(Video) Douglas Murray On 'The Strage Death Of Europe'

 


British author and lecturer Douglas Murray has a recent bestseller out called "The Strange death of Europe. Here he is talking about the book and the ideas it presents at David Horowitz's Restoration Weekend. A transcript is below.




Douglas Murray: I'm only going to speak for about 15 minutes because I wanted as much time as possible for Q&A, because I sense that there hasn't been much, so far, and because I'm always very excited about hearing other people's views and questions. But let me start by making a few remarks.

The first, by the way, is that I'll talk a little about my recent book. It's always rather difficult to understand another country, let alone another continent, or another culture. There are things you have in common. There are things which seem bizarre, when you look at them from outside, and there are things that look recognizable. There are things that rhyme. There are an enormous number of similarities between where I'm from and where most of you are from, and an enormous number of differences too. I've been in the states a week, spoken at a campus, and was on the West Coast at the beginning of the week, and I had one of those disassociation moments in San Francisco, when I had been in my second day in the city, and I just noticed that absolutely everywhere, there seemed to be posters advertising delivery services for marijuana. And I thought this is interesting because if there's one thing it seems to me that San Francisco doesn't need it's easier access to marijuana. More of it, just so that people who smoke it don't even have to go down the street. But there are lots of similarities between our societies as well, and one of the, I suppose, most gratifying things since the "Strange Death of Europe" came out in June here in the U.S. is the number of people who have come over to me and written to me from America, from Canada, from Australia, and said this book is about us isn't it? And, perhaps I could stop by just saying a little about what it is about, and you'll get some of the resonances.

The "Strange Death of Europe" centers on the 2015 migration crisis, which you all remember was the moment when Angela Merkel massively exacerbated an already existing problem by announcing, unilaterally, that the external and internal borders of Europe were basically dissolved. In a single act, the mass movement of people that had been going on for decades sped up exponentially, so that Germany in a single year took in an additional 2 percent of its population. Sweden took in an additional almost 3 percent of its population. This is all part of a pattern. I say that has been going on for many decades. And, just like those previous decades, what happened after the 2015 crisis was that politicians and the media found excuses to justify something that would have happened anyway. So, for instance, German citizens and others were told that this mass migration, millions of people into Europe, was there would be a net economic gain for their society, that it would enrich their society. Now, actually, all of the studies that I have gone over on this show that, at best, most such migration cannot be called to be any kind of economic gain. A study in Britain showed that over a 15 year period, migrants took out 95 billion more in services than they put in taxation. And, of course they would. If you go to another country, you don't speak the language. You don't have the skills. It's going to be a very long time, before you've put in anything into the welfare system, remotely like the amount that you and your family will have taken out. But, this is one of the arguments that is made.

And, by the way, just as in all of the decades after the war, so in the post-2015 moment, the governments that came up with these explanations had to hedge around the facts, so that just like the labor government, after 1997, they had to pretend that the average migrant was a Luxemburgian hedge funder. And this is just one of the lies that gets told to the people, because once that one is shut down, once, for instance, you notice that the number of people who have been added to Germany's welfare bill in the last year, is almost exactly the number of the people who came in in 2015, once you go over that lie, you get to another one, which the German people and others were told; which is that we are an aging population. We are a graying population, and then, therefore, we need, obviously, to bring people in, to keep us and our society into the standards to which we've become accustomed. Of course, this argument always ignores one extraordinary thing, which none of the politicians ever seem to recognize, which is the startling fact that migrants get old as well. Amazingly enough, it's not just us Europeans who suffer the aging process. Who knew? But, of course, if you do believe in that idea, that you need to keep on bringing people to keep yourself in the custom that you're now used to, you get, what I describe as, the pyramid problem in migration. You keep having to bring in more and more people all the time, to keep yourselves in that sustainable societal moment.

So once you get the one of, well, okay maybe they don't make us richer. Maybe the aging population thing doesn't work. You get to another one, which is diversity. It doesn't matter if we're financially poorer. It doesn't matter, because we're so much more culturally rich. Now, I should say that there is something in this. What society -- Europeans certainly wouldn't do this. What society doesn't want to know as much of interest and culture as the world has to offer? Who doesn't want to know as much about the world, and about the ideas of the world as possible? But, of course, the first person from, for instance, India to bring Indian cuisine into the U.K., does an interesting service. Vins up the local cuisine. It's not the case that the next 100 Indians who come, for instance, bring a hundred times more interesting cuisine. It's not the case that the first Sudanese poet who enters the U.K. massively brings interest to your country and that the next thousand people from Sudan continue to just bring ever richer versions of the poetry of Sudan. And, by the way, please don't ask me to name my favorite Sudanese poet. But, this is just a part of that lie. They all say – You also notice, by the way, that this is always a one way street. Not once in my adult life have I heard anybody say that the thing that Eritrea needs an injection of Welshman. That they just could do with some Welsh cooking or singing. Nobody says this. Nobody says, as Mark Steyn and I were saying in a conversation recently, nobody says the thing that the Somalis really need is a bit more Bach. I actually think it would be nice for them if they had a bit more Bach. But nobody thinks that's an appropriate way to say it. But Europeans are told there's something hollow at our heart. As if we in Europe, the culture of Dante and Gerter and Bach, has some kind of diminishment; something hollow at its center that needs filling by the world.

And then you get to another stage in this, which is, okay, maybe it doesn't make you richer. Maybe the aging population thing does fall apart. Maybe the diversity thing isn't all it's cracked up to be or, as I put it at one point in my book, maybe we just have to do an agreement this is a quid pro quo. We have a bit more gang rape and beheading than we used to have, but then there's a wider range of cuisines. So, who's to – life's all swings and roundabouts.

But, then you get to the last stage of that, which is the one that politicians now say and speak to us about. Which is, okay, maybe none of these things are the case. We'll suck it up. This is globalization. This is going to happen anyway. This is a hell of a way to speak to the general public about their and their children's future. And, it is only said, once again, to the peoples of Europe in this tone.

So, I explained, at great length, not just the stats and the result of my travels across, not just all of Europe, but many of the countries that migrants have been coming from, trying to explain in as much detail and with as much honesty as possible, the reality of the situation that my continent now faces. But also to explain the deeper, underlying reasons why this might be happening. Because, it seems to me that what I describe as the "strange death of Europe," I say in the opening line, "Europe is committing suicide or, at least, its leaders have decided to commit suicide." Whether the publics agree to go along with that, or not, is another matter. Now, this strange death, this suicide, seems to me to be a very unnatural thing to happen in nature. And, so there must be, and I posit that there are deeper underlying reasons for it. One is what I described, taking it from the French philosopher Pascal Bruckner, as the Tyranny of Guilt. This overwhelming guilt, specifically, the German guilt that has spread across the continent in the decades since the war. You, of course, in America have a very clear version of this, yourself. Just as we, in Europe now, have this myth of original sin, so you now have it in America; the original sin of slavery, the original sin of racism, and the European versions of the original sin of colonialism, and so on. Again, it's a one-way movement.

And, of course, we fall for it, as everybody who has children and grandchildren, or has attended an American campus in recent years, knows. If you say to a student, and I do it quite often, what is your solution for, for instance, the problems that Nigeria currently faces? They have no solutions. They have no suggestions. Very few of them can point to the country on a map. But, the one thing they all can be sure about is, at some point, it must have been their or their ancestor's fault. The fastest fast tract to look like you're a knowledgeable young person is to blame yourself and your own society. And, as I say at another point in the book, we get to the big problem the masochists always risk, which is what happens to them when they meet a real sadist? And Europe is meeting a real sadist. So you think you're appalling, empty, barren, rubbish, guilty. We agree. This seems to me to be the worst possible concatenation of events. The mass movement of peoples into a society. Then, at the point that that society appears to have lost its own faith in itself, this two of the other big underlying issues I raise in the book, are what I call, firstly, the sense of European tiredness. There's a German word I use that translates roughly as "tiredness with history" or "weariness with history," where you've gone so many of the wars of religion, the wars of nation and states, the wars of ideas, the political dreams, that you're just tired of it all, and at that point, a change might be as good as a rest. And, then there's what I describe as the sense that the story may have run out, and that this is just our fate, to go through.

Now, I'm very weary and wary, rather, about making predictions. I do, at the end of the book, say roughly two directions I think this could go. But, specific predictions, I tend to avoid. After all, we live in a world where Harvey Weinstein can end up causing the resignation of a British defense minister. So who knows what the rules of causality are in this world we now live in. But, there are some predictions that you can make. One, that it's fairly obvious that Europe will not be the same place with different people in it, and that it isn't the case that people who just walk into a continent immediately absorb all the ideas of that continent. And the subtitle of my book is immigration, identity and Islam; that the Islam bit matters because it's clearly proving for Europe to be the part that we may not be able to digest or are finding it, at the very least, very hard to digest. And, you know there are all sorts of motifs that go around on this. One, is the constant claim that there might, at some point, be a tipping point. I've given up claiming that there is such a thing as tipping point. If we'd had met this time last year, and you said to me there'll be three major terrorist attacks in your country in the opening months of the year, I'd have probably said, well that might be the tipping point. But, it turns out that 22 young women killed on a Monday night at the pop concert in Manchester, within hours the motif becomes, how can we have love rather than hate? How can we overcome hate? Hate, hate, hate. Sing John Lennon's Imagine. Imagine there's no borders. Great idea. For then we had one of the Gallagher Brother's songs. A song called Don't Look Back in Anger. People started crooning away, Don't Look Back in Anger. Why not? Why not? You know, we had the love, love, stop the hate concert, I think two weekends after the Manchester area bombing, and there was a bit of that was sad, and then they got onto all the dancing and boogying. They didn't pay any attention. The media didn't pay attention to the fact the dead hadn't even been buried. There were still girls in hospitals having bits of bolts and nails taken out of their spines. Well, at least we've moved on. It didn't get us down. Boogey on. And I deeply resent this tone, and I suspect and know that a great number of the members of the public in Europe deeply dislike it too.

