Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Johnny Rotten gets it

Punk as fuck.

“What I dislike is the left-wing media in America are trying to smear the bloke as a racist, and that’s completely not true,” the 61-year-old said. “There’s many, many problems with him as a human being, but he’s not that, and there just might be a chance something good will come out of that situation, because he terrifies politicians.”

Mr. Lydon said Mr. Trump is like a “political Sex Pistol” whose purpose is to rattle the status quo. After co-host Piers Morgan described Mr. Trump as “the archetypal anti-establishment character,” Mr. Lydon added: “Dare I say, a possible friend.”

The former lead singer also declared his support for Brexit, saying he stands with Britain’s “working class” who voted to exit the European Union in June.

“Where do I stand on Brexit? Well, here it goes: The working class have spoke, and I’m one of them, and I’m with them,” Mr. Lydon said, raising his fist. “And there it is.”

And there it is indeed. Good on ya, John.

Share

“If only we had gun control. Like those civilized Europeans”

Uncontrolled immigration by unassimilable, unvetted, hostile savages has consequences.

London overtook New York in murders for the first time in modern history in February as the capital endured a dramatic surge in knife crime.

Fifteen people were murdered in the capital, against 14 in New York. Both cities have almost exactly the same population.

London murders for March are also likely to exceed or equal New York’s. By late last night there had been 22 killings in the capital, according to the Metropolitan police, against 21 in the US city.

Eight Londoners were murdered between March 14 and March 20 alone and the total number of London murders, even excluding victims of terrorism, has risen by 38% since 2014.

Daniel is duly SHOCKED™!

It’s surprising, but there are other ways to murder people. Banning guns doesn’t stop murders. At best it means that the murderers have to switch from guns to knives.

Pas de sweat; no doubt the clueless twits will soon be banning knives too. THAT ought to put things right. Meanwhile, Steyn wonders what might have changed in Old Blighty since 2014 that could have goosed those stats so dramatically:

Eight Londoners were murdered between March 14 and March 20 alone and the total number of London murders, even excluding victims of terrorism, has risen by 38% since 2014.

Interesting. But why exactly are terrorism victims – Westminster Bridge, London Bridge – excluded? As we all know from Mrs May, Mr Cameron and the rest, terrorism is nothing to do with anything: it’s nothing to do with Islam, it’s nothing to do with immigration, it’s nothing to do with any socio-cultural factors… So presumably it’s simply a criminal matter, in which case violent death at the hands of another person acting with intent ought surely to count as part of the murder statistics. Golly, you’d almost get the impression the authorities had come up with a system expressly designed to keep the numbers low…

Meanwhile, The Daily Mail lets us know the names of the dead:

Sadiq Mohamed, 20, Kentish Town
Abdikarim Hassan, 17, Kentish Town
Josef Boci, 30, Greenwich
Seyed Khan, 49, Ilford
Rotimi Oshibanjo, 26, Southall
Promise Nkenda, 17, Canning Town
Sabri Chibani, 19, Streatham Common
Lewis Blackman, 19, Kensington
Hasan Ozcan, 19, Barking
Hannah Leonard, 55, Swiss Cottage
Kwabena Nelson, 22, Tottenham
Mark Smith, 48, Chingford
Bulent Kabala, 41, Enfield
Saeeda Hussain, 54, Ilford
Juan Olmos Saca, 39, Peckham

What a positively Dickensian roll-call. Of the three names a Londoner might have had at the time of, say, Darkest Hour, Lewis Blackman was a black man stabbed to death by six teenagers; Hannah Leonard was a middle-aged Irish lady also stabbed to death, by a couple from Kilburn; and Mark Smith apparently met his end at the hands of a woman “of no fixed abode”. At least eighty-five per cent of that grim toll would have been wholly unknown to pre-multicultural London, because neither perpetrators nor victims would have been residents of the United Kingdom.

If you were to say that on Twitter, Scotland Yard would stop investigating today’s stabbing and investigate you instead. To modify a famous Philip K Dick line, reality doesn’t cease just because Mrs May, the Metropolitan Police and everyone else who matters stop believing in it. Yet they are making a sustained attempt to suspend it.

They have to. They have no choice; reality is Left/liberalism’s true nemesis. It strips the pretty veneer of adolescent Utopianism right off the thing, revealing it to be shot through with rot and incapable of supporting any serious weight.

Share

Happy birthday

To the RAF:

For this Easter Day, we have an audio special for you telling the story of the only Easter standard in the American songbook. However, April 1st 2018 is not only Easter, and not only All Fools’ Day, but also the one hundredth birthday of the Royal Air Force. So I thought this day we’d incline our eyes and ears skyward:

In April 1911 the British Army’s Royal Engineers formed the first air battalion, consisting of aircraft, airships, balloons, and men with kites. At the end of the year the Royal Naval Flying School was born. The following year – 1912 – both were merged into the army’s Royal Flying Corps. By 1914 the navy had reasserted itself and inaugurated the Royal Naval Air Service. And finally on this day exactly a century ago the RFC and the RNAS were merged to form an entirely separate third branch of the British military – the Royal Air Force, the first such independent air force in the world.

Good illustration accompanying the article of what I believe is an SE5, if I remember right. Nice enough, I guess, but when it comes to WW1-era flying contraptions my heart will always belong to the good ol’ SPAD XIII, with special fond mention going to the Fokker DR1. Read on to see where Steyn takes things.

Share

Whatever happened to that “reset button,” anyway?

The Democrat-Socialist soft coup might exact a heavier cost than just the annoying Mueller circus itself. Its unanticipated consequences could wreak grave harm indeed, and not just domestically.

Russia is acting again as a great power. And she sees us as a nation that slapped away her hand, extended in friendship in the 1990s, and then humiliated her by planting NATO on her front porch.

Yet, what is also clear is that Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States.

Clearly, Putin wanted that, as did Trump.

Yet, with the Beltway hysteria over hacking of the DNC and John Pedestal emails, and the Russophobia raging in this capital, we appear to be paralyzed when it comes to engaging with Russia.

The U.S. political system, said Putin this week, “has been eating itself up.” Is his depiction that wide of the mark?

What is the matter with us?

Oh, I wouldn’t say us necessarily. It’s the Democrat Socialists and their too-expedient, self-serving RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA freakout who have damaged any chance we might have had at greater rapprochement with Russia.

Particularly encouraging early on, to me anyway, was Trump’s overture towards Russia regarding possible mutual effort against ISIS. Such a cooperative effort might well have turned out to be world-altering in all kinds of positive ways; at the very least, it would have yielded real, tangible benefit in the struggle against Muslim terrorism. It provided razor-edged contrast to Hillary’s amateurish, meaningless “reset” and Barky’s clueless blundering about trying bootlessly to gain undeserved respect from an experienced, tough-minded leader who knew damned well what kind of contemptible lightweight he was dealing with.

But we haven’t heard the slightest peep out of a living soul about Trump’s proposal now, and we won’t for the foreseeable future. That praiseworthy idea was killed aborning by petty, short-sighted power-grubbing on the part of a passel of sleazy political operators bereft of any regard whatsoever for the best interests of the nation…or the wider world.

Russia will never be America’s bosom chum or some kind of sister-nation; global politics don’t work that way, and never will. Russia has its own national interests to pursue just as we have ours, and those interests must necessarily conflict on occasion. But that doesn’t mean they can’t become merely a competitor rather than an adversary—and on some matters an ally, if perhaps not as trusted a one as, say, Britain or Israel.

Maybe if those clumsy, foolish Dem-Soc juveniles and their maneuvering receive the crushing repudiation they so richly deserve this fall, Trump can at last get on with the grown-up task of doing serious business over serious matters with serious men—a task he’s proven, time and again throughout his adult life, to be quite adept at.

Be sure to read the whole thing; Buchanan lays out his usual strong argument, backed by a heaping helping of historical reminder to boot.

Share

What works, what doesn’t

As I warned yesterday: shriek all you like, you libtards ain’t getting our guns. Not now, not ever. Even worse for you, your fantasy of disarming the American citizenry won’t accomplish your stated aim of “making us all safer” in the first damned place—quite the opposite, in fact. Here’s just one of the myriad lessons you’re too pigheaded to heed.

Gun rights advocates contend that the way to stop mass shootings is by ensuring that there are always well-armed citizens present who can neutralize the shooter. As NRA chairman Wayne Lapierre always says, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. A bedrock of the NRA’s philosophy is that criminals will always acquire guns illegally, and draconian gun laws only render law-abiding citizens defenseless.

Enter Israel: When the knife intifada erupted in September 2015, the Israeli government’s response was to ease the process for the civilian populace to obtain weapons. After a particularly bloody Jerusalem shooting attack that killed four, then-Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan drastically changed the gun laws in order to significantly raise the number of armed civilians on the streets. Instantly, graduates of Special Forces units and IDF officers with the rank of Lieutenant and above were permitted to purchase guns at their will, security guards were allowed to bring their guns home after work, and the minimum age for a license was reduced from 21 to 18.

Erdan explained that “civilians well trained in the use of weapons provide reinforcement in the struggle against terrorism”, while Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat called for every resident to carry a gun, and was even photographed traveling the city carrying a Glock 23.

In addition, the overwhelming majority of terror attacks in Israel are stopped by armed civilians, not law enforcement. For example, the terrorists in the 2016 Sarona market attack were stopped by armed passersby. A pistol-carrying tour guide put an end to the 2017 ramming attack in Arnona that left four soldiers dead.

Bold mine, natch—which underlines another home-truth disruption of liberal-fascist delusion, one reducible to a bumper-sticker slogan: cops ain’t bodyguards. Or try this: call for a cop, call for an ambulance, call for a pizza. See who gets there quickest. Want another? When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Beyond LaPierre’s succinct and undeniable line and the others I quoted above, we got a million of ’em, Lefties—every last one of them nothing but the plain and simple truth, boiled down to short phrases even you ought to be able to comprehend.

