Gay Patriot Header Image

CIA vs. WikiLeaks: It’s Awn

Of course the fight between them was already on; I’ll get to that in a moment.

President Trump’s CIA director, Mike Pompeo:

CIA Director Mike Pompeo, in his first speech since taking over the agency, lambasted WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange — calling the group a “non-state hostile intelligence service” that is often abetted by “state actors like Russia.”

Speaking Thursday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Pompeo called Assange a “fraud,” someone with no “moral compass” and a “narcissist who has created nothing of value.”

He asserted that Assange and former National Security Agency staffer and famed leaker Edward Snowden “seek to use that information to make a name for themselves” and they “care nothing about the lives they put at risk or the damage they cause to national security.”

Asked why he would focus on WikiLeaks rather than other issues, Pompeo said he felt it was vital to inform the American people about the threat they pose.

There’s more. RTWT.

Some of Pompeo’s claims are absurd, and others are all too real. First, the absurd: That Snowden did it to make a name for himself.

The guy is almost a prisoner – in Russia, of all places. If he comes back to the U.S., he faces trial. Snowden agrees that he should face trial, and says that he will do so – when he is allowed to mount a public-interest defense (presenting his side of it, that he acted in the public interest when he revealed masses of NSA classified info). But I digress. The point is: Snowden has given up so much to reveal what he revealed, that saying he did it for the fame is ridiculous.

Similar thoughts would apply to Assange, who is almost a prisoner in Ecuador’s embassy in London. While no one is ever perfect, both of these men have acted from their ideals. In denying that so crudely, Pompeo counts on his audience to be stupid.

As to what’s real in Pompeo’s speech: There is no question that both Snowden’s revelations and WikiLeaks make the job of U.S. intelligence agencies much harder. That has to be a bad thing, in many respects. The question is whether, in some other respects, it might also be a good thing?

What has been revealed, first by Snowden and more recently by WikiLeaks Vault 7, is: massive surveillance programs whereby U.S. intelligence agencies spy not only on enemies, but on allies and on ordinary Americans. Really unconstitutional programs and capabilities. So unconstitutional and invasive that they destroy U.S. moral authority and make us understandably hated by the rest of the world.

Until recently, Pompeo’s boss, President Trump, was pro-WikiLeaks (see here – Trump literally said “I love WikiLeaks!”). And against excessive surveillance, such as the Obama administration’s surveillance on Trump before, during and after the 2016 election. Likewise with Pompeo himself. But their love for WikiLeaks was before the Vault 7 revelations and more to come, which could be ugly enough to destroy the CIA as an institution.

In the past, I’ve blogged on my ambivalence about Snowden (example, see here). But, in the last year, I’ve come more to his side; glad that he and Assange did what they do. The more so because of news headlines in the last 5 months: I believe that some leaders of the U.S. intelligence community have tried to damage (if not overthrow) a duly elected President, with a campaign of “intelligence leaks” that are so empty and misleading as to be lies-in-effect. That would be a separate issue. But one that proves the said leaders’ bad faith and anti-constitutional intentions.

In short, we’re at a sad juncture where several issues point to the same conclusion: the U.S. intelligence community is way out of control and in great need of investigation and cleanup.

As always, feel free to disagree or state your view, in the comments. (As always, I’m looking for “agreeable disagreement” and exchange; don’t expect me to come instantly to your viewpoint.)

More conspiracy theories become fact – partly, sort of

On April 8, Cernovich Media claimed that National Security Advisor “H. R. McMaster [is] Manipulating Intelligence Reports to Trump, Wants 150,000 Ground Soldiers in Syria”.

Today, Eli Lake at Bloomberg confirms that McMaster wants to send up to 50,000 ground troops to Syria. And “has been quietly pressing his colleagues to question the underlying assumptions of a draft war plan against the Islamic State that would maintain only a light U.S. ground troop presence in Syria…to facilitate a better interagency process to develop Trump’s new strategy to defeat [ISIS].”

The real news is that Trump has said no to McMaster – at least for the time being. Kudos to those GP commenters who advised me, more or less, that Trump is his own man and wouldn’ t automatically go with McMaster.

As to the rest: it sounds like Cernovich dropped the nuances and exaggerated what was left, but still got much of the essence. And ahead of Bloomberg. Here’s a similar example, this one with Judge Napolitano.

In March, Napolitano claimed that, in spying on Trump, Obama went around U.S. laws that would restrict such spying by having a British intelligence agency access the U.S. NSA surveillance databases, then pass along findings. Obama and the British denied it vehemently.