The reception of this book, by the way, has been rather startling. The Guardian and The New York Times both tried to snuff this out at birth and didn't succeed. It's now the bestselling non-fiction book of the year. In the U.K., it's been a top – I'm not after applause for it. But, yes, the publisher said that, actually, their quarterly reports were far higher than they expected, because of me and Harry Potter, which was not a combination I'd ever thought would come about, but my mother had told me for a long time that it would be worth getting into books about wizards, because it was good for sales. So, I was pleased to say I got there without the wizards. And, the best thing, really, has been the number of publishers that have been sidling up to me, since saying things like, "I told my bosses we should do something in this area." One publisher in the U.K. said to me that their boss, after my book had been at the top of the bestseller list for 20 weeks, said that their boss said to them, "Well, we don't want those readers." Hmm, love his shareholders to know that.

But, anyway, for the time being continued this period of keep-calm-and-carryon-ism or ignoring the facts. But, at some point, they will, inevitably, catch up with us, and that's what the latter part of my book is about. There are people, of course, who don't care at all about this. I spoke to somebody the other week who said, "Well, it doesn't matter to me because I won't be here." Among other things, that point of view breaks down what I regard as the essential pact of civilization, which is it is not just about you. But as Edmond Burke most famously and brilliantly said, that civilization is a pact between the dead and the living and those yet to be born. You have to hold that pact together, every bit of it, and to give it up and to break a part of that pact is to break everything that you should be loving and cherishing. Now, there are plenty of people, today, who are attacking us in Europe with genuine hate, just as there are here in America. But the one thing that they never take account of is that we are not just motivated in response by hatred and justified hatred, but also by love; love of everything that we hold dear, love of an entire culture, love of country, love of family, love of neighborhood, and love of everything that's gone before us, and that it would be the worst thing imaginable, if in response to having inherited that, we then handed on to the next generation, something that was unrecognizable. So, we have this gift in our power not to pass on something like a large version of Mogadishu to the next generation. It's in the balance there, in Britain, as it is here, and in the years ahead, we're all going to be walking through this same swamp. I'd like to hand it over to you for questions. Thank you.

I don't know whether there's a microphone or whether people with large lungs can just holler.

Audience Member: Yes, hello, Mr. Murray. Thank you very much for a great speech. I have one question sir. What do you believe is your prognosis for Eastern Europe; orthodoxy and the former Soviet Republics, Warsaw Pact? They're not as willing to embrace this multi-culturalism and this disease that affects Western Europe. What do you think is the prognosis for them?

Douglas Murray: Very good and very important question. I have a section in my book that I call "Why Eastern Europeans are Different." You're right. I was in Hungary, again, a couple of weeks ago. The Polish translation of my book just came out. I had been speaking there. They have a totally different view on this. I think there are lots of reasons, but the central one I suggest is that Eastern Europeans have retained, what a great Spanish philosopher described as, the tragic sense of life. The thing that we in Western Europe, and I think large numbers of people in America, have forgotten, is, as I said, the tragic sense of life. Life, as we have it now, is highly unusual, historically speaking. We're extraordinarily lucky with what we have, and we think that this luck goes on forever. The Eastern Europeans remember that differently. They get swept aside, from one side, and just as they get rid of that, they get swept aside from another. They got no time off from history, and they remember this. They remember that even the things you care about most can be destroyed, utterly, by people who are utterly unworthy of them. And, I think we've forgotten that in the West, but they have good reason to keep that memory. And, as a result, I think their future will be very different. Somebody else.

Audience Member: Thank you so much for being here today. Here in the United States there's also another line that we face which is, as we discuss the issue of immigration, particularly with respect to Muslim immigration, we were told we are a nation of immigrants and, particularly, ensuring aspects, for example, in the Jewish community, if it were not for the United States, we would not be here. My family would not be here. How do you go and address that particular core issue? We are a county with a history of welcoming others. We are welcoming the different people. I, of course, respond why welcome people that don't share your values?

Douglas Murray: It's a very important question. There are several things. There are two critiques to this book that I found interesting, but this one is one of the most interesting. Yes, America is a nation of immigrants. That's true. Of course, it's not true with Britain. And it's not true of most of Europe, actually. We've had very, very static populations, so that, to give you a quick example, everyone talks about Huguenots, French Protestants who came over in the 17th Century. Fifty thousand French Huguenots, French Protestants came over after 1683; 1681, sorry. And that, by the 1990s was an average of 6 weeks of migration into the UK.

So, we still talk about the Huguenots, which is a one-off. But that's going on all the time now. And, of course, the French Huguenots, French Protestants, had a better chance of integrating into Britain than, say, a Nigerian Muslim is going to.

And I think this is a question – this is not a science, but there are obvious truths that we have to be able to face up to, which is that some groups integrate better than others. And we have to work out what the general rules are. Now, where I'm from, as I say, this is a deeper problem than it is here. Your sense is that you have an integration success story; you still have the sense that it's a good thing to be in America and that you're lucky to be in America, and a lot of things like that. The response in Europe is very, very different on that.

And, I would say that one of the things you can agree with is, let's at least look at what the basic ground rules are. Okay? If I move to this country, for instance, I became a citizen, I might say, I want to bring some of my values. Imagine if I said to you, I would like to bring my car. Okay. You might think that's a rather odd thing to do, but okay. And my wheel would be on the other side from yours. You say, okay. Just a little quirk. He's a British guy. He likes driving on that side of it. But if I said, and I also want to continue to have the right to drive down the left-hand side, we'd have to talk about that, wouldn't we?

And that's what a lot of this is about. There are lots of groups here who feel very sensitive, by the way, when I talk about immigration in an American context. Because there are so many people here who think, like a lot of Jews do in Europe, oh, my gosh. What if this is about us? It's not about you. It's about the people who don't want to join the you. And that's a big challenge we're all going to have. Do I have time for one more question?

Audience Member: It's kind of been easy to get into the minds of the ruling elite, as far as this collective guilt, but how do you account for the phenomenon, I think it was in Nottingham, where you had blue-collar police who are actively suppressing the ongoing rapes of British girls by Muslims? How do you account for that? Is it equivalent to the concentration camp guards or how do you put it together?

Douglas Murray: Well, because they are trying to defend what they believe, rightly or wrongly, to be the religion of our time. Like all belief systems, it shatters in a very ugly fashion. But we've been trying to sustain a whole set of unsustainable ideas. One of them is this idea, as I say, that people don't bring their own ideas when they move into a culture. They're all the same the minute you walk over the border. You immediately get 21st Century ideas about women and everything else.

So, these policemen who are in this position, they're having to police that. And not just policing criminality or crimes; they're trying to police the culture. They're trying to hold together the whole thing. And I've spoken to many people who have gone through this cognitive dissonance. It's the same reason why in Britain at the moment, if your house gets burgled, if you get robbed in the street, it's very likely the police will tell you they don't have time to look into the crime. Whereas if, as some people present know, you send out a Tweet with the wrong tone of joke in it, they'll be all over you. So, as I say, this is just one part of the phenomenon.

Now, I'm aware that I've got Mike Finch standing to my left, which is usually a great pleasure, as always, but it also almost certainly signals a change in speaker. But can I just say, I've got to sadly go up to New York after this, and it's such a pleasure always to be here at Restoration. It's enormous pleasure to meet so many friends and to see so many heroes. Thank you for your time, and I hope to see you another year. Thank you.

Catalonia: What The Media's Not Telling You

The world, and especially the EU was shocked at the brutality the Spanish government used in an attempt to suppress a referendum on Catalonian independence. The paramilitary Guardia Civil was particularly brutal as they invaded polling places. Over 800 people were reported injured as well as a dozen of so Guardia:



Catalonia is the extreme northeast of Spain. It consists of four provinces: Barcelona, Girona, Lleida, and Tarragona. The capital and largest city is Barcelona.



Catalonia was originally an independent principality with its own language and culture. That ended after the War of Spanish Secession in 1714, when Catalonia picked the wrong horse, Spain was essentially united by the Bourbon Philip V of Spain and Catalan was replaced on all legal documents with Castilian Spanish.

But Catalonia has remained something of a separate part of Spain, with a unique culture. During the Spanish Civil War, Catalonia, which had socialist movements as an important part of its politics dating back to the mid 19th century sided with the Republic against Franco, which again led to a certain amount of repression when Franco won, including abolishing Catalan institutions and banning the official use of the Catalan language again. Things eased up in the latter part of Franco's rule, and considerably more after Franco died in 1975.

The current independence movement started in 2014, and the current referendum proceeded as planned by Catalonia's regional government even after Spain's courts declared that the referendum was illegal. Proponents of Catalonia's independence say they won, while Spain says otherwise since in their point of view the entire referendum was illegal.

While many people now want to see Catalonia gain its independence (and the Catalonian independence movement wants to join the EU as a separate, independent country) there's an interesting detail that no one's mentioning, and it definitely figures in.

Catalonia has always trended a lot more to the Left than the rest of Spain. And it is slowly but surely in the process of Islamization, aided and abetted by its regional government.   For more than a decade the Muslim population of Catalonia has been rapidly growing, because Catalonia's politicians have made it a prime destination for Muslim migrants and 'refugees.' A large part of the population, now well over 7% of Catalonia, has become radicalized (or already were) and are calling for the establishment of a Muslim state in what they still refer to by the name of their former conquest, as 'al-Andaluz.'

