Michael Scheuer | Non-Intervention

“To find pleasure in the calamities of other nations would be criminal; but to benefit ourselves by opening an asylum to those who suffer in consequence of them is as justifiable as it is politic.”

Alexander Hamilton, Report on the Subject of Manufactures, 5 December 1791[1]

For decades, Americans have listened to Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the mainstream media lecture them about why they have a moral responsibility to welcome, financially support, and give legal preference to arriving legal and illegal immigrants who are very often the dregs of the societies they are leaving. The result has been an ocean of illiterate, dole-loving, unskilled, and often violent foreigners who guzzle down all the money the American taxpayer can provide, refuse to assimilate, vote blindly for America-hating American politicians — read Democrats — and generally constitute a potent acid that is dissolving the republic’s social cohesiveness. It is time for a change.

If we must have more legal immigration into America, there is one way we can make sure the new entrants will be worth having. I would suggest that for the next three years we have a program that gives exclusive access to applications for immigration only to those individuals whose governments are either killing them or refusing to protect them against violent minorities, especially against violent Muslims. To keep this program small and focused — so as to be able to assess its value at the end of three years — I would recommend that we take in only white South Africans and white Europeans from a limited number of EU countries. Why? Because native-born whites in both regions currently are threatened with increasingly violent attacks that are conducted with either their government’s support or their government’s indifference to their safety.

South Africa: Since the West — stupefied by multiculturalism and diversity — forced white South Africans to turn over the country to the communist/terrorist Mandela and his rainbow coalition of moronic white liberals and violent Black communists, the result has been an unmitigated economic, social, and human disaster for the Republic of South Africa. What was once the economic powerhouse of the African continent is now approaching the status that characterizes most other African states: an ill-governed, economically sinking, lawless, and increasingly violent shithole. But no matter, the turnover of power is complete, and South Africa is probably beyond saving with anything short of divine intervention.

So we should let the South African communist-gangsters drown, while killing one another, in their own poisonous juices. But we can take in as many white South Africans as we can, especially the rural-based ones who are reported to grow up to 70-percent of the country’s food crops. This section of the population is now seeing its property seized without payment by the Black communists who run the national government. These officials also have turned a resolutely blind eye toward — and may be arming — Black gunmen who are killing white South African farmers, their wives, and their children simply for the racist fun of that genocidal endeavor. These white South African targets of the Black communist murderers are a sturdy lot. Their ancestors tamed a savage wilderness, built a powerful economy, nearly defeated the British Empire in the Boer wars, and aligned themselves with the Western allies’ during both world wars. In addition, most speak English; are Christians, self-reliant, and familiar with weapons; bring some applicable skills with them; and would repay an eventual grant of U.S. citizenship with loyalty to the republic, a strong sense of community, thoughtful voting, and hard work. They would be a first step toward beginning to dilute the utter worthlessness of that great ocean of human refuse that Obama and his party brought in — legally and illegally — to mindlessly vote Democrat and assist that party’s ongoing effort to destroy the United States.

Europe: The United States now stand in a ridiculous situation in regard to its relations with the NATO and EU countries. With few exceptions — Poland, Hungary, and other states in Eastern Europe — the member states of these two organizations, each claiming to be bound by democratic tenets, have become willing oppressors of their own native-born populations. Blinded by the multiculturalism-and-diversity disease, Europe’s political leaders have inundated much of the continent with the same kind of human refuse that Obama brought to America. Now faced with ten million or more of these illiterate, unassimilable, violence-prone, and mostly military-age young men from the Arab world and Africa, European governments have turned their backs on such concepts as equality before the law, free speech, majority rule, effective and fair performance of duty by police and judges, and law-and order regimes that protect all citizens. These increasingly authoritarian governments and their socialist EU parliament are in the process of stripping their native citizens — especially if they are white and Christian — of their civil liberties and allowing them to be the unprotected-by-police targets of Muslim immigrant violence.

From Norway south to Sicily, the native-born — especially white women and children — are being molested, raped, physically beaten, “groomed” from childhood for future use as revenue-raising prostitutes, and doused with acid. Their attackers are seldom arrested, and when arrested and sent to trial are often let off the hook by judges who claim they were only doing things consistent with the culture from which they came, which, while true, ought not to protect them from the rule of law. In addition, if the raped, beaten, acid scarred, and molested victims, or their family members, dare to publicly condemn the governments’ that allowed them to be physically attacked, they are at times arrested and always publicly damned as racist for voicing the simple fact that they had been attacked by identifiable Muslim immigrants who are the prize pets of their government.