Today, CNN confirms that “British intelligence passed Trump associates’ communications with Russians on to US counterparts.” CNN suggests that the British did the surveilling themselves, a difference from Napolitano’s story. Still, the British did it under intelligence-sharing agreements and to me, it sounds like Napolitano was in the ballpark.

The real news is that CNN still has no substantive Russian collusion to report against Trump.

Syria: Whom do you trust?

Posted by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) at 11:45 am - April 12, 2017.
Filed under: National Security,War On Terror,World War III

As former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter has put it:

…chemical attacks had been occurring inside Syria on a regular basis… International investigations of these attacks produced mixed results, with…the majority being attributed to anti-regime fighters, in particular those affiliated with Al Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate.

Some sort of chemical event took place in Khan Sheikhoun; what is very much in question is who is responsible…

A critical piece of information that has largely escaped the reporting in the mainstream media is that Khan Sheikhoun is ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement…

The Russian Ministry of Defense has claimed that Liwa al-Aqsa [anti-Assad jihadists] was using facilities in and around Khan Sheikhoun to manufacture crude chemical shells and landmines…

Al Nusra has a long history of manufacturing and employing crude chemical weapons; the 2013 chemical attack on Ghouta made use of low-grade Sarin nerve agent locally synthesized, while attacks in and around Aleppo in 2016 made use of a chlorine/white phosphorous blend.

If…the building bombed in Khan Sheikhoun on the morning of April 4, 2017 was producing and/or storing chemical weapons, the probability that viable agent and other toxic contaminants were dispersed into the surrounding neighborhood, and further disseminated by the prevailing wind, is high.

Emphasis added. Although the article is at PuffHo and written by a sex offender (teenage girls), it’s a detailed article and worth reading in full.

So, there’s that. The whole thing could have been an accident, when a Syrian government jet did a conventional attack on a facility where the rebels were storing their own, illegal, home-grown(?) chemical weapons.

On the other hand, we have Defense Secretary Mattis stating, “The Syrian regime attacked its own people with chemical weapons. I have personally reviewed the intelligence and there is no doubt the Syrian regime is responsible for the decision to attack and for the attack itself.”

Fifteen years ago, deciding whether to believe the U.S. defense secretary would have been easy: Just believe him! But, disturbingly, Mattis’ briefing gave almost no supporting details – for a story which makes little sense on its surface.

And a lot has changed, in the last 15 years. We now know to a certainty that the U.S. intelligence agencies get things wrong or even mislead on purpose.

  • Most recently, the proverbial “17 intelligence agencies” supported highly doubtful claims of Russian election hacking.
  • Also, they leaked surveillance information in an effort to stoke fires of McCarthyism (hysteria) against a newly-elected President – who, it seemed at the time, wouldn’t go along with the agencies’ desire to attack Syria.

As such, I’m not comforted to know that Mattis “personally reviewed the intelligence” (a fancy way of saying just that he read the agency reports). I remain a skeptic of the official story. As always, feel free to disagree or to tell me what I missed, in the comments.

As to the larger picture: Trump says, “We’re not going into Syria.” But… Spicer is comparing Assad to Hitler and Nikki Haley is still talking Syria regime change. As is McCain. Yuck.

UPDATE: Zero Hedge lists more reasons to question the official story, including:

  • Evidence that it was anhydrous ammonia or chlorine, not sarin. Supposedly, the “first responders” handled the victims without gloves, which should have killed them (if it was sarin).
  • A statement from Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), claiming that local U.S. Army officers in Syria agree with the accidental-release theory (mainly faulting the rebels).

The Tyranny of Fake News

I was advised to google “Syria hoax footage” and see what comes up. A lot comes up. For one thing, here’s video from November 2016 of Syrian “White Helmets” (a pro-rebel group; thus pro-Islamist) carefully STAGING a scene of man whose legs were supposedly crushed in a government attack.

YouTube Preview Image

They all scream on cue, at about 0:22. Afterward, the man – that is, the actor – looks cheerful and takes a photo with his fellow actors. Click here and scroll down to see.

CNN lately has been hitting the “Won’t somebody PLEEEZ think of the children??!” button extra hard, with its clips of Bana, an adorable, wide-eyed Syrian 7-year old who pleads for the freedom to play and go to school.

Here, CNN throws Bana into the face of a rather sensible Congressperson, starting around 1:50.

YouTube Preview Image

It turns out, of course, that each of Bana’s performances and Tweets are scripted and staged by her politically-motivated mother.

