Wednesday, September 12, 2018

Every week, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What's Your Reaction to Barack Hussein Obama's New Speech?

 Jeffrey Avalon Friedberg: I  didn’t read it, or hear it.

Obama, is—and has always been—a lying bastard. 

1. He lied some 32 times about Obamacare.
 2. His “parents” were never legally married.

Also, what the hell is the deal here ?

Obama was born a Muslim, and is still alive, so, he must still—according to Sharia Law—be a Muslim.

His legal name after he was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather is Barry Soetoro, and he has never, ever legally changed it to his self-chosen, warlike, Arabic names. And there is no evidence—not anywhere—that he has done so.

Early written material, apparently published by him, says he was born in Kenya.

His alleged birth certificate—to me, and I have seen many of them in 35 years as a licensed private investigator—appears to be a poorly made, computer-generated fraud.

Both times he was “elected” he was secretly sworn in twice—each time. Using both alleged names?

Records about his life and education are sealed and not available to anybody.

Who is he?

 Patrick O'Hannigan: My answer isn't as colorful as Jeffrey's, but I did not read or listen to Obama's recent speech, either. I was amused by one caller I heard on Rush Limbaugh's show, where Ken Matthews (?) was guest hosting. The caller said Obama had tried to take credit for the Trump economy. He said that reminded him of when he was a kid, and his mother would strive to open a peanut butter jar before giving up and handing it to him. When he then opened the jar, she'd say, "See! I loosened it for ya." But the funny analogy did not quite fit (according to the caller), because Obama not only did NOT "loosen the lid" for Donald Trump; he (Obama) was twisting it the wrong way.

Rob Miller: I did see it, as well as a transcript. One thing few people noticed is that Obama didn't once refer to his successor as  'President Trump.' 

Other than that, it was quite typical. Filled with classless behavior, mistruths, self-aggrandizement and whining while taking credit for the work and accomplishments of far better men as well as lying about his own 'accomplishments.'

What were they?

He weakened America at every turn, from our military to our basic institutions like the courts, our healthcare system and academia. He came close to ruining the economy and ran up more debt with less to show for it than all his predecessors combined. He exacerbated racial tensions, happily militarized government agencies to go after those he considered his political foes and ended by gifting our sworn enemy, one who was complicit in 9/11 with billions of dollars.

 It doesn't matter, really. The Left will always love him , because he came the closest of any American president of turning America into a socialist hellhole. And of course, because he was the first black president, which also kept him from being investigated and impeached.

He got every benefit and boost up the ladder America has to offer and worked for very little of it. The historians in academia  will paint him in glowing terms, but he remains a classic example of the bird who deliberately crapped in his own nest and did his best to foul it beyond redemption.

Fausta Rodriquez Wertz: I wasn't interested in watching. Former president. Yesterday's news.

Laura Rambeau LeeI had two immediate reactions.  President Obama, you didn’t build that! And thankfully …President Obama is #NotMyPresident anymore.

  Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Tuesday, September 04, 2018

Forum: What Will Trump Do About Social Media Bias And Censorship?

Every week, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Will Trump Do About Social Media Bias And Censorship?

Jeffrey Avalon Friedberg: What would I do? That’s simple, but not “polite,” because the time for that is long past.

Legally: I would....

I would do something to make their by-now-puckering asses hurt really really really really really bad.

I would do something they cannot afford.

I would lock up as many as possible and keep them there—witnesses, protection—whatever.

I would start the break up of any monopoly.

I would shut them all down as much as possible any way allowed.


What will Trump do? Something similar to maybe only part of the above, but he will also make their heads explode via his Tweets, etc.—and spread their madness, like a plague of fleas up their hairy undies.

He will allow it to go on until it is much worse, and then he will set his machinery in motion.

Right now, this (his machinery) is all just waiting, poised—on standby....

“...not polite....”
Rob Miller : I think there's some real meat here, and ironically, the Obama Administration paved the way. For one thing, the major Social Media sites are obviously colluding to effect the coming election. That's illegal, especially since these sites call themselves public platforms. They also have a clear record of discrimination against certain points of view based on their own arbitrary whims, which are kept secret precisely so that they can be used in an arbitrary way and never ever revealed, merely referred to as 'community standards.' Since these are also media companies, this may very well be an FCC violation since sites that are banned or discriminated against in such a fashion are never informed of what violations they may have committed, if any. That is, besides having conservative views.

This combined with their open efforts to collude to influence elections could be real red meat. It might even lead to an anti-trust suit. And certainly to FCC and IRS examinations of, respectively, their corporate practices from a media standpoint and their finances, both on a corporate level and a personal one for their major executives.

Yes, these are private companies, but such companies have been successfully sued before for restraint of trade or other monopolistic practices. We'll see.

At the very least considering how these companies bowed down to the Chinese and the EU, it might make them a lot less likely to act in such a biased manner.

Patrick O'Hannigan: I can't remember where I first saw the idea (meaning either at "Instapundit" or "Ace of Spades"), but I do think the president and his administration can exploit the legal differences between "platforms" and "publishers." Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media players like to think of themselves as platforms, because that allows them the fig leaf of neutrality between competing points of view. There are people who make a good case that these technologies are not platforms, so much as publishing apparatuses (apparati?). Publishers can be sued for libel, among other things. The other thing President Trump could do continues his current strategy of tweeting to his heart's content, knowing that his tweets drive people crazy, while continuing to appoint lower-court judges, keep an eye on the FCC, etc. It's sleight-of-hand, and it lets the president take advantage of the manufactured outrage directed against him 24/7 to get things done while the media wastes time on stupid questions like whether he honored the late Senator John McCain sufficiently (FWIW, I'm of the opinion that honors for McCain were over the top to begin with. Ronald Reagan didn't get such fulsome praise when he died, and he'd done more for this country. Moreover, when Jeff Flake ("the other Senator from Arizona") said of his late colleague, "Now he belongs to the ages," he was deliberately borrowing a line first used by then Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to describe Abraham Lincoln at Lincoln's death bed -- and John McCain was not in Lincoln's class).

Don Surber: President Trump knows the limitations of his power as president; he hasn't fired Mueller. He will not use the government against the media.

But he also knows his power as the head of a rebellion, and he will continue to push back. Public opinion will change behaviors at Twitter and Facebook.

He is a president the Founding Fathers imagined: a fellow who actually puts country first, upholds the Constitution, respects the office, and does not abuse the power.

The reason is simple, he does not need the job. Fame and fortune, he had. He is an altruistic president along the lines of Coolidge, Eisenhower, and Reagan. He saw a need and filled it.

These are the best eight years of our lives. Enjoy. Mock the media and the critics, and have a blast!

Laura Rambeau Lee: President Trump understands the Constitutional limitations of his power, unlike his predecessor. In his position he speaks loudly and often on behalf of conservative voices and the unfair bias against them by the left-leaning social media platforms.

Hopefully he will continue being our tireless advocate and publicly bring attention and call out the media for their bias. The technology that allows us to communicate with one another can be a double edged sword, especially with the power and control being in the hands of very few individuals. It is up to Congress to pass laws against censorship and to protect everyone’s right to free speech. Our representatives must assure we all receive equal access and our voices not be censored with this rapidly growing and powerful technology. It’s great to know we have such a vocal advocate in the White House.

  Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Monday, August 27, 2018

Forum: What Effect Will Michael Cohen's Plea Bargain Have?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question
:What Effect Will Michael Cohen's Plea Bargain Have?

Rob Miller
: This is pretty simple to understand. Mueller has Cohen cold for massive tax evasion, none of which had anything to do with the president. In exchange for leniency on those actual crimes, Cohen was prepared to say absolutely anything Mueller wanted.Mueller was even allowed to violate attorney-client privilege to set this up.

The plea bargain works for both Mueller and Cohen quite well, because now these allegations won't go to trial because there won't be one. It will be simply Cohen's word against the president, with the media of course trumpeting Cohen's nonsense and any other garbage Mueller twists his arm to make up...just more BS to float on the water and dirty it. and meanwhile, the Left can keep yelling 'impeachment! impeachment! just to keep it in the voter's minds until the midterms.

As for Lanny Davis, he should be disbarred for (a)not lodging motions protesting against the violation of attorney -client privilege (b) allowing his client to plead guilty to a non-existent crime and (c) damaging his cliet's chance for a pardon from Trump by deliberately telling the world Cohen won't accept one! No legitimate lawyer representing his client would ever be this derelict, but of course Lanny Davis is in this for Bill and Hill and isn't interested in actually representing Michael Cohen except as it suits Mueller. Davis is in this up to his neck.

To fully understand what a partisan jihad is going on here, consider this...Mueller's assignment from Assistant AG Rosenstein was to investigate Russian collusion that could have influenced the election.Mueller has never investigated Hillary Clinton and the DNC's collusion in commissioning Fusion GPS's bogus 'pee dossier' which was oppo research definitely designed to influence the election, now has he? Nope, it's all about Trump and certainly not about possible Russian collusion in the election.

Jeffrey Avalon Friedberg: The actual purpose of a plea bargain is to “lock in” or guarantee an outcome of the arrest and prosecution of an accused perpetrator. It saves either side from getting a worse result than might be expected, and either side profits in some way by the “bargain.”