And yet. Meanwhile, back in the real world:

Gun control has been proven to be a dismal failure in Israel. The Israeli Arab communities are rife with illegal weapons, with some police estimates putting the number of unlicensed weapons in the Arab sector as high as 500,000. Think about that for a second: The most heavily guarded borders in the world and a highly professional Shin Bet are still not enough to prevent criminals from obtaining illegal firearms.

When terrorists attacked a school in Maalot in 1974, Israel did not declare every school a gun-free zone. It passed a law mandating armed security in schools, provided weapons training to teachers and today runs frequent active shooter drills. There have been only two school shootings since then, and both have ended with teachers killing the terrorists.

Which is EXACTLY what any sensible person would expect.

Best give it up, libtards, and with a quickness. You have neither logic, nor facts, nor history, nor integrity on your side. You’re liars, you’re treacherous, you’re snakes; after years and years of hearing you falsely deny any desire to eliminate the 2A, obscuring your real intentions with fork-tongued blather about “common sense gun control,” we know it now, and will never, ever trust you with anything at all. Certainly not with something as important as our unalienable right to keep and bear arms.

You aren’t getting our guns. Not now, not ever. Better back the fuck off before you get hurt.

(Via CDB)

Update! Not getting them. Period.

The Florida House blocked an attempt to take up a bill that would ban assault rifles. The vote came on the same day survivors of the Stoneman Douglas High shooting traveled to Tallahassee to plead with legislators for gun control reform.

As the post says, it wasn’t even close: 71-36, with 13 abstentions. Serious kudos to the Florida legislators for refusing to be stampeded.

(Via Aesop)

Share

Diversity Bollards

I’m sure we’re all BAFFLED as to motive.

So there will be more empty seats round the Christmas table this year, after an “Australian citizen” mowed down pedestrians at the junction of Flinders Street and Elizabeth Street in Melbourne. The casualties include “a pre-schooler with serious head injuries”. The “Australian citizen” (I presume this designation is being used to emphasize that he’s entirely eligible to serve in Mr Turnbull’s cabinet) did it deliberately, but relax, lighten up, there’s no need to worry because, according to Victoria’s police commissioner, all this terrifying terror is “not terror-related”.

You’ll recall there was a previous “vehicle attack” in downtown Melbourne earlier this year, after which the authorities ordered up the bollardization of every pedestrianized precinct in the vicinity. As Andrew Bolt writes:

All the bollards put up after six people were killed in Bourke St Mall in January have not stopped this.

After the Halloween jihadist killed eight people on a bike path in Lower Manhattan, New York’s bollardizers commanded similarly extravagant installation of Diversity Bollards up and down the city.

Alternatively, instead of attempting to ring-fence every potential target – ie, everything and everyone – with Diversity Bollards, we could try installing bollards where they matter – around the civilized world.

Better yet, around the Muslim world instead. Failing that, Trump’s Big Beautiful Wall ought to suffice.

But the second part of Steyn’s post is where things really go careening around the bend into full-on bughouse insanity.

Speaking of non-terror-related Muslims, there’s a hot new hashtag trending in Britain called #AVeryMerryMuslimChristmas. This derives from the title of a new report by Westminster’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. “A Very Merry Muslim Christmas” purports to demonstrate that almost all Christian charity in fact comes from Muslims:

What we hear even less about is the ‘Muslim Merry Christmas’. The soup kitchens, the food banks, the Christmas dinners, the New Year clean up – work Muslim charities will be busy doing during the Christmas period.

Yeah, you Islamophobes thought that the “Muslim Merry Christmas” consisted of shooting up churches in Egypt and Pakistan, and mowing down shoppers in Berlin markets and Melbourne intersections, and self-detonating at Port Authority Bus Terminal. But you’ve got it all wrong: Allah is the reason for the season. Without him, this whole Christmas thing would be a total bust.

And that right there is why the West can’t have nice things—or a peaceable existence free of monthly Muzz-rat terror attacks in our own damned countries. Read on, though, because as incredible as it seems, it gets worse. The picture Steyn posts of St Paul’s cathedral in Melbourne is nothing short of sickening.

Share

Pressure

More on Jerusalem, the rightful capital of the Jewish state of Israel.

Trump’s move applied pressure to the PLO’s Palestinian Authority in exactly the way that the left had wanted pressure to be applied to Israel. He did to the PLO, what Obama had been doing to Israel by covertly backing the PA’s statehood moves.

The double standard is that pressuring Israel in this way is deemed a very good thing because the Jews are somehow the obstacles to peace. While pressuring the PLO is a terrible thing because that will destroy the cause of peace.

Why is pressuring Israel a good thing and pressuring Islamic terrorists a bad thing?

That’s the bias that needs addressing.

Because the Left looooves them some Moslem savages and loathes the only functioning, civilized democracy in the Middle East, that’s why.

Update! Of course, the Deep State is still gonna Deep State:

The United States still will not formally recognize Jerusalem as being located in Israel on official documents, maps, and passports, despite President Donald Trump’s announcement earlier this week that America is formally recognizing the holy city as Israel’s capital, according to State Department officials who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon about the matter.

Despite Trump’s declaration, which was formally codified on Wednesday into U.S. policy, the State Department is taking a more nuanced position on the matter, drawing some ire in Congress among pro-Israel lawmakers who accuse the State Department of undermining Trump’s efforts.

State Department officials this week had difficulty stating as fact that Jerusalem is located within Israel, instead trying to parse the issue as still subject to diplomatic negotiations.

It’s a two-fer for them: they get to make an empty, futile gesture towards thwarting Trump, and they also get to thumb their noses at Israel into the bargain. And being Progtards and all, they don’t care in the least how their self-defeating foolishness makes them look:

State Department officials who spoke to the Free Beacon about the situation said that while it supports Trump’s declaration that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, it is not yet at the point where it will list Jerusalem as part of Israel on passports, maps, and official documents. This means that official documents, such as passports, will not, at this point, list “Jerusalem, Israel” as a place that exists.

As always, their argument really isn’t with Trump or any other sane, sensible person. Their argument is with reality.

Updated update! Oh, THIS is gonna leave a mark.

As the chicken-hearted, yellow-bellied, lily-livered, gutless and spineless leaders of Western Civilization from Western Europe to New Zealand now shake and tremble in the face of a simple truth that they all know — that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel — we may expect to hear the meme interminably day-and-night, until the next television or movie icon’s pants fall, that “This decision now threatens the Middle East ‘Peace Process.’” For the last fifty years, someone in a European capital and in the U.S. State Department has uttered that sentence at least once weekly. If Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston divorce, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Megyn Kelly ever gets ratings on NBC, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Hillary Clinton admits that she knowingly spoliated those emails and that they had nothing to do with yoga, yogurt, or Chelsea’s wedding, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Netflix raises its prices again, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie divorce, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Eli Manning does not start for the New York Giants, or if Colin Kaepernick does start anywhere, it will endanger the Middle East peace process. If Bill Clinton admits that he raped Juanita Broaddrick, it will endanger the Middle East peace process.

So, while other experts debate the meme, let us share a secret: There is no Middle East “peace process” and there has not been a “Middle East peace process” for decades. It is a sham

Couldn’t have said it better myself. More inconvenient truth:

Arafat and his cronies, chief among them Mahmoud Abbas, the current Palestinian Authority dictator who now is entering the thirteenth year of his four-year elected term in office, never wanted a final agreement that would recognize the permanent existence of a non-Muslim, Jewish-majority country in the Middle East. There never was a “Middle East Peace Process.” Rather, it was a “Piece Process”: Fool one American President to get us a piece of the Sinai, the next to get us a piece of the Golan Heights, the next to get a piece of Gaza. There never was a “Peace Process” — and, if one simply pauses to contemplate the reality of the terrain and the demography, the painful conclusion is that a “Two-State Solution” is best when not contemplated. Consider:

Before June 1967, an Arab Muslim polity (Egypt) held Gaza, an Arab Muslim polity (Syria) held the Golan Heights, and an Arab Muslim polity (Jordan) held Judea and Samaria (misnomered the “West Bank”). Yet in 1964, three years before June 1967, the Arab world created the “Palestine Liberation Organization” (PLO). Which “Palestine” did that “organization” set about to “liberate” in 1964? Not Gaza, Golan, and Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”). Jordanian Olympic athletes were not attacked for “occupying the West Bank.” Nor were Egyptian school children for “occupying Gaza.” Nor Syrian civilians for “occupying the Golan.” Rather, all PLO terror attacks, from the PLO’s 1964 founding through June 1967, aimed within pre-June 1967 IsraelThat is what the PLO was organized to liberate: the “Palestine” that is Israel. Not Gaza, Golan, nor Judea and Samaria.

Bingo. If the “Palestinians” were anything other than implacably opposed to the idea of peaceful coexistence with Israel, they could’ve had it long, long ago. Instead, they cling to the same old dream they always have cherished: the destruction of Israel, and the genocide of the Jews. It’s the same dream they were promised by their Arab “brethren,” none of whom are in the least amenable to offering up a chunk of their own ample land for a “Palestinian” state, when the modern state of Israel was established. Fischer is correct: there is no “peace process.” It’s a sham, a subterfuge, and a very, very bad joke, and it has never been—nor will it ever be—anything more.

Share

“Is there any reason to believe that acquiescing to Arab demands will lead to peace?”

No. No, there is not.

In April of this year, when Russia declared its recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the announcement was met with deafening silence by the Arab world. Why, then, the roars of protestations at the same simple acknowledgment by the United States?

Threats by Turkey and other countries in the Arab League to sever diplomatic relations with the U.S. over the issue prove once again that in our time the world has made the Middle East safe for hypocrisy.