Note to CNN: A seven-year old isn’t a U.S. foreign policy expert. Her opinion, even if unscripted, would still be Fake News in the sense that it simply isn’t news. And oh yeah, if we did invade Syria (or bomb it further), it would become even harder for Bana to play or go to school. Tell her that.

The U.S. Intelligence and foreign policy bureaucrats (Deep State) wanted Hillary because, for some reason or other, they want a war in Syria at the least; if not a full-on war with Russia. Along with a few billionaires – like Carlos Slim (New York Times) and Jeff Bezos (Washington Post) and Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild (Economist magazine) and some others (Time-Warner / CNN) – the Deep State controls the proverbial Controlled Media, which spews War propaganda on command.

That’s reality. That is the world we live in: A tyranny in which relatively non-accountable, secretive bureaucrats manipulate the media – and have the media, in turn, manipulate us with FAKE NEWS.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that the recent Syria chemical attack was a hoax or a false flag. But it means that we’re right to wonder. We’re right to ask our leaders for caution. We’re right to question “the narrative.”


Guess what else? We just got a little more information on how it could have been the murdered DNC-insider Seth Rich, and not the Russians, who hacked/leaked the DNC emails in the 2016 election.

“The consensus of 17 intelligence agencies is that the Russians did it!!1!” was always a shaky story. For one thing, the DNC didn’t even allow the FBI in to look at the alleged crime scene for a couple of weeks after it happened.

Its investigation hampered, the FBI then relied mostly on a report of Russian hacking from CrowdStrike, a Democrat-funded company. And CrowdStrike’s report/story has been more or less debunked. The other 16 agencies then relied on the FBI. I say, phooey. This isn’t the first time the proverbial “17 intelligence agencies!” have gotten it wrong – or even tried to deceive us.

UPDATE: On further reflection, the GatewayPundit link above (after “Guess what else?”) is a NothingBurger. As such, I apologize for having brought up that link.

Nonetheless, Julian Assange of Wikileaks has strongly denied Russian involvement in the DNC leaks (try here) and implied that Seth Rich was his source (try here). That continues to be my hypothesis.

UPDATE: On the other side of the spectrum, Cernovich goes on a limb, claims that McMaster has been lying to Trump in an effort to get 150,000 boots on the ground in Syria. If true: it’s a bad moment for America. And if false: it’s a bad moment for Cernovich – who has been shaky on some things, and astoundingly right on some other things.

My evolution on the topic of “war”

Just speaking for myself. After 9-11, I supported the war in Afghanistan because:

  • Killing al Qaeda terrorists seemed like a good idea, and the Taliban was harboring them.
  • It was only one war.
  • It was legal. (Congress authorized it. As did the United Nations, explicitly.)

A couple years later, I supported the Iraq war because:

  • Killing al Qaeda terrorists seemed like a good idea, and Saddam had begun to harbor some who had just fled from Afghanistan, like Zarqawi.
  • Whether or not Saddam Hussein had ready-to-go WMD, getting him and his thugs off the world stage seemed like a good idea.
  • It was only a second war.
  • It was legal. (Congress authorized it. As did the United Nations, more or less.)

By 2008, both wars seemed almost to be won. Their endings were in sight. But then a strange thing happened.

America elected a feckless socialist (Barack Obama) as President. He promised indeed to end the above two wars. But he didn’t. He messed up our winning positions; meaning the wars dragged on.

Even worse, he started more wars. All were illegal (not authorized beforehand by Congress). All were disastrous.

  • His (and Hillary’s) Libya war destabilized all of northern Africa and eventually drowned Europe in “migrants”.
  • His Ukraine coup (and the war/tensions that followed) was an unprecedented and deliberate rattling of the Russian bear’s cage, re-opening the Cold War that had been won in the 1980s and settled in the 1990s.
  • His Syria war fueled the rise of ISIS in Iraq. (Since ISIS and the Syrian rebels overlap quite a bit, aid to the Syrian rebels quickly becomes ‘de facto’ aid to ISIS.)
  • His Saudi friends’ war in Yemen is no help to anyone.

For the first time in U.S. history, we were at war every single day of someone’s 8-year presidency. And his preferred successor (Hillary Clinton) wanted to extend those wars. The U.S. has “achieved” an Orwellian state of Continuous War. That’s bad.

Ever read Thucydides? Athens – the progressive, open, commercial-democratic society of that era – failed. Basically, she over-extended herself in too many wars. She couldn’t afford them – whether financially, militarily, politically or morally. I don’t think we can, either.