The defendant gains a concession from the prosecutor. The prosecutor secures a guilty “plea” from the defendant.

However, the real, legal effect on President Donald H. Trump will be zero. Cohen must walk a tightrope. If he f*cks up again he faces a much more powerful enemy in Trump than Mueller.

All sorts of local color, media innuendo, and Chyron generated flash will fly, but, in the end, the only ones truly affected will be der Jude, und Herr Sonderstaatsanwalt.

Laura Rambeau Lee: Not one of us who voted for Trump believed he was of impeccable character. Nothing that has been revealed rises to the level of impeachable or illegal activity. Hey, at least he used his own money to pay off porn stars and bimbos, unlike Congress which had a slush fund of taxpayer money just for the purpose of paying off and silencing their accusers. Michael Cohen’s plea bargain will have no effect on President Trump, except for the non-stop media analysis and legal conjecture. The frenzy must continue, relentless and at all costs.

James Kirwin: Unfortunately more effect than it should have. Judging by the non-stop media coverage you would think Trump had been the Manchurian Candidate controlled by Putin and elected through Russian manipulation of the election.

Instead what I’ve had to remind myself is that the Russians spent a few hundred grand on Facebook and Trump paid off an accuser for ½ as much as #METOO Queen Asia Argento did – or rather Anthony Bourdain did on Argento’s behalf. Maybe Bourdain should have hired Cohen. Evidently that lawyer knows how to cut a deal.

I also have to remind myself that nothing Trump did with these women was in the Oval Office unlike the mess Bill Clinton left on an intern’s dress, and which he twisted the meaning of the simplest verb in the English language: Is.

Meanwhile Clinton’s wife operated a server hacked by everyone and received no punishment – unlike a sailor who took a picture of a submarine interior to brag to his family and received a court martial and prison sentence that took Trump’s pardon to fix.

After a year and a half and tens of millions of dollars, is this the best Mueller can do? I’d almost like to see Trump tweet, “Yeah I did it with a porn star. I apologized to my wife and paid her off with my own money, but hey, it was a porn star and not an intern – and not in the Oval Office.” So what? French President Francois Mitterand’s mistress walked behind his casket at his state funeral alongside his wife. Kissinger said “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac,” and Trump had its runner-up money. Is he an idiot for cheating on his (admittedly hot) wife? Sure – but as someone who doesn’t care about who he sleeps with and is concerned about the future of our country, I am more worried about jobs and the strength of America’s enemies abroad.

So far the Economy is doing the best since the Reagan era, and our enemies abroad are the weakest they’ve been since 9-11. I am pleased with both and credit Trump for their successes.

But the constant media frenzy conflating Stormy Daniels with Putin will likely continue. And it sucks.

Dave Schuler
:An impeachable offense is anything the House thinks it is. A Congress with a Republican majority will never impeach an even notionally Republican president with an approval rating of 43% let alone try and remove. With as much fan-dancing as they've been doing for the last year and a half a Congress with a Democratic majority will find it difficult not to impeach and, possibly, remove. This despite that a President Pence is probably their worst nightmare.

I have no idea. I think that the Mueller investigation will continue until one of three things happens: something serious is uncovered (a prospect that becomes less likely with every passing day), Trump is no longer president, or Mueller is dismissed.

Don Surber
: The effect is the Left has succeeded in ending lawyer-client privilege. There is nothing in civilized society that the Left would not destroy for an edge. Ruthless.

 Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Forum: Are China And The US Headed For War?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question
: Are China And The US Headed For War?

Jeffrey Avalon Friedberg: War?


One thing China is not: is stupid.

China can do much better on its Long March by simply stripping Earth away from the Americans, one sliver at a time, piece by piece, bit by bit.

They can do this in terms of physically taking things, such as our technology, American real estate, or by extending influence, as in Latin America, and actually being welcomed in.

Then, one day, poof! They are the majority—at a pinnacle of the majors—and are in control.

In this non-nuclear manner they can preserve a lot of real estate and personnel. I mean—none of the Chinese leaders want to live underground or in a nuclear cook-oven, am I right?


In the interim—there’s no rush. And it’s just a game. When the time comes, they can win. And nobody—like maybe the Rooskies—will be able to step in and take over the hand they are playing.

In a nuclear war with the USA they will be degraded militarily, financially, and morally, to a point where they will probably be overthrown by a sea of people who just want to eat....

...And who want to have some fun in life and living.

Rob Miller: To answer this question properly, it's helpful to know something about Chinese history and culture.

China has always been more concerned with keeping the quong fai (foreign devils) out then in expanding it's own territory. That's what the Great Wall was all about. Like Japan, China essentially was a closed society for centuries.

In the 1400s, China had the greatest seagoing fleet in the world, up to 3,500 ships at its peak.  Some of them were five times the size of the ships being built in Europe at the time. But by 1525, all of China's "Treasure Fleet" ships had been destroyed -- burned in their docks or left to rot by the government as the Ming Dynasty entered a 200-year-long period of isolationist slumber.

That ended with the Opium wars of the mid-nineteenth century, referred to quite accurately by the Chinese as 'the years of humiliation. Essentially, the Chinese wanted the very lucrative opium trade the British enjoyed stopped. The British actually went to war in 1839 to force the Chinese to keep importing this poison, and ended up with China ceding the Hong Kong island to Britain as well as 'treaty ports' at Shanghai, Canton, Ningpo (Ningbo), Foochow (Fuzhou), and Amoy. France secured concessions on the same terms as the British, in treaties of 1843 and 1844.

The second Opium War, fought from 1856–1860 actually increased the concessions to Britain and other European countries as well as the amount of the trade in opium. Russia also seized Chinese territory. And the hideous invasion of China by Japan was a major disaster. Aside from the loss of territory, the Japanese committed major atrocities.An untold number of Chinese civilians were literally murdered, whole cities were destroyed, thousands of Chinese young women (as well as Koreans and Filipinas) were kidnapped and forced into prostitution as 'comfort girls' for the Japanese military, and bizarre 'experiments' on human beings were conducted, especially in Manchuria (Manchuko).

My point here is that all this emphasized something to the Chinese...that foreigners were not to be trusted, and neither were China's corrupt governments. Most Americans underestimate the enormous achievement of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in overcoming all this history and opening up China again.

I've been fascinated with Chinese culture for quite some time. In fact, I almost married a delightful Chinese girl who lived in Queens, the only woman I ever seriously considered marrying until I met my beloved. Among other things I learned from my Chinese girlfriend was how to play the Chinese game of Go. Understanding Go is a key to understanding how the Chinese think.

Western tactics are based on chess, which involves 'killing off' your opponent's power pieces, occupying territory on the board and surrounding the king to the point that any move the King makes results in the king's 'death.'

In Go, the idea is to not to occupy territory but to control access to territory, to make your opponent's 'soldiers' useless. There are no power pieces per se.

That's what the Chinese have been doing for some time, with trade agreements and lately, using a strategy of loans to both developing and developed countries like South Africa. It works like this...the Chinese loan money to these countries in exchange for trade concessions, with economically or strategically  beneficial resources as collateral. When the loans (which deliberately have terms very difficult for these countries to meet) are defaulted on, China gets control, sometimes with an additional loan as a sweetener. These are Go tactics.

Are the U.S. and China headed for war? Possible, but I doubt it.

For a quarter of a century, China enjoyed dealing with three of the worst U.S. presidents in history. The corrupt Bill Clinton, who the Chinese bought via a one million dollar loan after he lost the New Hampshire primary via his China connection, his  old friends and campaign donors the Riyadis. And
 then there was the Clueless George W. Bush, and the openly anti-American Barack Hussein Obama.
All of them allowed the Chinese as well as friendly American companies to export jobs wholesale to China while allowing cheap Chinese goods to flood the market. Both Clinton and Obama also cut back hugely on America's military. Clinton even  used heavy Democratic party donor and defense contractor Loral to funnel advanced military technology to the Chinese as fast as he could sign the paperwork. Most military analysts estimate that the Chinese made a Great Leap Forward of at least two decades in military technology during the eight years of Clinton's two terms.

A big part of the recent tension has to do with the fact that  the Chinese, having grown used to pushovers like this are now faces with an entirely different president in Donald J. Trump. The concept of intellectual piracy, copyrights and patents are foreign to the Chinese. They now have a president to deal with who insists on their honoring these precepts, and who is willing to use tariffs and even sanctions to change the unequal trade deals China has enjoyed for years.

What the Chinese are doing now, I think, is circling the wagons. Many of the armaments, like shore to ship missiles are designed to be defensive in nature, and it's worth remembering that China has only engaged in wars on their borders, in places like northern India, Tibet and North Korea. Even their new island fortresses in the China Sea could reasonably be seen as defensive in nature.

I see Xi's new role as emperor ( and I wouldn't call it anything else) and its more recent totalitarian conduct on the home front to be troubling signs, even something of a throwback to the bad old days of the Cultural Revolution, but not necessarily signs of upcoming hostilities. China needs the American market badly, a war would gain them nothing and might even result in domestic turbulence as jobs disappear and domestic supplies of staples increase in price.