With many of Europe’s governments having decided to become the allies and abettors of their native-born citizens’ lethal Muslim enemies and tormentors, many white, Christian Europeans may find a chance to emigrate to the United States to be an attractive option. And, certainly, our republic would benefit from white, Christian immigrants who brought with them an education, English-language capability, pertinent work skills and experience, and a willingness to assimilate.

I am not suggesting here that would-be immigrants from these two regions should be accepted in huge numbers nor — as did Obama — that they be accepted without ensuring they would serve U.S. national interests and not threaten internal security. They would, for example, have to pass stringent security vetting; ought to be relatively young, say not more than thirty-five; have a high- or vocational-school education; display at least a working-level knowledge of English; possess work experience that roughly matches known employment openings in the United States; enjoy generally good health, with no serious communicable diseases; and display an ability to use in-door plumbing.

Overall, white immigrants from Europe and South Africa, the latter now bound for genocide, would be the first groups of immigrants in decades — save for Asians — that could be counted on to make a positive and near-term contribution to the republic’s social cohesion and economy. Such an immigration policy also would show — at long last — an understanding of the Founders’ intent that the national government did not have to accept immigrants if they appeared unassimilable or otherwise harmful to the republic. Indeed, because the Constitution was written to serve American interests, and so offers no protections for foreigners located outside the United States, the national government has both the lawful right and the moral responsibility to facilitate the legal entry of only those immigrants who can be expected to benefit the United States.

Endnote:

1. Donald R. Hickey and Connie D. Clark, (Eds). Citizen Hamilton. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield Publishers, 2006, p. 74

After thinking more about the Broward County school shooting, I believe that it is worth taking a look at the issue from the national level, and to suggest that the Democrats, the other leftist groups, and the media are deliberately moving this country to the edge of a civil war, probably believing those it oppresses will not take up cudgels against them. Several supporting points for this idea stand out to me as most important:

• To repeat, the great mass of Americans know that they are clearly being lied to about the school attack in Florida, as they continue to be lied to about the Las Vegas shooting. This congenital government lying, as I have said here before, is by itself a good reason for buying the most powerful weapons possible and stockpiling ammunition.
• The Democrats, the media, the banks, the tech giants, and some other businesses are making an all-out effort to dismantle the 2nd Amendment. That is, a small but rich and powerful section of the population wants to take an inalienable right from the rest of the population, while they, their guard forces and governments at all levels will remain armed to the teeth. If successful they will have what all authoritarians know is necessary to hold power, a monopoly on the tools of force. Strike 1.
• The same entities also are picking up the pace of their ongoing strangulation of the 1st Amendment by mandating the deletion of what some claim are thousands of conservative and libertarian social media sites and channels. We are seeing in real-time — in this once free-speech republic — the Nazi-like spectacle of a thoroughly corrupt, terminally adolescent outfit like CNN ordering YouTube and other social media providers to remove such outlets and those orders are being followed to the letter. Strike 2.
• The same entities, President Trump, and much of his party all seem to be moving toward preventing all access to the AR-15 rifle — which is not an “assault rifle” — a gradual process they will start by raising the age at which one can by the rifle and finish by banning all rifle sales. Why? Because the rifle has been used in school shootings? No, this is only a justification for the unjustifiable. And the left’s claim that the Founders, when embedding the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution, did not foresee the great growth in the power and lethality in small arms, and so would not have included it today, is an illogical and completely bullshit piece of argumentation. The Founders included the 2nd Amendment precisely because they knew that over time, weaponry — like the tools of agriculture, industry, maritime commerce, communications, etc. — would grow in strength and complexity. Their goal was never, during the duration of the republic’s life, to allow a situation where the citizenry could not defend itself with the best weapons of the age against a tyrannical government. To think that the Founders believed American citizens could protect their liberties from tyrants emerging in future generations and centuries with black-powder, muzzle-loading muskets accurate at no more than 80-100 yards is to regard them not as the great, prescient men they were, but as idiots with the same room-temperature IQs as Maxine Waters, and Adam Shiff. The Democrats, et al., obviously want to ban the AR-15 and then all rifles because they detest all Americans who disagree with them and intend to rule them as they did their Black slaves in the antebellum era. Strike 3.
• The same entities are responsible for forming sanctuary cities and states in an effort to break the republican government guaranteed by the Constitution, as well as the Union that is the sheet-anchor of the republic’s existence. The leaders of these cities and states warn, protect, and hide illegal aliens, criminals, MS-13 gang members, Antifa, BAM, and BLM terrorists and thereby endanger the lives of citizens and the national government’s law enforcement officers seeking to execute lawful operations meant to deport or incarcerate the scum with which these locales are rife. Strike 4 – one more than necessary.