Sometimes it’s better to retreat and retrench, and patriotic to advocate for it. If you catch me striking a different tone on our wars than I did 5-10 years ago, that’s why.

We should shore up our borders and defenses, our infrastructure, our industry, our national finances, our energy independence, and our commitment to liberty, here at home. We can probably still keep our commitments to Europe, Japan, Korea and Israel (which means I’m no isolationist). But, apart from the historical commitments just mentioned, we should accept a multi-polar world order and NOT look for wars to get into.

In my opinion. Please feel free to criticize or to state yours, in the comments.

Lindsey Graham is insane

YouTube Preview Image

In the clip above: Senator Lindsey Graham (R – SC) takes the position that we should now fight ISIS plus every major faction in Syria at the same time plus the Russians if they should dare to oppose us, with ground troops and “advisers” to do nation-building in Syria, which somehow isn’t nation-building because it’s letting the “Syrians take care of Assad”, and all of which is directly needed to protect “the homeland” because it would have prevented 9-11 (a strike over here by Saudi terrorists) if only we had done it 16 years ago in Afghanistan. Also, it will save us money.

Even the intelligent Tucker Carlson can’t make sense of it.

Graham’s tone is so deadpan – so authentically uncaring about the lives involved, whether U.S. troops or Syrian locals or even U.S. taxpayers – that it gave me the creeps, once my head stopped spinning.

At the end of the clip, Carlson notes that articles in the Democrat-leaning New York Times and Washington Post have declared that anyone who would OPPOSE the U.S. bombing the brown people of Syria is somehow a “white nationalist”. Anyone who would oppose the Establishment’s new war plans is somehow – did you see this coming? – “racist, anti-Semitic and sexist”.

Do you need more evidence that, by now in 2017, America is in the grip of a war-mongering, out-of-control Deep State? Which opposed Trump fiercely – until a few days ago, when apparently he caved? And that what we have been calling “the mainstream/liberal media” and “the party Establishments” all this time are really the Deep State’s servants?

Syria smells like a hoax

…or more precisely, like a False Flag attack to stampede President Trump into attacking Syria (and indirectly Russia) rather than ISIS. Here’s why. Please note:

  • I’m NOT claiming that it *is* a hoax or a false flag. Only saying why it might be, on present information. Why we should want everyone to take a deep breath and slow down.
  • For brevity, I’ll say Deep State to mean “the consensus of the U.S. intelligence agencies” or “the permanent bureaucracy of the U.S. intelligence community”.
  • For brevity, I’ll say Controlled Media to mean “the mainstream media, largely controlled by Deep State and certain billionaires”.

Now for the reasons.

  1. Syria’s dictator Assad has nothing to gain by chemical attacks on his own people. He gains no strategic territory. He does not intimidate his opponents, nor kill many of them, nor destroy much of their equipment. He only unites the world against him. It does not help him win.

    Even if Assad is the New Hitler testing the nerve of the West: History shows that megalomaniacs always test their opponents’ nerve by going for a worthwhile objective, a genuine win. For example: Hitler in 1936 re-militarized the Rhineland; Saddam in 1990 seized Kuwait and its rich oil fields. Nothing like that, here.

  2. Until recently, Deep State claimed that Assad had absolutely NO chemical weapons. Here’s a Rewind reel to refresh your memory.

    Of course the Deep State could have been wrong (whether mistaken or deceptive), when its politicians and Controlled Media said those things. The point is: They were said. The sudden reversal requires explanation and accounting. Which, so far, has not been given.

  3. ISIS and the Syrian rebels (they’re much the same people, on adjoining territory) do have chemical weapons. Even Foreign Policy magazine says so.
  4. ISIS and the Syrian rebels, and the Deep State factions which back them, do gain by a false-flag attack that gets President Trump to bomb Assad – instead of moving to “eliminate” ISIS, as he was promising.
  5. Suddenly, it’s The Children. Normally, the Controlled Media will avoid showing pictures of maimed children. The exception is when they’re out to whip people up toward some specific end – like, say, a war. This time, they’ve been showing the dead kids (whom we all pity) a great deal.

    Yesterday, I watched both Nikki Haley’s speech to the U.N., and President Trump’s statement to the nation. Both were high on emotion and very short on facts, evidence or logic. That’s a giant red flag.

  6. Deep State and Controlled Media have hoaxed us before. Some would bring up the Iraq War and WMD, as an example. I wouldn’t, but that’s a long story. It doesn’t matter, because we have other examples.