Another sign is that Chinese with money have heavily invested here in America, especially in real estate. They understand that if their money's here, the Chinese government can't confiscate it. Remember what I wrote earlier about the basic Chinese skeptical attitude towards their government.

Don Surber:Red China and the USA are in a trade war and have been for 20 years. The Bushes and Clinton allowed Red China to steal technology, manipulate currency, and otherwise wreak havoc with trade.

The weasels who call this free trade are traitors. Let's look at the facts. For every $1 we sell in goods to China, we buy $4 worth of their goods. We are a thoroughbred running against a plow horse and losing because we are hobbled by environmental, labor, and other regulations.

Consider coal mining. The nation's coal mines recorded 15 deaths last year, including eight in West Virginia.

According to Xinhua, the number of deaths in 2017 in China's coal sector was 375.

We finally have a president who is a master of negotiating and an astute student of Sun Tzu. Scot Adams of Dilbert fame calls President Donald John Trump a wizard. Everything you know about President Trump through the media is a lie because he throws them off scent every step of the way.

The Chinese cannot fathom him. They are communists, a sheeplike people with great credentials but no intellectual curiosity. Their ideology requires a conformity that would be amusing if not for the deaths of tens of milions in the name of their religion. Muslims are nowhere near as bloody.

President Trump is an entrepreneur who thinks outside of the box. He lives to negotiate. He already has plucked the Korean Peninsula from Red China. Korea has been a protectorate of China going back 1,400 years although the Japanese held it from 1910 to 1945. (You could say World War II began before World War I.)

There is no doubt that Kim Jong Un is on our side. He is dismantling his nuke program. Compare how healthy and alert the last three hostages Kim gave us compared to the condition of Otto Warmbier. Something happened between June 2017 and May 2018 that turned Kim around. Just what, we can only guess at. Why, we know. President Trump flipped Kim, likely on a personal level as he did with Kanye West.

The answer to your question is yes, we are in a war -- a trade war - and we have turned the tide. Chairman Xi should surrender now while his economy is damaged but still alive.

Iran is on deck, and Russia needs to clean up its act.

Meanwhile, the European Union wants to cut a deal. Mexico is cutting a deal. Japan and South Korea have made their deals.

While he is doing all this, President Trump also has to deal with a witch hunt, work on immigration, and get his judges and justices confirmed.

He still finds time to golf on weekends.

Doug Hagin:Very doubtful. Not anytime soon anyway. And our currently having a strong president is a large deterrent to China. Another reason 2020 is so important.

David Schuler: here's more than one answer to that question. The first answer is that we've been at war with China for at least the last 20 years and maybe as long as the last 70 years. For the last several decades American companies, looking at a market of a billion prospective customers with dollars signs in their eyes, have convinced the politicians of both political parties that we're not. You need only look at the precipitous drop in U. S. manufacturing employment after the admission of China to the WTO, pictured below:

to recognize that as nothing short of economic warfare. Additionally, if you take the various pronouncements of Chinese officials on trade and foreign policy it is quite clear that they view them as zero-sum games, transactions with one winner and one loser.

The other answer is that we need not be headed for war with China. It would be a choice not an inevitability. If the Chinese leadership realized just how deadly war with the U. S. could be for them and everything and everybody they know, there would be no chance of war. But there are so many saber-rattlers on both sides of the relationship I think there is a genuine danger of war with China.

Laura Rambeau Lee: Yes, it appears China’s goal is to draw us into a war and we better be prepared. We are late in realizing just how great a threat China is to the west and the free world. We must secure our alliances and assure them we will be there to fight with them to oppose this existential threat. It’s not a matter of if, but when.

 Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Judge Sets Leaders of New Mexico Terrorist Training Camp Free

Image result for Judge Sarah Backus

A radical Judge has set the leaders of a violent New Mexico terrorist training camp free.

Judge Sarah Bacus ruled that five Islamic radicals in charge of what amounted to a jihadist terrorist training camp on a $20,000 “signature bond,” which requires no payment.

She did this in spite of police warnings that children being trained and indoctrinated in the camp were being trained with guns to carry out school attacks. According to the Albuquerque Journal Judge Sarah Backus concluded that the radical Islamists aren’t “a danger to the community,”

Image result for New Mexico Training Camp defendants

Thank you, infidel!

Here's what local law enforcement had discovered.

Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, 39, Lucas Morton, 40, Jany Leveille, 35, Hujrah Wahhaj, 38, and Subhanah Wahhaj, 35, operated what amounted to a terrorist training camp, where they trained 11 children to use firearms and to attack schools. The compound had been under surveillance for awhile but police only launched a raid when one of the children texted that they were all in need of food and water.

The police found found rifles, handguns ammo and a shooting range, as well a various signs with Islamist slogans posted around the camp. In a tunnel outside the compound they found the remains of a boy later identified as Abdul-Ghani Wahhaj. According to his mother, he took medicine for seizures but the Islamic radicals thought he was possessed by evil spirits.

They also found 11 malnourished children. and Prosecutors also alleged that the suspects planned to commit violent acts and that Siraj Wahhaj had trained at least one child at the compound to use firearms to conduct school shootings.

Siraj Wahhaj has a interesting jihadist background. His father is none other than Siraj Wajjai, an unindicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 who got off due to a technicality. The Imam, a former CAIR advisor, offered prayer at a Democratic National Convention event in 2012. The elder Wahhaj is also close to Linda Sarsour, an anti-semite, Democrat darling and frequent speaker who encourages Muslims to radicalize.

With all that evidence, the prosecutors only charged the five defendants with child abuse. And Judge Backus simply let them go free, without even posting bail.

From the Grant County Beat:

"Judge Sarah Backus made the determination the suspects weren't a danger to the community following several hours of testimony and evidence being presented by prosecutors…State prosecutors outlined evidence suggesting that at least some of the suspects could have been planning some sort of attack…Various weapons and ammo were found during the raid on August 3, and several more firearms were discovered in subsequent searches. The children were allegedly taught how to load and fire assault rifles…In addition, prosecutors described a letter sent to Siraj Wahhaj from his brother allegedly inviting him to come to New Mexico and die as a martyr." (KOB, 8/13/18)

"These suspects face serious charges that they intended to inflict mass violence, possibly through school shootings," added Rep. Bill Rehm (R-Alb), a retired law enforcement officer. "This, combined with the discovery of the remains of a young child, is strong evidence that they pose a high risk of violence and should be behind bars. People who are suspected of killing children and orchestrating mass shootings should not be allowed to walk out of the courthouse and back into their communities with almost zero guarantee that they will ever show up to trial. Regardless of political party, New Mexicans can recognize the danger of the judge's ruling and the risk it poses to public safety. This is Exhibit A as to why we need to pass a new constitutional amendment that would require judges to keep dangerous criminals like these in jail pending trial."

So why would any judge do something like this? These people are a definite flight risk and will likely never show up for trial.

A look at the judge's background sheds some light. She's essentially a San Francisco Bay area transplant. She's a graduate of the University of California Hastings College at UC San Francisco and served as a deputy public defender and deputy attorney general in San Francisco.

As such, it's safe to assume that Judge Backus's ideas and priorities are warped in that direction, and a look at other cases she's handled also give a good indication of that.

Letting a bunch of jihadis go free on their own recognizance is far far, more important than public safety to her.

Oddly enough, she was appointed to fill a judicial vacancy by none other than New Mexico's Republican governor, Susan Martinez, after which Judge Backus ran for the office and won as a Democrat. Needless to say, Governor Martinez is desperately trying to distance herself:

"Unfortunately, it (the verdict) highlights how extreme the New Mexico Supreme Court has been in dictating pretrial release for all kinds of dangerous criminals."

And you're going to do what about this, Governor? Do tell.

Image result for Susana Martinez governor

Monday, August 13, 2018

Forum:Pope Francis Now Opposes Capital Punishment. What Say You?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question
:Pope Francis Now Opposes Capital Punishment. What Say You?

James Kirwin: As I’ve gotten older and become more mistrustful of government, I’ve had to reconcile that with my support of capital punishment. Giving the State that power when you don’t completely trust it seems contradictory, and the number of people exonerated after years on Death Row should give everyone pause.

I still support it at this time, but it’s not a strongly held, non-negotiable position like my support of Israel or gun rights is. The fact that this dippy Pope, who I have little respect for, opposes it really doesn’t affect my decision one way or another.

Jeffrey Avalon Friedberg : I was once blessed by a Pope when he came to visit Atlantic City, waayyyy back in the 1950’s, and blessed the entire ocean—with me in it.

I liked the just-previous Pope, and others prior to him. I like benign religion that gives people happiness and hope. Solace. A good and creative life. A beneficent Way to be. Order out of chaos.

I have been following the diatribes and rants of this current Pope. Catholics, have you had enough yet?

I have.

Without reading his statement on capital punishment I am going to disregard anything he says—based on his past performance as Pope. To me he is irrelevant in wisdom or religion. To me he is irrelevant as a thinker. He is irrelevant as a man. He is irrelevant.

To me, he is a foreign-born, socialist fraud. How he got to be Pope is a mystery—at least—to me. I speculate he was handpicked to help destroy America and bring the Church down further than it had already fallen.