The Islamization was deliberately started and encouraged by the Catalonian separatist movement.

The central person of the Catalan independence movement is Jordi Pujol, who was  from 1980 to 2003 the president of the Generalitat de Catalunya, literally the governor of Catalonia. Aside from being indicted along with members of his family for massive corruption and money laundering, Pujol and his cronies decided that Islamic migration was the solution to Catalonia's low birth rate and their plans for an independent Catalonia.

The separatists hoped to get lots of of cheap labor forces  which they could win over as Catalonian nationalists for the separatist movement. And they also figured that these new migrants would be taught to be Catalan speakers. After all, a worker, who could only speak Catalan and Arabic and was dependent on social benefits would hardly be able to leave Catalonia.

So the Muslim population grew to more than 500,000 and even more, when you  take the amount of illegal migration into consideration. In 2012, the second most common name in the province of Girona was Mohammed. In the region of Segarra (Lérida), 55% of the children born in 2014 had foreign mothers. Salt (Girona) has become a major center of Salafis and Islamists:


 

Besides Salt, other towns too became centers of Salafist Islam in Spain. The movement has its seat in Tarragona, but has important branches in Badalona, Calafell, Cunit, El Vendrel, Gerona, Lleida, Mataró, Reus, Roda de Bara, Rubí, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Sant Boi, Torredembarra, Valls, Vic and Vilanova. Barcelona alone has 5 Salafist mosques. Just like elsewhere, the Salafists in Catalonia preach that the Sharia law is above Spanish law, they push the development of Muslim parallel societies, and have established sharia courts and morality police  that enforce the adherence to Islamic rules.

Catalonia's seperatists made the same mistake Angela Merkel made. They never figured on Islam taking them over instead of integrating peacefully. Catalonia  is now one of  the most important Mediterranean centers of radical Islamists.And potentially a base in Europe for the takeover and expaniasion of Islamism into places like Spain, southern France and Italy.

The EU is likely to even encourage this scenario by extending EU membership and financial incentives to  a newly independent Catalonia in exchange for using it  as a dumping ground for the Muslim migrants and refugees countries like  Denmark, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland are refusing to take. And for the surplus Muslim migrants Germany and France want to rid themselves of.

Of course the catch for that brilliant plan is that these Muslims are unlikely to be content with retaking Catalonia, or even all of Spain. They will expand north, just as they did in the 14th century.

When you take these facts into consideration and consider Spain's own history with Islam, the idea of an independent Catalonia takes on a very different aroma.

A Look At President Trump's Strategy In Afghanistan

 

President Trump addressed the nation last night to outline his strategy in Afghanistan. Of course he didn't go into details,being smarter than his twp predecessors. There were no deadlines or grandiose claims, merely that America would start winning this war and that our eventual withdrawal would be based on conditions on the ground rather than any arbitrary dates.

He announced five “core pillars” to the approach: getting rid of any timelines for how long U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan; using all elements of power, including diplomatic and economic; getting tougher on Pakistan; getting India to help more with economic development; and expanding authorities for U.S. forces to fight terrorists.

He said it was up to the people of Afghanistan to “take ownership of their future” and to “achieve an everlasting peace.”

“We are not nation-building again, we are killing terrorists.”

Here's what the president had to say, in his own words. And it's obvious he's thought about this quite a bit:




Needless to say, the President received quite a bit of criticism, especially from the Left.

So let's look at what the president actually had to say.

AfPak is a war we should never have gotten involved with in the first place. I never went to West Point, but I also understand that it was crazy to send an army and billions of dollars worth of equipment to a landlocked country surrounded by hostile territory - and I include Pakistan in that. Most of the equipment needs to be unloaded at Karachi and sent overland to Afghanistan via the Torkum Pass, and aside from us needing to bribe the Pakistanis with billions every year, they've cut the road and kept us from supplying our troops on various occasions.

OTOH, both commanders in chief involved in this handcuffed our troops with ridiculous rules of engagement and various other things designed to appease 'hearts and minds' of the locals.Which of course, didn't work. The Brits kept the Afghans at bay for some time by paying the chiefs 'subsidies' to keep them from raiding India. The Afghan Wars only started when the Brits stopped paying.

The president isn't talking about arbitray deadlines and 'nation building' but victory If Trump lets our troops do what's needed and especially if he brings back great combat generals like McCrystal and starts fighting the war strategically, he has a chance. it also helps that by all accounts, the Afghani government has a lot more respect for Trump than they ever did for Barack Hussein Obama.

I have a feeling Trump and Mattis are going to fight a very different war than Bush and especially Obama, who actually appeared to be aiding and abetting the Taliban on numerous occasions... like giving up 5 top Taliban commanders and a cash ransom for Bowie Bergdahl, a deserter.

I also fully agree with his statement on getting a lot tougher with Pakistan. They have no interest in a stable Afghanistan, which was heading that way in the 1950's and 1960's.



What changed things was the Soviet invasion and Jimmy Carter's well intentioned funding of the muhadajeen, many of whom were Islamists and became the breeding ground for al-Qaeda, the Taliban and other terrorist groups. Since Afghanistan is landlocked, it was Pakistan who decided who get the money and arms, and they made sure it was the Islamists. That and Bill Clinton's failure to support the pro-Western Northern Alliance is what delivered Afghanistan to the Taliban. And as I mentioned, Pakistan has still given tacit support to the Taliban by periodically cutting off supplies to our troops and allowing the Taliban to have havens in their country except for periodic raids when the Taliban or allied groups have carried out terrorist activities in Pakistan itself.

One thing that could be especially effective is forgetting Afghanistan as a country to an extent and dealing with the local chiefs directly. They make most of their money selling opium, and they are forced to pay 'taxes' to the Taliban in order to be able to sell their crops at whatever price they can get...with most of the processing done in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier.

Imagine what would happen if the U.S made them an offer they couldn't refuse?

"We want to be your friends, and as our friends, they will be able to sell their crops directly to us for a fair market price, and without any more taxes.to the Taliban. And we will help our friends defend their territory from the Taliban. of course, those who are not our friends will see their fields burned, much as we'd hate to do that."

Many of these Pashtun chiefs have territories that overlap the AfPak borders, Give them some help defending their territories and the bennie no longer having to settle for whatever price they can get and with Taliban taxation and this war could take on an entirely different complexion. Especially if we took a hard line with the Pakistanis about any obstructions and the consequences.

Yes, we could also simply leave, and part of me says 'why not?' . But there are inherent and obvious problems with that. With the right leadership, this could end up being a major graveyard for jihadis.

This was a mess Trump inherited from two dysfunctional commanders-in-chiefs. Let's withhold judgement and see how he does.

A Haunting Video From The UK – “Stiff Upper Lip”

This song, "Stiff Upper Lip" was written by Byron De La Vandal. it is about the UK in the 21st century and reflects the emotion of quite a few people in the UK in view of their government's inaction against Islamist terrorism and subversion.



After failing to thwart two terror attacks that have occurred in the U.K. so far this year – both of which were carried out by suspected jihadis who were known to U.K. authorities – intelligence agencies have identified 23,000 potential jihadis living in Britain, according to a report published in the Times of London on Saturday.

Out of that total, 3,000 are suspected of posing an “imminent threat” and are being investigated accordingly, the Times reports. Meanwhile, the other 20,000 have been involved with past investigations and have been categorized as posing a “residual risk.”

Those MI5 figures were confirmed by UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd the following day on Andrew Marr's BBC show.

I personally bet this is a low ball estimate, based on the UK's law enforcement agencies previous desire to ignore Islamist extremism for the sake of political correctness. And even at that, these men and women are still free, even the 3,000 who pose an imminent threat.

More proof that MI5 is likely underestimating the nature of the problem is the fact that both Manchester attacker Salman Abedi and Westminster killer Khalid Masood were in a pool of “former subjects of interest” and were no longer the subject of surveillance efforts, the Times reported. Abedi, a 23-year-old whose parents immigrated to the U.K. from Libya, killed 22 kids, in addition to himself, when he detonated a bomb just as attendees of a concert by American singer Ariana Grande were rushing for the exits following her concert.

Is it any wonder that hideous attacks like the one on the Finsbury Mosque in London are occurring as people see their government as ineffectual in providing even basic public safety from Islamist terrorism? That some people are likely to take matters into their own hands?

By an odd coincidence, a motion picture is premiering soon that is based on one of Britain's finest hours, Dunkirk. In 1940, when France fell to the Nazis, the British expeditionary force was trapped on the beaches at Dunkirk with their backs to the sea, subject to artillery and tank attacks from the land and strafing and bombing from the Luftwaffe. To rescue their army, the British pulled off an amazing feat of heroism. They sent everything that could float across the channel to pick up the stranded troops - naval vessels, tug boats, even pleasure boats and yachts captained by civilians who volunteered and jauntily sailed their boats into fire and shell. As Churchill put it afterwards, "The little ships of England brought the Army home." And the rescued soldier became the core of the British Army who helped defeat Hitler.

Does that spirit still exist in Britain? Does it still live there? Byron De La Vandal's "Stiff Upper Lip" and the accompanying video seems to indicate that it does and will surface in the end. Time will tell. In any event, it seems that things are going down to the wire.

Crossposted on WoW! Magazine.


Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com and other publications.

Follow him on Twitter here and on Facebook

Patrick Condell: The Invasion Of Europe

Patrick Condell in another classic commentary, this time on what he calls the invasion of Europe. As usual, he gets right to the heart of the matter.