    Are you old enough to remember Nariyah? She got us into the first Gulf War with her tearful tale of Iraqi soldiers ripping babies from incubators – and it was fake, fake, fake.

  7. We’ve had reports in the not-too-distant past, that Deep State was planning false-flag chemical attacks in Syria. Click on this one, allegedly from the Daily Mail. So, the idea isn’t all that far-fetched.
  8. The wrong people are praising Trump’s response of bombing Syria.
  9. When known, Deep State-backed war-mongers like Hillary Clinton, John “Landslide” McCain, and the Saudis approve of your attack on some country, it’s a good time to think twice.

I’m open to solid evidence that Assad did the attack. But if it’s a hoax: then it’s a pity that it has worked; Trump is bombing Syria. After months of failed and ridiculous “Trump is a Russian spy!!1!” innuendo, have the Deep State and Controlled Media found a different way to manipulate him into doing their wars?

Trump’s emotional statement, yesterday, was all-too genuine and sincere. Pictures of dead kids are, it seems, a way to corner him into changing policy and doing your bidding.

I think we should still be going after ISIS. Given that ISIS is largely a creation of the Saudis and certain U.S. Deep State factions, it makes perfect sense to me that the latter – and their minions in the Controlled Media and both U.S. political parties – would be so determined to either knock Trump out of office, or yank him over to their preferred policy of war on Syria/Assad/Russia (largely ignoring ISIS).

Springtime for Assad and Syria

Posted by V the K at 8:25 am - April 7, 2017.
Filed under: War On Terror

Sean L requested a “hot take” on PDT’s decision to launch missile strikes against military targets in Syria. I think I have, like, four.

1. Well, so much for the idea that Trump is a prawn of Vladimir Putin; what with the bombing and calling for the ouster of Putin’s buddy Assad. And on that topic…

2. When has removing a strongman in the Middle East ever made anything better? You would think we had learned what happened after toppling Saddam, Qadaffi, the Shah…

3. BTW, what is it about going to war in the Middle East that US presidents just can’t resist? The last five presidents have all launched or continued military adventures in the Middle East. Maybe it was important when our European allies needed the oil. But we can pretty much fulfill our oil requirements from other sources. If France and Germany want to go to war in the Middle East so *they* can has oil, then let them do it. Oh, right, they can’t. Honestly, the Middle East is a snake pit. If we were smart, we’d quarantine the entire region and let them work out their differences while we watched from the sidelines.

4. The left should have to contort themselves like a Cirque du SoGay acrobat to explain why missile strikes were brilliant foreign policy when Hillary suggested them, but Trump is a warmongering buffoon for carrying them out. I think the explanation will be along the lines of, “Shut up, racist.”

Anyway, Sean L might find Scott Adams take more interesting than mine. He wonders if Assad was really the one behind the gas attacks. He makes some interesting points.

“Let Them In,” They Said

Posted by V the K at 8:29 am - March 9, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace,War On Terror

Democrat Senators Chuck Schumer and Dippy Blond Seat-Warmer Kirsten Gillibrand went to the wall — with assistance from a Democrat Mayor and a leftist middle-school teacher — to help a Mohammedan child rapist gain entry to the United States.

When Tanveer Hussain and Abid Khan weren’t allowed into the United States, they blamed President Trump. So did the media outlets that covered the story. The controversial Democrat mayor of Saranac Lake reached out to fellow New York party members Senator Charles Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. They leaned on the local embassy and Hussain and Khan were waved through.

“Still a country that welcomes athletes from across the globe,” Senator Schumer’s statement read. The statement, shared on Hussain’s Facebook page, declared, “So proud of the town of Saranac Lake for their efforts and their open hearts.”

Later Hussain’s brother would explain one difference between Saranac Lake and Kashmir. “In Kashmir, we have a tradition of showing love to children,” he said. Kashmir’s idea of showing love to children was very different than that of Saranac Lake. Tanveer Hussain would be charged with molesting a 12-year-old girl who was a student at the school.

At the time, Chuck and Kirstie were keen to “stand up to Donald Trump” by getting unvetted Mohammedans into the country. I guess they really showed him. Too bad it led to a little girl getting raped, though. Although apparently, many of the people who worked to bring the child molester into the country think it was a small price to pay for their virtue-signaling. Besides, rape is only wrong when it’s committed by white, upper-middle class college students, or so it would seem.

Not only that, but one of the “refugees” that somehow got through Obama’s “thorough vetting process” (“It takes over a year, you guys. We ask them lots and lots of times if they’re terrorists.”)  turns out to be an ISIS-affiliated terrorist. (“Oopsie!”)

