Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

What’s been going around is now coming around

Reprisal? Good. It’s high time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Update! Steyn expands on a theme:

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

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

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

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


Foolish inconsistencies

The hobgoblin of dhimmi minds.

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

Oh, my.

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

Hamas Executes Prominent Commander After Accusations Of Gay Sex

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

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

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

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

Thirteen years ago in The Spectator I wrote the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Lessons? What lessons?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fools. Bloody feckless fucking fools.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



There is a great divide, all right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



There is a great divide, all right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


NOW you’re getting it

Do try and keep up, willya?

Washington (CNN)On Sunday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel uttered a single sentence that speaks to how fundamentally President Donald Trump has reshaped — and will continue to reshape — the world, and America’s place in it.

“The times when we could completely rely on others are, to an extent, over,” Merkel said at a beer hall(!) rally to support her campaign.

While Merkel made no mention of Trump specifically, she made clear that her realization had come “in the last few days” — a time period which overlapped with a G7 meeting in which Trump blasted America’s traditional European allies over NATO obligations and made clear that he was more than willing to go it alone on climate change and trade.

What Trump’s words — and Merkel’s reaction — reveal is something that sharp foreign policy minds have known since the start of Trump’s campaign: His true potential for drastic change exists in the foreign policy sphere.

Trump was right all along about NATO: it is an outdated alliance whose primary mission was rendered moot by the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The European allies have long relied on us to foot the bill for their grand experiment in Nouveau Socialism by carrying the cost of their defense. But the old circumstances no longer apply. The Fulda Gap should no longer be the main cause of European concern; the Persian Gulf is where the real trouble lies.

Don’t kid yourself that Comrade Merkel is stoutly proposing that Germany (and Europe) get up on its hind legs and stand upright at last, shouldering more of the burden of their defense as they should—a bit abashed if not outright shamefaced, perhaps, but at last maturing from a dependent to a partner. No, what she’s doing here is whining about Trump’s “abandonment” of the archaic alliance—pissing and moaning about his reckless disregard for the Cold War status quo even as she imports all the barbaric Muslim “refugees” she can, and snarls viciously at anyone who dares to suggest this might not be such a good idea as regards Europe’s security.

We’ve already seen how that’s working out for them. Mutti Merkel is complaining about protection from an enemy that no longer even exists, while sitting idly back, doing nothing as she watches her beloved Europe going up in flames all around her as a direct result of her own politically-correct idiocy.

Hey, you guys manage to figure out what the motive of the Manchester murderer could possibly have been yet, perchance?


Punch back twice as hard

It gets results.

Republican Greg Gianforte won Thursday’s special election for the U.S. House in Montana, defeating Democratic challenger Rob Quist despite being charged with misdemeanor assault the day before.

The election results — with Gianforte winning over 50% of the vote and leading by a seven-point margin — were a major blow to Democrats’ anti-Trump efforts, and to the media’s expectations, after Gianforte had allegedly “body-slammed” a reporter before his final campaign event on Wednesday.

Montanans are “sending a wake-up call to the Washington D.C. establishment,” Gianforte told a jubilant crowd outside his campaign headquarters, after multiple outlets called the race.

That they are. The DC sewer rats, however, are desperately slapping the snooze button:

GOP strategist Rick Wilson lamented this “Trump effect.”

“This Gianforte assault story is one of those moments where the cultural collapse of the GOP into the Trump Troll Party is captured,” Wilson tweeted. He attacked those who might defend “someone assaulting a reporter because ‘duh lubrul media lies.'”

Wilson asked, “Are you so past the rule of law, and lack so much confidence in your ideas that this is where you take political satisfaction? Because if this is where you are, you’re not a party; you’re a mob. If this is where you are, you’re not a conservative; you’re trash.”

Get bent, loser. You and the rest of the Vichy Republicans are long past your sell-by date.

The GOP strategist concluded by saying, “If you’re a Republican or conservative defending this, please stop identifying yourself as either.”

Happy to, fuckface. In fact, a lot of us are way, way ahead of you on that. Now you just trot on off and joyously wag your little tail for your Democrat Socialist masters, and collect your pat on the head for doing their bidding like you were told.

While many Republicans might side with Wilson on this, Trump supporters are sick of the GOP playing by “politically correct” rules. They might defend Gianforte — and be willing to send him extra money after the assault — because he is not afraid to fight back.


This particular Twitter user might merely be trolling, but his message seems to fit this mentality. “I just voted for Greg Gianforte because our founding fathers used to duel to the death over arguments and they weren’t deemed ‘unfit,'” a user named (Zombie_Cartman) who identified himself as “a 35 year old former Marine/full time gamer/ninja/comedian” tweeted.

Again: bingo. Shout it from the rooftops: we’re fed up. We’re fed up with liberal propagandists masquerading as honest journalists harassing us, slandering us, lying about us, and acting as if they have a God-granted right to be allowed to get away with it all. And we’re also fed up with no-ball phony “conservatives” who talk a great fight but won’t lift a finger to stop the destruction of our nation, for whom the best time to mount an effective defense is always and forever “next time.”

Those useless pissant Republicans who never saw an American value or ideal they were willing to vigorously, forcefully protect—who expect us all to just back and humbly submit to being made punching bags by the Left while being scolded for our “incivility” by the fucking Republican scum who have been selling us down the river for decades now—really need to lay off that snooze button. Failing that, they need to just hide and watch while those who are serious about making America great again roll up their sleeves, ball their fists, and get to work.


He’s on a roll!

Schlichter, that is.

We’re not even willing to take our own side in this fight.

Yeah, the West is theoretically at war with them somewhere far away, or rather, we’re playing at war with a few soldiers and some bombs. It’s war on the cheap, and this campaign may eventually wear down the ISIS caliphate so that that one pustule of Islamic radicalism is lanced, but it won’t be victory. They’ll just pop up again, in Yemen or Somalia or Afghanistan, where we have futzed around for 15-plus years and those pedophilia-loving creeps still hold most of the ground. We sort of fight a sort of war to sort of hold them at bay for a little while.

But it gets worse. We invite them into our countries, willy-nilly, sacrificing what we are so they can remain what they always have been, and on our dime. Do we screen immigrants to make sure they adhere to our values and our beliefs, or do we somehow feel we have no right to decide who comes into our nation and just shrug?

We know who they are and we know what they want. But the suicide squad that is our elite would rather prove its virtue to its emasculated self by placing its weird multicultural fetish above our kids’ lives. We elect a president who wants to slow down the influx of refugees so we have a chance to figure out who the hell they are and our elite rushes to credulous courts that manufacture sanctimonious legal reasoning out of whole cloth to ensure that our people are kept defenseless.


When something is truly unacceptable, you can tell because we do not accept it. But we accept terror. We won’t do what it takes to win. The solution is obvious. It’s right there, and we all know it, but our elite is largely willing to let scores of us die rather than admit the truth that none of them dare speak.

The answer is not fake solidarity and social media memes and sacrificing a few little girls here and there so we can avoid calling out the lies we have allowed to castrate us.

The answer is destroying the enemy in war zones thoroughly and completely. It is to take up arms and crush our enemies, not just tread water in this sea of blood.

Get angry.

Because we have a right to be angry.

Because anger is the first crucial step to fighting back.

Because if we can see two dozen little kids blasted to shreds and not get angry, then maybe we deserve to live as the slaves of these 7th century savages.

As I’ve said all along: we’ll never defeat an enemy we’re too fucking chickenshit to even call by his proper name. We might not even have to destroy the terror-sponsoring regimes in Saudi Arabia and Iran to win, though; Billy Hollis left some great ideas in the comments here:

How’s this for some brainstorming about what could be done:

1. For any act of Islamic terror that results in injury to a non-Muslim, the mosque of the perp is closed for one year.

2. For any act of Islamic terror that results in death of a non-Muslim, the mosque of the perp is closed for two years.

3. For any two such acts from the same mosque, the mosque is closed permanently.

4. If the number of deaths from any incident or combination of incidents by perps from a mosque exceeds 20, the mosque is closed, defiled, and burned to the ground.

5. For any violent responses to such acts, such as riots, any participants who are not citizens are immediately deported. Any participants who are citizens are convicted of a felony and jailed unconditionally for one year.

Works for me, every last word of it. In any event, I feel certain that more weepy, maudlin rallies after the fact are NOT gonna get the job done. Nor are ziggurats of flowers adorned with photos of the never-to-be-avenged victims of each successive Muslim atrocity. Nor any number of pathetic, embarrassing #WHERETHEHELLEVERSTRONG hashtags.

Piss-soaked milksops all over the Western world can roll over and show their soft, flabby bellies all they may like; it will never buy them a single moment’s peace or safety. They are begging for mercy from an enemy who possesses not an ounce of it; they are speaking in a language he doesn’t comprehend, bargaining with a currency he doesn’t value. With each successive attack, they are being tested…and found wanting.

