that that might be vaguely annoying if one were a non-paedophile Muslim – although evidently not so annoying that spokespersons for the wider Muslim community ever rouse themselves to object to all the industrial-scale sex slavery. But it is a fact that in 21st-century England – in Yorkshire, in Shropshire, in Lancashire, in Oxfordshire, in the Home Counties – child-rape gangs are Muslim. It is a phenomenon, one that has never existed previously in the British Isles and one which will continue and metastasize until there is honest debate about it.

Which will come far too late to save them. It’s a hell of a bed they’ve made for themselves in Old Blighty; may they have much joy of the lying in it.

Robinson is a true hero, one of the last of a now-dead line of staunch, proud, gutsy Brits. His countrymen, far too many of them at any rate, are disgusting cowards, not worth the unzipping to piss over. Too bad for them; they’re sure to find themselves on fire soon enough.

Share

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

CF Comments Policy Statement

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

Notable Quotes

"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

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine." - Joseph Goebbels

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it." - NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in." -Bill Whittle

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