Federal lawmakers are investigating how a former Iraqi insurgent fighter was able to lie about his identity and still get through America’s ‘extreme’ vetting process.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to find out why the terror suspect’s pending arrest was allegedly spiked just over a week before the election. [Oh, I think we can guess why – V]

U.S. officials said earlier this week that nearly a third of the FBI’S 1,000 ongoing domestic terrorism investigations involve those admitted to the U.S. as refugees.

Remember when Barack Obama characterized the refugees he was swarming into the country as “widows and orphans?” That was a lie to placate you while he ushered in terrorists and child rapists.

In perhaps the most glaring example of Iraqi terrorists getting into the U.S, two Iraqi refugees living in Bowling Green, Ky., were convicted in 2013 of plotting to help Al Qaeda. The men were also hit with additional charges after their fingerprints matched ones found on IEDs used in Iraq to kill U.S. soldiers

Wait, I thought that never happened and Kellyanne Conway made it up. That’s what the media said, anyway.

War of Words

Posted by V the K at 12:37 pm - September 19, 2016.
Filed under: War On Terror

Jihadists are setting off bombs in American cities and shooting up gay discos and Christmas parties. The Obama Adminisitration describes this as “a narrative fight, a narratives battle.”

untitled

He did not explain how a narrative battle with Islamic terrorists is distinct from a rap battle or whether it was more or less dangerous than getting served in a dance contest.

A “battle of narratives?” Seriously? Is the Obama Regime going to begin recruiting novelists to fight back against ISIS with unexpected plot twists and a surprising backstory?

“Battle of Narratives,” Good Lord.

Our country is being led by people convinced that the rejection of reality is the highest form of intellect; “Intellectuals Yet Idiots,” indeed.

 

Saddy McSadface Versus Terrorist Mohammedism

Posted by V the K at 7:38 pm - March 23, 2016.
Filed under: War On Terror

You may have heard in this; in the former Great Britain, there has been a contest to name the latest addition to Her Majesty’s fleet. In a land that once gave us the HMS Indomitable, HMS Indefatigable, and HMS Dreadnought, the leading contender for the name of this ship is HMS Boaty McBoatface. A neat summary of Brittania’s decline from a global power to a trivia question. Running an empire is hard work; living in a fantasy children’s book is easy.

The West similarly takes a children’s book approach to acts of mass violence and terror committed in the name of the Prophet Mohammed. AOSHQ has been on something of a tear on this subject, noting that rather than strength and resolve, the response of the West to terror attacks is to draw sad-faced cartoon characters and trend dippy hashtags. (#BringBackOurBrussels) To an enemy that relishes our tears, this show of weakness is just extra credit to a successful attack.

See how sad you made us, terrorists? Stop making us sad!

Make-believe is how children respond to things they can’t deal with; like when they can’t deal with seeing the words “Trump 2016” scrawled in chalk on the sidewalk at a university. It’s not the way adults ought to respond to terror attacks. An adult response would be to honestly and without prejudice assess the causes of the attack and determine a means to halt further attacks; even if it meant hurting the feelings of people who share a common religious belief with those who carried out the attack and even… yes… even if it involved the brutal and punitive application of military force against those who ordered, supported, or logistically facilitated the attacks. Instead, our delusional leadership thinks providing billions of dollars to the leading promoters of Islamist terror in the world is a good move, and then goes to watch a baseball gang with other sponsors of terror.

Maudlin cartoons and hashtags gets you nowhere. There is an appropriate time to indulge in whimsy; but it is a poor response to murderous barbarians.

Terrorists Use Cell Phones; We Should Make It Really Hard to Buy Cell Phones

Posted by V the K at 12:33 pm - December 10, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror

There are reports of three recent incidents in Missouri of foreign men making bulk purchases of disposable cell phones at Wal-Mart.

Cell phones are very dangerous in the hands of terrorists, criminals, and psychopaths. They can be used to plot terror attacks, as detonators for IEDs, and to send texts that traumatize college students with heteronormative microaggression triggers.

Because cell phones are so dangerous, it is obvious that some “Common Sense” regulations are required in the interests of Public Safety.

  • Obviously, no one on the secret, Government-controlled, no safeguards, no due process, no appeals Terror Watch list should be allowed to by a cell phone.
  • Many states have wisely enacted bans on using cell phones while driving, but since drivers still do, these bans obviously do not go far enough. You shouldn’t be allowed to transport a cell phone in your car. Ever. At a minimum, the cell phone should be locked up and its battery locked in a separate case; mimicking “common sense” laws in NJ, California, and Maryland regarding firearms. Likewise, the state should be able to prosecute you for having a cell phone in your car even if it is unusable.
  • All cell phones should be restricted to ten minutes of call time. This will not eliminate terror incidents, but will reduce the ability of terrorists to use their phones to plan mass-murder. After all, does anyone really *need* a plan with unlimited minutes?