If we are looking toward our own best interests, there are good diplomatic and constitutional reasons to countenance Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. First and foremost is historical reality and common sense. As law professor Eugene Kontorovich, an expert on international law and policy, pointed out last month in testimony before Congress, “One of the main reasons for the failure to reach a peace deal is the unspoken assumption that protracted and repeated Palestinian rejectionism costs them nothing diplomatically, while creating constraints for Israel.

Every country in the world has had the right to designate the capital of its choice, with Israel the lone exception. Congress recognized this anomaly over two decades ago, when it passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995. (The vote was 93-5 in the Senate and 374-37 in the House.) The Act noted that. “Jerusalem is the seat of Israel’s President, Parliament, and Supreme Court, and most of its ministries and cultural institutions” – and that since the reunification of the city in 1967, religious freedom has been guaranteed to every faith.

Which would assuredly NOT be the case were the Paleosimians ever to take over.

Screw them. With their moronic intransigence; their refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist on land their forebears possessed for long millennia before anybody even thought of a name to call the primitive Jordanians and other miscellaneous Arabs squatting there; their duplicitous charade of “peace talks” which always end in their flat rejection of meaningful offers of compromise, each and every time; their neverending campaign of mindless, brutal terrorism against Israelis; their clinging to the ugly dream of genocide for the Jews—with all these things, they prove themselves not just unworthy of any “two-state solution,” but of any sympathy or concern for them on the part of any civilized person at all.

Israel is the ancient ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. Jerusalem is and of right ought to be its capital. Period fucking dot. Turkey, the Arab League, the “Palestinians,” American libtards, and any and every Jew-hating Moslem goat-humper worldwide who might be shrieking and bitching over this long-overdue move can all go bite a fart. And if Trump tells ’em so, in those exact words—well, that’ll be jake with me.

Share

I believe

If this is Alt Right, count me in.

In any case, I wanted to take the opportunity to calm frazzled nerves, and to emphasize in how few matters Vox Day and I disagree.

First, we both voted for Chuck Tingle for a Hugo Award. Love is real!

Second, we both support a permanent ban on further immigration into the United States, but would settle reluctantly for a fifty year ban. We both would prefer immigrants, if they must come, to be from civilized nations, and persons who clearly offer more to the nation than the likely burden their coming imposes.

Third, we both believe Mohammedanism is incompatible with Western Civilization. Koranic Law allows neither for the Rights of Man nor any republican form of government.

Fourth, neither of us believes coerced integration of the races is desirable nor possible. There is nothing wrong with a man seeking out his own kind.

Fifth, we both regard the ‘open borders’ and ‘New World Order’ and ‘One World Government’ type talk as treason against the United States and against the West.

Sixth, we both think feminism is cancer. Woman are happier and society is healthier when brides are young, and families are large.

Seventh, we both reject the strategy embraced by GOP politicos and pundits that noble defeat is better than crass victory. The Culture War is real, it is a war, and our side has suffered decades of humiliating defeats. A gentleman does not use the Marquis of Queensbury rules with a guttersnipe, a cur, a blackguard, or when facing a mob.

Can’t find a whole lot to disagree with here myself. Here’s the real takeaway, though:

Honest men do not take disagreement on scientific, political, or practical matters as a bar to friendship, mutual respect, or mutual alliance.

Only Leftists, whose cruel, crooked and false religion is nothing but the worship of political power, regard disagreement on politics as apostasy, and regard those who disagree to be infidels, worthy only to be scorned, silenced, and slain.

Exactly. We don’t all have to agree on every least little thing. But we MUST remember—always—who the real enemy of freedom and individual self-determination ultimately is. As Vox says:

John is a better man than I am. I admire and respect him, and not only for his incredible literary talent. I do not expect anyone to agree with me about all things, indeed, I do not know anyone who does, including myself from only a few years ago. Remember: the man who is a failure always manages to find disagreement with others, but the man who is successful will always find a way to find common ground with his friends and allies.

And that’s the name of that tune.

Share

Used to it

Ain’t got a whole lot to say in defense of someone who responds to Manchester and the subsequent attacks by blaming Trump for it all.

Theresa May has said sorry to the Tory MPs and ministers who lost their seats as a result of her decision to call a snap general election which cost the Conservatives their majority.

A disastrous set of election results have left Mrs May clinging onto power with the Prime Minister forced to pursue a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to stay in Downing Street.

She had been hoping to boost her mandate for Brexit negotiations but the Tories actually lost seats and fell below the 326 needed to form a majority government.

What’s truly baffling is that—as I’ve been reading and hearing everywhere and can’t really find anything to contradict—the ceaseless Muslim terrorist onslaught had no impact on the election at all.

I mean…seriously? May’s pathetic appeasement of the savages who in just the last couple of weeks unleashed bloody mayhem in Manchester, at London Bridge, wasn’t a factor in any way here? Her mewling suck-uppery, her disgraceful contortions in blaming Trump for her own fecklessness, her abandonment of entire sectors of her once-proud and mighty nation to gang-rape and grooming and creeping sharia—these profound derelictions were suddenly irrelevant in a national referendum?

Of course, it’s not as if the useless Leftists in the other parties will do any better. England’s electoral choice would seem now to be between “weak” and “cringing,” between “self-deceiving” and “openly begging for mercy.” Given that, it’s kind of hard to get worked up about one party or the other losing or winning a single election; in the end, the foregone conclusion of dhimmitude is all that really matters here.

All in all: wow. Just…wow. “There’ll Always Be An England“? Not one worth bothering about, or that anybody would recognize as such. To re-quote Steyn:

On November 25th 1941, off the coast of Alexandria, HMS Barham was torpedoed by a German U-boat during a visit to the battleship by Vice-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell. The ship lurched to its port side, the commanding officer was killed, and the vice-admiral found himself treading oil-perfumed water surrounded by the ship’s men and far from rafts. To keep their morale up, he led them in a rendition of “There’ll Always Be An England”. The 31,000-ton Barham sank in less than four minutes, the largest British warship destroyed by a U-boat in the course of the war. But 449 of its crew of 1,311 survived.

“There’ll Always Be An England” was written for that England.

It’s different now. It’s still a popular headline, but today there’s a question mark at the end, either explicit or implied.

I’d say that by now, it’s more than explicit; the question mark is a given, hugely ironic, and the very asking of the question itself little more than a bitter joke.

It’s already too late for England; the jihadists are seeded throughout the nation, and even if the Brits began earnestly rounding up, locking up, and deporting first thing in the morning, they’ll suffer attack after attack for years to come. The pitiful truth is that they’ve been overrun; England is a conquered nation, and it’s just going to have to, as they say, get used to this.

England resigned itself to its ignominious fate long ago; disarmed, enfeebled, helpless, and besieged, they are now reaping the whirlwind. May God forbid that America ever walks the same shameful, contemptible road.

Now tell me again, whydon’tcha, how Trump’s disdain for NATO is just the most horrible, unthinkable thing EVAR.

Share

Taking Gillespie to school

Speaking of embarrassment.

Now, does Nick Gillespie really think altering tax policy will magically transform low-IQ, inbred Muslims from the Maghreb into patriotic French republicans who work at Parisian software shops? It’s tempting to say it is just another pose, but the evidence is piling up in favor of the argument that Nick Gillespie is a stupid person. Anyone who truly believes altering tax policy will reverse a thousand generations of evolution is an idiot.

That’s the fundamental problem with modern libertarians. They believe this or they simply are incapable of mastering ground floor level biology. The reason the country of Niger is a basket case is that’s the way the people of Niger want it. It is full of Hausa. The reason Paris was Paris was that, up until recently, it was full of Parisians! Now that Paris is filling up with North Africans and Arabs, it is looking like Algeria with better plumbing.

What’s happened to libertarians is a form of what Vox Day calls convergence. It used to be that libertarians accepted the chain of causality. They worked backward in order to arrive, obliquely, at the first cause. If you wanted to have a nation of maximum freedom, you had to have a nation with rational laws and that meant a rational, Anglo-Saxon culture. The result was a libertarianism in one country model.

Then a new breed of libertarian showed up mouthing all the economic arguments of libertarians, often with the zeal of a fanatic, but embracing liberal cultural arguments, re-framing them in terms of personal liberty. The result is libertarians have almost fully converged now with the liberals. They have been assimilated into the Borg. Libertarianism, like most libertarians, is all about someone else paying for their ethnic dining habits.

Jeez, that stung me, and I’m only an onlooker.

Not that Gillespie is completely wrong, mind. The origins of the decay of France—and the rest of Europe—can easily be traced to their witless embrace of the eternally destructive force that is socialism, sure enough. But to assert that the recent exponential acceleration of that decay has little or nothing to do with the importation of hordes of primordial fanatics openly hostile to the culture that brought them in—vociferously dedicated to its destruction; antipathetic to assimilation; implacable and intractable, eager to do violence against it by any means they can contrive—bespeaks a willful blindness I can’t even begin to grasp.

And I’ve long considered myself a libertarian of the small-l variety, and have admired Gillespie’s writing and quoted it here who even knows how many times.

That said, Z’s last line still smarts a little. And like I said, I’m only an onlooker here.

The bottom line is, all the old paradigms have been overturned, and not just in France, or even Europe. Here in the States, what we thought of as conservatism has been revealed as useless against the Progressivist onslaught, an ideology all too comfortable with its own perpetual defeat. The political party long associated with it stands exposed by its actions as fraudulent, a subterfuge in collusion with its declared enemies, struggling to maintain an unworkable status quo that benefits not the governed, but the government.

Our gutless leaders have not only refused to mount an effective, proactive defense against a deadly jihadist foe, they’ve actually repeatedly suggested that occasional mass murder in our public spaces is just something we’ll all have to learn to live with, while boasting of our supposedly indisputable military supremacy—a hollow supremacy purchased at unimaginable expense, which is incapable of dispensing with an enemy comprised of illiterate goatherds dwelling in remote mountain caves and barren deserts after a decade and a half of violent struggle. They rattle cardboard sabers and mouth empty threats to vanquish an enemy they’re too goddamned cowardly to even name.