Our “leadership” won’t lead. Our military—the “strongest in the WORLD!”—is forced to squander its might and spill its lifeblood fighting Welcome-Wagon “wars” in far-flung barbaric shitholes without the faintest hope of victory—or any clear idea of what victory might actually even be. Our law enforcement agencies don’t dare to cross the rigid boundaries of political correctness to take official notice of blatantly suspicious malefactors living among us. And too many of our population will support no more vigorous response than flapping their hands, weeping, and milling about in the streets after the fact congratulating themselves on how “strong” they are.

And so, in another couple of weeks—maybe a month at the outside—we’ll be having this conversation again. Until we learn. Or are vanquished.

Official Lies update! Steyn:

Twenty-four hours after the Manchester attack, I joined Evan Solomon on CFRA in Ottawa to talk about what it meant and where we go. You can hear the full interview here (scroll down if necessary). I began by making the point that I was offended by the media coverage’s Orwellian inversion of language – whereby “#ManchesterStrong” means a limp passivity of flowers and candlelight vigils and teddy bears for a couple of days before we all forget it until the next “strong” “united” community gets blown apart.

My thoughts yesterday did not meet with universal agreement. Linda Cianchetti emails:

The killer was the queen of England’s clan.

Rothschild Soros club.

Stop zionist Israel jews from manufacturing all this illusion. They are the banking cartel around the world. Stop blaming everyone but the culprits, themselves. Or we will have no respect for journalists and the tales they put out.

Well, thanks for clearing that up.

I get a lot more of this than I used to. I suspect Ms Cianchetti would blame “zionist Israel jews” and “the queen of England’s clan” whatever happened, but it’s a close call whether she’s any more detached from reality than, say, Newsweek fretting about “reprisals” against Muslims or the nincompoop diversicrat who serves as Chief Constable of Greater Manchester sternly warning that we must not “tolerate hate” – by which he means not the hate of people who shred little girls’ bodies with nail bombs but the mean-spirited Tweets of people who get angry at the people who shred little girls’ bodies with nail bombs.

I was halfway hoping for a more lengthy and comprehensive piece from Steyn on this, but as he himself has said: really, what’s the point? Before we can hope to defeat the Muslims, we’re first going to have to defeat the Left. Until their miserable self-loathing and cowardice is made entirely irrelevant, it’s all just gum-flapping, to little or no good purpose. It’s the main reason I haven’t been in any great hurry to post on this latest attack: I had plenty to say, all right—but I’ve already said it, and have been saying it for sixteen years now. You guys already know it; the Progressivist lackwits ain’t listening, and couldn’t grasp it if they were. Until they’re removed from any position of power or influence, we’re all just pissing in the wind here.


Another great VICTORY in the not-quite-a-war against random man-caused disasters which have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam!

We’re all MANCHESTER “STRONG”!™ now. This week. In another two or three weeks, it’ll be someplace else. But after we hold hands, sing a John Lennon song, light some candles, and have ourselves yet another good cry, we’ll all feel a whole lot better about our weak-willed cowardice. To the latest dead: so sorry, but your deaths will go unavenged, and we won’t be doing a single damned thing to lend them at least some meaning by seeing to it that the animals who slaughtered you suffer in full measure for their atrocities and will thereby be persuaded that it might be best to leave us the hell alone.

And now back to telling ourselves how STRONG!™ and invincible we all are; how resolute, how determined; and how DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH and WE STAND TOGETHER and YOU WILL NEVER DIVIDE US and all the rest of that meaningless, pathetic folderol. Strong hint to the mewling kittens of the enfeebled West: if you’re always the ones crying, you assuredly are NOT winning.



Gee, I hope they don’t get upset when I call them cucks

When the going gets tough, the cucks roll over.

Young America’s Foundation (YAF) has pulled out of Ann Coulter’s Thursday event at UC Berkeley, blaming the college for allowing left-wing extremists to terrorize conservatives on campus.

“When Young America’s Foundation confirmed Ann Coulter would speak at UC-Berkeley as part of YAF’s nationwide campus lecture program on April 27, we assumed UC Berkeley would take all steps necessary to ensure the safety of students attending the educational event,” the group declared in a blog post on Tuesday. “In the meantime we discovered that the University of California Police Department at Berkeley has an official ‘stand-down’ policy for any situation that develops on campus as long as the situation doesn’t involve the imminent loss of life, allowing the leftist thugs who have terrorized Berkeley’s campus to do so without consequence.”

“As of 4:00 p.m. today, Young America’s Foundation will not be moving forward with an event at Berkeley on April 27 due to the lack of assurances for protections from foreseeable violence from unrestrained leftist agitators,” they continued. “Berkeley should be ashamed for creating this hostile atmosphere.”

And you guys should likewise be ashamed for folding like a cheap, piss-soaked accordion rather than fighting back, and thereby letting them win.

YAF added that they are still pushing forward with their lawsuit against the college, and that the group “looks forward to the day when First Amendment freedoms are enjoyed by conservative students.”

Lawsuits ain’t gonna do it, bub. I mean, more power to ya and all; I hope you win, for all the good that might do anybody. But when your only hope is an appeal to the judiciary, and said judiciary is wholly converged—infested top to bottom with anti-Constitutional Progressivist termites who are openly hostile to your First Amendment freedoms—well, can you reasonably hope for a good result?

Worse, when the cops are sitting back and refusing to maintain civic order and uphold your most basic human rights against the violent Progressivist onslaught…well, let’s just say their weak-kneed, puissant optimism would seem to be, shall we say, misplaced.

“Ms. Coulter may still choose to speak in some form on campus, but Young America’s Foundation will not jeopardize the safety of its staff or students,” they concluded. “For information on Ms. Coulter’s plans, please contact her directly.”

Gee, nice cop-out there, boys. If the restoration of Constitutional liberty is reliant on this sort of wet-pantied cowardice, then the restoration of Constitutional liberty is something we won’t be seeing for a long, long time. On a positive note, though, this IS Berkeley we’re talking about here. And Berkeley—along with most of the rest of California—was lost a long time ago, and is no longer worth bothering about. Let them go their way. We’ll go ours.

The civil war I’ve been mulling over here for a good while now has started; it began in Berkeley, of all places. There may still be some small chance of avoiding the shooting part of it, but probably not. Either way, there was never the remotest chance of a victory for FreeFor in Berkeley, of course. It’s merely the place where the battle’s contours are taking shape, and its inevitability made undeniable. We cannot peacefully coexist with Leftist vermin implacably committed to denying us our God-granted liberty. They are not going to leave us alone without getting their noses severely bloodied first, and until the consequences of their fascist arrogance are unmistakably spelled out.

Once again: they will not stop. They will have to BE stopped.

It never should have come to this, though, and we will all come to rue it in the end. But the hard, insuperable fact is that we no longer share any common ideological ground with the Left, any at all. There is no reasoning with them, no meaningful dialogue possible, no chance of true or equitable compromise.

In fairness, I understand YAF’s motivation here, and I know they think the wording of their capitulation will maybe matter someday, to somebody. I also understand their unwillingness to confront the violent, authoritarian Left without some assurance of police protection. It’s Berkeley, for God’s sake; they’re surrounded, without hope of reinforcement anytime soon. Nobody wants to be on the wrong end of a beating; nobody wants to get killed over what seems a mere political disagreement, especially in a place where the cause was so long ago lost.

But at this point, they—and we—are going to have to provide our OWN protection, under whatever terms and ROEs WE deem necessary and appropriate. They punch us, we punch them—harder. This is much more than an ordinary political disagreement. This is a fundamental, bare-knuckled dispute between two ideologies that cannot coexist within the borders of a single nation, and can only be settled by conquest and unquestionable victory for one side or the other.

I say again: if you wish to “compromise” with them, then which of your most basic and precious liberties are you willing to give up? And do you really believe that, once you’ve surrendered one or two, that will be the end of it, and their demands will end? CAN you have any faith in such a risible notion, having seen how greedy they are, how unslakable their thirst for absolute power over you is?

If so, may I have some of what you’re smoking?

The time for us to docilely soak up their repeated assaults and pat ourselves on the back for “taking the high road”—expecting approbation from the Powers That Be that will never come, while our honest blood clogs the gutters—is over. Vox spells it out:

This is yet another reason why the Alt-Right is replacing the conservative movement. Conservatives are social cowards who are manifestly unwilling to fight for their sacred principles against internal enemies. Sure, they’ll bravely fight external enemies to the death so long as they have the State’s blessing, but they cave every time they don’t have its approval.

That, in the end, is the fatal weakness of the conservative movement; the need of its members for the approval of authority. As long as the Left can wield the trappings of authority, conservatives will fall in line.

It seems they can’t even conceive of such a notion, or wish to hide from it, but it’s spelled out right in the Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution they claim to revere: enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC.

We are now all on a path none of the sensible and historically literate among us really wants to walk. I hate it. But so be it.

Update! Two from Ace’s HQ, spelling out exactly who the Leftymedia wants you to blame. Guess who it is; go on, guess. I dare ya.

And here’s a typically twisted, depraved take from the NYT:

In Ann Coulter’s Speech Battle, Signs That Conservatives Are Emboldened

“Emboldened.” To have the lunatic audacity to expect that the fucking US Constitution applies to them too, the bastards.

Yep, we’re off to a typically NYT start here.