As Patrick Condell points out, this is a self inflicted wound, and a particularly dangerous one for women, gays and Jews. And slowly but surely, the cost of keeping these 'refugees' many of whom remain on welfare is slowly bankrupting the EU. There's also the cost, both human and financial, of crime.

Will Europe eventually wake up and stop this slow suicide? Time will tell.

A Must Read - The Untold Eyewitness Story Of The Paris Bataclan Killings

If you read nothing else today, take the time to read this gripping interview on the November 2015 Bataclan jihad attack in Paris with Eagles of Death Metal vocalist Jesse Hughes. The interview was conducted by Gavin McInnes over at Taki's Magazine. Hughes's band was onstage when the jihad killings occurred. This is his eye witness account of what happened. Hughes feels that the media totally misrepresented the story, with details pulled out of context from his previous interviews and manipulated to support editorializing and commentary that was completely opposed to his views.

Hughes tells exactly what happened, how it was handled and the implications for the future in the War on Jihad.

Here's a taste:

McInnes: It’s hard to talk about the attack without sounding like you’re blaming the victims, but it’s impossible to deny fear of Islamophobia and fear of guns led to a lot of deaths that night.

Jesse Hughes:: I saw fear fall like a blanket on the whole crowd and they fell like wheat in the wind—the way you would before a god. I was totally alert from the very beginning. The first thing I needed to do was find my girl. Fear took a backseat and “where’s my girl?” took over. I could smell gunpowder in the backstage area and I knew someone fired a round back there. I saw a guy with an FAL and when he turned to face me his eyes looked like marbles. He was stoned out of his mind, and we now know they were on Xanax and cocaine. I recognized him. I’d seen him earlier in the day and noticed him staring at us.

McInnes: They were in the venue early. That implies some staff were in on it.

Jesse Hughes:I got in a lot of trouble for saying that. I know for sure that they were in there early. I remember them staring at my buddy. I just chalked it up to Arab envy. You know what I mean? When a Muslim sees a cocky American dude with tattoos, he stares at him. I realized later it was Abdeslam and he was staring at my buddy because they thought he was a threat. There’s no denying the terrorists were already inside, and they had to get in somehow. During the shooting I went outside and the backstage door was propped open. How did that happen?

McInnes: Do you think political correctness is killing our natural instincts and making us vulnerable?

Jesse Hughes:Definitely. There were two girls who were involved. They were at the venue and vanished before the shooting, and these women were in traditional Muslim garb. They knew people wouldn’t check them because of the way they were dressed. They got caught a few days later.

McInnes:The fear of offending Muslims is a terrorist’s greatest weapon.

Jesse Hughes:Look at the guys who bombed Brussels. They were wearing black gloves on one hand. Their luggage was too heavy to lift, but they didn’t want anyone helping them with it. Nobody brought any of this up until after the bombs went off.

McInnes:We’d rather die than be called a bigot.

Jesse Hughes: How is a faith being associated with racism? Just take out the word “Islam” and replace it with “communism.” It’s an ideology. The same way the Rosenbergs could sell nuclear secrets from within America is the same way Muslim terrorists can attack us from within. It’s okay to be discerning when it comes to Muslims in this day and age.

McInnes: Where is this push coming from? Is it all our fault?

Jesse Hughes:Of course not. When you’re at a soccer game in Europe and you see the words “United Arab Emirates,” you know there is a lot of Arab money floating around and influencing the dialogue. The conversation is constantly being steered away from scrutiny. They think we’re fools.

Arab money is a pollutant. So many movies are made with Arab money. George Clooney doesn’t kiss the ass of the Arabs for no reason. American movies are the best way to influence the hearts and minds of the world.

Read the whole interview at Taki's Magazine. Highly recommended.


.

Paris: The Louvre Targeted By A Muslim Terrorist

 

The Louvre in Paris is one of the most famous art museums in the world, the home of priceless works of art and culture. It's an historic landmark as well as a huge sanctuary that dates back to the 12th century for some of the finest creative efforts of mankind.It's impossible to see everything in a single day. Nearly 35,000 exhibits from prehistory to the 21st century are exhibited over nearly two acres. And today the Louvre was targeted by a Muslim terrorist.

Incroyable. This is what it has come to.

29-year-old Abdallah EH (full name not released yet) is an Egyptian, who arrived in France on a flight from Dubai on January 26 and reportedly applied for refugee status. He came to the Louvre with a backpack that contained paint bombs, according to the Paris Chief of Police. When security guards asked him to open his backpack, his pulled out a machete, started yelling the old war cry ' Allahu Akbar!' and  attacked one guard who sustained a head wound. He then was shot several times by the other guards, critically wounding him. There's a report that he had an accomplice, who fled and is still being sought by the police.

The terrified museum patrons who had come for a day of enjoying the marvels the Louvre has to offer were put in lock down for several hours and then evacuated.

The paint bombs pretty much tell us the story. Abdallah and his partner intended to vandalize and slash as many of the priceless and irreplaceable works of art as they could and kill as many infidels as possible in the process. Islam, as some of you may know, forbids any artwork depicting the human form and has a dim view of artwork in general.What better way to tell the kuffars (nonbelievers) that France belongs to Islam now then to attack the Louvre?

US President Donald Trump tweeted following the attack in the French capital: 'A new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris. Tourists were locked down. France on edge again. GET SMART U.S.'

Indeed.

In a few months the French are going to decide their destiny in elections. They are going to decide whether they want to be a declining part of Dar Islam or the free France their forefathers fought to preserve. I think they are going to choose the latter, but we'll see. In any event, I'm sure Marine Le Pen and the Front National received another boost in the polls today.

The Religion Of Peace Strikes Again - 9 Dead In Munich

Islamist killers struck again today. This time, the scene was Munich,Germany.

One of the killers targeted a McDonald's restaurant near the Olympia Einkaufszentrum mall in the district of Moosach and started firing into the crowded eatery while yelling the old war cry 'Allahu Akbar!'

One woman who was actually saw the shooter just before he started his rampage told CNN, 'I come out of the toilet and I hear like an alarm, boom, boom, boom. He's killing the children. The children were sitting to eat. They can't run.'

After shooting up the McDonald's, the killer sauntered into the mall itself and continued gunning down people, all the while screaming 'Allahu Akbar!' So far, nine people are dead and many badly wounded. The death toll so far may include one of the jihadis. At least 21 wounded were taken to the hospital in today's toll. At least three are said to be in critical condition.




According to Chief of Munich Police Marcus Dagloria Martins,there are at least three jihadi killers involved. In his last statement,he said, 'We are at the moment after three attackers. We have about 100 people on site and we are trying to evacuate people from the site. Our priority is to catch the attackers at this stage and then we will inform you again.

The entire city has been shut down as the police hunt for the two - or more - still unaccounted for. The main German rail company Deutsche Bahn has stopped all train traffic to Munich’s main station.

This is the second jihad attack in Germany in less than a week. Last Monday, a 17-year-old jihadi attacked people on a train in an in an ax-and-knife attack on a train near the Bavarian city of Wuerzburg and badly wounded four people as well as another woman outside as he fled until he was shot and killed by police.

'We welcome you to our country!'

 






Are the German people waking up yet to the fact that these 'guests' have no intention of sharing, but are there to take over? Do they realize that they are in the process of becoming a despised minority in their own country?

Almost all of these 'refugees' are young men of military age.  Did the Germans actually not notice this? Did they actually expect anything different?

How many more lives will it take? And when I ask that question, I am not just talking about Germany. They're just today's event d'jour.

UPDATE: The police an 'all clear'. The Jihadi, an 18-year-old Shi'ite Muslim killed nine people and wounded 16 others, including a number of children. People outside the mall claim to have seen at least three armed men,but the police are claiming that the killer 'apparently acted alone' which means they're either right about that or that the other two got away.

Here's the punchline - Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae told a news conference the suspect ('suspect'???) was a dual citizen from Munich and his motive was still "fully unclear".

'Suspect?' 'Fully unclear?' You can't make this stuff up.

A Message For France - And For Us

In France, July 14th is Bastille Day, when the French revel on the anniversary of their independence and the beginnings of the establishment of their republic. In some ways it's very much like America's July Fourth. There are parades, topped by a military parade along Paris’ famed Champs-Elysées along with fireworks and gatherings in public places.

This Bastille Day, there were fireworks of a different sort.

Nice is a common seaside spot for French families to take a vacation holiday this time of year, and one of the Bastille Day attractions is a magnificent fireworks show, one of many along France's Cote D'Azur on the Mediterranean. Hundreds of people were enjoying the gorgeous sight of the fireworks reflected on the water.

This was the target of a jihadi who plowed into the crowd at full speed that was leaving the celebration on the Promenade des Anglais. In a large rented white truck,he drove through them for a kilometer of so - over a mile- chasing down more victims and even pursuing them on to the pavement in places. He then stepped out of the vehicle and opened fire indiscriminately on the traumatized milling crowd until he was shot down by police and killed. Here's what it looked like:





The death toll is at 84 so far, not counting the jihadi and rising, with a number of people in critical condition.



A large cache of heavy weapons, grenades and explosives was found in the truck. And while the authorities are still noncommital, a number of eyewitnesses have said there were two jihadis in the truck, one who fired at the crowd while the other was running people down. It would certainly make sense given the large body count. And if that's the case, one of them escaped.

And a note to President Barack Hussein Obama and Mrs. Clinton...France's strict gun laws, a mirror of how these people would love to disarm Americans doesn't stop jihadis from getting whatever weapons they want.