The Democrats and their aforementioned allies, who spare no effort to denigrate the Confederacy’s political, military leaders, and destroy their statues, are much more violent Union-destroyers than the Confederates ever were. As I have said, I believe the Confederates started the war too soon by firing on Fort Sumter after Lincoln tried — as was his duty as president — to resupply it with provisions. To justify any attack, Davis should have waited for Lincoln to fire the first shot, by a U.S. military attack, a naval blockade, or ramming anti-slavery legislation through the post-secession Congress. Just before Davis ordered the attack, his Secretary of State, Robert Toombs, told him that his order

“will inaugurate a civil war greater than any the world has yet seen … It is suicide, murder, and will lose us every friend at the North. You will wantonly strike a hornet’s nest which extends from mountains to ocean, and legions now quiet will storm out and sting us to death. It is unnecessary; it puts us in the wrong; it is fatal.” [1]

Toombs was right. Davis had no credible constitutional basis for secession and war, and his attack did unite much of the north and rallied it to save the Union. Today, however, Americans have the constitutionally legitimate reasons to rebel the South lacked. A nefarious, often-violent, and always anti-republican cabal led by the Democrats is dedicated to dismantling the population’s inalienable and natural rights, censoring or removing its opponents on the internet, ruining the reputations and businesses of people who disagree them, and breaking the Union. These are legitimate constitutional justifications for a rebellion aimed at permanently eliminating the republic’s domestic foes and, as well, they are very close to being factors that make such a war not only necessary but the constitutional duty of a well-armed, anti-tyranny citizenry.

Four strikes? Perhaps enough is enough? “There is great justice with our cause,” Machiavelli wrote in The Prince, “because when it is a necessary war, that war is just; and weapons are hallowed when there is no other hope but in those weapons.” [2] Unless President Trump acts soon to stop this blatant attempt to install tyranny “there is no other hope but in those weapons.”

Endnotes:

1. Toombs is quoted at https://www.care2.com/causes/on-this-day-1861-civil-war-begins-as-the-confederacy-attacks-fort-sumter.html
2. Nicolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter 26

I have not previously chosen to write about school shootings in this space except to excoriate Obama and other politicians in both parties who regularly built their plans for eradicating the 2^nd Amendment on the back of school attacks and dead students. I do that again here to the same politicians, journalists, and businessmen who are trying to capitalize on young corpses to further their plans to disarm Americans. I also will add my view that President Trump is playing into the hands of these anti-republican bastards with his irrelevant, nonsense talk about banning bump-stocks and pegging the age qualification at twenty-one years before an individual can purchase a rifle. Mr. President, do not deal with this gang of authoritarians by setting precedents that can be used to further undercut the 2^nd Amendment in the future. A few other points.

Why raise the rifle-buying age to 21?

This is an action that would cut away at a core part of many father-son relationships in the United States; it is something to be expected only of a Democrat. Hunting is an activity in which fathers and sons bond, and has been such since Englishmen first came to North America and became Anglo-Americans. Do you intend to also forbid fathers from buying rifles for their under-eighteen sons, or daughters for that matter? Will an eighteen-year old no longer be able to get a hunting license because he is not allowed to have a rifle? Will an eighteen-year old and his Dad be fined or arrested if a game warden catches them hunting or target-shooting with rifles? If this becomes a legal infraction, will the government seize the father’s guns as punishment for giving his son a rifle? The bastard anti-gunners are playing a long-game, Mr. President, and your proposed concessions to them will be used to pry open the door to destroy the 2^nd Amendment long after you are back with your company.