Ms. Coulter, the acid-penned conservative writer, canceled a planned appearance on Thursday after the political organizations that invited her rescinded their support over fears of violence. “It’s a sad day for free speech,” she said.

But across the country, conservatives like her are eagerly throwing themselves into volatile situations like the one in Berkeley, emboldened by a backlash over what many Americans see as excessive political correctness, a president who has gleefully taken up their fight, and liberals they accuse of trying to censor any idea they disagree with.

I know, right? I mean, how DARE any conservative speakers have the temerity to think they might be permitted to give a speech on a college campus expressing ideas liberal censors disagree with?

Oh, and damn that damned Trump, for gleefully taking up this fight on behalf of “emboldened” conservatives.

President Trump’s victory was, to many of his supporters, a defiant uprising against what they saw as a cultural and political elite that told them their values were wrong and their beliefs bigoted.


And Mr. Trump, who has routinely used racially charged controversies and social movements like Black Lives Matter to his political benefit, has leapt to their defense, ready to fan the flames.

Catch that? Why, both sides are equally to blame here, and Trump most of all, for wantonly “fanning the flames” purely for his own “political benefit.” If those provocative, dangerous, belligerent “conservatives” would just shut up and go back to being their usual docile, humble selves and accept the “fact” of their racist, misogynist, homophobic bigotry—why, none of this would be happening!

And actually, they’re right about that, when you get down to it. But you’re getting the gist, right? The uprising against stifling political correctness—against all the direct insults; the contempt for the culture that shelters and provides for them; the adolescent resentment of those without whose forbearance their self-indulgent hatred could not exist for more than five minutes; the childish rebellion against reality—is to be blamed not on those whose irrationality provoked the uprising, but on those who are merely responding rationally to that witless provocation.

Hey, they told us Trump was horrible, and after witnessing the folly of their attempted destruction of the very way of life that they rely on for their continued existence, we voted him in anyway. So now, we must pay. I mean, how DARE we?

All that aside, get ready for a bona fide rarity here: I am about to compliment Bernie Sanders. Sincerely, with no sarcasm or smart-assery at all.

No, really. Not joking; I mean it. The blind pig has found his truffle, and trust me when I tell you that I am just as gobsmacked as you are. Better sit down for this, folks.

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a self-described democratic socialist, this week scolded anyone who would shut out Ms. Coulter. “What are you afraid of — her ideas?” he asked.

Uhhh, yes, that is EXACTLY what they’re afraid of. But bless your heart for saying it.

“Unfortunately, Berkeley and other universities have played into a narrative that the right would love to advance,” said Robert B. Reich, a former Labor secretary under President Bill Clinton who is now a professor of public policy at Berkeley. “The narrative assumes a cultural plot against the free expression of right-wing views in which academe, mainstream media — every facet of the establishment — is organized against them.”

Mr. Reich, noting the parallels to Mr. Trump’s message, added, “That’s a narrative Trump used to get into the White House.”

Because that narrative is the simple, obvious truth—as has been proved over and over, and was once again in Berkeley.

Can someone tell me, please, the last time a speech by some stupid commie dickhead—ANY commie dickhead, anywhere—was shut down on account of a wholly credible threat of violence by us Reich Wingnuttzzz Nazi Deathbeasts? Anywhere at all, on any pretext whatsoever? Can anybody tell me the last time a speech by some stupid commie dickhead was even protested at all by a Reich Wingnuttzzz Nazi Deathbeasts, even something as simple as just walking around on the sidewalk outside, carrying a sign or something?

There may have been one or two, I guess. But I can’t remember any offhand.

The university breathed a sigh of relief on Wednesday, but it criticized Ms. Coulter, who has a knack for provocation and a history of inviting disruption wherever she speaks, for being wanton and reckless given that it had offered to accommodate her at a later date after canceling her originally scheduled speech. The Berkeley chancellor, Nicholas B. Dirks, said in a note to the campus, “This is a university, not a battlefield.”

Well, not until your violent campus SJWs—utterly devoid of any “knack for provocation,” and with no history at all of “inviting disruption,” natch—decide to shut down and de facto ban a speaker whose ideas they don’t agree with, apparently—thereby making it a battlefield, at least metaphorically. But when they do it, all bets are off, all declamations supporting “freedom of speech” are flushed, all tolerance renounced, all minds closed…and battle is eagerly joined, no matter how you may choose to refer to the ground on which it is fought.

The REAL problem here is, now you twerps just might get some fight back, at long last.

Once again, all they had to do was leave us alone; they didn’t have to attend Coulter’s speech if they didn’t want to. But the very idea that she might be allowed to speak at all was intolerable to them, and via credible threats of violence, they shut free speech down, and directly trampled not just Coulter’s Constitutionally-protected rights, but, indirectly, everyone’s.

And that says all about them that anybody should ever need to know. They are fascists; they are not just un- but anti-American; they are a direct threat to absolutely everything this country is supposed to be about. They are precisely what the Founders feared most, and warned us most explicitly about, in every word and writing.

May the dimestore dictators wake up before it’s too late to avoid the cataclysm they’re forcing on us. Failing that, may they have joy of their choice—in Hell, alongside all the other vanquished would-be tramplers upon human liberty.

Sad denouement update! Leave it to Steyn to get to the bloody heart of it:

The left is increasingly confident in its ideological enforcement mob. Yet, as we saw a week or two back at Berkeley, when you incentivize thuggery, it’s careless to assume you’ll always have a monopoly of it. That too is a free-speech lesson – because, as I always say, in a society without freedom of speech, without vigorous public debate, all you can do to express yourself is punch the other guy’s lights out.

So here we are seven years on from the show not going on in Ottawa, and free speech is despised even more. I should note one other small change: in the old days, columns such as the one below used to attract emails from US readers pointing out that “We’re not like you Canuck pussies/Euro-wimps/[Insert Despised Foreign Jurisdiction Here]. Americans won’t put up with this nonsense.” But it’s 2017 and, from Middlebury to Berkeley, Americans are putting up with it. The organs of the state – from taxpayer-funded schools to law enforcement – are colluding with the thugs against the only diversity that matters: diversity of opinion. A First Amendment that doesn’t extend even to public universities is in pretty poor shape. What matters is public support for the broader culture of free speech and in the US, as in Canada and Europe and Australia, the left’s hostility to freedom of expression is ever more brazen.

He then goes on to repost a 2010 column which is depressingly even more germane now. The meat of the whole thing:

Remember Allan Rock? Oh, come on, he was all the rage for 20 minutes back in the nineties. Was it only a decade ago that he was briefly a rising star among Liberal cabinet ministers and that week’s prime-minister-in-waiting? Having drunk from the poisoned chalice M. Chrétien reserved for his many putative successors, Mr. Rock landed with his bottom in the butter and, for not entirely obvious reasons, is now president of the University of Ottawa. After M. Houle’s Houligans had gone to work, president Rock felt obliged to defend his institution. “We have a long history of hosting contentious and controversial speakers on our campus.”

That’s good to know. By “long history,” you mean 50, 70 years ago? Because the speakers hosted in recent seasons seem to be the usual parade of dreary publicly funded identity-group ward-heelers living high off the hog of diversity. Anyone else has a tougher time wiggling through. The howling gang of rent-a-leftists that greeted Miss Coulter at Ottawa is the natural product of this shrivelled, desiccated environment. I don’t suppose M. Houle gave his email much thought, other than that it would impress the many colleagues to whom he copied it: what a man! Speaking truth to power blond! But most of the diversity-peddling faculty are old enough to have some residual acquaintanceship with the inheritance they affect to revile. Whatever bollocks they spout in class, they have no wish to live anywhere other than an advanced Western society: for one thing, it’s the only place you can make a living selling fatuous pap about diversity; in that and many other ways, multiculturalism is a unicultural phenomenon. In some deep unacknowledged sense, they understand they’re engaged in a pantomime.

But their students are another matter. If you’re born circa 1990, you have been raised entirely in a François Houle world: this is all you know; it’s the air that you breathe. It’s like the difference between the first generation of rock ‘n’ rollers and those nineties gangsta rappers. Elvis sang, “If you’re looking for trouble, you’ve come to the right place / If you’re looking for trouble, look right in my face.” But when you did, as the novelist Tony Parsons noted, you couldn’t help noticing he was wearing a little too much mascara. Whereas when you looked into Snoop Dogg’s or the Notorious B.I.G.’s face, you really were looking for trouble. Asinine ham-fisted clods like Houle are play revolutionaries; I’m not so sure about his young charges. When he threatened criminal charges against Miss Coulter, it was a cheap rhetorical sneer. To his students, it was a call to arms. One was struck in news reports of the riot at the complete worthlessness of the “disciplines” the protesters are “studying”: “Sameena Topan, 26, a conflict studies and human rights major.” Twenty-six, huh?

As for Ottawa’s coppers, they certainly demonstrated that famously Canadian “restraint.” Faced with a law-abiding group engaging in legal activity and a bunch of thugs trying to prevent it, the police declined to maintain order. As George Jonas wrote, “Ottawa’s finest exemplified Canada’s definition of moral leadership by observing neutrality between lawful and lawless.”