This particular tactic is pretty much standard operating procedure in the Middle East, although usually it takes the form of stationary truck bombs. Recently in Israel, one of the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians was working at a construction site and attempted a similar attack on pedestrians using a bulldozer. Given that it was Israel, his results were nowhere near as successful as the jihad attack in Nice. He was shot down and killed by one of his intended victims in minutes.


In a separate incident, the Eiffel Tower, a symbol of France's glory and achievement is on fire.



The official line is that the fire was caused by a truck carrying fireworks that somehow caught on fire.

Odd though, since while the Eiffel Tower is also a traditional site of Bastille Day fireworks, fireworks explode rather than burn and the fireworks themselves are not set off right by the Tower, where the truck was, but some distance away.

And being iron, the Tower itself doesn't burn, although some of the buildings inside would. In fact, the last fire on the Eiffel Tower was a kitchen fire in a restaurant. But the Tower has never before been on fire like this.

The jihadi who was shot down by police has been identified as a 31-year-old Tunisian Muslim named Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel. What angers me most today is the media's attempt to portray him as a simple criminal. That's pretty much based on an interview with his Muslim cousin, who of course claimed that Bouhlel was 'not a Muslim' because he 'ate pork, drank alcohol and those are forbidden by Islam' according to the Daily Mail's account.

The 9/11 hijackers also ate pork, drank alcohol and frequently visited strip clubs, if you remember.  That's allowed if you are on a jihad for Allah and need cover. So is  lying to infidels is to advance Islam. To quote Mohammed himself numerous times in the Qu'ran and hadiths, 'War is deception.'

And as we also know, the back of the truck was filled with fully automatic weapons, explosives and hand grenades. Items like that aren't obtainable by a simple, inexperienced loan wolf criminal, especially not in France. Speculation on my part, but I think Bouhlel's mission (and that of his partner if he had one) was a replica of Paris; murder as many people as possible on the Promenade and then proceed to a targeted building like a club or restaurant where other jihadis were waiting, take it over, wire it with explosives to prevent a police or special forces assault  and either trade the hostages for imprisoned jihadis or just simply kill off those inside.

If I'm right, than it's likely Bouhlel failed to make it to the rendezvous point because one or more of the police bullets disabled his truck, and he exited to murder a few more infidels before he was gunned down. In any event, there's no way he was some kind of lone wolf ne'er do well who simply snapped. Too much planning and preparation went into this, and too many guns and equipment were on site for one unassisted wack job to obtain on his own without a network of experienced jihadis involved. *

Bouhlel himself was allowed into France courtesy of a resident permit by France's Socialist Hollande government. And even though he committed several felonies and was on the police radar, deportation from France was never even considered. Comment typique!

Speaking of which, France's President François Hollande confirmed this was a terrorist attack in his statement. “We will continue to hit those who threaten us,” Hollande said. The attacker, he said, acted “with the intention to kill, to crush and to massacre.”

“It is clear that we must do everything we can to fight against this scourge of terrorism.”

'Everything we can' apparently consists of extending a state of emergency another three months and -wait for it - and calling up France's 'operational reservists' which includes quite a large number of totally untrained civilians for increased border control. Monsieur Le President apparently would rather not have people think too much about the fact that this jihadi didn't cross the border. He was allowed into France openly and knowingly by Hollande's government, along with a lot of others just like him.

This buffoon still thinks he's 'fighting terrorism.'

The local newspaper, Nice-Matin, is also reporting that reports that the man driving the truck shouted 'Allahu Akbar' — 'Allah is greatest' — before being shot dead by police. The old war cry...you'd think that would give Hollande a clue.

I remember 9/11 quite well, and the aftermath. Do you? After the shock of seeing 3,000 of us murdered on our own soil was absorbed, Americans reacted with visceral patriotism, adrenaline and fighting spirit. The nation was united. Young men and women were enlisting in droves in our volunteer military, people were flying American flags from their cars and the their homes, and the American people were ready to be called upon to make sacrifices for victory over our murderous enemies by our president.

What we got instead was President George W. Bush telling us that Islam was a religion of peace, that we were engaged in a 'great war on terror' with a handful of fanatics, to go shopping at the mall and let the government handle it.

 

The mood change afterwards was palpable. While no one I remember said so openly, may of us  understood afterwards that the fix was in, especially when  the Bush Administration went back to business as usual with the Saudis which was the intent all along. And Islam? It was George W. Bush and his administration that put out the welcome mat for the Saudi and Emirates funded Muslim Brotherhood Islamist front groups and jihadi mosques. Barack Hussein Obama just revved up the process on steroids, along with seeing to it that he was able to increase the Muslim population of America as much as possible with unvetted 'refugees.'

Boston, San Bernardino, Orlando, Ft. Hood...those are just the beginning. The French are further along simply because they started earlier, and with more gusto.

We aren't fighting 'terrorism.' We aren't even just fighting ISIS, who are just one sector, just as Japan or Italy were just one part of the Axis powers of WWII.

We're fighting exactly what the subtitle of this site, created over a decade ago says we're fighting - The War on Jihad.

While individual Muslim may be able to live peacefully in a free society, after 1,500 years it ought to obvious that Islam itself cannot, at least not the major branches. It simply isn't in its nature to play well with others, a conclusion I have to admit I avoided for sometime because of the Muslims I know and like in my own life. But after the orgy of violence in Mumbai,  I realized I was fooling myself. The Muslims I know with two major exceptions are fairly secular, and the ones whom aren't have cherry-picked their own version of Islam to the point where they would be labeled heretics by your average Sunni or Shia. There are indeed others like them, but the momentum in Islam, and the part of it paid deference by many of our leaders  is with Islamist fascism and jihad. As the Pew Trust polls revealed, the majority of Muslims, especially in the Muslim world  understand quite well that Islam is at war with the West. We're the ones that don't.

Terrorism is merely a tactic of that war. And one reason it continues to work is because for the perpetrators and their enablers, there are no real life consequences. We're dealing with a morality alien to ours that we don't understand. Walk with me awhile on this one.

Islam is unique among the major religions  because while there are obviously Muslims who live differently, it has nothing akin to the basic religious imperative that we'd call the Golden Rule of do unto others as you'd have them do unto you.  Not when it comes to non-Muslims. So there is no ethical payback for raping them ('what thy right hand possesses'), killing them or deceiving them.

For  Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, there were simply no consequences no matter how this turned out. If he escaped, he'd be a hero to those who counted most with him as a victorious jihad warrior. As a dead man, he'd be a heroic martyr savoring the carnal delights of Mohammed's Paradise. If he were taken alive, he'd merely be an inmate in a relatively humane prison environment protected and looked up to by the other Muslim prisoners, and always with the hope that another raid might produce some hostages to be swapped for his freedom.

Nothing and nobody he cared  deeply about was at risk. For him, it was a win win. That's why jihadi recruiting is so successful. A key part of stopping these attacks is to provide real world consequences for the Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlels of the world as well as their paymasters,sympathizers and enablers that make the every idea of carrying them out abhorrent, frightening  and repulsive. And without going into details for brevity's sake, there are many ways to do exactly that. Call it the modern version of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) that worked so well in the Cold War, adapted for Islam's special characteristics.

 I have a message for the people of France.

You are our oldest ally, and in our time of need you helped us gain our freedom from the tyrants who sought to oppress us. And we  repaid that blood debt with interest in the Argonne, at Belleau Wood,at Saint - Mihilel and again on the beaches of Normandy. The evidence of that repayment is still buried in your soil.

In spite of the differences that have come between us at times, that long standing bond still remains, at least where I am concerned. And it compels me to be honest.

Your republic is in grave danger. Your leadership has betrayed you, and imported massive numbers of enemies to France. Just as with Vichy, they are appeasing the Germans in their attempt to dominate Europe.

You must resist if you are to retain your freedom, your honor and even perhaps your very lives. Charles Martel, your brave ancestor who crushed the Muslim invaders at Poitiers and drove them from France's sacred soil...how would he react to your present situation? What would he say? How would he advise you?

If France is to survive, you must rally around new leadership and take your country back. And you must do it now. Your election takes place in just under a year from now. How many more attacks like Paris and Nice can you absorb before then?

Fortunately, you have at least one leader to rally around, and perhaps others. Marine Le Pen is not perfect, but she is a courageous woman who at least understands the nature of the enemy that is destroying France and other ancient states in Europe.

The time to save France is now. Do it for yourselves, for your children and for your children's children. Do it so you can once again hold your heads up proudly, and so France can remain France.

And in doing so, set a proud example for other nations.

Vive La France!


J'ai un message pour le peuple de France.


Vous êtes notre allié le plus ancien, et dans notre temps de besoin vous avez aidé à nous faire gagner notre liberté des tyrans qui cherchaient à nous opprimer. Et nous avons remboursé la dette de sang avec intérêt dans l'Argonne, à Belleau Wood, à Saint - Mihilel et encore sur les plages de Normandie. La preuve que le remboursement est toujours enterré dans votre sol.

En dépit des différences qui sont venus entre nous à certains moments, ce lien de longue date reste encore, au moins là où je suis concerné. Et il me force à être honnête.

Votre république est en grave danger. Votre leadership vous a trahi, et importé massivement des ennemis à la France. Tout comme avec Vichy, ils sont apaiser les Allemands dans leur tentative de dominer l'Europe.

Vous devez résister si vous êtes de conserver votre liberté, votre honneur et même peut-être vos vies. Charles Martel, votre courageux ancêtre qui a écrasé les envahisseurs musulmans à Poitiers et les chassa de sol sacré de la France ... comment pourrait-il réagir à votre situation actuelle? Que dirait-il? Comment pourrait-il vous conseiller?