At any moment I expect him to order Catholics to celebrate Ramadan. And some ancient Aztec feast.

Don Surber: Capital punishment was pivotal in the story of Christ. No execution, no resurrection. Life imprisonment is cruel, but sadly no longer unusual.

Patrick O'Hannigan: The reading I've done asserts that Pope Francis has modified the Catechism of the Catholic Church to say that the death penalty is "inadmissable." This in contrast to what it had said, which was basically that the death penalty could only be legitimately applied in extreme circumstances where there were no other means of safeguarding the public. In the old days, the Papal States (precursors to Vatican City State) applied the death penalty.themselves, and even employed an official executioner. I fear that the change in perspective is a concession to self-proclaimed social justice warriors rather than an honest development of doctrine.

Death penalty opponents typically say that the problem with that is its finality. They mean that when you're dead, it's too late to repent of your sins, and preserving at least the chance for repentance is a recognition of inherent human dignity. That's true as far as it goes, but it ignores potential similarities between capital punishment and the "death bed conversions" that you sometimes read about. Repentance need not take long. It need not come at the expense of justice, either.

Latin remains the official language of Church documents. That said, the word choice (in English) as it has been reported is telling, because it seems to leave a little wiggle room, in a kind of embarrassed acknowledgement of what the Catechism used to say. "Inadmissable" is a lawyerly word, not something typically found in moral theology texts. I'm reminded of the difference between "right" and "legal" (or "evil" and "illegal"). It's a stretch that lay Catholics should not have to make, but something can be "inadmissible" without being "intrinsically evil."

I also can't help but wonder what this pope would make of "By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment," which is a book that came out just last year. Edward Feser, one of the two people who wrote that scholarly but accessible book, has pointed out that popes have explicitly endorsed the death penalty on several occasions. He was also brave and smart enough to point out that slapping the label "development" on a contradiction does not make the so-called development a non-contradiction.

Laura Rambeau Lee: I suspect at least one reason my ancestors left Germany to come to the Colonies in the 1700s was to escape Catholicism, as they were Protestants and members of the German Reformed Church. Protestants believe no mortal man is a direct conduit to G-d and that our relationship with our Creator is a personal one, as is our interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. Pope Francis is advancing a globalist Marxist agenda under the guise of a holy man. His beliefs may very well bring about the destruction of the Catholic Church.

When there is no doubt of the guilt of the person and the crime was premeditated, capital punishment delivers justice and brings much needed closure to the loved ones of the victim. The reality is every one of us is going to die. Why should a murderer be permitted to take breath and enjoy this precious gift of life when they callously and cruelly chose to deprive another human being of this gift? Let the guilty repent and receive redemption from G-d in the afterlife, but here on earth they should be required to pay the ultimate price.

 Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Monday, August 06, 2018

Forum: Why Is Racism Directed At Whites And Asians Largely Ignored?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Why is Racism Directed At Whites And Asians Largely Ignored?

Scott Kirwan:Because in the eyes of those who worry about such things it’s all about power, and they believe that whites have power. As for the Asians, well, they just don’t fit into that belief so they just ignore them.

The whites who believe this tend to come from upper class backgrounds where, surprise! They grew up with wealth and privilege and think their skin color had something to do with that.

My parents, on the other hand, had trouble making ends meet and as late as the 1950s skipped meals so their kids had full bellies. Depression-era survivors they inculcated a belief in us that all that mattered was education and hard work to succeed in life. Skin color didn’t matter, especially to my father who worked menial jobs alongside blacks and Hispanics until he died on the job in 1977.

Where was his white privilege? Or for that matter where was my mother’s who died 3 years ago, penniless after working until her mid-80s?

The SJWs don’t come from the South Side Chicago: they come from places like Martha’s Vineyard and Beverly Hills – and their guilt of being born with a silver spoon in their mouths gets transferred to their skin color, making it about the broader issue of race instead of the narrow topic of being born into great wealth. In a sense it’s the same ignorance and myopia that drove upper class Victorians to shoulder “the White Man’s Burden.”

Currently they hold the megaphone on race so until blacks, Hispanics and Asians rip it away from them, then all white people – including those of us not born into wealth – will be subject to their masochism.

Rob Miller:Actually, I see racism as a very useful tool of the Left.

For one thing, when you convince a portion of certain demographic that America is racist, and that only one political party is their sole guarantor of not only their basic rights but freebies they have become accustomed to because of course they deserve them, it gives you a solid voting bloc, particularly in urban fortresses where voter fraud is easy, and where a bloc vote can result in carrying a state. President Lyndon Johnson, among others knew this when he raided the Social Security trust fund to pay for the so-called war on poverty program to the tune of over a trillion 1960's US dollars.

Not only that, but when you reward certain behavior like urban riots with that kind of largess and center blame on society rather than the perpetrators, something else happens. The behavior gets repeated and held over society's head as a threat. Because it works.

Even the very idea of what racism is becomes distorted, because it becomes not just accepted but actually rewarded...depending on who it comes from.

Another thing that happens is that various parts of civil society start to become the idea of law and order applied equally, the ability of the police to keep civil order and the main concept America has always been based on, that it is a meritocracy, or at the very least a place where you can better yourself based on your own efforts. Once you start giving preference to people based on their race rather than their qualifications or their actual accomplishments, it destroys that ethic, and has the effect of lowering standards across the board as well as building resentment in the non-favored who lose out in the name of 'diversity.'

That's exactly why Asian civil rights organizations are suing the Ivy League colleges for rejecting Asian students based on race. Jews, Asian Indians and other minorities are similarly discriminated against unless their families have alumni who contribute large amounts to the college in question. And it is by no means only Ivy League colleges that do this. Some public funded state universities are also notorious for their worshiping at the graven idol of diversity rather than accepting students and doling out financial aid based on their accomplishments and qualifications rather than their ethnicity. and both Harvard and Yale are openly saying that they will continue to use race as a criterion for admissions.

This story is hardly being covered in much of the media. Imagine the uproar if Harvard was discriminating against blacks, Muslims or Latinos instead of Asians!

Another thing we have to understand is the collusion of whites on the Left with this scenario. Having made this a successful political tactic in grievance politics with one group, the Left is now trying to repeat this tactic with other groups. The idea, of course is divide and conquer, with those not in the select groups, particularly white men being the target.

The way to counter this tactic is (a)not to cringe and cower but to respond aggressively and expose those using it as the real racists they are...ridicule works particularly well (b) use the court systems to punish those who use discrimination as 'virtue signaling' (3) Boycott companies, media sites and universities who practice, promote or reward this kind of bigotry. (4) Use our DOJ to prosecute those who violate our laws on this matter where applicable and have zero tolerance for violence that is race based or attempts to silence critics of this kind of racism...provided someone either wakes Jeff Sessions up from his nap or 'retires' him.

Laura Rambeau Lee
: Racism directed at Whites and Asians is a tool the left uses to engender feelings of victimization in minorities. It’s easier to blame an unjust society for ones failings than to take personal responsibility. It’s also easier to manipulate people if they have been told their circumstances are no fault of their own, and that Whites and Asians are born with an undeserved privilege and have reaped the rewards of this privilege with little to no work or effort.

 The problem is there is no way to fight this kind of racism. There is no worse thing that can happen to someone than to be labeled as racist. It has destroyed people’s livelihoods and lives. Look at what happened to Roseanne Barr for a stupid Tweet. I believe we understand this and also understand no matter how we react we cannot win. If we are proud of our heritage the left labels us white supremacists, Nazis or KKK supporters. A rational person understands that one can be proud of their heritage without diminishing the heritage of others. Unfortunately we are not dealing with rational people when it comes to the left. Their entire ideology plays on the emotions of others to build their embittered ranks.

Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Monday, July 16, 2018

Forum: What's Your Reaction to Mueller's Indictment?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question:What's Your Reaction to Mueller's Indictment?

Don Surber
: Indicting Mueller could not come soon enough.

All joking aside, this latest batch of indictments -- timed to draw attention away from the president's trip to Britain and Peter Strzok's bizarre behavior before Congress -- are useless. None of those indicted will be extradited, thus Mueller can make whatever wild and baseless charges he wants and have the press parrot his unbelievable tales and outright lies.

The DNC computer was not hacked. It was leaked. An insider leaked it. After the leak became public, the DNC immediately purged its staff of potential leakers, including Seth Rich who was murdered days later.

Mueller is an abusive coward who should have been fired after the botched anthrax investigation. He went after the wrong man for 5 1/2 years and we had to pay the victim of his vendetta $5.8 million to settle litigation. President Bush failed America by not firing Mueller. Now President Trump must take out this trash.

Federal judges need to rein in prosecutors.

Rob Miller: As I watched the video of Rothenstein reading the so-called Mueller indictment, I started laughing uncontrollably, I really did! There's nothing in here that's remotely indictable. Russia and the U.S. don't even have an extradition treaty. And even if we did, all foreign intel agencies spy on each other's computers, including, of course, the good ol' USA. Putin isn't going to turn over any of his highly trained intel agents to us any more than we would turn ours over to him.