There seems to be rather a lot of this in the True North restrained and civil. I’m not just referring to obvious surrenders such as Caledonia, but to the bizarre episode of TVO’s The Agenda broadcast from the Munk Centre last week. No Ann Coulter around, only the finance minister of Ontario. But a Coulteresque mob rushed the stage, and the host Steve Paikin had to insert himself between protesters and the minister. “Regardless of what you thought of yesterday’s budget,” wrote Paikin, “I don’t believe guests who agree to appear on The Agenda ought to get beaten up.”

Oh, c’mon, you pussy. Where’s your commitment to social justice? As in Ottawa, law enforcement declined to enforce the law, the OPP remaining in the wings as thugs rushed the stage. “The police, I’m told, were urged not to intervene,” Paikin explained, “lest pictures of demonstrators being hauled off by the cops show up all over YouTube.”

True. You might haul off a Muslim or a lesbian and find yourself in “human rights” hell. Better just to linger nonchalantly by the side until it’s all over: O Canada, we stand around for thee. Her Majesty’s Constabulary seem to be sending the message that violence pays-—at least for approved identity groups. That doesn’t seem a prudent strategy.

Well, it depends on what your desired end-state is. If your goal is the humiliation of the West and the destruction of its culture—and you feel assured enough by prior meekness in its defense, previous pliant acceptance of your raw aggression, that such meek acceptance will continue—well, what’s not to like? You get to go on winning without resistance; you get victory without real battle, conquest sans combat. You get to march off the field without even getting your clothes dirty or your hair mussed.

But if your goal is the ongoing well-being of the very culture without which you cannot exist, but which your demented ideology demands you revile and undermine…well, yeah, imprudent is probably putting it mildly. But that realization would require an acknowledgement the Left is not capable of, and a logic that is far, far beyond them. It would require humility; it would require an admission of dependency and inferiority that, while perfectly proper and accurate, they can never, ever be reconciled to. Nobody ought to expect it for a moment. As my mom always said: wish in one hand, shit in the other. See which one gets full quickest.

Plain and simple update! That’s about the size of it:

This is who we are up against. They don’t want to debate. They want to destroy. They have created a straw man and that straw man needs to be punished for the fictional crimes he has committed until society suffers so much decay, the freaks appear normal.

There is a culture war going on, and it’s apoplectic idiots with nothing to say vs. perfectly sane people who want everyone to have their say. Our world includes them. They can go have a talk about how Nazis are lurking around every corner and Trump is Hitler. We won’t “shut it down,” as Yvette Felarca brags. Their world doesn’t include us. They don’t tolerate Nazis, and by Nazis they mean anyone who doesn’t take their radical views seriously. If you think there are two genders (as doctors do), if you don’t support gay marriage (over a third of Americans oppose it), if you think illegal aliens are illegal (as the law does), if you think women are different from men (as reality does), you are a Nazi and you need to be punched in the face. This kind of harassment works for a while. Sane people aren’t looking for trouble. We have jobs and we want peace and quiet after a hard day’s work. However, when you burn down a gay immigrant’s talk because you think he’s a homophobic xenophobe, we start to question your cause. When professors need a neck brace after trying to escape a talk that was already shut down, we begin to wonder what you’re thinking. When pedophiles start telling us what to do, we begin to question their morals. When feminists embrace Sharia, we begin to consider the possibility that none of these people have any idea what they’re doing. Then, when breathtakingly gorgeous intellectuals get maced for daring to question the anarchist narrative, we begin to get angry. This is where we are. We’re angry. And you’re not going to like us when we’re angry.

Leftist propaganda is done because we know the truth, and the truth is they’ve all been lying. Alexis de Tocqueville recognized that democracy was much less efficient than aristocratic society, but when the people finally do get off their asses and fight, nothing can stop them. This is where we’re at. The momentum has finally hit its stride and nothing can stop it now.

Yeah, feels that way to me too. After reading this entire post, something smacked me upside the head: they’re absolutely obsessed with us, but we really don’t give much of a shit about them. Very few of us are at all interested in wasting any precious time pondering what they think; let them huddle in their decaying urban rat-traps and mutter about us all they like, we don’t care. They can live however they like; we have no interest in stopping them, or shielding them from the consequences of whatever mad lifestyle they may dream up.

And in the end, that’s what drives them mad, I think: we don’t care. They don’t matter in the least to us. Their opinions are their own, and we aren’t humbled by their view of our benighted failure to share them. At long, long last, try to provoke Daddy all they like, Daddy is no longer paying attention; Daddy is bored, and Daddy has better things to do. The ensuing hissy-fit probably shouldn’t surprise any of us, really.

We wanted a President who didn’t despise America, who didn’t blame America, who would put our national interests first instead of last, when they were considered at all. Who would be unabashed and unembarrassed by his patriotic affection for his country. We elected that President fair and square, against all odds. Beyond that, well, know what? Honestly?

We. Don’t. Care. Sorry, snowflakes, but there it is.


Fighting the Antifa fascists: a practical AAR

Advice from someone who’s been there and done that:

Those Nike batting helmets are light, but they work! I took a rock to the top of my head yesterday that probably would have had me out. We also tested it before the saturday with a could of good smacks to the sides and back with both dowels and 1x3s. The impact jerked your head, but it protected against the pain and did a reasonable job of getting the blow to skate along the curves of the helmet.

One of the folks there next to me wasn’t wearing a helmet, and took a nasty smack in the head with a thrown full mini-can of soda. He recovered OK, but there was a LOT of blood. They have video of him getting treated.

Wear a helmet…even if you are fit and young. I armored up because I am slow, but even those fit madmen dodging rocks on the front line could use it.

…and VD, They did a fantastic job of keeping the lines together yesterday. They had folks watching for flanking and the berserkers (that’s what those based millennials were fighting like…absolutely breathtaking) at the front were keeping an ear out for the yell to pull back when they smashed into the front lines of the very skinny antifa janissaries. There were only a few incidents of folks pushing too far and getting enveloped.

Gloves are necessary as well. I started out with my motorcycle gloves, but lost them when I took them off to put some gauze on the fellow how to smack with the soda. Even though I didn’t take a hit in the hands, I still learned why I needed them after the rally when I was heading back home. I didn’t get pepper sprayed directly, but I did go through the clouds a couple of times and helped a few guys holding their head back when they were getting their eyes washed out. Pepper spray residue was all over my hands and when I took off my mask, helmet and goggles, I instinctively wiped my lips. Noob mistake that would have been mitigated if I was wearing gloves. I’m glad there were no cameras to capture my “it’s too spicy” dance.

Vox elaborates:

Remember, antifa is all offense, so the leaders are not expecting to engage in any direct conflict themselves. The wedgies were a nice touch; another effective humiliation is to tie their shoelaces together or to remove their belts and bind their ankles with them.

Okay, that’s just hilarious right there. Once our side really DOES get fed up and decide to start fighting back, these pitiful geeks are well and truly fucked. They’ve become used to assaulting people with complete impunity; that will end, and right soon. They’re cowards, and nothing more—accustomed to hiding in crowds and never being called to account for their chickenshit attacks; sucker-punching people and then running away, never pursued by the cops and allowed to melt away into the surrounding landscape.

These are quintessential liberal-fascists, opposed to violence except when it suits them, completely ignorant of guns and other weaponry that they’re viscerally frightened of and upset by. Unfortunately for them, they’ll soon be facing off with former soldiers, men who have served in the combat arms and have done battle on faraway fields against a relentless enemy, under absurd rules of engagement demanded by the self-same feebs that forced them to witness the slaughter of their brothers for no good reason, while denying them the ability to retaliate effectively.

Those combat-blooded soldiers resent those ROEs, as well they might; they know full well who inflicted the ROEs on them—who tied their hands and effectively turned them from able, near-invincible warriors into mere walking targets. And now those pathetic, gutless cowards want to overturn an election that didn’t go their way, to effect a soft coup d’etat merely by boo-hooing and bleating in the streets over it?

Um—sorry, snowflakes, but…no. Most emphatically, NO. If you really do want a stand-up fight, keep pushing and you’re going to get one. If you want to keep on sneaking up and punching us from behind without ever being called to account, well, sorry to tell you: Ain’t. Gonna. Happen. Our patience with you is fully expended. We don’t want this civil war. But we aren’t the types to shrink from it if it’s forced on us, either. Both cheeks have been turned at this point; you damned well better wake up and pull yourselves back from the brink of madness, before we all plunge over the precipice and into the abyss in one big, ugly pile.

I say again: I fervently hope they do come to their senses at last. But I ain’t holding my breath, either. Wedgies, pepper spray, and batting helmets are going to be the very least of it, and will come to seem quaint and almost charming before all is said and done, I’m afraid. If they don’t stop pushing, it will be bullets, blood, and disastrous chaos all too soon, seems to me.

But know what? So be it then, frankly. They’ve stolen all of our liberty that they ought to be allowed; way more, in fact. May they come to regret that choice, as is only just. And may they profit from their very own teachable moment, at long last. As I keep saying: there is liberty, or there is tyranny. All they ever had to do was leave us alone. They wouldn’t, or couldn’t. Now, they must be stopped. And eventually, they will be.