Si la France est de survivre, vous devez rallier autour d'un nouveau leadership et prenez votre arrière-pays. Et vous devez le faire maintenant. Votre élection a lieu dans un peu moins d'un an à partir de maintenant. Combien d'attaques comme Paris et Nice pouvez-vous absorber avant?

Heureusement, vous avez au moins un chef de file à se rallier autour, et peut-être d'autres. Marine Le Pen est pas parfaite, mais elle est une femme courageuse qui, au moins comprend la nature de l'ennemi qui est en train de détruire la France et d'autres Etats anciens en Europe.

Le temps pour sauver la France est maintenant. Faites-le pour vous, pour vos enfants et pour les enfants de vos enfants. Faites-le et vous pourrez à nouveau tenir vos têtes fièrement, et ainsi la France peut rester en France.

Et, ce faisant, mettre un fier exemple pour les autres nations.

Vive la France!




* We now know that yes, there were definitely co-conspirators. This was jihad, an ISIS attack.

The Las Vegas Strip Attack - If It Smells Like Jihad, It Usually Is

On December 20th, Lakeisha Holloway drove a car onto a crowded sidewalk on the Las Vegas Strip in front of the Paris Hotel & Casino, and Planet Hollywood. She killed a mother of three while injuring many others, some critically.

The Vegas police had no difficulty in saying that the attack was deliberate and charging her with a number of felony offenses, including the murder of Jessica Valenzuela, 32, of Buckeye, Arizona, who was visiting Vegas with her husband,child abuse or neglect (her three year old was in the back seat) and failure to stop at the scene of an accident.

Her tires were flattened in the assault and she was apprehended by the police not to far from the crime scene.

This so closely resembled the attacks using cars going on in Jerusalem that my first thought immediately was that this was a jihadi strike, probably by someone indoctrinated at a radical mosque.

But what really had the alarm bells ringing for me was when the police described her demeanor as 'stoic' and said she had given them a reason for the assault. But Las Vegas Sheriff Joe Lomabardo refused to disclose to the media what that reason was when asked about a motive, saying "She did (offer and explanation for the attacks) and I’m not comfortable disclosing that at this point because it is an ongoing investigation. I can’t go any further into that comment."

After what happened in San Bernardino, the only rational explanation for his reluctance to disclose what the killer had told him was if Islam was involved and he got a call from upstairs somewhere to keep his mouth shut about it. The police did the exact same thing in San Bernardino, refusing to reveal the killer's names until bloggers and reporters heard them mentioned on the police scanner and outed them.

The same thing just happened. Various eyewitnesses are saying now that the car windows were open and Lakeisha Holloway was screaming 'Allahu Akbar!' as she mowed down pedestrians:

The witness went on to say "As this unfolded, the only thing I recall as this happened is the insane sound of her car accelerating and the voice from the car was screaming "Allah Akbar!" I've heard the sound enough times on the news that I was waiting for a bomb to blow up or guns to start firing. "


I have a feeling that after Christmas as more and more on this comes out the authorities are going to have to admit what happened. I have a distinct feeling that my first gut feeling, that this was a jihad attack is going to be proven correct. I hope I'm wrong.

The Heart Of The Matter

A great deal has been written and said about the attacks in San Bernardino, President Obama's unserious, know nothing speech in response and subjects like ISIS, Muslim 'radicalization', Islam and immigration.

Much of it has been pretty good, some of it has been insightful and a lot of it has been deliberately misleading. For a good sample of the latter read Obama bootlicker Dan Balz's piece in the Washington Post essentially calling Donald Trump the equivalent of Adolf Hitler for merely proposing the entirely reasonable suggestion that we put a temporary moratorium on migrations from certain Muslim countries until we have the ability to vet them better. At one point,Balz even equates The Donald with - wait for it- anti-Semites like Father Coughlin in the 1930's. You can't make this stuff up.

Like Obama spokesmouth Josh Earnest, it's ironic that these two minions both have surnames that are the exact opposites of their actual characters.

Another thing that's funny is that that the same people, both Republicans and Democrats whom whine constantly about our 'broken immigration system' are absolutely horrified at the idea of stopping migration to America  from an increasingly dangerous part of the world until it's fixed.And that, of course, includes our president.

You might almost think they're Up To Something...and of course they are.

Have you ever wondered how things got to this state, when the most powerful military and the huge intrusive security apparatus that was assembled after 9/11 is so ineffectual that this war still goes on 14 years after 9/11 and a couple of ISIS groupies could assemble explosive devices and acquire AK 47's and thousands of rounds of ammo with their own little jihadi cell in a place like San Bernardino, plan an attack and carry it off so easily? Have you ever wondered why so many Muslims, especially younger ones become jihadis and why the problem keeps increasing?

Part of it, of course is the actual nature of Islam, much of which is fascist, cruel, misogynist and violent. Most Muslims aren't, not by any means. But it is the Islamic fascism brand name that is increasingly being imported into America and elsewhere in the Western world, and as that continues, more and more Muslims, especially younger ones are going to identify with it, because it appears to be winning.

The same thing occurred in Nazi Germany. I call it my 20-60-20 formula. Any political movement or ideology, which is exactly what Islamic fascism is, will start with a hardened core of True Believers willing to go to any lengths to win. As they get more notoriety and become more established, there will be a roughly equal amount of people who are horrified by them and who rigidly, sometimes vociferously oppose them.And then there's the 60% in the middle, some of whom may lean one way or the other but essentially are more interested in just day to day life. But as one side or the other appears to be winning, more and more of the 60% start drifting more and more to what looks the winning side. That's exactly what we're seeing now. Why has this happened?

The fact is that the last two presidents (and Mrs. Clinton) were essentially bought and sold by the Saudis, Qatar and the Emirates, along with a lot of other politicians, diplomats,and other government functionaries.

Their reward for faithful service once they left office was the funding of presidential libraries, six figure speaking fees, honorariums and 'consulting' fees, lucrative business opportunities (just research how Bill Clinton became a multi-millionaire) and generous gifts to presidential 'foundations' like the Clinton Foundation. All one needs to do is to follow the money and watch where it leads.

What the Arabs bought with their money was the US military to use as needed for their personal mercenaries, a guaranteed market for their oil while we sold our domestic oil elsewhere, immunity from any prosecution for their support for terrorism, policy influence...and oh yes, a free hand to do aggressive dawa and indoctrination for their extremely fundamentalist version of Islam via the Muslim Brotherhood front organizations who took over something like 80% of America's mosques via the North American Islamic Trust - and replaced the imams with their own radical choices.

Add appeasement of Iran and a clueless president to the mix and you have our present situation in a nutshell.

This is why whenever a jihadi attack occurs on American soil, the perpetrators can almost always be traced to attendance at a Muslim Brotherhood owned mosque with a radical imam in charge and lots of 'educational materials' promoting jihad, Islamist doctrine and martyrdom. President George W. Bush actually spoke at one of these mosques, the Saudi funded Washington Islamic Center.

The Saudis and the others were particularly willing to fund this effort not only to spread Wahhabi Islam but  to get the Muslim Brotherhood firebrands out of their countries, where they posed a risk to the House of Saud and other autocratically ruled kingdoms. And they continue to fund it today, with increasing success because of the increase in Muslim migration to America, aided and abetted by the last three administrations. President Barack Hussein Obama alone has brought almost one million Muslims into America and many of them are bringing certain attitudes with them that do not mix at all well with Western culture.

Our current president is a True Believer who welcomes the alliance between prog-fascists and Islamists. And he has a number of Islamists and their sympathizers in low profile but influential positions, even in Homeland Security. If you look at his domestic and foreign policy, one common thread in both is to protect and empower Islamist and the Muslim Brotherhood, whether it's keeping them out of jail for aiding and abetting terrorism, getting into an illegal war in Libya to empower them, siccing his Department of Justice on anyone whom opposes them in the least , liberating dangerous jihadis from Guantanamo or doing his best to allow them to take over Egypt.

And that of course is the heart of the matter. Most average people in the Western World have finally gotten beyond the media fog and the absurd rhetoric of many of their so called leaders and elites to realize what many of us figured out a long time ago, that we're in a war with at least a significant portion of Islam, with what I prefer to call Islamist fascism. That's at least a start, to actually realize that we're fighting an ideology rather than 'terrorists' or 'terrorism'. And there are any number of good ideas on how to fight that war and win.

We defeated the Nazis and the Japanese in 3 and half years, starting out with a much weaker military than we have now, and they were far stronger than our present adversaries.

But the biggest problem we have, and the one that could defeat us is leadership. It is lack of it that got us to this point and a continued lack of it that will cost us even more dearly than it has already.

Hearing Barack Obama refer to himself as 'commander in chief' in his absurd 13-minute speech the other night brings the problem home. Any military leader with his record would have been relieved of command long ago.

A different Congress would have impeached Barack Obama long ago for this and many other reasons, but that's unfortunately not likely. Elections have consequences, and so does passively tolerating the results and not insisting that our representatives fulfill their oats and take action.

No progress is going to occur on winning this war until Barack Obama and his sordid gang are out of office, because winning this war is the last thing they want, believe it or not. They'd prefer to maintain their relationships with our enemies, 'manage' this and run out the clock, because while they mouth platitudes about how they're serving the country, their own personal interests take precedence over that. And that includes political interests as well as financial ones. Can anyone imagine Hillary Clinton making demands or taking the fight to some of the biggest donors to her 'charitable foundation?'

For all the bold words out there about taking out ISIS and 'fighting terrorism', it's leadership we need to focus on most of all right now. We've already seen in the last 23 years what happens without it.
And there are signs that the leadership we need is developing as the West awakens from its long, enforced slumber and realizes that the knife is at its throat.