If you question any of these prohibitions, you are obviously in the pay of Big Telecom or an ignorant bigot who values your freedom to own a cell phone over the lives of other people.

After all, if it saves even one life, it’s worth it.

The President of Bizarro World

Posted by V the K at 7:21 am - December 8, 2015.
Filed under: Obama Watch,War On Terror

Bizarro-World

In the Bizarro world of “htraE” (“Earth” spelled backwards), society is ruled by the Bizarro Code which states “Us do opposite of all Earthly things! Us hate beauty! Us love ugliness! Is big crime to make anything perfect on Bizarro World!” In one episode, for example, a salesman is doing a brisk trade selling Bizarro bonds: “Guaranteed to lose money for you”. Later, the mayor appoints Bizarro No. 1 to investigate a crime, “Because you are stupider than the entire Bizarro police force put together”. This is intended and taken as a great compliment. – Wikipedia

Last week, there was a jihadist terror attack in a Gun Free Zone in a state with harsh and restrictive gun control laws. The two jihadis murdered 14 innocent people for Islam. One of the jihadis was a recent immigrant. One of their neighbors suspected they were up to no good, but was afraid to say anything for fear of being called racist.

How would Bizarro President respond?

How did Obama respond?

He called for those exact things.

America has been fundamentally transformed into Bizarro World.

The Left Works Out Its Feelings Toward ISIS

Posted by V the K at 7:54 pm - November 25, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror,World War III

You may have found Hillary’s Strategy to defeat ISIS a little vague, as it amounted to: “ISIS is bad. We should defeat ISIS. It’s not Islam’s fault.” But fortunately, there are some others on the left with more nuanced approaches:

Macho posturing will only make matters worse. Which, of course, is exactly what one learns in the practice of meditation. It is possible to coexist with difficult emotions and set down the burden of trying to make them go away.

Bernie Sanders, not Clinton or Trump, will refrain from sending more Americans back to failed counterinsurgency wars in the Middle East…. The willingness of Bernie Sanders to move beyond the traditional American paradigm of continual war, in the hopes of ending continual terror, is why Sanders has the right formula to defeat ISIS.

This is what passes for Very Deep Thought on the Progressive Left.

Bear in mind, Bernie Sanders also famously stated that Global Warming causes terrorism. The Democrats are much more eager to fight Global Warming than terrorism because it involves doing stuff they want to do any way; expand Government control, dismantle capitalism, and redistribute wealth.  It’s the geopolitical equivalent of blowing off your math homework because you’d rather hang out with the Drama Club.

The Danger of the Left’s Simplistic, Childish Dogma

Posted by V the K at 9:21 am - November 19, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror

Imagine this: The haggard survivors of the Zombie Apocalypse are holed up in the ruins of their redoubt, approached by a herd of shambling zombies who want to eat their brains. The leaders grimly draw their weapons and prepare to dispatch the threat.

Suddenly, a chunky woman in a poncho and a bad haircut jumps between the men with guns and the zombies. “No, you mustn’t,” she insists. “That’s what the Zombies *want* you to do!”

This is precisely the behavior of the American Left as represented by Sally Kohn, the Huffington Post, the Washington Post, and… naturally… MSDNC.

This is the infantile psychology of the left at work. If they think that terrorists want you to do X, it doesn’t matter if X is the most reasonable course of action for stopping the terrorists, and that the terrorists would be irrational to *want* us to bomb them or to *want* us to stop taking in communities of “refugees” they can easily infiltrate to bring us harm. We must not do X.

The Left also… for all of their supposed wisdom about “what ISIS really wants” is ignoring or pretending not to believe what ISIS is actually doing and saying what they want… to come to the west and kill as many infidels as possible.

They seem to treat this whole matter as if it is a game; not as though lives and civilization itself are at stake.

Give War a Chance

Posted by V the K at 9:51 pm - November 17, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror

Contrary to the delusions of Sally Kohn and the rest of the defeat “we can defeat ISIS with flowers and candles and by joining hands and singing ‘Imagine’ until their hearts grow three sizes” crowd, the actual path to defeating the Islamo-Barbarians looks more like this:

The first wave of 12 B-52H’s emptied their bays of 750-pound dumb bombs directly over the heart of Raqqa, followed by a second wave, then a third. Crack Air Force ground crews were waiting back at the base in Saudi Arabia, and rearmament took less than two hours. Then they headed north again. In 24 hours, Raqqa ceased to exist.