Update! Have we reached peak liberal-fascist violence yet?

Political Violence is Here — Now the Question is, Who Can Do it Better?
The fake news media was silent when a woman wearing a Make BITCOIN Great Again hat was pepper sprayed by (a) left-wing activist. The young woman wearing a bitcoin hat was not the first woman to be assaulted by a liberal.

No, she most certainly was not—nor the last, either. But soon enough, one of us will be the last. May God have mercy on the liberal-fascists when we finally decide we’ve had enough…because we surely won’t. They’ll get the same mercy and forbearance from us that we’ve received from them right along: none at all.

(Via WRSA)


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.


An idea whose time is….

Coming soon.

Mind you, these insulated and boundlessly arrogant coastal creeps are so out of touch that they expected to be able to shit on the Silent Majority from here to eternity without the Silent Majority ever barking back at the ballot box. And they remain so encased in their opaque Rainbow Bubble that they appear to think that sooner or later, people won’t start punching back.

At this point, the psychotic hyperbole of the Antifa turds is so familiar as to be depressingly mainstream—SMASH the Nazis! CRUSH their skulls into the pavement! The only good fascist is a DEAD fascist!

Believe this—if they were truly under the impression that the “Nazis” were such a looming threat, they wouldn’t be acting nearly this bold. They act without fear, mainly because it’s been generations since anyone gave them a good reason to be afraid.

Enter the new Right Wing Death Squads, which don’t truly exist as anything more than an idea at this point. They are not organized and well-funded like Antifa are, and to my knowledge they are not responsible for any rioting nor even a single sucker punch…yet.

At the moment, it is not an organized movement so much as it is the sort of threat that a longsuffering parent may give to its misbehaving child—“If you keep it up, I’m going to really give you something to cry about.”

What could be more appropriate, for a bunch of misbehaving children?

Follows, a brief history of actual death squads, a good few of which it shouldn’t surprise you to learn were oriented Leftwards. Bottom line? This:

If the left keeps kicking the hornet’s nest, they shouldn’t cry if they wind up getting stung. Oh, they’ll cry—it’s what they do—but they shouldn’t.

For eight years—with all the flash mobs and Occupy protests and wide-scale looting and arson whenever a black criminal who fought with a cop wound up getting shot—the left threw Victory Riots. Now they seem hell-bent on at least four years of Defeat Riots.

But somehow I doubt they’d be nearly so brazen if they feared that down every street across America, their violent shenanigans might be met by self-styled Right Wing Death Squads who are willing to fight back. Ronald Reagan was clearly not yet senile back when he insisted that the only way to achieve peace is through strength.

Yep. As I keep saying: careful what you wish for, Leftards, lest you get it in the end—good and hard.


Petulant, pussified boy-man comes up short again

Putin took his measure years ago, and found Obambi wanting. He was correct in that assessment.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said today he will not expel 35 U.S. diplomats, rejecting his foreign minister’s recommendation to do so in response to U.S. sanctions.

Putin, in a statement on the Kremlin’s website today, referred to the new sanctions, including the expulsion of Russian intelligence operatives, as “provocation and aimed at further weakening the Russia-U.S. relationship.”

“The diplomats who are returning to Russia will spend the New Year’s holidays with their families and friends,” Putin said in a statement that also included season’s greetings to President Obama and Donald Trump. “We will not create any problems for US diplomats. We will not expel anyone.”

He added: “As it proceeds from international practice, Russia has reasons to respond in kind. Although we have the right to retaliate, we will not resort to irresponsible ‘kitchen’ diplomacy but will plan our further steps to restore Russian-U.S. relations based on the policies of the Trump administration.”

Good for him. Putin is a real leader—a tough, realistic player on the international stage; Barky is a punk in way over his head, an unaccomplished, egotistical cipher with nothing whatsoever to be so narcissistic about. Putin just took the high road and made Obarbie a laughingstock yet again. Not that that’s at all difficult to do, mind; the whole world has been laughing at him while running rings around his smug, stupid ass for eight long, miserable years now.

It’s going to be a matter of real interest—in ways, an outright pleasure—watching Trump and Putin spar and joust under terms of mutual respect, if not genuine admiration. That’s as it should be; if I was an ISIS leader right now, I would be shaking in my boots at the world of hurt about to descend on my head when two serious players team up to put an end to my reign of terror once and for all, instead of just talking big and doing nothing of any real or lasting import.

January 20th can’t come soon enough. That’s when the real “reset button” gets pressed. The entire world will be better off for it, too.

Update! Thomas Lifson:

First and foremost, this move disempowers President Obama before he even leaves office. Our chief geopolitical rival – a notion Barack Obama sneered at in a presidential debate with Mitt Romney – has just in effect said to Obama, “Who cares what you do? You’re outta here in 3 weeks, buddy.” Dismissing Obama as not worthy of retaliation projects a loss of face onto the world stage, making a capon out of the outgoing president.

Again: not hard to do. He never was anything much else but. Our first affirmative-action pResident couldn’t ever have amounted to much more than a sad, bitter joke. And, well, here we all are.

Don’t worry: I realize that Putin is a thug from the KGB. The sad fact is that ruthless people occupy a disproportionate number of head-of-government roles in the world. I doubt very much that President-elect Trump has any illusions.

In the meantime, Obama looks smaller and smaller.

To some of us who saw through the manufactured deception from the beginning, he always was small. Hey Barky, how about getting back to slowing the rise of the oceans and healing the planet, whydon’tcha?

Fucking jackass.


Bull Moose redux?

Daniel crystallizes a comparison I’ve sort of been batting around in my own mind for a while now: Trump as Teddy.

A hundred years ago, Muslims were furious over an immigration bill whose origins lay with advocacy by a headstrong and loudmouthed Republican in the White House.

The anti-immigration bill offended the Ottoman Empire, the rotting Caliphate of Islam soon to be defeated at the hands of America and the West, by banning the entry of “all polygamists, or persons who admit their belief in the practice of polygamy.”

This, as was pointed out at the time, would prohibit the entry of the “entire Mohammedan world” into the United States.

And indeed it would.

The Immigration Act of 1891 had merely banned polygamists. The newest law banned anyone who believed in the practice of polygamy. That group included every faithful believing Muslim.

The Ottoman Empire’s representatives argued that their immigrants believed in the practice of polygamy, but wouldn’t actually take more than one wife. This argument echoes the current contention that Muslim immigrants may believe in a Jihad against non-Muslims without actually engaging in terrorism. That type of argument proved far less convincing to Americans than it does today.

Muslim immigration was still slight at the time and bans on polygamy had not been created to deliberately target them, but the Muslim practice of an act repulsive to most Americans even back then pitted their cries of discrimination and victimhood against the values of the nation. The Immigration Act of 1907 had been meant to select only those immigrants who would make good Americans.

And Muslims would not.

And still won’t. And never will, except maybe for the apostates. Their creed, after all, stands in opposition to and is incompatible with our Constitution, as TR and most other Western leaders once knew. The degree to which we’re willing to countenance the influx of immigrants who despise its principles is reflective of the degree to which we’ve abandoned those principles ourselves.


Are we desensitized yet?

We’d better be.

While somberly addressing the massacre still in progress — with the usual boilerplate “our hearts go out to [X victim of terror]” — U.S. President Obama managed to crack a joke, grin, chuckle, and draw laughter from his audience.

After all, what is the big deal? Shouldn’t we be used to Muslims rampaging and killing by now? And really, what’s nine dead compared to the many hundreds killed by Islamic terrorists around the world in recent weeks?

The leader of the nation where the attack took place, Angela Merkel, waited almost 24 hours before she delivered yet another perfunctory speech containing all the usual words, condolences, and platitudes.

Then again, what was the hurry? Muslims abusing, raping, and killing Germans in Germany is old hat.

Smaller Islamic terror attacks which once would have been extremely newsworthy — and received condemnation from the highest echelons of the political rung — now receive obligatory or no media coverage, and little comment.

So? What’s really left to say that hasn’t been said already—and ignored?

Systematic desensitization is when the client [the West] is exposed to the anxiety-producing stimulus [Islamic violence] at a low level [reports and images of Islamic violence “over there” in the Mideast], and once no anxiety is present a stronger version of the anxiety-producing stimulus is given [reports of violence closer to home, in the West]. This continues until the individual client [the West] no longer feels any anxiety towards the stimulus [Islamic violence].

Is this the plan?

Are the “global elite” producing situations, such as the manufactured “migrant crisis,” that cause the West to experience incrementally worse forms of Islamic violence, until it becomes desensitized, loses its “phobia” — in this case, “Islamophobia” — and simply “learns to live with terrorism,” as in the words of France’s prime minister?

And the US’s pRetend pResident too, lest we forget.

It’s like this: the War On Something Or Other is over, and we lost. We lost the moment George W Bush called Islam “the religion of peace.” The decision was made to stick our heads in the sand and go after shadowman enemies, defining “enemy” very strictly down to willfully and chickenheartedly sweep the realities of the Muslim pseudo-religion under a very thick rug. You can’t defeat an enemy you don’t understand and refuse to acknowledge…and we didn’t.