The real issue, politically and ideologically speaking, is not so much convergence as it is irrelevance—an irrelevance imposed by insuperable reality, unmoved by definitions and assumptions that are all too obviously outdated, rooted as they are in a stultified political structure that dates back to the Civil War. That structure refers whenever convenient or useful to a Constitution it long since discarded; professes reverence to principles it holds in contempt; and relies on a history it never bothered learning in the first place.

Conservative me no more conservatives, and liberals and libertarians too. Republicans? Democrats? Libertarians, Greens, Socialists, Fascists, Populists, Communists? Meh; might as well talk to me about the Whigs as if they still matter.

There’s now a strong wind blowing, and it’s already sweeping all the old detritus aside. Trump was merely the first gust of it. The old-line pundits complained that he wasn’t really a conservative, and he clearly wasn’t a liberal either. But instead of attempting to wrap their old strictures around him, what they should have done was just admit right up front that they hadn’t the vaguest clue what to make of him. They might at least have then been able to maintain their claim to some sort of intellectual acuity, rather then ending up looking like the befuddled guardians of an old, tired order that history already sidestepped and left behind.

Now all that fresh wind, that new paradigm, really has to do to establish its dominance and forever alter the landscape is adequately and persuasively answer a question or two: will it effectively defend me from murderous Islamist troglodytes, and can it be persuaded to leave me mostly the hell alone, to live my life and pursue my humble ambitions as I see fit?

The Constitution doesn’t enter into it; it’s as dead as the dodo, and has been for decades. The Founders’ vision of freedom and legitimate government doesn’t either, for better or worse; it, too, is gone, and cannot be brought back. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people was finished the moment the people felt secure, prosperous, and comfortable enough to start ignoring what was being done in their name by their supposed representatives, and to suffer no personally disastrous consequences from that disregard.

In addition to the questions I just posed, the ultimate one is this: will it work? Along, perhaps, with: can I trust it?

Whatever rises up to replace the current muddle, if it just handles those questions adroitly, it will truly change the world. For the better? For the worse? Well, we’ll just have to wait and see about that, won’t we?

Share

Wrong again

An administration in chaos, that doesn’t know what it’s doing!

It seemed as though no headway would be made going into the Mar-a-Lago Summit. And, had Trump been a conventional politician, it is likely that he would have given the proverbial store away for a token photo op with Xi. But, geopolitics is akin to magic, and the best practitioners of geopolitics often use the same tools of theatricality and deception to aid them in their quest for greatness.

The thrust of the Mar-a-Lago Summit was about how Trump could get Xi Jinping to embrace regime change in North Korea.

We’ve heard over the decades that the only way to ensure that North Korea does not go nuclear is to topple the Kim regime. However, we won’t do that because of the costs involved, the risk to South Korea (and the wider region), and the fact that China would likely feel compelled to send military forces to their stricken client state’s aid. That, of course, would risk igniting another world war.

Trump understood this. Since President Trump is the master of the art of the deal, he likely spent the last several months bashing China as an opening bid in his effort to topple Kim Jong-un at cost. So, Trump and his team assembled a catchy deal with China: America will sell China its coal and grant Chinese firms access to America’s lucrative market, if China promises to stabilize North Korea after the United States topples Kim Jong-un. For all of their rhetoric about the evils of America, Xi and his fellow CCP apparatchiks yearn for greater access to American markets.

No sooner had the Trump Administration launched its volley of Tomahawk cruise missiles at Assad’s air base, than China refused to accept a major shipment of vital coal from North Korea. The United States has deployed a flotilla to the western Pacific Ocean. Also, the renowned U.S. Navy SEAL Team 6 has been deployed to South Korea on a “training mission.” Just what are they training for? Only the SEALs know for sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it involves ensuring that Kim Jong-un is soon to have a very bad day. Oh, yeah, and China just moved 150,000 of its troops to the North Korean border.

Just as D’Angelo described, Trump’s magic trick was a misdirection for both the press and the Chinese. He created an illusion—the attack on Assad—to distract his audience, while he deftly performed an action only he and Xi could see. In one fell swoop, then, Trump managed to set the stage for regime change in North Korea without repeating the missteps of Iraq. He’s reinvigorated America’s military prestige. Also, by opening up American coal to Chinese interests, President Trump has upheld his campaign pledge to coal miners. President Trump has also rehabilitated the ailing Sino-American relationship (what was once dubbed “Chimerica”).

And just pay no attention to the NeverTrumpTard behind the curtain…weeping. More from McInnes:

You can be an isolationist Trump supporter who hates meddling in the Middle East and still think this was a brilliant move. This wasn’t intervention. It was a fireworks display. We’re done. There will be no abdication of thrones nor any boots on the ground. Sure, U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley says Assad has to go, but the secretary of state said that “the first priority is the defeat of ISIS.” Secretary of state is a real job. The U.N. is Hollywood.

This is a huge part my compatriots seem to be missing. The Middle East is all about theatrics. Palestinians stage so many pretend attacks they call it “Pallywood.” There are false flags all over the place, from fake car-bomb attacks to the entire country listening to a 7-year-old refugee girl in Aleppo who tells us, “Condemnation doesn’t save lives but actions do.” It’s entirely possible the gas attack never happened. I don’t really care. What matters is that the world thinks it happened, and that means we need to react. That’s all it was—a reaction. Only half our missiles even hit their target. The Russians had already left and Syria managed to get all their personnel out too. We just blowed up a bunch of shit and it “blowed up real good.” It was a checkmate move on five different chessboards that took out the following opponents.

All of which badly needed taking out, and were ripe to the point of rot for it. But isn’t it amazing how much of this basic, elementary “Art Of The Deal” stuff our professional-politician “experts” seem to not only not understand at all, but to be completely unaware of? Apparently, spending an entire career cloistered in DC Fantasyland with your fellow tapeworms and remoras isn’t really good preparation for anything at all—beyond a graduate-level education in making messes and fucking up generally.

Share

Eurosuicide

Suffering from self-inflicted wounds.

Europe as we have known it for over five decades has been a stable and prosperous place at peace with itself, famous for its museums, cafes, classical architecture, and graceful retirement from history. But today, it’s under assault. The greatest refugee crisis since World War II is overwhelming the continent, while Jews flee by the thousands. Populist parties so outrageous that they make their American counterparts seem like milquetoast centrists are winning or almost winning one election after another. One of them—Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz—has already transformed Hungary into an authoritarian state. Russian President Vladimir Putin is swaggering like a conquering warlord and winning applause for his exploits as far west as Great Britain. The European Union has already begun to unravel and could be replaced down the road by God only knows what as an aloof United Kingdom decides to go it alone while Europe circles the drain.

Journalist and author James Kirchick lived and worked in Europe for six years, and in his bracing first book, The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, he dives deep into the continent’s turmoil. The cumulative effect is sobering and alarming, but also perversely comforting if misery truly loves company. The book makes it clear that America’s political crisis is part of a larger crisis of democratic liberalism and institutional legitimacy that stretches from Seattle to Athens, and Kirchick does his American readers an invaluable service by informing them, in a can’t-put-it-down style, that they aren’t going through this alone.

Connecting Europe’s seemingly disparate troubles is a continent-wide cratering of the political center and collapsing confidence in the liberal European idea. “In the wake of World War II,” Kirchick writes, “when Europe was divided, both the political left and right valued very highly what the West had and the East coveted: an environment of political and economic freedom, religious openness (even if it often shaded into religious indifference), and peace.” Western Europeans were far more dependent upon the military power of the Pax Americana than they liked to admit, but it paid off for all of us when the Soviet Union finally imploded, calcified communist police states withered away, and Europe’s eastern half rejoined the West.

But a unified liberal Europe only lasted a generation, and the Russian bear is no longer hibernating.

Michael is a lot more worried about Putin’s ambitions than I am, but then I don’t live in Eastern Europe, either. For my money, the far bigger worry is here:

Why is Europe’s political center collapsing? For a couple of reasons. Near-zero economic growth over ten years never does ruling parties any good. The European Union’s overbearing micromanagement, its notorious democratic deficit, and the entirely sensible belief almost everywhere that local democracy is better than distant bureaucracy are coupled with the near-refusal of mainstream parties to address these concerns. And to top it all off, mainstream parties both left and right have been jamming their fingers in their ears and socks in their voters’ mouths for years about immigration.

Xenophobia is stalking Europe—again—but at the same time, in fairness, all societies are strained when a massive number of newcomers show up at the same time, and not every person feeling that strain is by definition a bigot. So when German Chancellor Angela Merkel green-lit the entrance of a million Syrian refugees, that strain should have been as predictable as it was inevitable. How would you like to live in the village of Sumte—with a population of just 102—and be told by the government in Berlin that you can and will find room for 750 Syrian refugees?

And as Kirchick points out, when Merkel invited a million refugees into Germany, she effectively invited a million refugees into Europe’s entire Schengen Area without consulting any other head of state, let alone voters elsewhere in Europe.

“What made Merkel’s decision to open Europe’s gates to an untold number of Muslim migrants so problematic,” Kirchick writes, “is that the continent has done such a poor job integrating the Muslims who already live there.” Even the European-born children of immigrants tend to be thought of and treated as guests in Europe rather than permanent residents and citizens. The United States, like Canada, does a much better job assimilating immigrants than Europe does and it always will.

The real problem is not Europe’s (or our) failure to “assimilate” Muslims; the real problem is that they are unassimilable, being entirely uninterested in assimilating anyway. They prefer to cling absolutely to a pseudo-religious ideology wholly incompatible with freedom—not just alien to Western ideals of how a free and democratic society should properly order itself, but implacably hostile to them. That’s what renders Merkel’s near-incredible folly more than merely “problematic”—what it is, culturally, is suicidal.