Who gives a rat’s ass what the kids are saying?

What kind of an adult and commonsense republic listens to kids who 15 or 16 years of age, and takes seriously what they have to say about the alteration of its Constitution? Only a moron would pay the least attention to their words on this score. We should all take a lesson from having amended the Constitution to allow 18 year-olds to vote, an action which gave us the republicanism-hating likes of Obama and Bill Clinton as presidents, the aged communist Sanders as the heartthrob of whining and greedy millennials, and nearly gave us Clinton’s wretchedly treasonous wife as president. Who gives a good damn what these drug-and-sex addled kids have to say about anything? They will do the Democrats and the media’s bidding by publicly advocating an end to the 2^nd Amendment during the day, and then they will stay up all night smoking dope, randomly copulating, and playing video games or watching movies that do nothing but depict and celebrate all forms of unlimited violence against human beings. Kids of this age have only one job and that is to get an education. They should be free to say what they want, but only a fool would do more than listen politely. To listen to them and then allow their uneducated and callow words to have any role whatsoever in guiding the ship of state is the stuff that insanity and Democrats are made from.

What really occurred at the Broward County school?

As I said above, I have tried to avoid mentioning anything about mass shootings that would suggest the authorities were lying to the public about what happened during the attacks. That reluctance died last October in Las Vegas, when what I watched live on the TV screen bore absolutely no resemblance to the fantastical stories Americans got from officials of at all levels of government, and most especially, and not surprisingly, from the FBI. But this Broward business is even worse than Las Vegas. The astonishingly high number of clear and detailed warnings about the purported shooter’s lethal intentions and capabilities that the FBI, the school system, and the county sheriffs chose to ignore, cannot be explained away as mistakes or blamed on an overly bureaucratic system. Likewise, the mainstream media’s deliberate suppression of the views of 2,996 of the school’s 3,000 students — a goodly number of them eyewitnesses — some of their teachers, and the videotapes that contradict the official attack story cannot be chalked-up to a mistake or an oversight; rather, it is a deliberate attempt to hold tight to a plainly false story and use it against the 2^nd amendment and President Trump. Then there are the four armed Broward County deputy sheriffs, the so-called men who stood silently outside the school because they had clearly been told beforehand by their leaders not to do anything to prematurely stop the murdering. Finally, the decision to tear down the school — thereby destroying any contradictory evidence lying therein — and YouTube’s rapid deletion of many dozens of leading conservative alternative-media channels that dared give voice to the information and videos suppressed by the mainstream media surely makes it clear that the attack was real; that many students were killed and wounded; and that it was the fruit of a well-planned operation to murder both the students and the 2^ndAmendment. The plan almost certainly was concocted by Democrats, the media, and the county’s Hillary-loving political leaders and sheriffs. If this likelihood can be proven a certainty, it would be well for the conspirators to recall that turn-about is always fair and, indeed, marvelously delightful play.

I had foolishly thought that all the syrupy calls for blessed bipartisanship in 2018 would peter out and return to storage closet labeled “nonsense.” That burnout has not occurred, and many pundits and journalists still demand bipartisanship, hands-across-the aisle, and the joining of forces in efforts for the betterment of the “American people.” It is much too late for all of that, and that really should be plain to everyone.

At no time since 1861 have Americans been divided to a greater extent by political differences, cultural warfare, and contending sets of worries about the republic’s future. It also seems likely that Americans of 1861 –probably more southerners than northerners — also shared a deep disgust with the inability of their national government to resolve decades-old problems like slavery, tariffs, and western expansion. There also was a festering anger among many southerners at all levels of society for the rhetorical abuse that had been relentlessly heaped upon them by the North’s abolitionists, novelists, editors, and politicians for their region’s economic backwardness, aristocratic tendencies, and slave holding. On the civil war’s eve, Senator Judah Benjamin (D-Louisiana) told his senatorial colleagues that “the heart of the matter was not so much what the abolitionists and Republicans had done or might do to the South, as it was the things they said about the South — and the moral arrogance with which they said them.” Benjamin simply told his colleagues that words can kill — and they did, and will again. [2] (NB: This savage rhetoric was not unlike that which has been for thirty years piled upon American conservatives and traditionalists by the Democrats and their enslaved ethnic, sexually deviant, illegal alien, and feminist plantation-dwellers.) The scenario shaped by these factors yielded a savage four-year civil war, fought by the North mainly to preserve the Union, not to end slavery.