It’s too late for Europe, and very nearly so for us. They’ve allowed their societies to be infiltrated top to bottom with hordes of violent savages who despise them, and intend to see the Western world either subjugated or destroyed. We’re doing the same. The Muzzrats are committed to their beliefs in a way we never will be to ours, with a wholehearted fanaticism we can’t even comprehend, much less defeat.

They’ve been right about one thing all along: we are indeed soft and decadent, while they are ruthless and implacable. Strong horse, weak horse. Does that sound like a formula for victory for the soft and decadent to anybody? Can anybody seriously doubt the outcome of any clash between Ahmed the Beheader and Pajama Boy? Which one looks like the Weak Horse to you?


Islam is all by itself a reminder that humanity—and the world itself—is neither perfect nor perfectible. To fight it successfully means doing some ugly and unpleasant and extremely difficult things, and we simply don’t have “difficult” in us anymore. In truth, most of us would rather just be left alone. It’s understandable, I guess; in fact, it’s by way of being human nature. It’s also dangerous as hell, and it’s always been an irony central to human existence that our success—any success, either as individuals or as a culture—always carries within it the seeds of our destruction.

The nice thing is that the filthbag in question shown above, commonly known by his nickname Jihadi John, is dead. But Pajama Boy is alive and well, and still very much in charge of our government. And he’s in over his head, running a long-term war he can’t possibly win. Not when he doesn’t have the heart or the balls to try, refuses to admit that he’s in a war at all, and can’t even understand the concept of “war” in the first place.


An open letter to liberals

Seconded. With all my heart.

The fact is, you can rail against my conservatism all you wish. You can make fun of my Tea Party gatherings, and you can ridicule patriots in tri-corner hats until you wet yourself from mirth, but one thing is for certain: my political philosophy will NEVER be a threat to your freedom. If you feel a burning responsibility to the poor, conservatism will never prevent you from working 80 hours per week and donating all of your income to charity. If you feel a strong sense of pity for a family who cannot afford health insurance, my political philosophy will never prevent you from purchasing health insurance for this family or raising money to do so, if you cannot afford it, personally. If you are moved with compassion for a family who is homeless, a conservative will never use the police power of government to prevent you from taking that family in to your own home or mobilizing your community to build one for them.

However, you cannot say the same for liberalism. If I choose not to give to the poor for whatever reason, you won’t simply try to persuade me on the merits of the idea – you will seek to use the government as an instrument of plunder to force me to give to the poor. If we are walking down the street together and we spot a homeless person, using this logic, you would not simply be content with giving him $20 from your own pocket – you would hold a gun to my head and force me to give him $20, as well.

Everything that modern liberalism accomplishes is accomplished at the barrel of a government rifle.

What angers me the most about you is the eagerness with which you allow the incremental enslavement to occur. You are the cliched and proverbial frog in the pot who has actually convinced himself that he’s discovered a big, silver jacuzzi. Somehow, you’re naive enough to believe that one more degree of heat won’t really matter that much.

I have the utmost respect for a slave who is continuously seeking a path to freedom. What I cannot stomach is a free man who is continuously seeking a path to servitude by willingly trading his freedom for the false sense of security that government will provide.

Servitude can exist in a free society, but freedom cannot exist in a slave nation. In a free country, you have the liberty to join with others of your political ilk and realize whatever collectivist ideals you can dream up. You can start your own little commune where the sign at the front gate says, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need”, and everyone can work for the mutual benefit of everyone else. In my society, you have the freedom to do that.

In your society, I don’t have the same freedom. If your collectivism offends me, I am not free to start my own free society within its borders. In order for collectivism to work, everyone must be on board, even those who oppose it – why do you think there was a Berlin Wall?

In conclusion, just know that the harder you push to enact your agenda, the more hostile I will become – the harder I will fight you. It’s nothing personal, necessarily.

Not yet. But it’s going to be, because they won’t stop until it is. May they have joy of their choice, once they find themselves on the business end of some rifle barrels themselves.

Know what puzzles me, though? This: why does anybody still think there’s a need—hell, a reason—to be civil to people who clearly, openly intend to enslave them? Barry Goldwater said “extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in defense of liberty is no virtue” and these are people who almost always make a point of emphasizing their agreement with him. So why do they suddenly go all meek, humble, and limp when confronted by people who actually, literally want to enslave every man Jack of us to an all-powerful government? Why do they cringe and cower from any even slightly forceful declaration of opposition to the Slaver Left—as if impoliteness is a greater abomination than acquiescence? Is there any reason at all to view that attitude as anything more than weakness and cowardice? If there is, I ain’t seeing it.

(Via WRSA)


Remain calm

Vox sees it:

The Khan/Implosion narrative (is) nothing more than the Democratic hasbara that we’ve been seeing on this blog and others, writ large. As for the polls, I remind you of my previous assessment: they don’t mean ANYTHING until 30 days after the end of the second convention.

If there is no discernible Trump trend by then, it MIGHT be time to start considering the possibility of a Hillary win. In the meantime, pay no attention to the media’s attempt to establish a false narrative. Remember, they are trying to shape reality, they are not honestly reporting it.

Let’s look at this rationally. If the media was genuinely convinced that Hillary Clinton was going to win, do you really think they would engage in this sort of mass narrative-shaping instead of triumphantly slinging insults at Republicans while victory-dancing?

As to how long it will be before they pivot, I would say one week after the polls start showing Trump within striking distance of Hillary again. Which should be in about one month.

UPDATE: from the comments: “Ricky Vaughn 99 has suggested for months that it all starts with one push from Labor Day. He has said Trump does pushes and retreats in waves.

I have noticed this too. Remember there were similar lulls around the time Michelle Fields was raped, murdered, and dismembered at a Trump rally and again after the Ohio loss cost Trump the Republican nomination.

No need to get all distressed and handwringy over the media doing what it was always going to do, what it has always done, and what it was going to do regardless of who the Republican nominee was. Remember when Mitt Romney—that nicest of all nice-guy perennial-loser candidates for whom the libtards and Republicrats (pardon the redundancy) now so winsomely yearn—was pushing grannies in wheelchairs off cliffs, deliberately giving female employees cancer, raping companies and destroying entire economies to enrich himself and his greedy-bastard cronies, and murdering his dog by putting it in a rooftop car carrier? If not, you damned well ought to.

This is all just business as usual, folks, the principal difference being that fewer of us than ever are agreeing to get into the van with the nice Republican conman to take some of that candy he’s been offering on our way home from school. Don’t let’s be fooled again, and don’t let yourself be hoodwinked and stampeded by these conniving swindlers again either.


Ho hum

France can absorb it. They’d better be able to; they don’t have any other choice by now.

The most important thing, though, is to be sure not to allocate blame anyplace but where it truly belongs: the NRA, Christian intolerance, slutty European woman and their shameless mode of dress, and Donald Trump. Oh, and white cops. We’re also going to need to begin considering—at long last—implementing some common-sense truck control measures.

I was having a conversation with my brother last night about all this, and I said something along the lines of “maybe this time they’ll finally learn.” His position, while a good bit less optimistic, made more sense: they’ll never learn, and it is no longer reasonable to expect it of them. After all, these are people who still cling to socialism despite its hundred-year record of abject failure all around the globe. These are people who believe that talking is the solution to every problem, as long as they’re the ones talking and everybody else shuts up. They’re the ones who believe it possible—and desirable—to micromanage a planetary climate but simply beyond human ability to secure a border.

No, they won’t learn from this or any other of the monthly jihadi attacks; clearly, they’re incapable of learning.

The truth is, they can’t afford to learn, because learning would require them to admit to decades of error. It would require them to face up to the most unpalatable notion in the world for them: that maybe, just maybe, they aren’t the supergenius übermenschen they’ve always told themselves and everybody else they were; that maybe the rest of us might not be the stupid, grunting, uneducable troglodytes they’ve always assumed; that maybe, just maybe, we’re not in desperate need of their strict supervision and management in order to survive and thrive. That maybe we just might all be better off without them.

And all this they will never, ever concede, no matter how many have to die to sustain their irrational megalomania. Which brings me right back around to my long-held and oft-stated belief: that before we can ever have any hope of successfully defeating the Muslims, we’re going to have to defeat the Left. In the meantime, break out the candles and crying towels. Practice up on “duck and cover,” “cower in place,” and “run screaming and piss yourself in terror,” all the preferred Progressivist methods for responding to open warfare in the streets of our cities. Put those crappy John Lennon songs on endless repeat and congratulate yourselves on your “courage” at “confronting” the threat with no weapons other than bared throats and exposed soft, flabby underbellies. Western Civ has got itself some more groveling to do.

Update! Maybe if we all painted eyes on our asses

Boots on the ground update!How Much Blood, Mr. President, How Much Do You Need?” The answer is as eternal as it is obvious: more.