Lots… and I mean… LOTS of leftist butthurt in the comments.

 

An Impertinent Question

Posted by V the K at 5:05 pm - November 15, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror

In retaliation for the Paris Massacre, France has launched air strikes against a major ISIS command center in Syria.

Here’s a question; Obama has supposedly been bombing ISIS for months. Why is there still a command center for France to bomb?

Also, aren’t the French always condemning Israel when Israel retaliates for Islamic Terrorist Massacres of Israelis?

How About No, You Stupid Bint

Posted by V the K at 10:51 am - November 14, 2015.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace,War On Terror

Well, there it is. The stupidest possible response to  . From an  idiot progressive with a stripper name. 

CTxzTcRUEAAGVXA

#BeginRant

Sick and tired of all these progressives who attack people who just want to cut Government spending a little as “terrorists who must be destroyed” because cutting welfare spending “doesn’t reflect our American values.” And then when real terrorism happens with real violence and real death it’s like, “Hugs all around everybody, let’s form a healing circle.”

These people are so stupid, they’d hug a grizzly bear and try to make friends with it.

A suggestion for Ms Krystal Ball; why don’t you take your ‘Peace and Love’ act to Malmo, or one of the No-Go Zones in Paris you claim don’t exist. Walk down the street wearing something sexy; see how that goes for you.

And to all the phonies on Facebook and Twitter changing their profile pictures to French flags and retweeting #StandWithParis hashtags: Bite me.  A lot of them are the same people that denounce those of us on the right who insist on seeing Islamism for what it is: a threat to gays, women, and Western Civilization. When we said mass importation of Mohammedans was a bad idea, they called us bigots and racists. Now that they see the results of their policies, they’re all, “Oh, such a tragedy. We must stand strong.” It’s not a tragedy, you idiots, it’s a massacre committed by barbarians that you side with over the civilized

Oh, and some idiot in Paris hauled out a piano and played ‘Imagine.’ Yeah, that will totally address the problem.

Idiot.

If you really really want to do something about the threat of terrorism, then this is what you should do:

1. Buy a firearm, learn how to use it, carry it wherever it is legal to do so.

2. GTFO of any large American city, they are all terror targets, and it’s only a matter of time before the Islamo-Barbarians carry out a massive attack here.

3. Do not count on politicians to do anything for you; they are worthless.

#EndRant (more…)

International Geopolitics Abhors a Vacuum

Posted by V the K at 11:24 pm - September 29, 2015.
Filed under: War On Terror

Russia is setting up shop in Syria, deploying a massive amount of military power in support of the Assad Regime. This places Russia in position to be the power broker in the Middle East, filling the vacuum created by America’s weakness and retreat under Obama. Syria stands to become the base from which Russia expands its security arrangements and becomes the dominant power on the Arabian Peninsula. He’s also proposing a coalition of military power to take on ISIS, and openly questioning Obama’s policies that have turned Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen into dumpster fires.

“Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster — and nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life,” Putin said through a translator. “I cannot help asking those who have forced that situation: Do you realize what you have done?”

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, whose “Hashtag Diplomacy” was so effective in taking down Boko Haram and getting Russia out of Ukraine (/sarc), has his own strategy for defeating ISIS. It involves consulting with Hollywood to figure out how to make catchy videos to counter ISIS propaganda and turn them away from violent genocide. I am not making this up.

The Obama administration is turning to HBO, Snapchat, and a controversial, Oscar-winning screenwriter to help them fight ISIS.

Earlier this year, the State Department convened a group of friends in the U.S. film industry, social media, and premium cable TV to brainstorm ways to counter jihadist propaganda.

The administration claimed Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video. They now think ISIS can be defeated by YouTube videos. I think they vastly overestimate YouTube’s influence.

Either that, or they simply are not serious people.

Vladimir Putin, whatever else he may be, is a serious man.

You don’t have to be a supporter of Putin’s domestic to recognize that he is successfully expanding Russia’s influence and strengthening his country’s global position, while Obama has thoroughly squandered American prestige, abandoned allies, embraced our enemies, and reduced American influence to third-rate status.

Boom.

I only hope whoever did this got the right pictures, because I would hate it if the point were lost.

12006266_143151069363022_2365846717699711215_n