Share

There’ll always be an England?

Another fine Steyn music post, about a song I always did like.

Not when she sang, though. It’s not a creamy voice, like GI Jo Stafford’s. There’s something rawer in there, and in those early records a very real emotional clutch. The sound of Britain at war is Vera Lynn singing, whether “There’ll Always Be And England” or “We’ll Meet Again”. And, with either number, despite the notorious British antipathy to audience participation, she never had to cajole the Tommies or anybody else into joining in.

On that rather strained luncheon with Princess Margaret, Dame Vera seemed a delightfully near parodic embodiment of Englishness. (She sent back the avocado with the words, “This foreign food disagrees with me.”) Afterwards, we had a little chat about her songs. “They still like ‘We’ll Meet Again’,” she said (I seem to recall a couple of laddish telly pop stars had just had a Number One cover version with it). “But ‘There’ll Always Be An England’ is what they call ‘controversial’,” she added, lowering her voice, lest someone might overhear.

By “controversial”, she meant that the very concept of “England” was now officially discouraged. “There’ll Always Be An England” is conspicuous by its absence on her 100th birthday album and her other hit CDs of this century. With one of her two signature songs all but banned from the airwaves, the survivor was imbued with a kind of pathos it had never had during the lowest moments of the Second World War. It came to symbolize simultaneously both Britain’s wartime defiance and a resigned acceptance of remorseless decline. To me, Dame Vera’s original near-eight-decade-old recording sounds sadder with every passing year.

We’ll Meet Again
Don’t know where, don’t know when
But I know We’ll Meet Again
Some sunny day.

Will we? You can see what Dame Vera means about the “controversial” nature of “There’ll Always Be An England” at the Blairite website set up after the 2005 Tube bombings. Its object was to try to identify British “icons” around which a roiled nation could unite. In the comments responding to “There’ll Always Be…”, a reader who identifies himself as Alex rages that the song is “an appallingly syrupy anthem to petty nationalism and ‘little Englanders’. Haven’t two world wars shown us that nationalism is a scourge, a hangover from the tribal groupings of the Dark Ages? I’m a citizen of a united Europe, and proud to be so.” On the other hand, Margaret Stringfellow says, “The EU is hell bent on destroying England as a country, by replacing England by the Regions. There will not always be an England unless the English people wake up.”

I’ve mentioned it here before, and I’ve searched and searched for it over the years and never have been able to find it, but I distinctly remember a quote from some Englishter, a government official of some type, not long after 9/11 that I thought was piercing indeed. Asked by a reporter if our Cousins across the pond remained able to respond forcefully to such hideous aggression, the guy pointed out that it was the wrong question; the truly relevant question, he said, was “whether England remained England.”

Depressing, innit? But all prospective cracks from me about “Londonistan” aside, who knows; perhaps the same stark division we’ve seen here between the iniquitous multiculti surrender-monkey derangement in our urban areas and the stouter, sterner, more sensible mindset prevalent in flyover country will yet hold true in England. They—and we—had better hope so, at least.

But perhaps not; Steyn just about puts paid to it with his closer:

On November 25th 1941, off the coast of Alexandria, HMS Barham was torpedoed by a German U-boat during a visit to the battleship by Vice-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell. The ship lurched to its port side, the commanding officer was killed, and the vice-admiral found himself treading oil-perfumed water surrounded by the ship’s men and far from rafts. To keep their morale up, he led them in a rendition of “There’ll Always Be An England”. The 31,000-ton Barham sank in less than four minutes, the largest British warship destroyed by a U-boat in the course of the war. But 449 of its crew of 1,311 survived.

“There’ll Always Be An England” was written for that England.

It’s different now.

Lots of things are, to our great detriment. We’ve lost much, and thrown away even more. It remains to be seen whether we retain enough to bring us back from the brink of disaster and destruction. Personally, I have some small hope. But I have to admit it probably ain’t the way to bet.

Share

No more duplicitous friend, no more treacherous enemy

That would be Obama’s Amerika—thankfully, soon to be as dead as the dodo.

Senior Obama administration officials are scrambling to provide explanations after multiple reports, including in the Washington Free Beacon, identified the White House as being a chief architect of a recent United Nations resolution condemning the state of Israel, according to conversations with multiple former and current U.S. officials.

On the heels of the hotly contested resolution, which condemned Israel for building homes in its capital, Jerusalem, senior Obama administration officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden, have been identified as leading the charge to ensure the anti-Israel measure won approval by the U.N. Security Council.

The administration’s denials of this charge broke down during the past several days as multiple reporters confirmed the Obama administration worked behind-the-scenes to help shape and forward the resolution.

As with the meeting between Kerry and Erekat, the phone call between Biden and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has been confirmed multiple times by a plethora of sources in the United States, Israel, and Europe following the Free Beacon’s initial report.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a weekly cabinet meeting that “the Obama administration initiated [the resolution], stood behind it, coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be passed.”

The administration has not yet addressed the discrepancy between its own narrative and that being revealed in the press.

One veteran foreign policy insider and former government official who requested anonymity in order to speak freely described senior Obama administration officials as “lying sacks of shit” who routinely feed the press disinformation.

Of course they are. They’ve been lying sacks of shit from the beginning of their foul (mis)administration, they’re lying sacks of shit now, and lying sacks of shit they’ll forever be. Their toxic team is headed by one of the lyingest sacks of shit ever to fork a tongue, and this stinking fish is rotting from the head down. Most of them ought to have been in prison long before now, and the rest of them ought to be in the witness protection program for turning state’s evidence against them. Shitweasels to a man, they are, from their filthy figurehead right down to the last lowly intern. They can’t be ousted soon enough to suit me.

Share

Very simple, not so easy

Much is always being made of the “complexities” of the Israel-Palestine problem. It’s no such thing; it is very easy, very simple to understand. And as a service to my beloved readers, I am now going to lay it out for you, in a way that even the simplest libtard could grasp, were they willing to even try.

It all boils down to this quote from the Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari (52:177) – Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

And there it is. How do you negotiate, how do you compromise, how do you find common ground with that? With people whose most sincere wish—for whom the cornerstone of their very existence—is to see Israel destroyed and the Jews—all Jews, including those foolish and despicable American Jews immersed in Progressivist self-deception and wishful thinking—wiped from the face of the earth?

There are plenty more such quotes from the Koran, Hadith, and Sura (a hundred and nine of them, in fact, for which there is NO equivalent in the Christian bible, although the Torah does have some questionable passages that hew uncomfortably close to the Koran), not just endorsing, not just suggesting, but outright commanding violence on the part of the followers of the vile, deranged pedophile Mohammed. Such commands are what make Islam unique among all the world’s religions, particularly in the modern age. Thus:

The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.

And again: there it is.

Now, the Israelis have tried trading land for peace in the West Bank and Gaza; in each case, they lost the land, but did not gain peace.

Time and again—and even as staunch and solid an Israeli leader as Netanyahu has fallen victim to the delusion—Israel has been led to the bargaining table with deceptive, treacherous, and genocidal Paleosimian leaders. Time and again, they have made their bootless concessions. And time and again, the Palestinian swine have walked away, from Arafat to Abu Mazen, now known for some reason as Mahmoud Abbas. The inescapable historical fact:

UN Resolution 181, the Partition Resolution, passed in November 1947, called for the creation of a Jewish state and an Arab state in the land which at that point was controlled by the British-run Palestine Mandate. All the Arab countries opposed the resolution, voted against it, and promised to go to war to prevent its implementation. Representing the Palestinians, the Arab Higher Committee also opposed the plan and threatened war, while the Jewish Agency, representing the Jewish inhabitants of the Palestine Mandate, supported the plan.

The Arabs and the Palestinians were true to their word and did launch a war against the Jews of Palestine, violating both Resolution 181 and the UN Charter. Much to the surprise of the Arab side, the Jews were able to survive the initial onslaughts and eventually win the war.

The fundamental fact remains that had the Arabs and the Palestinians accepted the Partition Resolution and not violated the UN Charter by attacking Israel, there would be a 63-year-old Palestinian state today next to Israel, and there would not have been a single Palestinian refugee.

Just as today, it seems that even in 1948 the Arab side was more concerned with opposing and attacking the Jewish state than with creating a Palestinian state.

The Jews were living in Judea hundreds of years before Mohammad was even born and his filthy pseudo-religion established by conquest and murder. The so-called Palestinians have no legitimate, historical, or legal claim to so much as one inch of Israeli land. The Israelis would be perfectly happy to adopt the so-called “two-state solution,” and have tried in good faith and with no intent of deception to do just that. The Palestinians have rejected each and every such offer and resumed their barbaric atrocities. They wish to see Israel destroyed, and the Jews wiped from the face of the earth. There’s your Israeli-Palestinian problem summed up; there’s why, as long as the Palestinians cling to the abominable teachings of Mohammed, there will never be a real solution. It doesn’t get much simpler than that.

As I said yesterday, there are those on the alt-Right who would see us abandon Israel and cozy up to the Muslim shitrapies. I will never be one of them.

Bottom line update! JJ Sefton sums up pretty well:

Since its founding in 1948, the modern State of Israel has been the lone beacon of freedom and enlightenment surrounded by a vast wasteland of medieval tyranny, pig-ignorance, squalor, barbarity and a blind, centuries-old unreconstructed hatred. In spite of this, it has year after year made concession after concession in a desperate attempt to stop generational bloodshed and save the lives of not only its own children but of children whose parents use them as suicide bombers. It has only earned them enmity. And the twin ideologies of Islam and Marxism are converging with the aim of wiping Israel off the map and annihilating every Jew that Hitler couldn’t gas now in sight; all thanks to Barack Hussein Obama, 44th President of the United States.