The war cost more than 620,000 dead, devastated large areas in the southern states, and resulted in a joint military/carpet-bagger occupation of much of the territory of southern America by their sometimes vengeful and always avaricious fellow northern Americans. But there were no executions exacted from the reckless motivators of the civil war — Northern abolitionists and Southern Fire-Eaters — and only one from the political leaders, generals, subordinate officers, sailors, and infantrymen of the Confederacy.

Still, the memory of fiercely acrimonious antebellum debates, the costs of war, and the post-war military occupation of the South yielded a deeply divided population and it took more than a century to reunite it into a single people and country. If I recall correctly, the city of Vicksburg did not mark Independence Day after Appomattox until 4 July 1944. Though lengthy, this reconciliation process reestablished a bond among Americans from both sections that survived world wars, depression, cold war, over-taxation, unnecessary interventionist wars, inundation by illegal foreigners, and the emergence of a near-tyranny in the guise of the national government.

One might suppose that if post-1865 Americans could work their way back to unity, their contemporary counterparts could do the same. Certainly, that seems to be the rather engrained and media-pushed popular assumption, just join hands and all will come right.

I think that is a fantasy. Whatever name is appropriate to the political left in these days, there is none among the leftists with whom I would have myself, my children, or grandchildren associated. Indeed, there are none that I would not deem it dishonorable to be associated with. The truth, at least for me, is that there is no longer any discernible common ground between what I will, for the sake of argument, call right and left in the United States. Why would I want to reach out my hand, or ask my elected representative to reach out his hand, to those who want to:

• Destroy the 1^st, 2^nd, and 4^th amendments to the Constitution, the amendments that in combination are indispensable to preserving liberty and republican government. The only reason the Democrats fear the second amendment, and want weapons banned, is that so long as there is a heavily armed citizenry — preferably with military-grade weapons — their desire for absolute, arbitrary, and permanent power cannot be attained. Commonsense makes a palpable lie of the Democrats and the left when they assert they want gun control to “protect children,” such as those killed in Florida on 14 February 2017. Building on that lie, Democrats led by Wasserman-Shultz, who herself is awaiting an espionage indictment, are organizing Parkland’s children and their parents to play fools in marches that will blame the killings on inanimate objects, the banning of which save the children. Only a moron would buy that argument from the Democrats and the left who have, since 1973, championed the murder of more than 60 million unborn Americans and sold their body parts. Sadly, our educational system produces almost nothing but morons, people who have been indoctrinated to ignore commonsense and hew closely to a callous and murderous ideology. Their opposition to and undercutting of the 1^st and 4^th amendments also are aimed at restoring slavery in the United States. Overall, the only defense against the Democrats and their plantation-folk’s deliberate campaign to destroy the Bill of Rights is to continue resist their moves politically, while accumulating high-powered weapons and stocks of ammunition to ensure that as many of them as possible can be killed if their drive toward tyranny seems to be nearing success.
• Inundate the nation with illegally entering foreigners who cannot/will not speak English, who are uneducated and unskilled, and who either cannot or will not assimilate. The Democrats and the left care as much about illegal immigrants as they do about the unborn; that is, they matter only as tools. In the first instance to celebrate the only feminist success — abortion (aka: premeditated/unpunished murder) — and, in the latter, to create herds of ignorant, cattle-like voters, most coming from semi- or fully authoritarian nations. People, in other words, who do not understand Anglo-American liberties and so cannot handle them responsibly, but who will form the base on which the Democrats’ bid for power ultimately depends. I will not peacefully agree to be ruled by a government of any party whose support depends on such republic-destroying human refuse. Perhaps others will. I will not.
• Surrender our sovereignty and independence to some kind of “world government,” which, by definition, could only rule by diktat, military coercion, and reeducation camps. We are already saddled with a war on drugs framed by the UN, and are for some reason afraid of what the Third-World-dominated UN and the capitulate-to-Islam EU will think if we control immigration and our borders. We barely escaped paying for world government when Trump walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris Climate Accord. With sovereignty, independence, and enormously reduced immigration, legal and illegal, America can take care of itself and be a good international citizen. Without those attributes, Americans will be the slaves and funders of worldwide authoritarianism, which the Democrats intend to preside over in North America.
• Murder infants for the purpose of persuading women to believe that because they are allowed — and often encouraged — to murder other human beings at will, they are the equal of men. Those supposedly mature women — now wearing clothing in public that is meant to resemble their genitals — do not seem to recognize that they can never be the equal of any man who merits being called a man, namely, those men who are willing to risk life-and-limb to protect children and kill, without qualm, those who threaten them. These women also have been duped into thinking that because they are free ruin a man’s career, reputation, and family by simply claiming to have been offended by his speech, actions, looks, or fists they are the equal of men. That is not so. The ability of women to negate the standing legal system by simply weeping and coming up with claims, pictures and/or witnesses — which are easy to manufacture, see Alabama’s recent, stolen senatorial election — of those men who offended them in any number of ways, and ruin them thereby, is nothing more than a return to one of the Democratic Party’s hallowed and definitive traditions — the lynching of its enemies. Women who are physically attacked by men, of course, have every right to take them to court and seek a conviction. In this republic, no one — male or female — is guilty until that guilt is proven in court, and no pre-guilty-decision punishment, save arrest and perhaps incarceration without bail, can be imposed. Many women seem to believe they are above the law — a status given them by power-hungry Democrats, the media, and cowardly Republican politicians — but they are not. Currently, these women are riding for the fall that generally comes to creatures of their kind, namely, people who combine the traits of liars, slanderers, self-proclaimed demigods, murderers, and willing toys of Hollywood directors and pornographers. A well-merited and hopefully painful fall is more than their due, and it is long overdue.
• Institutionalize racism through the educational system they have subverted and now control. In this system, teachers assert that the history of the republic is a shameful nightmare; that pitting the component parts of the citizenry against each other in terms of ethnicity, gender, race, language, faith, and sexual normality and deviancy are the only ways to unite the country; and that all white people are responsible are for all of the nation’s problems, past and present. Students are taught that illegal aliens are protected by the Constitution; that border control and voter IDs are tools of racist whites; and that Confederate statues and battle flags are signs of racism, rather than the truly effective tools of national reconciliation they have irrefutably proven to be over the past 150-plus years. If some Black Americans, Antifa, BLM, Black Panthers, white intellectuals, and BAM — all slaves of the Democrats — say that they do not like the icons and want them destroyed, the only reasonable response to them is “tough shit,” accompanied by the restoration of those symbols of our republic’s history and post-Civil War reconciliation to their places of honor by well-armed national guard or regular military units.
• Distort and/or prohibit the use of language they find disagreeable or, more accurately, threatening to their plans to permanently seize power. This campaign is so idiotic and unconstitutional that even a modicum of commonsense would cause it to be drained-off into the sewer where it belongs, alongside its demented advocates. But commonsense is not in season; indeed, it may have fled North America. The laws that punish individuals or groups for “hate speech” are clearly violations of the 1^st Amendment, and laws that assert that there are far more than two genders — and those that provide for punishing people who deny that clearly absurd dictum — are sure signs that their proponents are unable to understand the simple reality of the line that absolutely divides sexual normality from sexual deviancy. The Democrats and the left, of course, are champions of perversion of all sorts, especially among the young. They are led on perversion front — naturally enough — by a female Supreme Court justice who believes that children would benefit from lowering the age of consent to twelve.

The foregoing attributes of contemporary times amount to a pre-civil war environment, which the Democrats, the left, and their media jackals now claim that they yearn for, recently using as their spokesman the Hollywood cretin/blimp Rob Reiner. They seem to think that they have invented the idea, as they have listened to none of their deplorable countrymen for nearly half a century. As a result, and most wonderfully, they strongly believe that warrior Reiner’s words about being prepared for “the last battle of the civil war” will strike fear into those who oppose the Democrats and their hatred for the republic.