Anyone interested in exactly how ridiculously funny this 'indictment' is ought to read my parsing of this nonsense here. Of course, we also know that finally, Mueller has admitted that that no Trump campaign associates were involved in the hacking effort, that there was no collusion by the Trump campaign or that any Americans were knowingly in touch with the Russians. And he also had to admit that no vote tallies were altered by the alleged 'hacking.'

And by the way, in order to prove hacking Mueller's corrupt team would have had to examine the servers. But those were all wiped clean or destroyed a long time ago while the Famous But Incompetent stood by and did nothing, remember?

Whatever hacking took place involved classified intel Hillary's illegal unprotected bathroom server and on her chief aide Huma Abedin's laptop, the one she shared with Anthony Weiner. The DNC was released by a leaker, and to Julian Assange who made most of the WikiLeaks on the DNC public his source was not the Russians but someone inside the Clinton campaign. This was almost certainly Bernie supporter Seth Richards, who was murdered in what police branded as a robbery attempt...even though the body had $5,000 in cash and jewellery on it when it was found. The NYC cops confiscated his laptop as evidence and are still holding it, unless they destroyed it clandestinely. Since Julian Assange offered a $100k reward for info leading to the capture of Rich's murderer, it's implausible that Seth Rich wasn't involved in the leaks in some fashion.

OK, so we now know that there never was any evidence of Trump's collusion with the Russians. But we also know that a Democrat president misused the FISA apparatus and weaponized the FBI to illegally spy on an opposition candidate during a presidential campaign. That we know for a fact.

For me, that's far more serious than Russian intel agents doing what intel agents from all countries including ours do, especially when a secretary of state commits felonies by having classified documents on an unprotected server in a bathroom, and on a laptop owned by her chief aide and her wacko husband. And the hypocrisy is compounded by the fact that President Barack Hussein Obama illegally intervened in several elections directly...the UK, Israel and Nigeria among others.

For me, the unfunny part of this is that is was timed to poison a badly needed summit conference between President Trump and Russia's Vladimir Putin. President Trump himself has remarked about how this idiocy has made any agreement s between America and Russia difficult. We have common interests with Russia to be worked out, especially now that Putin is realizing that Russia can't control the Iranians any more.

James Kirwin
:I agree with Don.

As for my interest in the indictments themselves I’ll quote the illustrious George S. Kaufmann:

" Mr. Fisher, on Mount Wilson there is a telescope that can magnify the most distant stars to twenty-four times the magnification of any previous telescope. This remarkable instrument was unsurpassed in the world of astronomy until the development and construction of the Mount Palomar telescope.

"The Mount Palomar telescope is an even more remarkable instrument of magnification. Owing to advances and improvements in optical technology, it is capable of magnifying the stars to four times the magnification and resolution of the Mount Wilson telescope."

" Mr. Fisher, if you could somehow put the Mount Wilson telescope inside the Mount Palomar telescope, you still wouldn’t be able to see my interest in your problem."

Fausta Rodriquez Wertz:More kabuki

Patrick O'Hannigan
:The Mueller indictments look a lot like a nothingburger. Twelve Russian intelligence officers, none of which will ever be convicted of anything in an American court, and note, please, that every computer system they either hacked or supervised the hacking of was in the possession of Democrats. The Mueller indictments prove that Trump was right about the whole Mueller investigation being a witch hunt aimed squarely at him.

After almost two years in the headlines, trying to gin up support for overthrowing the electoral will of the American people, Mueller had to indict at least the proverbial ham sandwich to justify all the money he's spent. Meanwhile, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz is not yet in jail for handing Democrat servers and email accounts over to IT experts from Pakistan (Were they "doing jobs Americans won't do"?). Hillary Clinton has not been convicted of the money laundering and obstruction of justice charges that she so richly deserves. James Comey still plays "holier than thou" on a book tour. And the FBI's executive leadership continues to disgrace itself.

Dave Schuler:The most recent indictments, of a dozen Russian intelligence officers, actually contained two interesting points. First, to the best of my knowledge it's the first official claim that the DNC was actually hacked by the Russian government. That's actually a pretty important disclosure.

Second, there is still no evidence of collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

As I have said repeatedly over at my place, I'm content to let the Mueller investigation play out. And I think that just about everybody will be disappointed by its outcome. President Trump and his campaign won't be exonerated outright; he also won't be impeached as a consequence of the investigation's findings.

Laura Rambeau Lee
:The Mueller indictment insults the intelligence of we smelly, Walmart-shopping hillbilly deplorables. In an interview on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business, Rep. Devin Nunes stated the House Intelligence Committee released this information in March, only to be mocked by the Democrats and the media. There was even more information in the committee report than in the Mueller indictment. Rep. Nunes stated they essentially wrote this indictment for the Mueller team.

The longer this investigation goes on the more it becomes clear what a waste of time and money has been spent by Mueller and his team. Whatever Russian interference occurred had little impact on the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. And after nearly two years there is no evidence anyone connected with the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the election, which was the whole reason for the appointment of a Special Counsel investigation.

These indictments of Russian intelligence officers will go nowhere. And we know we will never discover the truth with these circuses like we saw last week with Peter Strzok. President Trump must instruct the DOJ to declassify documents related to the Russia investigation so that Americans can see the House report in its entirety without redaction.Most importantly we need to know if our counter intelligence agencies were utilized by the Obama Administration to obtain questionably legitimate FISA warrants to spy on individuals in the Trump campaign. This is supposed to be provided by the DOJ to the committee by July 31st. And so we continue to wait.

 Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Tuesday, July 10, 2018

Forum: Are Sanctions On Countries Trading With Iran Wise Policy?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Are Sanctions On Countries Trading With Iran Wise Policy?

Don Surber:Yes. Given that the Iranian protests are in their second month, there is a chance for a regime change. Women are doffing their headgear, and drivers are parking their trucks. The Grand Bazaar in Teheran shut down. 40 years ago, merchants in the Grand Bazaar backed the Iranian Revolution. Now they seem to want a regime change.

The only influence the United States has is in commerce. President Trump wisely is avoiding too much public support, and I doubt we are doing clandestine operations, as well. Why risk being associated with the rebellion? Any conection betwen us and them will end the revolution. The one thing we can do is not trade with Iran, and tom punish those who do.

This is the latest sign that the New World Order failed. Brexit, Trump, Macron, AMLO in Mexico, and now this. There are many other examples of regime changes because the old order failed The People.

Patrick O'Hannigan:I wish I could be more original on this question than to say that I agree with Don, but -- I agree with Don!

Deterrence does not have to be exclusively in the military realm. The sanctions game (and it is a game, of sorts) amounts to "Leave the gun --Take the cannoli" writ large.

Rob Miller
: Oh, I think it's imperative. Iran's economy is in free fall. No one wants the rial, inflation is rampant and the prices of food and other necessities is skyrocketing. That's a big part of what's behind the protests. Iran will not be able to continue to financially afford adventures abroad in Yemen, Syria or Lebanon for too much longer, and even Iraq's kingmaker Muqtada al-Sadr is inching away from Iran somewhat. This will get even worse once Trump's sanctions on countries buying Iran's oil and natural gas take effect. Iran also my not have the funds needed to continue to be Hamas's pay master along with Erdogan. The EU, BTW are looking like they're reluctantly going along with the sanctions. They need our markets far more than Iran's, and their choice will boil down to paying Putin's atrocious prices or buying U.S. LPGD.

I also think our President and his team members are making a mistake by NOT informing the American people what a hideous regime this it brutalizes its own people, the corruption of the Ayatollahs, and that Iran is not in any sense a 'democracy. They need to explain that Iran has been in a state of war with America since 1979. They need to tell the American people that Iran never actually even signed th eso called 'Iran Deal.' They need to remind the American people about Iran's complicity in 9/11, and how the rhetoric of both Ayatollahs Khomeini and Khamanei focus on the Twelver Sect's open embrace of apocalypse as a necessity for the Hidden Imam to return to rule the world for their brand of Islam.

The days of Iran's despotic regime aren't over yet. That won't happen until the Army turns. But this is a great way to get the ball rolling.

I'm going to be so original that I'll say I agree with both Don and Patrick! Honestly, I'd love to add some unique, wonderful insight, but I think they said it all.

What I will tack on, because I'm petty, is that one of Obama's most significant failings as president happened early in his administration when he refused to give the Green Revolution any moral support. As we know now, the self-centered Obama had his own grand dream of "solving" Iran and was content to let people die in the streets rather than risk losing the halo he envisioned for himself.

Laura Rambeau Lee:I must say I agree with everyone, also. Sanctions hit them where it hurts most and can often lead to cooperation where and when we need it.

Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Wednesday, July 04, 2018

Mexico's Election And What It Means

Image result for Amlo

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or Amlo as he's colloquially known is Mexico's new president, having won a landslide victory on July 1st. Obrador is essentially a far left populist. A former mayor of Mexico City who twice ran for president and lost, in 2006 and 2012, Obrador won the presidency because of outrage over the corruption of incumbent President Enrique Peña Nieto and his Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the conditions in what is rapidly becoming a failed state.The conditions of poverty, corruption, and high crime as well as their governments inability to deal with these problems is what caused Mexicans in desperation to vote for Amlo, their first leftist president since 1934.

Given that Mexico shares a 2,000 mile border with America, this development is worth looking at.