Mot juste update! Please allow me to be the first to refer to this mysteriously-motivated man-caused disaster as the Road Rage Attack. Update within an update! MSNBC goes me one better, with “Deadly truck crash.” And there you have it: just another run-of-the-mill freeway accident, folks—a “tragedy,” not an atrocity. No Islam to see here, nor much of anything else. Now let’s all get back to “absorbing” it, shall we? Have a good cry, hold hands for a while, sing a few sappy, maudlin songs, and just never mind all that other existential-war unpleasantness.



Another Muslim terror attack which has nothing whatever to do with Muslims

Right-wing Christian conservative Republican Trump supporters blew up a train station in Turkey. Looks like the Turks are gonna need to get themselves some common-sense bomb control—not that anybody wants to take away Muslims’ bombs, of course, which is just silly and an outrageous lie. Obama immediately issued a statement calling for Turks and international travelers to remain calm, saying that they “can absorb a few attacks like this” and that people should “chillax, dude, no biggie.” No comment was available or even necessary from the Islamic State’s leadership, who were all laughing too hard to speak.

Meanwhile, in other news, the number 12 man in charge at ISIS was taken out by a drone strike in Outer Hellholistan, bringing IS to its knees and signaling final victory in the “War” on “Terror,” since it is impossible to imagine that he will be replaced by any of the fifty or so underlings scrambling to succeed him. His name was not released because who cares.

Update! Fucking morons.

In a Tuesday hearing on the use of terms like “Islam,” “Muslim,” and “jihad” in discussions on national security, Senate Democrats and expert witnesses argued that using the term “radical Islam” to describe groups like the Islamic State (ISIS) is just as insulting and factually incorrect as using the term “radical Christianity” to describe the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Yes, they did it with straight faces.

Well, of course they did. They’re idiots, and they really believe their own PC bullshit. Although I must admit, the moron Left is right about this part:

“Radical Islam is no more accurate or appropriate a descriptor of the source of terrorist violence committed by Muslims than radical Christianity would be to describe the Ku Klux Klan, Army of God, or others,” Michael German, a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, testified at the “Willful Blindness” Senate Committee on the Judiciary hearing organized by Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

“Radical Islam” is of course NOT accurate. The correct and truthful term would be “mainstream Islam,” or more simply, Islam. Not that you’ll ever hear it from any of these contemptible assclowns.

At this point, it’s hard NOT to be rooting for ISIS at least a little bit. A well-timed bomb or three in and around the halls of Congress would do us all a world of good, in all kinds of ways. But they’re not stupid enough to try it; they know that after such a cleansing event, there’d be a dangerous chance of our bringing in some actual leaders, who might then decide to stop organizing committees and holding hearings and start fighting a real war on terrorism or something.

Via Ed, who adds: “Klan-admirer Woodrow Wilson (D-NJ) could not be reached for comment.”

It gets worse update! Another one of those things, increasingly common in life these days, that you will simultaneously find shocking and won’t be the least bit surprised by.

You’d think we would be thanking him.


Not-so-lone wolves

They DO hunt in packs, you know.

President Obama says don’t worry, the Orlando terrorist was just another “lone actor” operating in isolation, unconnected to any larger group of supporters. In fact, these so-called “lone wolves” are running in packs, and suggesting otherwise gives the public a false sense of security.

Yet Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson echoed Obama, saying Omar Mateen was “self-radicalized” without any religious, ideological or operational support from friends, family or others in the Muslim community.

“What we do know at this point is it appears this was a case of self-radicalization,” Johnson said. “He does not appear to have been part of any group.”

A more accurate picture is that Mateen, an Afghan-American, was part of a disturbingly large Muslim family of sympathizers, supporters and even co-conspirators.

Actually, this bothers me a lot less than all the “homegrown terrorist” bushwa they keep trying to force down our throats. This guy was about as American as a dishdasha, and not one jot or tittle more. The fact that his father moved here a few years back (towing all the baggage of his Muslim-supremacist, America-hating ideology and an enduring fondness for the Taliban like a surgically-attached U-Haul) in no way makes either of them a real American, no matter how badly Obama needs for them to be. Truth is, as the first-generation son of another America-hating racist ideologue himself, Ogabe suffers from a very similar mental problem.

Via Mike Walsh, who says:

Fort Hood, Chattanooga, Boston, San Bernardino, Orlando — across the country, Americans are under attack by cultural aliens knowingly and deliberately imported into this country by the Obama administration.

Yep—almost 500 more of them in the week since Orlando, 1,523 of them the first half of June, and well over 4000 of them this fiscal year. But hey, it’s just bound to end well as long as we keep wishing, hoping, and averting our eyes, right?


Oh, it’s obvious, all right

Again: so obvious only a liberal-fascist supergenius could possibly be so stupid as to fail to see it.

President Obama quickly grew political Thursday while speaking at a memorial site for the victims of the Orlando terrorist attack, attacking Republicans for voting against gun control laws.

“The notion that the answer to this tragedy would be to make sure that more people in a nightclub are similarly armed to the killer defies common sense,” Obama said. “Those who defend the easy accessibility of assault weapons should meet these families and explain why that makes sense.”

Gladly, you dumbass. In fact, I don’t have to meet them, I can do it from here:

PoliceOne, a private organization with 450,000 members (380,000 full-time active law enforcement and 70,000 retired), polled its members in 2013 shortly after the Newtown, Conn., massacre. Eighty percent of respondents said allowing legally armed citizens to carry guns in places such as Newtown and Aurora would have reduced the number of casualties. Another 6 percent thought the presence of legally armed civilians would “likely” have prevented the innocent casualties altogether.

According to police and prosecutors, there have been dozens of cases of permit holders clearly stopping what would have been mass public shootings. It’s understandable these killers avoid places where they can’t kill a large number of people.

It ought to be common sense — even the most ardent gun-control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone” signs on their homes. Let’s finally stop putting them elsewhere.

If Obama is too stupid to believe me (and those cops) maybe Howard Stern can describe it to him in terms he can grasp:

“The military – and they don’t mean it as a derogatory statement – but they look at the public as sheep. And think about it. We are sheep. Most of us sit around all day. We don’t know how to defend ourselves. We are in a flock. And we basically think everything’s OK. Except the wolves, the bad guys – whether they be ISIS or terrorists, homegrown or otherwise, ISIL, Daesh, the common thug, whatever. They’re wolves. They look at them as wolves.

“The military and police look at themselves as sheep dogs. They’re warriors, but they’re on the good side. You know, they’re protecting us…

“Now, I’m gonna tell you about the most gun-free zone on the planet. It happened during 9/11. It was on a plane. You know you can’t get a gun on a plane. It’s completely gun free. So what did the wolves do? They said, ‘This is great! We’ll just kill the sheep with box cutters. They went on the plane with box cutters, and all the sheep went, ‘Baaah!’

“Now if there had been an Air Marshal on that plane, a whole f—ing other thing would have gone down. There wouldn’t have been no 9/11.

“See, the wolves are always plotting. They’ll use box cutters. They’ll use an airplane and fly it right into a building. They don’t need AR-15s.

“Nazi Germany – which, by the way, didn’t happen 1,000 years ago – it happened within my dad’s lifetime. It’s not that long ago. Can you imagine if the Jews, at least when the Nazis were banging on the door, if they had a couple of pistols and AR-15s to fight the Nazis? If Anne Frank’s father had a f—ing gun? Maybe at least he could have taken a few Nazis out.

“Now why would the sheep say, ‘Oh, we’ve got an answer to all of the terrorism, all these bad wolves that are coming after us. We’ll just hand in all our guns. We’re gonna hand them in. Baaah. You know who will protect us? The government, or the police’?

“That’s a bad f—ing idea!”

Which just makes it of a piece with every other idea pResident Jugeared Moron ever had in his life. But here’s the real nut of it:

“But guess what? Most of your politicians all have private security…So they’re OK. Those are sheep that are very well protected. You, on the other hand, you’re a sitting duck. If you’re a sitting duck, do you want a fighting chance or not? I don’t understand it.”

Drudge hammers that essential point home:

Just months after Department of Homeland Security advisers claimed “the threat from right-wing extremists domestically is just as real as the threat from Islamic extremism,” DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson is now suggesting his department should be in charge of implementing gun control.

But media pioneer Matt Drudge reacted to Johnson’s comments with his own demand.

He insisted the DHS secretary give up his own guns first.

“Homeland Jeh says Give up Your Guns!” Drudge tweeted Wednesday. “You go first, Brah.”

This. Precisely this. We’ll consider giving up our means of self-defense—against not just ordinary lowlife predators but also grabby politicians and tyrannical “leaders”—the moment you scumbags come out from behind your AR15-wielding security details, take down those supposedly impossible-to-build walls around the gated compounds you live in, and face the same dangers as the rest of us do, with the same means of defense you insist we settle for: none at all.

And not one fucking moment before. Until I see Hillary or Ogabe or any other rich liberal gun-grabber walking around in public with security guards armed with nothing more than a hand with some skin on it, I will continue to repeat: come and take them, liberal-fascist assholes.


Blinded by the narrative

None so blind etc.