Having backed Israel into a corner by all but giving Iran nukes, and now opening a second front at the UN to annihilate the Jewish state politically, I suppose Bibi’s only response must be as unthinkable as Obama’s incitement: Annex the West Bank and to hell with the consequences.

Well, nah; all he really has to do is just wait till January 20th, when the Marxist, Jew-hating Left will finally get its comeuppance, Israel will once again have a friend in the White House and, as Trump said, “things will be different.”

Things WILL be different update! A most delicious quote: “Who is Obama?” (Israel’s Culture and Sports Minister Miri) Regev asked rhetorically. “Obama is history. We have Trump.” Yes, we do—all of us, Israelis and Americans alike—and not a moment too soon, either.

5 questions update! Here’s the first two:

1.  Why are the territories continually referred to as “Palestinian?” With cities such as Hebron, Shilo, Bethlehem, Jericho, and Jerusalem—and many others from the Bible—why is the land never referred to as “Jewish” or “Christian?” For example, one of the most well-known cities in the West Bank is known as “The Palestinian city of Nablus.” How many people know how that name came about? (Hint: the Roman Emperor Vespasian re-named it from Shechem to “Neapolis,” as in Naples).

2.  Why are Palestinians free to live throughout cities in Israel such as Tel Aviv, but Jews are told they cannot be free to live in cities such as Hebron or Jerusalem?

Good questions all. I’ll add one of my own: what kind of access do you think Christians, Jews, or any non-Muslims would be allowed to holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Jericho, and other places in Israel if the Palestinians were in charge of them? Hint: one need only look to Mecca for the answer.

Share

“I will therefore content myself with the observation that no better Constitution was ever better written in English”

No wonder Obama sent his bust back.

No one can think clearly or sensibly about this vast and burning topic without in the first instance making up his mind upon the fundamental issue. Does he value the State above the citizen, or the citizen above the State? Does a government exist for the individual, or do individuals exist for the government?

In the United States, also, economic crisis has led to an extension of the activities of the Executive and to the pillorying, by irresponsible agitators, of certain groups and sections of the population as enemies of the rest. There have been efforts to exalt the power of the central government and to limit the rights of individuals. It has been sought to mobilize behind this reversal of the American tradition, at once the selfishness of the pensioners, or would-be pensioners, of Washington, and the patriotism of all who wish to see their country prosperous once more.

It is when passions and cupidities are thus unleashed and, at the same time, the sense of public duty rides high in the hearts of all men and women of good will that the handcuffs can be slipped upon the citizens and they can be brought into entire subjugation to the executive government. Then they are led to believe that, if they will only yield themselves, body, mind and soul, to the State, and obey unquestioningly its injunctions, some dazzling future of riches and power will open to them…

I take the opposite view. I hold that governments are meant to be, and must remain, the servants of the citizens; that states and federations only come into existence and can only by justified by preserving the ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ in the homes and families of individuals. The true right and power rest in the individual. He gives of his right and power to the State, expecting and requiring thereby in return to receive certain advantages and guarantees. I do not admit that an economic crisis can ever truly be compared with the kind of struggle for existence by races constantly under primordial conditions. I do not think that modern nations in time of peace ought to regard themselves as if they were the inhabitants of besieged cities, liable to be put to the sword or led into slavery if they cannot make good their defense.

Socialism or overweening State life, whether in peace or war, is only sharing miseries and not blessings. Every self-respecting citizen in every country must be on his guard lest the rulers demand of him in time of peace sacrifices only tolerable in a period of war for national self-preservation.

I judge the civilization of any community by simple tests. What is the degree of freedom possessed by the citizen or subject? Can he think, speak and act freely under well-established, well-known laws? Can he criticize the executive government? Can he sue the State if it has infringed his rights? Are there also great processes for changing the law to meet new conditions?

It’s the great Winston Churchill, of course. The man was a visionary and a genius. Hs words are plain but eloquent, and beautifully direct; the wisdom expressed by them is beyond argument. That some arrogant-in-ignorance little pipsqueak like the Current Occupant would dare presume to offer him any conceivable insult is incomprehensibly offensive. Churchill in his prescience had something to say to present-day advocates for the Constitution as a “living document,” too:

And here we must note a dangerous misuse of terminology. ‘Taking the rigidity out of the American Constitution’ means, and is intended to mean, new gigantic accessions of power to the dominating centre of government and giving it the means to make new fundamental laws enforceable upon all American citizens.

And so it has turned out. It didn’t happen by accident, either. He would no doubt be sick to his core at what both our nation and his own have become. And he’d be right about that, too.

(Via Weird Dave and Constitution Daily)

Share

The Forever Rule

To wit: any ground ever trod by a Moslem, even once and momentarily, is to be considered Moslem territory forever.

The Israeli government reacted angrily on Thursday to a United Nations body’s resolutions that failed to mention any link between Judaism and its holy sites in Jerusalem.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) renewed the resolutions that criticized Israel for what it says are its policies that restrict Muslim access to a site considered holy by both Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem’s Old City.

The site is revered by Jews and Muslims alike, known to Jews as Temple Mount and to Muslims as the al-Aqsa compound or Haram al-Sharif (which is the Arabic translation for ‘Noble Sanctuary’).

But a draft of the latest version of the resolution, posted on UNESCO’s website and dated Oct 12, showed the site repeatedly described only by its Muslim names – something Israel says amounts to a denial of its Jewish history.

‘The theatre of the absurd at UNESCO continues and today the organization adopted another delusional decision which says that the people of Israel have no connection to the Temple Mount and the Western Wall,’ Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in Jerusalem.

The Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site, is a remnant of the Second Jewish Temple that was built by Herod the Great and destroyed by the Roman Empire nearly 2,000 years ago.

Which, by my calculations, would be in the neighborhood of, oh, FIFTEEN HUNDRED FUCKING YEARS before Pisslam even existed, thereby fully negating the claim to any supposed Moslem “right” to ever even set foot on the place at all.

Share

End game

Since 9/11, I’ve found myself wondering “what took you so long?” fairly often, about all sorts of things.

Ann,

I leave the Army for good in September of this year. My chain of command has been shell shocked that I am going through with it. Two years ago when I first came to grips with what was happening and resolved to no longer be a part of it, there was derision and even an officer telling me that voicing my opinions about the state of the US economy and its moral failings could be considered a violation of the UCMJ for conduct “prejudicial to good order and discipline.”

When I gave my Operations NCO a copy of the book “A Distant Mirror” by Barbara Tuchman he came to me a month later stating that if there is a civil war, he and his fellow Hispanics will “have to choose sides.”

When I told my first sergeant why I would not be re-enlisting, she said “Don’t you want to re-enlist to get your 20?”

I have many more anecdotes, but the summary is this:  Whereas I was laughed at two years ago, many other senior NCOS are leaving. Many Enlisted men are frightened and wish to get out. The liberals, humanists, atheists and feminists are taking over.

Ann, it’s been rough. I LOVE the US Army. At times I have almost been reduced to tears thinking about putting on the uniform for the last time. But I cannot be part of the army that serves a government like ours.

I’ve spent a good portion of my life studying military history, and always have had tremendous respect and admiration for soldiers—the real warriors among ’em, that is, which by no means all (or even most) soldiers typically are. And as the country has descended further into the mire of totalitarian despotism, I’ve wondered just how long it would be before those warriors would start asking themselves, “what exactly is it I’ve sworn a sacred oath to defend, and is it worth spending my life and honor to defend it?” The only possible answer for any intelligent and historically-aware person, which your true warrior-types almost universally tend to be, would have to be pretty damned obvious.

(Via WRSA)

Share

Without representation

Ben Domenech gets it almost exactly right.

Rauch’s piece is a whitewashing paean to a leadership class in both parties that once had the power to manage and mitigate the disruptive tendencies of populist movements. But how did they lose that power? It didn’t happen overnight. It happened after incident after incident where they proved themselves feckless and incapable of responding to the interests of the people.

The steady decline of confidence in institutions that began with Watergate and Vietnam is due to real failures of the elite leadership class. These failures undermined confidence not just in capacity to do good but in capability to represent interests. The list is familiar to you by now: Impeachment. 9/11. Iraq. Katrina. Congressional corruption. Financial meltdown. Failed stimulus. Obamacare. Stagnant wages. Diminished hopes. But oh, the party establishment was doing good? These middlemen Rauch puts on a pedestal – they were responding and managing and running things well? No. They were looking out for the interests of people other than those they were elected to serve. They were responding to the donor class and to the party leadership – the very people Rauch views as responsible balances against the populist tendencies of the electorate.

Square Rauch’s frame with the Benjy Sarlin report this week on the people who elected Trump, which is also quoted below. You can’t, because the latter offers actual data to show why people supported Trump, and I’ll give you a hint: it’s not because they’re angry about the lack of earmarks. It’s not that people believe their leadership class is corrupt – it’s that they know they’re stupid. It’s not that people are angry because a parking garage didn’t get built, it’s that they’re angry because the FBI can’t keep track of a terrorist’s wife.

Sarlin’s piece illustrates, in clear data-driven reporting, the real basis for the breakdown of our Cold War era political reality: an utter collapse in the belief that our elites, elected or otherwise, have the capacity to represent. They no longer believe our elites will ever look out for the interests of an anxious people. The “he can’t be bought” frame for Trump’s rise is best understood as code for “he’ll look out for me, not [pick your group]”.

This is not about ideology. If people trusted elites and institutions they defend to look out for them, in a non-ideological sense, the breakdown of our systems would have been mitigated or confined. The fact that it is so sweeping is due to a generation of elites who didn’t do their jobs well, or pretended things weren’t their job for too long.