Many observers are warning that Obrador is a radical and will turn Mexico into Venezuela north, leading to even more illegal migration into the U.S. That is by no means outside the realm of possibility.

Victor Davis Hanson declared last week that Obrador is “anti-American” and will push the idea that Mexicans have a “human right” to illegally enter the United States. Again, quite possible.

But there's another factor worth considering; Obrador has a limited ability to control any of these factors.

The cartels all but run the country on the basis of their enormous profits from drug sales, human trafficking, extortion, enforced prostitution, kidnapping for ransom and other unsavory activities as well as their willingness to resort to the most extreme violence if they're disobeyed or crossed. A common cartel tactic is to offer judges, politicians and law enforcement a choice of 'silver or lead,' co-operation and acceptance of a bribe or death.

And the cartels have branched out. Aside from the above, they now make money from fuel theft, illegal fishing, mining, and logging.Many Mexicans, especially in rural areas, are often have to work for the cartels if they're going to have any employment, period.

The big problem isn't Obrador, but that Mexico is becoming ungovernable—a failed state. And we're already experiencing the effects, and then some as the violence and crime spill across the border. It will only get worse unless we adopt some very protective policies.

Actually, from what I know of him, Obrador and President Trump might even get along relatively well. Both have larger than life personalities and both men described the initial conversation when President Trump called Amlo to congratulate him on his victory as friendly. Amlo supposedly even offered Trump a deal involving increased cooperation in border control and curbing illegal migration in exchange for U.S. financing of development projects for Mexico's economy.

The problem, of course is that the Mexican government has no real control over illegal migration nor is it in Mexico's interest to stop it even if it did. Illegal migrants send to Mexico almost $40 billion dollars a year, as well as money these migrants get from social welfare benefits and what amounts to outright tax fraud in many cases. It also has another bonus, as a social safety valve where the American taxpayers foot the bill to take care of the needs of people Mexico is unwilling to.

Presidente' Obrador has very few cards to actually play, unless he turns out to be a man of extraordinary courage with ability to defeat the cartels. Given that this is unlikely, America's policy towards Mexico has to be based on the realization that it is a failed state, unfortunate as that is.

That means the border wall, increased border security, selective repatriation to Mexico of a significant number of illegal migrants here and a realistic, closely controlled guest worker plan somewhat similar to the bracero program of the 1950's, with perhaps a number of H1-B temporary work visas for more skilled, non-agricultural workers. And of course. fighting the cartels and their allies here in America and cooperating with Mexico to give them whatever help we can to regain control over their country again.

Gettysburg - A Fourth Of July Long Ago


Two years, ten years, and passengers ask the conductor:What place is this? Where are we now? I am the grass.Let me work. - Carl Sandburg

One hundred and fifty five years ago today, brave men fought in and around a small town called Gettysburg in Pennsylvania to determine whether the Union would endure or whether it would not.

The Battle of Gettysburg broke the tide of the advance of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia and while the war itself didn't end for another 22 months, Gettysburg decided the outcome.

Lee's objective was psychological as much as strategic. By 1863 there was substantial sentiment in the North to allow the Confederacy to go its own way and end what had become an increasingly bloody, unpopular and costly war. By subjecting the North to the same sort of invasion the South had been subjected to - in essence, bringing the war home - Lee hoped to increase this sentiment and force the North to negotiate a settlement.

Gettysburg was very much an accidental battle. Neither side was really looking to fight here, but the armies accidentally collided, largely because Lee was deprived of Jeb Stuart's cavalry in the early stages of the battle and thus lacked his usual awareness of where the Union forces were. Once the initial impact was made,on July 1st 1863 in a battle between Brigadier General John Buford's Union cavalry division and two corps of Union infantry and two large Confederate corps that attacked from the north and northwest under General Richard Ewell, the armies came together and the battle was on.

An astounding fact about Gettysburg is that the victorious commander of the Union forces, General George Gordon Meade, had only been in command of the Army of the Potomac for a scant three days, after General Joseph Hooker was relieved of command. Meade was caught by surprise with the sudden collision of the two armies, but he reacted with coolness and unexpected courage at several points when the battle could very well have been lost with a different sort of general in charge.

The missing man at Gettysburg, one who might very well have altered the course of the battle and of history was Confederate General Stonewall Jackson, who was accidentally killed by his own troops after his amazing victory at Chancellorsville.

The key to Gettysburg was the control of the high ground, the hills and ridges outside the town. After Gen. Buford's troops were scattered into the hills that first day of battle, they could easily have been driven out of the high ground with an assault by the victorious Confederates, and had Stonewall been in command there's no doubt he would have driven his troops to do exactly that, digging them in on the high ground and reinforcing them with Longstreet's divisions to wait for General Meade's Union Army to come at them. Gettysburg would then have been a very different battle. But the troops Jackson would normally have commanded were under the command of General Richard Ewell.

General Ewell, even after he was ordered by Lee to take the Union position on Cemetery Hill "if practicable" chose not to make the attack. When he finally did, on the second and third day of the battle, it was the Union forces who were reinforced and dug in and the Confederates who were forced to assault them. Ewell's hesitancy likely cost the South the battle.

On the second day of the fighting, July 2nd, General Lee sent General Longstreet's divisions against the Union Left flank in an attempt to roll it up and knock the Union forces off of the high ground. Meade sent reinforcements to the Left flank to shore up positions that later became legendary - the Peach Orchard, the Wheatfield, Plum Run Valley and the Devil's Den. The Union forces held on in spite of horrendous casualties. One of the most amazing exploits of that day happened in the defense of Little Round Top, where Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, a former college professor in command of the 20th Maine maintained a precarious hold on the Union's extreme left flank under assault from General John Hood's troops.When the 20th were almost out of ammunition, Colonel Chamberlain led them in a surprise bayonet charge downhill that swept the Confederates off the hill, saved the position and likely the Union, a deed for which he later won the Medal of Honor.

On the third day, July 3rd, Lee decided to risk everything on a frontal assault on the right center on the Union lines, and 12,500 Confederate troops advanced from the ridge line three-quarters of a mile (1,200 meters) towards Cemetery Ridge in that gallant attempt to reverse fortune known to history as Pickett's Charge.

It was a slaughter. The Union artillery had deliberately held its fire during the Confederate bombardment prior to the Charge, but as the Confederate troops approached they were hit with fierce artillery fire from Union positions on Cemetery Hill and north of Little Round Top, and from the Union center. Nearly one half of the Confederate troops who participated in the Charge failed to return from the attack.

Somehow, some way, Confederate General Lewis Armistad's brigade managed to make it through the withering fire and briefly breach the Union lines at a place called the "Angle", a place with a low stone fence near a small wooded area. But they were quickly hurled back, and with that, the battle was essentially over.

After the battle it rained, something that occurred frequently enough to give rise to a belief among soldiers on both sides that the smoke and gunpowder somehow brought on the weather.

The two armies, both licking their wounds and having been through almost more than men should be able to bear gazed at each other across the field of battle on that long ago July Fourth. On both sides combined, there were over 50,000 casualties from three days of battle.

Late in the evening, Lee began the torturous retreat southwards. Did he understand at that point that the war was lost? We have no way of knowing. But on that July Fourth, one nation's hopes for independence were doomed and another nation's hopes reaffirmed.

After the battle, there were huge amounts or corpses that needed to be disposed of, and the Union decided to make the site a national cemetery, for convenience as much as anything else. Four months after the battle, on November 19, the cemetery was dedicated, and a ceremony was held.

The main speaker was a nationally known orator, Edward Everett. In those days of oratory as a national sport, he was expected to deliver a real rip snorter of a speech, and he reportedly did just that.

Oddly enough, Everett's isn't the speech that's remembered.Almost as an afterthought, the organizing committee invited President Abraham Lincoln to participate a scant two weeks before the ceremony, where they requested that he appear and "make a few brief remarks to honor the occasion".

So after Edward Everett finished his speech, which clocked in at close to an hour, the President rose and delivered those few brief remarks, ones that started with "Four score and seven years ago" and have come down to us through the mists of history.

Gettysburg today is a living version of Sandburg's poem. The grass has done its work, much of the original landscape has been altered and it takes some effort to visualize what happened there.

To do that, you have to go there when its quiet and listen to the ghosts. Trust me, they're there in abundance and they'll tell you the whole story if you feel like listening.

Have a wonderful July Fourth...and take a moment to remember and honor the ghosts of July Fourths past. They deserve that much, at least.

(reposted by request)

Tuesday, July 03, 2018

Germany Update: Angela Merkel Surrenders On Migrant Policy

Faced with having her government collapse, Angela Merkel surrendered entirely to the demands of her interior minister, Horst Seehofer. Here's the agreement, in English and then in German:

In order to better regulate, control and prevent secondary migration, we come to this agreement:

1. We agree to a new border regime at the German-Austrian border, which ensures that asylum seekers whose asylum procedures are the responsibility of other EU countries, will be refused entry.

2. To do so, we will establish transit centers, from which the asylum seekers will be directly sent back to the responsible countries (refusing entry on the basis of the legal implication of non-entry). We do not want to act in an uncoordinated fashion, but come to administrative agreements, or establish communication, with the countries concerned.