In the meantime, we can work to install that leadership and insist that the entire baggage of political correctness and appeasement of Islamic fascism our elites have fostered is ridiculed, shamed, opposed and shouted down for the lethal poison it is. If we don't it will kill us.


-selah-

Marine Le Pen Proves L'esprit de la France Is Alive And Well

France's socialist President Hollande's response to the attack on Paris was a desultory quickie airstrike on ISIS's Syrian capitol of Rakkah that amounted to 20 bombs being dropped, none of which did much damage. He badly needs France's Muslim vote and the anti-war left vote to stay in power, so he has no intention pf alienating them.

Marine Le Pen, leader of the rightest Front National and Hollande's likely opponent is rising steadily in the poll and has no use for such constraints. As she shows here, she is literally becoming the spirit of a defiant France in fighting Islamofascism (emphasis mine):

For the sixth time in a year, Islamic terrorism has struck France—and this time more viciously than ever before. Since then, from all corners of the world, there have been countless outpourings of friendship, salutation, and support for the admirable courage with which the French people have faced these trials. Everywhere it is sung, the Marseillaise embodies our universal determination, our unwillingness to yield to the barbarism of Islamic fundamentalism. Charles De Gaulle once said “There exists an immemorial covenant between the grandeur of France and the freedom of the world.” I am convinced the world recognizes this truth.

And yet, if the enemies of liberty have decided to attack France with such barbarity, it's because over decades our country has forgotten that liberty must be organized, that it must be defended, that it is a kind of power which must be nurtured. To forget that truth weakens freedom.

Liberty is exercised in the context of national community. It is armed with the principles of common sense, principles without hate. It is synonymous with a nation defined by strong borders, defined by our values, defined by our way of life, which is appreciated around the world.

Too often, we have confused hospitality with blindness. Not all of those we’ve opened our doors to have come to France with a love of our way of life. Today, under pressure from a European Union that renders us weaker and less free, France faces a cruel reality: It only takes a dozen terrorists—some French in nationality, but not spirit, and others capitalizing on the poorly managed migrant crisis—to take the lives of at 129 of our countrymen. It is up to us to affirm, without hesitation, that France’s freedom was built over centuries intentionally and collectively. That’s what defines a nation.

From here we must take a series of common-sense steps: We must reinvest in our police forces, our border security, our military. We must reverse a decade of disastrous budgetary decisions. We must reclaim our national borders permanently and rescind French citizenship to dual-national jihadists because they do not deserve to be considered French. We must close radical mosques, which are a site of hate. We must stop welcoming thousands of migrants and regain our national sovereignty.

We must also clarify Islam’s role in France. Our Muslim compatriots must no longer be hostage to radical Islamists. French rule of law and a renewed commitment to secularism will liberate them.

There is more: the threat we face calls us to ally with those who fight fundamentalist Islam. For a long time, I have been calling for a revision of French diplomatic policy in Africa and the Middle East. Let’s stop undercutting sovereign states, as Nicolas Sarkozy did disastrously in Libya in 2011. We need to work with Russia, Syria and Iran as well as other foreign powers including the United States which are fighting radical Islam. Let’s bring to a halt the obsolete cold wars and incestuous relationships with untrustworthy countries—I mean specifically Turkey or Qatar.

France has overcome numerous challenges in its long history. Our capacity to rebound has never failed. Many in the world know that a strong France, faithful to itself and master of its own destiny, is indispensable to world peace. Let us stand together. It is the only way to defeat, once and for all, fundamentalism and the enemies of liberty.

Well said, Madame Le Pen...toujours l'adace, à la victoire! Récupérer l'esprit de Poitiers!

And of course,lagniappe, that scene:

Why The West Is Doomed...

 

Unless we make a major corrections and entirely change direction, what happened in Paris is just the beginning of the end, and the West is headed for horrendous consequences and perhaps even defeat.

It's been just a few days since the atrocity in Paris, and the response to it has been similar to other jihadist attacks. They range from the usual suspects actually excusing the brutality and talking about how it has nothing to do with Islam ala' Mrs. Clinton  to misdirected remarks for 'action' that resemble nothing so much as the old carny game of whack-a-mole, this time with ISIS as the target d'jour.





Walk with me awhile and let's examine the real problems we face, along with what's really involved in solving them.  I guarantee you won't be bored. I haven't seen much real analysis anywhere on how to actually win this conflict for obvious reasons,because they involve dealing with some uncomfortable realities. Here's a small spoiler preview...ISIS is neither the main problem nor even the main target.

From the first, we were lied to. According to President George W. Bush post 9/11, we were fighting a war on 'terrorism'. To President Obama and Mrs. Clinton, we're at war with 'extremism.' They all have their own reasons for misdirecting the American people, most of which have nothing to do with either the good of the United States or making any real progress in actually winning the conflict against the faux target they've created.

We're in a war, all right. And ISIS is just one of the players.It's high time we realized that rather than an ISIS problem, we have a major problem with Islam..in particular, with Islamic fascism and its adherents.And even worse, we have problems that could very well doom civilization and freedom as we know it if we continue along the present course.

The idea that we're fighting 'terrorism' or 'extremism' is especially ludicrous and using the terms are   a gross insult to our collective intelligence. 'Extremism' is a vague, dubious and deliberately subjective term designed to cloak reality in fog, and  'terrorism,' after all, is a common tactic of war, designed for one purpose and one purpose only - to erode an enemy's desire and ability to make war.

In the Middle Ages, a common tactic of waging war was to try to destroy the wealth of an enemy and its ability to support warfare by sacking towns and farmlands. Another example more familiar to Americans was General William T. Sherman's March To The Sea through the most productive part of the Confederacy, leaving a swath of destruction and desolation in their path. They burned Atlanta and other cities and towns  to the ground, destroyed not only military targets but civilian property and infrastructure, and lived off the land by 'foraging,' which essentially meant stealing whatever they found and leaving the civilians with a bare minimum to survive on if they were fortunate.The idea was to end the war by degrading the South's ability and will to fight, and it was very successful in that regard.

 

We are not only fighting armies, but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war, as well as their organized armies. I know that this recent movement of mine through Georgia has had a wonderful effect in this respect. Thousands who had been deceived by their lying papers into the belief that we were being whipped all the time, realized the truth, and have no appetite for a repetition of the same experience. - General Sherman in a report to Union Chief Of Staff  General Henry Halleck, December, 1864.

Similar tactics were used in both world wars by both sides for similar reasons.

French President Hollande was entirely correct that the attack on Paris was an act of war, but it was not 'terrorism' or mindless carnage to no purpose. After all, France has been committing acts of war against ISIS by flying 200 air support missions against both combatants and civilians in ISIS territory since September of 2014.

The tactical idea involved also made sense - to remind the West that their cities and their civilians are also vulnerable and can be reached by ISIS.

Every master of strategic thinking whether its Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, General MacArthur or Napoleon has shared certain basic principles in common. They've all agreed that in order to successfully wage and win a war, you must have clear goals, know whom your enemy is and secure your base. To that, I'd add utilizing effective leadership and motivated forces.

Not only is the West not doing any of these things, it's doing its best to do the exact opposite. To really get perspective on that, let's look at how ISIS and other jihadist entities, both Sunni and Shi'ite are waging their war against us as opposed to  how we're doing whatever it is we've  been doing for the past decade and a half or so.

They have secured their bases, and there's little or no fifth column within. Anyone they even suspect of betrayal or less than full commitment to victory is immediately and ruthlessly dealt with. Both their enemies and their goals are clearly defined and marked out with formal declarations of war after the Islamic tradition, which both Osama bin-Laden and ISIS adhered to. On the Shi'ite side, Iran makes no secret of their hostility to us. They want death to America and President Obama is helping them get the tools for the job.

ISIS leaders and their fighters are dedicated, brave and more than prepared to fight and die for Allah and the Caliphate. The Paris attacks were carried out by young fighters willing to give their lives to accomplish their mission. So were their successful attacks on Iraqi forces who on paper outnumbered them and were far better equipped, courtesy of the American taxpayer.

In contrast, our leaders resort to the most tortuous euphemisms to avoid actually mentioning our real enemy or even establishing more than the most vague and general goals. Unlike al-Qaeda in it's heyday, The Muslim Brotherhood, The Taliban, Hizb' al-Tahrir and ISIS, there's no declaration of war by us and no defining of whom or what we're fighting at all.

Not only have they not secured our base, but our current leadership has actually enabled the breaching of those bases, encouraging mass migration from questionable Muslim countries where Islamism and jihadist thought are quite popular.

As a result of that migration and in particular America's tolerance and even appeasement of  Saudi and Emirate funded Muslim Brotherhood  front groups like CAIR, The North American Islamic Trust, The Muslim Public Affairs Counsel, The Islamic Society Of North America and others, a fifth column in America is rampant. Not only are young Muslims radicalized in mosques and madrassahs here by radical imams, but jihadist web sites and platforms like al-Jazeerah, or Jihad TV as I call it are readily accessible.

As opposed to the militaries of our opponents in this war, our severely scaled back forces have seen much of their best combat leaders and experienced combat troops forced into retirement or out of the service to make way for a military that  appears to be far more concerned with transgender rights, 'diversity' and placing women in combat roles regardless of whether they meet physical requirements to do so than concentrating on defeating our enemies.  Retention is at an all time low. And as for faith, even mentioning G-d is likely to get you reprimanded or even bounced out of the service - unless of course, you're talking aggressively about Islam's ultimate victory  over the Infidels and putting 'Soldier of Allah' on your official business card like Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood murderer did.