And there’s where my lone quibble, minor though it be, comes in. It’s not so much that they didn’t do their jobs well, or pretended things weren’t their job. It’s more that they had a completely wrong idea of what their jobs actually were in the first place: in a Constitutional republic, their jobs were, are, and should be to represent the interests of the American people, and to do so within the clear and unequivocal limitations placed upon the government by the Constitution as it was written, not as they might wish it had been. Robert Gore sees it more clearly:

The European powers will try, but the Brexit vote will be much harder to subvert. Command and control, as embodied by the EU and every other supranational governing institution—and every national government—is under mortal stress, doomed by its massive failures and its incompatibility with the demands of human survival. The proponents of staying in the EU weren’t even saying to the British: give us one more chance and we’ll get it right. They were saying: stay with us and we’ll keep doing what we’ve been doing wrong. Who accepts such a manifestly idiotic bargain? The wonder is that the vote was close, but the fear-mongering status quo mounted a ferocious and extraordinarily mendacious campaign.

The vote will hasten the EU’s eventual demise, but the biggest loser may turn out to be the US government. It pushed hard for a European union at the end of World War II and has promoted it ever since (Obama did his own cause more harm than good by telling the British how to vote). The EU was to be America’s one stop vassal, much tidier than trying to herd all of Europe’s cats. Just yesterday, The Wall Street Journal, a house organ for US unipolarity, headlined, “U.S. Worries ‘Brexit’ Will Dent Its Clout.” The government is right to worry. The confederated empire will be much harder to maintain if the EU dissolves, especially with its other European pillar, NATO, under attack from Donald Trump.

The mainstream media may be loath to admit it, we’ll see, but the Trump and Sanders insurgencies, and the gathering strength of various European nationalist movements, stem from the same impetus as the Brexit vote. Trump was quick to capitalize, saying the British were taking back their country and Americans would do the same by electing him.

The British people are to be congratulated for rejecting fear, embracing the future, and voting for sanity.

Indeed they are. More from Peter Hitchens, who sees some encouraging creative destruction going on:

Of course, it’s not just about immigration. A wonderful alliance, which I have long hoped for, has been forged in this campaign.

It has brought together two groups who had never really met before. The first group are the social and moral conservatives, whose views the Blairised Tory Party despised, while it still relied on their money and their votes. The second are the working-class families whose votes the Blairised Labour Party relied on, while it dismissed and ignored their concerns.

It is not just mass migration that worries them. They are also distressed about the decline in their standard of living, the pressure to get into debt, the way good state schools are reserved for the rich and cunning, the shrivelling of opportunities for the young, the unchecked spread of crime and disorder, the ridiculous cost of housing, and the general overcrowding of everything from roads to hospitals.

If it weren’t for old tribal party labels, these two groups would long ago have realised they were friends and allies.

They would have combined in a mutiny against the PR men and hedge-fund types who lounge arrogantly on the upper deck of politics, claiming that none of these problems exist – because they don’t experience them themselves.

For instance I, and millions of Tory voters, have far more in common with excellent Labour MPs such as Kate Hoey or Frank Field than I do with David Cameron and the weird, obedient, meaningless quacking robots with which he has filled the Cabinet Room and the Tory benches in the House of Commons.

But the ossified party system kept them apart until now. They could not and did not combine to defeat their common enemy. And so at Election after Election, those who merely wanted to live their lives much as they had always lived them, and were baffled and pained by the unending changes imposed on them, had nowhere to turn.

The parties they thought of as their own were in fact in an alliance against them. Blair became Cameron and Cameron became Blair, and after a while it was impossible to tell which was which.

Gee, that sure doesn’t sound anything at all like our own Democrat Socialist Party and its Republican collaborators, who demand that we unquestioningly support a Romney or McCain and later scream that a true Disrupter like Trump is “too liberal,” does it? Onwards:

That is why I don’t care who fills David Cameron’s place at the head of a Tory Party that long ago outlived its usefulness. There shouldn’t be any more David Camerons, thanks very much. In future, people like him should stand openly as what they are, globalist pro-migration Blairite liberals, and not call themselves Conservatives. So the important thing is that we do not miss this great moment when the people have joined together against a discredited and failed elite.

What we need is for the Tory Party and the Labour Party to collapse and split and be replaced by two new parties that properly reflect the real divisions in the country.

Emphasis mine, with hearty “amens” making the welkin ring. Again: gee, not familiar at all, no similarity with our own situation here in the States, is there? And with all that in mind, Walsh has some ideas for what Trump ought to be doing—all of which are good, concluding thusly:

Now it’s time for Trump 2.0: the focused, disciplined candidate we saw last week. This means focusing on Hillary’s weaknesses without fear, bringing speaker Paul Ryan and majority leader Mitch McConnell to heel and staying on message to Make America Great Again.

Hey, if the Brits can say adieu to the European Union and defy their entire political establishment, can Americans do any less? Across the world, there’s a hunger for national greatness again — and if Beltway insiders don’t hear that message, they surely will in November.

They damned well ought to, and forever afterward too. It reminds me of two great old (non)Jeffersonian homilies: when the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty and the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We went to sleep for a good long while there, and the inevitable happened. Now is a time for waking up and reclaiming our birthright.

Update! Wretchard: “All of a sudden, the invincible status quo looks very mortal. The BBC’s Katty Kayunderstood a Brexit win would signify everything had changed. If Brexit could win, then Trump could win. If Trump could win, the world was upside-down. The unthinkable was no longer impossible.” And not a moment too soon, either.

Updated update! Via Glenn: Wretchard responds (on Fakebook, no link provided) to the precious little snowflakes who are all upset and weepy over Britain’s liberation, whining that “Essentially people much, much older than us — and who won’t be around for the consequences — are giving us a future we don’t want”:

Essentially people much older than you gave you what you now take for granted. They won World War 2, fueled the great boom, walked through the valley of the shadow of nuclear death — and had you.

You didn’t make the present, nor as you now complain, are you making the future. No children, no national defense, no love of God or country.

But that’s just it. You’ve brainwashed yourselves into thinking someone else: the old, the older, the government, the dead would always do things for you.

If you learn anything from Brexit, learn that nobody got anywhere expecting someone to do things for him.

My response is a lot more succinct, if also profane. It would consist of two words, and I’m sure you can all guess what they are. But for my money, this is the truly important part:

“In Oxford especially, there’s this liberal atmosphere. You’re surrounded by so many like-minded people you forget there’s an outside world,” said Winn. “But especially in working-class communities, the Leave campaign was very popular. You do forget that being in an environment like this.”

“I have about 2,000 friends on Facebook — and all but three were voting ‘Remain.’ That tells you what kind of bubble you can live in, and how you can delude yourself it’s going to go one way and then it doesn’t.”

News flash for special snowflakes: not everybody thinks like you do, if what you’re doing can even be dignified by the word. It’s all boiling down to a contest between the elite, useless Screaming Garbage Babies versus the Dirt People. And it’s going to be a fight to the death.

Share

Independence day

Britain says “enough already.”

Britain’s stunning vote to bolt the EU sets into motion a lengthy diplomatic divorce for which there is no blueprint, and the economic and political upheaval is likely just beginning, say experts.

The immediate effect of the vote, in which Britons voted to leave the 28-nation bloc by a 52-48 margin was Prime Minister David Cameron’s announcement that he will step down sometime before October.

“The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their will must be respected,” Cameron said Friday morning. “I will do everything I can to steady the ship over the coming weeks, but I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers our country to its next destination.”

I must admit: I did NOT see this coming. Cheers to the 52 percent of Brits who voted for Brexit and rejected the nascent one-worldism that the EU represents. Independence is never a bad thing, and setting up a huge, monolithic, impenetrable and unresponsive bureaucracy to micromanage everything always is. Ironic thing is, it really is an endorsement of the kind of core values Americans barely bother even paying lip service to anymore. Roger Simon puts it well:

Earth to elites: Citizens of truly democratic countries don’t want unlimited immigration into their countries by people who couldn’t be less interested in democracy. They also don’t want to be governed by the rules and regulations of faceless bureaucrats whose not-so-hidden goals are power and riches for themselves and their friends. Simple, isn’t it?

Yep. So simple, so incandescently self-evident only a liberal Supergenius could fail to see it.

It might be only a small one; it might not amount to anything much at all before it’s all said and done. But a step in the right direction it most certainly is. Again: hearty and unreserved cheers to the Brits. Ya done good, people. Back to Roger for the heartening conclusion:

Long live the Anglosphere. Remember the Magna Carta and all that. This is a day truly to celebrate, even if stock markets are crashing around the world. They’ll come back. Look on it as a buying opportunity. A bubble has broken, but it isn’t a stock bubble. It’s a human bubble consisting of elites who seek to govern in a manner not all that distant from Comrade Lenin, just hiding under a phony mask of bureaucratic democracy. They’ve taken a big body blow from the citizens of England. Churchill would be proud. Time for America to follow suit.

Time, and past time. I repeat: decline is a choice. Yesterday, a clear majority of our English cousins chose differently. More power to them…literally.

Share

Really?

Will there always be an England?

Update 11:21 PM: ITV’s latest odds for a Leave victory rise to 85%

Update 11:17 PM: With two thirds of areas reporting, Leave has the lead with 51.5% of the vote, or 10,996,500 to 10,363,816

I haven’t had much—anything, actually—to say about the Brexit vote because I never for a moment expected it to do this well. In the end, it still won’t matter much; the actual exit will take decades, if it’s ever even realized at all:

If we assume that the political fallout is limited to the theatrical, the next step is the process of implementing the intent of the referendum. That will most likely take years as neither side will be in much of a hurry to get on with it. Parliament will surely pass some legislation as a stop gap to keep the current arrangements in place until a deal is done. The EU will set off on a long drawn out process of forming a committee to study the process of forming a committee to appoint a board to review Britain’s exit request.

The hope for all concerned is that the English people, having blown off some steam in the referendum, will go back to their affairs and forget all about it. From time to time the public will be notified that negotiations have taken place in the south of France during the winter or in the Alps during August, but otherwise nothing much will happen. There will no doubt be tales told to the British press about the long hours required to address the millions of details involved in actually leaving the EU.