3. In those cases where countries refuse administrative agreements, the rejection at the German-Austrian border will be on the basis of an agreement with the Republic of Austria.

The original German version:


Like I said, complete capitulation. Hort Seehofer had the best weapon possible in this kind of negotiation, the willingness to walk away from the table and take his CSU party with him. Needless to say, he was attacked ferociously by the Leftist German press, but he stood his ground, a man with courage and conviction.

Merkel’s facesaver in this agreement is one single sentence: “We do not want to act in an uncoordinated fashion, but come to administrative agreements, or establish communication, with the countries concerned.”
 Since the 'countries concerned' have already said no to more Muslim migrants, that question is essentially settled anyway, nicht wahr? But it looks nice on paper.

The true issue here was whether Germany actually has national borders and can refuse people entry or not. Merkel wanted to have a Germany with no borders and no real nationality, just a province in a non-democratic EUSSR.

This is a great day for both Germany and Europe, a victory for the German people's right to self-determination, and a major setback for the forces of multi-culti and slavery.

Don't be surprised if Seehofer ends up as the next German chancellor.

Forum: What's The Best Response To Leftist Assaults on Their Political Opponents?

Every Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question:What's The Best Response To Leftist Assaults on Their Political Opponents?

Scott Kirwan: Interesting question. My first instinct is to punch back twice as hard but considering how hysterical the Left is getting I’m thinking another course of action might be called for:


I never thought the Left would become more unhinged than it was in the lead-up to the Iraq War, but Trump has pushed them passed that point years ago. I’d be embarrassed to be a Democrat today. The party has lost its collective mind, and I find that hilarious. And now they are trotting out a 20-something as their standard-bearer, a girl who wasn’t around for Communism the first time but who just knows it’s sooo cool. Yeah, that Brezhnev – what a fashionista.

That said if we are going to laugh at them, we should do so while heading to the polls this Fall. Normally I don’t vote in non-presidential elections but I’ll be doing so this year.

Don Surber: Vote.

Rob Miller: By all means, vote...unless you've had your votes made meaningless because you live in a blue run state and your neighborhood has been gerrymandered to be safe Democrat no matter what. I think more is called for.

Two things I haven't seen discussed too much, certainly not by the usual suspects in the media. Almost all of these incidents have two things in common. First, they all occur in blue run jurisdictions, where the police, who take their orders from the local politicians can be told not to interfere. Second, they mostly involve mobs descending on smaller groups or even single individuals.

They're not only totalitarian barbarians but cowards. What's called for is what I refer to as puppy training. That means consequences for misbehavior.

Once the president gets rid of Jeff Sessions and gets a real attorney general, there are a lot of corrections to be had. You'll notice that a bunch of 'resistance' punks in Portland, Oregon surrounded and blockaded an ICE office and the mayor and the police did nothing...and then, all of a sudden, after a day or so of this, the police moved in, cleared away the 'demonstrators' and arrested some of them. Perhaps someone at the White House called the Mayor and mentioned that impeding federal officers from carrying out their duties s a felony, and so is impeding a federal office from carrying out their normal business. And so is aiding and abetting.

Former president Barack Hussein Obama got away with weaponizing federal agencies like the IRS to go after those he considered his political opponents. Things like that can also work both ways if necessary.So can lawfare. And Dick Tuck style pranks. These people have no sense of humor and get literally hysterical when they're mocked.

And on some occasions, simply standing up to these people can bear fruit,when the odds are right. It's time the Left learned that there's a price to pay for their antics.

Laura Rambeau Lee:The proper response seems to be just keep calm, keep speaking the truth whenever and wherever we can, grab some popcorn and watch it play out. Follow the growing #WalkAway Campaign founded by former liberal Brandon Straka. People from all “identity groups” are waking up to the lies they have been told by liberals and the Democrat Party and are walking away. Their testimonials on Facebook are powerful and enlightening to read.

And I agree with Don. We have to vote and get others to vote. That’s how we win!

Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Monday, July 02, 2018

Germany - The Fiction Finally Cracks

Related image

Angela Merkel is in deep trouble, and has a very good chance of being ousted from power. And Germany itself may be making a long overdue change for the better, as the German people finally tire of the Muslim migrants and the rapes, the murders, the crime and the huge financial cost most of them bring with them.

Even the Germans it seems, with their almost inbred preference for social order at almost all costs seem to have finally reached their limit. Even Germany's pro Merkel Leftist press and what amounts to near censorship of opposing views aren't hiding things anymore.

Mutti Merkel's original plot involved saving Germany's out-sized social welfare system. With the Germans no longer having children as they used to, she decided to open the gates to thousands of Muslim 'asylum seekers' and migrants. The majority were Muslim men between the late teens and mid-forties, which of course includes a lot of Muslim men who claimed to be children to gain asylum and benefits but were proven to be much older, usually in connection with various criminal trials and investigations.

Merkel's idea was that these men would both increase Gerany's population by impregnating German women and would work in Germany's industries, increasing the tax base.

Well, part of the plan worked, at least in theory. These Muslim migrants were quite happy to try and impregnate German women and girls, whether those women or girls were willing or not. And as in Britain, Sweden and other countries, the new migrants saw these infidel females as prey and treated them accordingly, to the point where over a third of Germany's women admitted that they were actually afraid to go out at night...this in what used to be one of the safest countries in Europe!

Related image

Even German institutions like public swimming pools, trains, train stations, Christmas markets, and Sylvester Night and Oktoberfest celebrations became far less safe if you were a German female.

Related image

Even worse was the Merkel government's response, which essentially was to make a few public statements and do absolutely nothing except to do their best to brand anyone opposed to these suicidal polices as 'racist,' something that worked well in Germany for some time because of its past. And to censor news of these events as much as possible. And insist that it was a minor problem that could be overcome with a little education. I won't even bother to tell you how little those efforts worked. Unglaublich.

The new migrants, who were almost entirely unskilled also found out quickly that they had no real reason to work, because of the German government's incredibly generous benefits they received. So much for the rest of the plan.And as more and more of them found out about the gravy train waiting for them, more and more of them surged into Germany. Since they have to have housing, German families are actually being moved out of their apartments and migrant encampments are being erected in German towns whether the populations wants them or not. As these towns and cities experience this sort of cultural enrichment, a number have simply refused to accept any more of it.

Think of the irony...instead of the Muslim migrants becoming tax slaves for the Germans, the exact reverse is happening!

And that's not Merkel's only problem. She also has a major scandal on her hands because a number of Germany's asylum processing centers have been caught taking bribes to grant people asylum status for money. And then, there's the problem of President Trump, who has not only raised tariffs on German goods. Infuriated by the refusal of Germany to stop empowering the hideous Iranian regime with trade that actually includes chemical weapons technology, the US president has doubled down and said there will be significant trade sanctions against any country importing Iranian oil.That means a trade war Germany can't win, and the Germans know it.

Chemical weapons from Germany to Iran to be used to shoot poison gas at Israel and the Jews? Sounds like the bad old days, nicht wahr Frau RiechsKanzler?

President Trump's new ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell is also mentioned in the above linked article, which brings us to the matter at hand. You see, Grenell has formed bonds with Merkel's new EU problems, the new, nationalist and anti-migrant governments in Austria and Italy both of which are outspoken Trump admirers. And with Merkel's chief German political problem, German Interior Minister Horst Seehofer.

Seehofer is also the head of the the Christian Social Union (CSU), Bavarian sister-party to Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and a major coalition partner. You might recall that Merkel's CDU needed months to be able to form a working coalition in order to govern and had to go to bed with the Socialists,FDP and Greens, an unwieldy partnership at best.

Seehofer is concerned because in the last election, a lot of CSU votes went to Alternative für Deutschland(AFD)instead, making the nationalist, anti-migrant party the third largest in Germany. And with another regional election coming up, he wants to staunch the bleeding. Bavaria, like most of Southern Germany is much more right leaning then say, Berlin. And AFD is polling even higher than it did when the last election was held.

This latest showdown between Merkel and Seehofer involves a dustup in the EU itself, because the Muslim migrants keep pouring in.With several EU members refusing to take any more, and in some cases haing always refused to take any at all, Merkel used Germany's power in the EU to try and force compliance. An early attempt at an alliance with France's President Macrom failed when his ideas were even more unrealistic then Merkel's. Another idea, putting 'asylum registration compounds' in places like Libya at a cost to the EU of 20-30 billion euros annually failed because those countries refused to allow the compounds on their territory. Merkel even claimed at one point that 'an EU deal has been made' only to be contradicted by several EU leaders like Hungary's Victor Orban that nothing like that had even been discussed,let alone agreed on.

Seehofer wants a stricter migration policy in all regards, but the specific disagreement was Seehoffer insistence that migrants who originally land in say, Greece or Spain and who had already been registered elsewhere cannot travel to Germany because of the higher benefits and apply for asylum in Germany. Merkel refuses to budge, so Seehofer can either defy her because he controls the Federal police and implement the policy, which means she would have to fire him. Or he could simply resign.

Either action would man that the long alliance between the CSU and CDU is over, and that Merkel's coalition wold fall to pieces, forcing a new national election.

It's not impossible that the CSU and AFD would even form a political alliance, which would give them almost enough seats to govern.