Why is it that the LGBT community never challenges Islam, but actually defends it, even after Sunday’s massacre? While Islam’s condemnation of LGBT people is in the strongest of terms — no mosque will allow a gay marriage on its premises, no imam will ever officiate a gay marriage — the reaction of the LGBT community is often a collective yawn. The penalty for engaging in homosexuality in Islam is not condemnation, or a refusal to bake a cake, but rather death in the most painful way possible. This is what true Islam looks like — and it’s not pretty.

It’s time for a wake-up call to Mr. Lemon and others of his ilk. Omar Mateen was a Muslim. He followed the directives of Sharia to the letter. Not only did he kill homosexuals, but he did it in the manner Mohammed required: long, arduously, torturously. And while there are a number of different strains of Islam, many which publicly eschew violence, there is only one Sharia. These ancient laws that draw upon Islamic scripture have not changed. Nor has the violence contained within.

Mateen was not observing ISIS or al Qaeda directives when he murdered 49 people. He was exercising his duties as a Sharia-compliant Muslim. One can speculate about his reasoning in committing this horrific act, and my suspicion is that he was seeking absolution from a life that would be viewed by Islamic adherents as sinful. His only path to redemption was in carnage. That is the true nature of Islam — the true nature which our president refuses to acknowledge. We continue, instead, on a course of political correctness, quite literally bowing in humility for even thinking that perhaps the problem lies within Islam itself.

Americans have bought the lie that we somehow must bow at the feet of those who wish to kill us. President George Bush did it a mere six days after this country was brought to its knees on 9/11. He prostrated himself at the local mosque and participated in a prayer service of a faith and an ideology which wants nothing less than our complete and utter destruction.

Now Lemon, the U.S. press, and gay rights groups throughout the country are bowing as well to the god of Islam. The “facts” as they see them have no basis in reality. The press, law enforcement, and the FBI continue the narrative that Mateen could not have perpetrated such an act without holding membership in ISIS, al Qaeda, or another militant group. They roll out imams, CAIR representatives, and the president himself to say that this was merely an act of hate that happened in a vacuum; that perhaps he was mentally ill; perhaps he was having a bad day; perhaps if he hadn’t been allowed to purchase guns … The nonsense goes on and on.

Mohammed said to kill homosexuals with no exceptions. “Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him.” How is this unclear?

It isn’t. It’s clear as day, clear as glass, clear as a bell. In fact, it’s so obvious only a liberal-fascist supergenius could possibly be so stupid as to fail to see it. And I strongly suspect that with a good many of them, it’s not so much that they can’t see it, as that they refuse to, because it’s too inconvenient to all the other silly shibboleths to which they’re so strongly attached.


More manhood

Will any of you folks be at all surprised when I tell you that the gutless, pathetic pussy I mocked here yesterday also happens to be a despicable liar?

Well, I mean, sure, he’s a liberal and all, so that means…of course he is. And we’ll get to that. But first, I wanted you to enjoy some of the finest in mockery of the panty-drenching pissboy, from his very own follow-up column.

“Hey there Cupcake!” wrote Gary Haney. “I have never subscribed to the idea of ‘gender confusion,’ but after reading your article on the AR-15, I’m a believer because there is no way you and I are the same gender. You should surrender your testicles to the Department of Girlymen. I’m not sure where it’s located, but your girlfriend Barack does!”

Others sent me videos of 7-, 10- and 12-year old girls firing the same weapon I fired — except these kids were smiling. And I wear it as a point of personal pride that conservative darling Erick Erickson posted a story on The Resurgent with the headline, “My 10 Year Old Daughter Is Tougher Than Gersh Kuntzman, Author of the Stupidest Thing on the Internet Today.”

“You f–king pussy,” wrote Sam Markota. “If you have a man card turn it in immediately. You might be better served writing about feminine hygiene products!!!”

And that’s just the printable stuff. To summarize, this line of argument suggests that I’m not a real man because I am frightened by the awesome power of an AR-15, which, despite however you willfully misread my story, can discharge dozens of rounds in mere seconds.

Yes, this weapon scared the crap out of me. And it should scare the crap out of all of you, too. An AR-15 is a weapon of mass destruction, a tool that should only be in the hands of our soldiers and cops, as Rep. Seth Moulton wrote in the Daily News on Tuesday. I don’t think there’s anything unmanly about pointing out this fact.

Besides, if masculinity is defined by the power to commit violence on a wide scale, I proudly choose femininity.

Oh, that’s plain enough, Peaches. Funny you should think declaring your femininity is an adequate assertion of masculinity, though. But enough mockery for now; let’s move on to the lying.

My email and Internet trolls won’t believe me, but I support the Second Amendment.

Woof. I ain’t even gonna bother with that one. It’s certainly a common ruse used by the gun-grabbing Left, and anybody who buys it by now is an even bigger fool than Cuntman is.

And I even agree with one letter writer who pointed out that hammers can kill people, too, but we don’t ban them.

But what if a weapons manufacturer could fashion a handgun that would fire a nuclear blast — an atomic version of an AR-15, if you will. It would look like a gun, but it could kill thousands instead of dozens. Like a rifle, it’s one of many arms that we are allowed to keep and bear. But would we really stand idly by as people buy a nuclear gun in the name of the Second Amendment?

“It’s just a gun,” you might say. “It’s my right. Trade in your man-card, you wimp.”

Well, not exactly; no, it wouldn’t be “just a gun.” That would be more accurately defined as a “weapon of mass destruction,” a WMD, which a lot of people would agree isn’t what the Founders were concerning themselves with in the 2A. Although there is certainly disagreement about that too. See, that’s part of that debate you lied about us “denying” your right to participate in earlier in this piece.

Yes, I’m a wimp. I simpered because my experience with the AR-15 bruised me, body and spirit. But there’s nothing unmanly about reminding my readers that mass murder is much easier to commit with a semi-automatic killing machine than it is with a hammer.

If that makes me a girl, well, maybe we should have a girl running the country.

We already have one, thanks, no need for another. That liberal “MUST DO” box has already been checked, so to speak. But I’m gonna give him a pass on this one too, since I want to jump straight to the most egregious of the lying, for which we’ll have to segue over to an honest writer.

Kuntzman’s original report appears to have blatantly misconstrued what the gun dealer said.

Following his original report’s publication, the gun shop he visited posted on Facebook saying:

To our knowledge we did not know that Mr. Kuntzman would completely turn things around and make our establishment look like one of anti-gun advocates…

I can assure everyone that we do not support mental health screenings like they do in Europe and we don’t think that government officials should take away guns from people as it was portrayed in the article.

When it comes to the Second Amendment, there will always be some who abuse the right. Omar Mateen was one of those, unfortunately.

Gersh Kuntzman abused the First by presenting a gun store as being on his side, and then he doubled down by claiming those who have insulted him are interfering with his freedom of speech.

That’s because lying liberal-fascists like Cuntman oppose both the 1a and 2a, along with all the rest of the Constitution…even while insisting that they support it when they feel it’s politically necessary for the subterfuge to be bolstered. Which, as the lies they routinely traffic in go, just might be the most egregious and sinister of them all.

And now, for a palate cleanser, let’s jump back over to mockery, with Larry Correia:

After the wildly successful feature where ace reporter Gersh Kuntzman gave us the straight scoop on what it is like to shoot the terrifying AR-15 “Black Mamba Star Killer Base” rifle, we here at the New York Daily News are happy to present our new feature ASK KUNTZMAN!

Join us as Gersh Kuntzman gives valuable life advice. Send us your questions, from lifestyle choices to product reviews, and together we may peer deep into his earth mother like wisdom. From his lilac scented crying pillow to you, rejoice as Gersh Kuntzman let’s you know what’s really going on in the world.

Dear Kuntzman, big fan. I am trying to go green in order to save the Earth. Dying polar bears make me sad. Should I buy a Toyota Prius?

– Carbon Neutral in Carson City

Dear Carbon, I drove a Prius once and it changed me forever. As soon as I climbed inside the minimalist brutalist interior of this carbon fiber Japanese death machine it was as if I was driving a monster truck. I pushed start. The engine was a throaty roar like a thousand nuclear jet bombers. I immediately soiled my trousers to prevent this beast of the land of hentai from raping me. Tentacles are NOT OKAY. In my haste to escape, I touched a lever, and the windshield wipers began beating like a reaper’s sickle threshing horror. Trying to reach the escape handle, I struck a phallus-like pole, and lights began to blink. Blink. Blink. A light. A terrible, red, light! BLINK BLINK! Shrieking and flailing, I clutched desperately at the door, and tumbled, helpless, into the street. In the cold New York City rain, I lay there helpless and soiled in the gutter. The terrifying Prius looming over me, asserting its alpha dominance, and I crawled away. Forever.

Also, you may want to check out the new Nissan Leaf.

You’ll enjoy reading the rest of it. But not as much as you might, perhaps, after the realization hits that this really is the way some of these people talk, and think. And in that moment, it suddenly ain’t nearly as funny. Although it does point up just how good Correia is, that he can still dig deep to parody people who can scarcely even be parodied anymore, having descended so far into self-parody on their own, with no help from anybody.




"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


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 - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments


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