Polling outfits will be surreptitiously dispatched to keep measuring public sentiment regarding the EU and the referendum. The hope being that opinion will swing the other way and Parliament can then pass an act overturning the referendum. The pressure to reverse the results of the referendum will slowly build over time until either the opposition is worn down or some crisis allows the rulers to act. A recession will be blamed on Brexit and it will be quickly “fixed” by overriding the referendum.

This probably seems like cynicism. After all, Britain is a liberal democracy where the will of the people, as expressed at the ballot box, is respected by the politicians.Our rulers invest a lot of time telling us this and then spend even more time getting us to come out and vote. Then there is the bizarre obsession with getting foreigners to vote in their own lands and come to our lands so they can vote in our elections. You can be forgiven for thinking that voting is a big deal and respected by our rulers.

That’s not been the pattern in Europe, or anywhere else in the West, over the last few decades. The voters vote and the political class does whatever it likes, coincidentally in line with the will of their donors and sponsors. The French people voted against the EU Constitution and the rulers promptly ignored them. Other EU countries then cancelled their referenda. The Greeks kept voting for change, only to get more of the same after each election. Despite the rhetoric, voting counts for little.

Yep. As Z says, we’ve seen plenty enough of that right here already. Still and all, hats off to the remaining true Englishmen for standing up and being counted, despite…well, everything. Meanwhile, Fox’s report is hard to make heads or tails of:

The outcome of a historic referendum on whether Great Britain should remain in the European Union was heading for an extraordinarily close finish early Friday.

With 256 of the 382 counting areas declaring their vote totals, the “Leave” camp led by more than four hundred thousand votes out of more than 16 million cast, but was underperforming analysts’ expectations.

The uncertainty rocked the financial markets. The British pound initially soared as polls closed and two opinion surveys put “remain” ahead and two leading supporters of the “leave” campaign said it appeared the pro-EU side had won. But it then suffered its biggest fall in years, plummeting from about $1.50 to $1.38 as results began to show stronger-than-expected support for quitting the bloc.

The first results, from England’s working-class northeast, were a smaller-than-expected “remain” win in Newcastle and a bigger-than-expected “leave” vote in nearby Sunderland. The “leave” side also outperformed expectations in other areas of England, though “remain” was ahead in early Scottish results.

So: Leave was underperforming analysts’ expectations. Except when it showed “stronger-than-expected support.” This, despite a “smaller-than-expected ‘remain’ win, and a “bigger-than-expected ‘leave’ vote.” All in all, expectations on both sides were exceeded, except when they weren’t. This part, however, is clear enough, and inarguable:

“Leave” campaigners claim that only a British exit, informally known as a “Brexit”, can restore power to Parliament and control immigration.

Yep, that’s certainly the case, on both counts. But the whole thing closes with another contradiction:

“One of the deeper headlines from tomorrow, of a narrow victory either way, is that wider Europe has got to learn the lesson about how to re-engage with ordinary publics,” he said.

“Wider Europe” is not even slightly interested in “re-engaging” with ordinary publics. “Wider Europe” would just as soon you ordinary publics shut the hell up and allow yourselves to be properly ruled, like good little serfs. So just bend over, spread ’em, and brace yourselves; Merkel has more Muslim welfare tourists and ISIS sleepers she needs to find new homes for.

Share

Obama’s man in Egypt goes down hard

And any Obama loss anywhere—even in Egypt—is a good thing for freedom-loving people who don’t support Islamic terrorism.

An Egyptian court has sentenced former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to life in prison while simultaneously passing down death sentences for six co-conspirators.

Those who followed the 2011 Islamic uprising in Egypt saw the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton support the Muslim Brotherhood and their candidate Mohamed Morsi.

President Obama was thrilled with the Morsi election and immediately called him with congratulations. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton flew to Cairo to express the administration sentiments and well wishes personally.

After a year of brutal dictatorship within Egypt, and with thousands of Egyptians killed as a result of the Islamic terrorists within the Muslim Brotherhood, the people of Egypt reached out to the widely respected General Fattah el-Sisi to restore order and bring peace.

Six months after the restabalization of Egypt elections were held and el-Sisi won the presidency with over 75% of the vote. It took President Obama over six weeks before he would call el-Sisi and make contact with the moderate leader. Sisi remains a widely popular leader (82% support) who was able to bring peace and stability along with a more secular outlook.

The Obama administration continues to belittle the efforts of Fattah el-Sisi but lets take a look at what he’s accomplished:

Now go take a look at the list. It’s damned impressive, to say the very least. I like this bit the best, though:

President Obama and Hillary Clinton remain widely despised within Egypt as they are seen as the cause of almost a year of brutality, terrorism, and bloodshed brought upon them by the rise of Mohamed Morsi and the advocacy of the Obama administration.

The last time Secretary Clinton attempted to visit Egypt her entourage was pelted with tomato’s and she experienced a gauntlet of hatred toward her by the victims of her short-sighted policies.

Would that most Americans were smart and perceptive enough to see her and her loathsome boss in the same light, and respond accordingly.

Share

Drool, Britannia

Sick and disgusting.

The last time Tommy was in prison, he was locked up with hardened Muslim criminals who wanted to kill him. He was repeatedly attacked and beaten up, and ended up in the prison hospital more than once.

On one occasion he was locked in a cell with several Muslim prisoners, one of whom (a Somali, if I remember correctly) was about throw boiling water in his face. Tommy acted pre-emptively, knocked the boiling water away, and beat up the man who tried to throw it on him.

It is this incident for which he is being charged.

The real issue behind all these arrests is that Tommy speaks the truth about the danger to the British people posed by Islam. But he is no longer being prosecuted for “hate speech” offenses — the state does not want the substance of what he says to aired in an open courtroom and discussed in the national media. Thus other types of infractions must be found and other charges brought. The current case against him is simply the latest example of the repressive tactics being employed by the totalitarian British state.

The Powers That Be were successful in “decapitating” the English Defence League — with the help of the Quilliam Foundation — and are now attempting to do the same thing to the recently established UK chapter of PEGIDA.

So here’s the plan: Lock up the most charismatic leader the British Counterjihad has. Put him in with his most dangerous enemies — Muslim criminals who have promised to kill him. Make sure that the guards are absent or looking the other way when the trouble starts. Then, as far as the shariah-compliant British state is concerned, the problem has been solved.

The UK, like all the other enlightened governments of Western Europe, has abolished the death penalty. But there’s more than one way to kill a political nuisance — you don’t have to march him up the steps to the gibbet, put the noose around his neck, and open the trapdoor under him.

What is happening to Tommy Robinson is capital punishment by alternative means.

It’s going to be gratifying to see liberal Brits all treated just like Robinson when sharia is fully implemented there. And it’s going to be, just as soon as they can get all the remaining Tommy Robinsons killed, locked away, or otherwise silenced.

The goal of this appeal is to keep that iron door from clanging shut behind Tommy Robinson again. Please give what you can afford to his defense fund and spread the word among your friends and colleagues.

A worthy cause if ever there was one. A bit more from GoV:

I hadn’t realized it before, but part of the establishment’s strategy to ensure that he gets sent back inside is that the charge against him has been reduced to battery, so that he is not entitled to a jury trial. Tommy is convinced that if he were to stand before a jury of his peers, he would be acquitted. But he is to be denied that opportunity.

Could there be a more bitterly ironic metaphor for where (and what) Western Civ now is than this guy being charged and jailed among patently hostile savages for the “crime” of defending himself against them? If nothing else, it’s all the proof anyone should need of my oft-repeated statement: in order to defeat our would-be Muslim conquerors, we are first going to have to defeat the treasonous Left. I see no way around it.

(Via WRSA)

Share

Build them or perish

It’s “impractical,” “too expensive,” and “impossible” when conservatives (or Donald Trump) suggest it, and just never you mind the stark contrast between believing it impossible to get rid of 11 million illegal aliens and the permanent liberal delusion of ridding the nation of 350 million guns in the hands of people absolutely unwilling to submit to confiscation. But despite the best efforts of the world’s Leftists, many in the West are still determined that our civilization will not go gently into that good night, and sooner or later–damned near too late, if past American wartime practice is any guide–both here and elsewhere, the fences WILL be built.

Austria, a strong critic of fences built to cope with Europe’s migrant influx, on Wednesday announced it is joining other nations that have either already erected border barriers or are planning to do so. Austrian Interior Minister Johanna Mikl-Leitner insisted the move was aimed solely at bringing order to the unrelenting influx of people entering the country, telling parliament there were no plans “to build a fence around Austria.”

Still the project is a major shift for the country, which has preached the sanctity of unimpeded internal EU borders since the migrant crisis intensified earlier this year, and Mikl-Leitner herself used the world “fence” in earlier comments announcing construction plans at the border.

Slovenia, the main entry point into Austria, also said it was ready to build a fence, while Hungary has been championing the success of its razor-wire border fences with Serbia and Croatia and plans another one with Romania. Greece already erected a barbed wire fence three years ago on a section of its border with Turkey not separated by a river. Bulgaria also has fenced off parts of its boundary to Turkey, while some Baltic states plan to erect fences on border segments with Russia.

Walsh says:

When reality bites hard enough, high-minded principles go out the window.

Meanwhile, Germany — the country that started the entire “crisis” — has announced that the flood of Afghans pouring into the country of Beethoven and Einstein in order to contribute to its vibrant diversity will likely be sent home. ”People who come to us as refugees from Afghanistan cannot all expect to be able to stay in Germany,” says the German interior minister.

Angela Merkel will go down as one of the greatest villains in European history.

Or one of its greatest dupes and buffoons.

Share

Categories

Archives

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

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



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

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

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

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

All original content © Mike Hendrix