This scenario should play out very soon.

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Fixing Gaza...Permanently

Related image

Related image

Since March 30th, much of the world's press and a chunk of the so-called 'international community' has been focusing on a series of what can only be called violent riots emanating from Gaza against Israel's border.

Of course the media refers to them as protests, and the rioters as protestors and the UN as well as the usual channels refer to what has happened as 'war crimes.' So as a beginning, it's perhaps helpful to describe these so-called protests and let the reader judge.

Israel understandably has a border fence with Gaza, a precaution against the numerous terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas and Iranian proxy Islamic Jihad that have occurred in the past. The protests weren't composed of people carrying signs and making a few speeches. They were mob attacks on Israel's border, specifically on points Hamas had advised the mob were vulnerable. The mobs attacked the fence directly with Molotov cocktails, small arms fire, axes, wire cutters, explosives and knives. They used women and children as human shields, and had support from Hamas missiles and mortar shells. In other words, this was an attack, an act of war carried out against a sovereign nation.

The IDF responded the way any country's military would faced by this attack on their borders. After warnings to the mob in Arabic not to approach the border fence and tear gas didn't stop them, the IDF soldiers opened fire when the mob charged the fence in response. It is a testimony to the cool heads, marksmanship and professionalism of the Tzahal that there were so few casualties, and that even Hamas admits almost all of them were Hamas or Islamic Jihad members. If a group of Jewish women and children had approached Gaza with an actual protest asking Hamas to stop firing missiles and mortar rounds at Israeli towns, does anyone doubt Hamas would have killed every one of them and celebrated afterwards?

Hamas's Leader Ismail Haniyeh has made it clear that the riots and assaults of the fence will continue 'until Jerusalem is liberated.' And true to his command, the riots have continued, usually of Fridays after the imams have had a chance to stir up the mobs.

Another assault has been launched from the air. Incendiary kites, balloons and even inflated condoms have been launched towards Israel, resulting in fires that have already destroyed hundreds of dunams of Israeli land. One balloon containing an explosive device and a booby trapped detonator attached to the string was launched to be landed near an Israeli kindergarten only a half hour before the children were scheduled to arrive for class. Here's what it looked like:

Image result for picture of Hamas balloon incendiary

The leftist press reacted as expected. The AP, for instance in an article I won't bother to link to had a whole sob story about how there's such limited electricity nowadays and that it was making medical procedures like tending the wounds of would-be jihadis so difficult. Of course, what this Hamas PR piece didn't mention is that the electricity in Gaza is so limited because a Hamas missile accidentally hit one of the Israeli towers that provides electricity to Hamasastan. And to add to the smell of what the AP and others are peddling, the Israelis aren't able to make repairs because of the danger to Israeli repair crew.

The UN also played its traditional role. An extremely biased UNSC resolution damning Israel for 'war crimes' was unable to pass thanks to a U.S. veto, but the same resolution passed in the General Assembly, 120-8, with 45 abstentions. About half of the EU voted for the resolution, including Spain, France and Belgium, with Switzerland, New Zealand, Iceland and Norway also voting in favor. The UK and Germany abstained. Of the major U.S. allies, only the Australians had the guts and decency to vote against this travesty openly...Advance Australia Fair indeed.

Related image

An amendment advanced by U.S Ambassador Nikki Haley condemning Hamas actually passed by a majority, but was disallowed by General Assembly president Miroslav Lajcak. While the resolution has the legal force of a stale piece of take out pizza, the fact that the UN was willing to vote to not condemn a clear aggressor against a democracy, and to actually vote in favor of establishing 'an international protection force for the occupied Palestinians' tells us quite a bit of what the UN has become. As Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon put it, if the UN approved the Palestinian resolution, “it will have signed in writing its unequivocal support for terrorism against Israel.”

“Let us not pretend,” Danon said. “If ISIS were to attack Stockholm tomorrow, ISIS would be held responsible for the attack. If al-Qaeda assaulted Paris, the UN would issue the strongest condemnation of al-Qaeda.”

“Only when Hamas attacks Israel does the UN seek to blame Israel.”

Well they did approve it, and a large part of the UN does approve terrorist attacks on Israel. And they have for a very long time.

So, how to fix this sorry situation?

Obviously the Israelis cannot depend on any cooperation at the UN. Nor can they depend on Hamas to stop attacking them or trust any negotiations they make with them. The latest laugher was Hamas's offer for 'comprehensive negotiation.' You know what Hamas proposed? They will return the remains of two Israeli servicemen,Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul they've held since the 2014 Operation Protective Edge. And they will return two kidnapped Israeli civilians Avera Mengistu and Hisham al-Sayed, prisoners who the Red Cross has not even been permitted to visit.

What do they want in exchange? Oh, just to build a seaport and an airport. When you realize the Iran has now joined Turkey as Hamas's paymasters, it's easy to figure out they don't exactly want these things for the tourist trade, but to fly and import weapons and missiles. The Iranians are particularly noted for using civilian airplanes for this purpose. And these attacks on Israel's border are largely at Iran's request, to open up another front against Israel and distract from Iranian attempts to militarize Syria.

And no mention of an actual peace treaty, of course. Israel is never going to be able to negotiate anything like that with people who would use a pretty, kid friendly balloon as a booby trap in hopes of murdering  Jewish children.

What Israel has done to date since the Hamas takeover is to wall Gaza off, destroy the terrorist tunnels into Israel and do their best not to allow Iranian heavy weapons to get into Hamas's hands. Whenever the missile firings and mortar shelling get too intense, Israel engages in  what they refer to as 'mowing the grass' to take out as many Hamas military assets as possible and calm things down until the next time. Followed, of course by the usual media and UN hysterics,

This strategy actually helps Hamas, who care very little about the people they rule or about peace with Israel.It has become, essentially a war of attrition which favors Hamas.

I have a different solution, and it's one I would implement if it were my decision to make.

Wars are won (or lost) when certain things occur. To end a war or the active threat of war, one side occupies enemy territory and subdues it while protecting its own. Or  one side simply destroys an enemy's capacity to wage war and forces them to seek terms of surrender and peaceful coexistence.

Of course, not all wars are decisively won or lost, but that is how a war in which one side is victorious ends.

My proposal is that Israel treat this like the war that it is and do what's necessary to end it. It would not be without cost, but is entirely possible. And certainly an improvement on the status quo.

First, I would inform the civilian population to leave to avoid undue hardship. Then, I would send the IDF over the borders, after announcing publicly to Hamas and the world that any hospitals, mosques, civilian dwellings or schools from which any missiles were fired would be considered  legitimate military targets and dealt with accordingly. After all, the UN is going to condemn anything Israel does anyway, so it makes sense to deal with this Hamas tactic properly, once and for all.

I would then shut off all electricity and water to Gaza. which is now provided by Israel. Men have survived for centuries without electricity, but never for very long without water. The IDF could simply dig in and besiege Gaza City and Khan Yunis while the air force and attack choppers took out the missile launching sites and anything else that was appropriate. Hamas would eventually have to come out to either face the IDF's firepower or to surrender.

After vetting them, the Israelis could definitely let a large part of the civilian population flee to Egyptian Sinai and then close off the Rafah crossing while turning over the Hamas small fry that were captured directly to Egypt's Mukhabarat for a nice, leisurely interrogation. Getting their hands on bunch of Hamas operatives is something I'm sure Egypt's al-Sisi would appreciate, especially when they spilled the beans about their fellow Muslim Brotherhood comrades in Egypt. The Hamas leaders could be subjected to a nice sit down with the Shin Bet, who are noted for their hospitality and encouragement of interesting conversation in these situations. Most of the Hamas leaderrs could probably be turned over to the Egyptians afterwards. Sharing is caring, nachon?

At that point, the Israelis would control previously hostile territory, eliminating an Iran proxy and a probable war front. Mahmoud Abbas would certainly want it turned over to him and the corrupt PLO, but Israel could and should refuse outright, and annex the Gaza Strip. They could then start doing what Israelis seem to do so well, rebuilding and improving the mess, exactly what they did to Judea and Samaria after the Six Day War. There would be no more missiles from Gaza, and not much of a Hamas threat. Perhaps even some of the inhabitants from Gush Katif could resettle there, along with other Israelis. It could even become a haven for Arab and Middle East Christians and Yazedis, whose young men would become as good soldiers defending their new country as the Druse, Bedouin and Arab Christians have been. South Africa's Jews, who are increasingly under threat from the government of their native land might be another good source of population.

And Gaza itself? It would become what it could easily have been with different rulers, a second Singapore rife with trade and prosperity. While Egypt might whine a bit about a large part of Gaza's population settling in Sinai, the increased trade between Israel and Egypt, which Egypt badly needs would be a consolation. Egypt could also probably apply to the UN or elsewhere to get some support money for these new refugees.

The UN and the usual media clowns would go insane. But they do that anyway whenever Israel takes the least step to defend itself. They would never recognize Israel's annexation of Gaza, but so what? They don't even recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, or Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, which is 50 years old. Some European nations might not accept products from Gaza, but there would be plenty of trade with Asia, Eastern Europe and the Arab world to make up the slack.

Wars end with victory. It's time this one did.