Finally, our lack of decisive leadership speaks for itself. We have no strategy and no clear goals  and we haven't for years. President Obama isn't even following the old rule of  'at the very least, do no harm.'  His destabilizing the Middle East and paving the way for Iranian nuclear weapons is a nightmare his successors in office as well as the American people will have to face and it will not be pretty.

Again - and I can't emphasize this enough - we are in a war with Islamic fascism, and it's supporter are far from being as much of a minority as certain people would lead you to believe. And yes, is does have everything to do with Islam. There is nothing Boko Haram, Hamas,  Hezbollah, ISIS, the Taliban, Hizb' al Tarir, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Iranian regime or any of the other so-called 'extremists' are doing that is not sanctioned by the Qu'ran. Nothing.

That, by the way is very different from being in a war with Muslims. Many of them are decent and peaceful people. But Islam itself is not going to be reformed. It is a violent religion that brutalizes women and non-believers and was designed for world conquest. As Mohammed told his followers before he died in 632 CE, they are commanded to fight the infidels until they died, became Muslims or paid massive protection money or other tribute for their lives to Muslims and "felt themselves subdued."

In response to that command,The Faithful have killed and enslaved more people in the name of their religion than all other faiths combined, and perhaps even more than secular leftists like Stalin, Mao and Hitler. The Indian genocide alone might amount to as much as 15-20 million dead, as well as millions whom were enslaved. Islam isn't going to change, at least not yet and possibly never. So we need to take steps to protect ourselves and minimize the problem. Part of that is realizing that the weaker we get and the more we appease Islamic fascism, the more Muslims are going to go along for the ride and side with the triumphant Umma against the Infidel kuf'rs. Again, just look at Europe.

So how do we win? First, of course, we need strong leadership actually prepared to win. We have very little leadership in power in the West (which I'll use as a generic term for the non-Muslim world) right now. Based on the link I shared in paragraph two of this article, it's obvious that there's not a Democrat now running even vaguely qualified to be commander-in-chief, and the single one who was, Jim Webb got disgusted by the foul smell surrounding him coming from his party and ended his campaign. And neither our current president or our vice president are qualified either, as they've proven many times. We have no FDR, no Winston Churchill around today that is in power.

But assuming that resolves itself sometime in the near future, here's some quotes from something I wrote on the same topic way back in 2008, which I recommend you read in full for context. Regrettably, little has changed since then:

The second point in which I disagree with Professor Dershowitz is on the need for new rules in dealing with this menace.The old ones work quite well, although an intelligent and otherwise reasonable liberal like Professor Dershowitz shies away from them.

The US has dealt in the past with fanatical enemies as well as potential fifth columnists on its soil with great success. The way we did it was not by using half measures.

When World War II began, President Roosevelt took stern measures to secure the nation at home.For starters, he arrested and/or deported anyone with ties to our enemies who might have even remotely resembled a security risk. He gave the FBI carte blanche to wiretap,listen to phone calls and intercept suspect mail and transatlantic cables at will to protect the country. I myself once had had tea with an elderly woman who proudly showed me a medal she received after she steamed the stamp off of a letter and found a microfilm dot underneath that destroyed a dangerous espionage ring and sent six Nazi spies to the gallows.And perhaps most importantly, unlike the present administration, he engaged his fellow Americans in the task of security with a widespread publicity campaign warning against `loose lips that sink ships.' Using posters,speeches, the radio and the newspapers, the Roosevelt administration let the American people know that there was a significant security threat that could endanger the war effort and their freedom,and that their vigilance and help was needed.

On the battlefield itself, particularly in the Pacific,our military dealt with suicidal enemies not only by destroying them en masse but by taking the war to the Japanese home islands with a vengeance.There's no question in my mind that if the Japanese had not surrendered after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the US would likely have destroyed a substantial portion of the Japanese nation. As it was, that defeat of an honor/shame culture similar to the one we face today swept away the poisonous militaristic fascism in Japan and paved the way for a new beginning, just as it did in Germany.

As for legislating dangerous ideologies, our courts have been down this road before when faced with the communist conspiracy here in America in the 1940's and 1950's. Those laws exist,  are quite plain and provide a firm and above all constitutional foundation when it comes dealing with most to the problems we have in the US with some practitioners of Islam and the people overseas who export jihad into America. And a few perfectly constitutional tweaks would cover the rest.

I go on to site several applicable laws from  the US code of justice that apply to those attempting to subvert or overthrow the US or its Constitution or to engage in a conspiracy to do so. Nowadays, they would also combine with RICO and anti-Terrorism statutes, provided we actually had a president and a justice department willing to prosecute in the future.

 Those Muslims who advocates sharia law, the Islamization of America, or jihad against Americans who happen to be Jews or Christians obviously fit this definition. Likewise, anyone who gives material support to such causes does too. And let's not be coy about it - any Muslim advocating sharia law in America is advocating the overthrow of the first and fourteenth amendments as well as the statutes mandating equal protection, since sharia mandates inferior status for women and non-Muslims, and as such is in clear violation of our laws.

This also applies to the sort of texts the Saudis are pushing in the madrassahs they control financially and to those fiery Friday sermons preaching death to the Jews.

And by the way, that is NOT constitutionally protected speech.....and the Supreme court has always agreed, utilizing the test of a `clear and present danger'.

A re-visitation and tweaking of laws like the Smith Act of 1940 and the Internal Security Act of 1950 would provide further ammunition, as would a law banning foreign funding of political lobbying groups and religious entities. That would dry up funds for the Muslim Brotherhood fronts here and their building of jihadi mosques without violating the First Amendment. Surveillance of the existing mosques (about 80% of them are owned by the North American Islamic Trust, a Muslim Brotherhood front group) and suspect imams with deportation as a resource would be key to securing our base. Blocking al-Jazeera and jihadist web sites would likewise close off channels of jihadist indoctrination. I can't imagine why that isn't being done already.

Rather than the current charade at our airports and public places, we need to adopt Israeli-style profiling with a corps of highly trained and dedicated security personnel rather than expensive screens purchased from one of George Soros's companies that have been proven not even to work very well. And that goes double  for relying on unionized personnel actually trained in part by a Muslim Brotherhood front group with a long record of opposing US counter terrorism efforts, especially at airports.

And a ban on Muslim immigration from some of the obvious countries along with real border security would likewise help secure our base. It simply makes common sense, and all we need to do is see how well not doing it has worked out in Europe. Islam does not play well with others, and not only should we pretty much stop importing it, but we need to be alert to whom is practicing it and how it is practiced here in America. And we need to be  prepared to deport problem Muslims and Islamists unclear on the concept of America being a free society.

It is also necessary to forcefully show our political and elite class that we no longer have tolerance for their appeasing Islamists and jihad against the West for their own profit. A law that should be passed is one outlawing anyone in public service to accept employment or compensation in any form from a foreign government during their service and for at least 15 years after his or her retirement. This would eliminate what I call the 'golden magic carpet' pension plan financed by people like the Saudis and Emirates, among others. We must make an end to the funding of presidential libraries and foundations, the special 'business opportunities' the six figure speaking fees,honorariums and consulting fees showered on our politicians and others with influence after retirement in exchange for their loyal services performed while in office.

The actual military aspect is likewise self evident.

We have at present given billions of dollars and lots of military hardware to Muslim countries like Pakistan, Qatar and Lebanon (which means Hezbollah) that are by no means friendly to us in the least. Not only that, but we have spent more billions arming and training no less than 3 Arab armies who are definitely not our 'allies' in the least- Iraq, Afghanistan and the Palestinian Authority. The first  step is to be far more careful not to fund our enemies or undependable 'allies'.

The second step is restoring our military to its former strength and bringing back commanders like Generals Mattis, Ham and McCrystal. Our military when used needs to have clear goals and a strategy and to not be handcuffed by PC nonsense or ridiculous rules of  engagement. Their first order of business should be to kill people, break things and be victorious over our enemies.

The strategy part is extremely important. for instance, when we took out Saddam Hussein, we essentially removed the check to Iran's fascist regime. The same thing would happen if we decided to take out ISIS without curbing Iran. As Dick Cheney famously said about the Iran/Iraq War that cost a combination of a million casualties, "It's a pity they can't both lose."  Thanks to President Obama's abject stupidity and his appeasement of Iran, we're currently arming both sides of the current conflict, supplying arms and funding to Hezbollah via Lebanon and  doing the same thing to Jaish al-Fatah, the rebel 'Army of Conquest' for the Sunni rebels that has al-Qaeda allies as its main components and is no better than ISIS. We may end up being required to make sure that both Iran and ISIS lose, but if we do, we need to have clear goals, and declarations of war by Congress in the event we plan something more long term than a pre-emptive strike on Iran, for instance. In short, unlike before, we need to know what comes next and that should most assuredly NOT involve US nation building. In fact,having our military turn a militant and unrepentant jihadist haven into ashes, dead bodies and wreckage might be quite useful as a reminder and example to others who have forgotten whom we are and what we are capable of thanks to our failed leadership and their lack of resolve. It worked with Japan and the Nazis quite well.

Another step is cultivating and in some cases rebuilding relationships with real allies and partners, something Rome and Britain provided models for. President Obama has done his best to alienate them, but Egypt, Israel, and a strong and viable independent Kurdistan are obvious candidates in the region. And we need to make an attempt to come to an understanding with Russia's Vladimir Putin, who has actually done more to curb ISIS than we have. China, with their own problems with the violent Muslim Uighers is another possibility. So is India.

We can win this war provided we end our self defeating behavior. If not, we can look forward to a new dark age for our freedoms and our civilization. Those are the alternatives.