This kind of fatal misperception occurred once before in American history. When Jefferson Davis and his lieutenants determined on secession and then shelled Fort Sumter, they did so on the basis of Abraham Lincoln’s election not on any overt act by which the national government attacked the constitutional rights of the southern states. Constitutional rights for the south were safe under Lincoln at the moment the war began, but Davis and his colleagues started the southern rebellion believing that Lincoln’s assurances were lies; that not all of the north would fight, and so the full power of the northern states would not be applied; and that, in any event, the military prowess and innate valor and courage of Southerners would prevail. They were incorrect, and by attacking a federal fort they rallied much of the north around the issue of preserving the union — not ending slavery — they started a war that the South ultimately lost.

The Democrats, the left, and their Black, deviant, ethnic, terrorist, and feminist coolies seem to have the same kind of misperception about today’s loyal Americans that the Confederates had of northerners in their day. In most ways, the Democrats’ misperceptions are likely to be more lethal than those the Southerners. The Confederates fought to preserve the rights they honestly believed to be their birthright under the Constitution. The Democrats, et al., however, make no such assertion; indeed, they manifest, at every turn, a burning hatred for the republic, the Constitution, and those who are loyal to the rule of law, demand equality before the law, and support the union and the ability of Americans to maintain their liberties with force if necessary. They must no longer be seen as potential partners in governing the country, they are the enemies of most Americans, their history, their language, families, and faith, and the definition of America found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If they will not reform themselves into a reasonable configuration of a U.S. citizen, they must be eradicated root and branch.

Here is where the hate-driven blindness of baldy Reiner and his ilk in regard to their foes dooms their cause. If he and his anti-republic followers press the issue — especially in regard to the 1^st, 2^nd,, and 4^th Amendments, and state and local governments refusing to execute their obligations as members of the union — and believe they will not be resisted, they are in for a surprise. In 1861, William T. Sherman told several of his pro-secession friends in Louisiana that,

You speak so lightly of war. You do not know what you are talking about. … You mistake … the people of the North. They … are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it. … Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with … in the end you will surely fail.” [2]

Warrior-blimp Reiner and his associates need only to replace the phrase “people of the North” in the foregoing quotation with the phrase “people of Constitutional order” and they will begin to see those who will — courtesy of the 2^nd Amendment — slaughter them if that becomes the sole remaining option for preserving our constitutional republic. As Sherman noted, Reiner and the Democratic left “will surely fail” and they will be dead and, most assuredly, unlamented.

Endnotes

1. Senator Benjamin is quoted in Don E. Fehrenbacher. Sectional Crisis and Southern Constitutionalism. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana University Press, 1995, p. 31
2. Sherman is quoted in James Lee McDonaugh. William Tecumseh Sherman. In the Service of My Country, A Life. New York and London: W.W. Norton and Company, 2016, p. 234

Mr. President:

Well done on releasing the Nunes memo, Sir. But for our republic, it is, sadly, only the first step, and multiple tougher ones are to come. The mainstream media are already saying that the memo is fraud, or that it there is nothing illegal in it. That mad sack of shit McCain has said the memo is irrelevant and has urged on the Mueller investigation. Your own CIA Director and FBI Director tried to stop the memo’s publication. (NB: Those two must go, Mr. President, they are disloyal, disgraces to their organizations, and liars when it comes to their oaths of office.) You have a big, arduous, and troubling task ahead, Mr. President, but you must, as President Reagan — peace be upon him — once said stay the course, and be perfectly and enduringly bloody minded.

You are in a fix, Mr. President, but your not alone. Those who voted for you remain loyal, 2nd Amendment-equipped, and eager to help. And I must think that the last American institution with integrity, courage, unlimited talent in many fields, and loyalty to the U.S. Constitution — the U.S. Marine Corps — would be eager to help and could make itself felt.

You also should recall — and perhaps publicly thank — the alternative media outlets and their reporters, commentators, and analysts that have helped mightily to bring us to this happy day. Without them, only the Democrats and their paid media whore-jackals would have been heard, and you may already have been impeached.

In this vein, I think especially of Infowars, Lionel, The Still Report, Styxenhammer666, Mike Cernovich, Jerome Corsi, William Binney, Joe diGenova, Roger Stone, Jack Posobiec, Brandon Tatum, Alex Jones, Q-Anon, and H.A. Goodman. They have done the heavy, alternative-media lifting for you and for truth, Mr. President, and they have been rhetorically and physically attacked, censored, and economically damaged for doing so, There are also many other alternative-media outlets, commentators, and analysts who are publishing the truth, and I fail to mention them only because I cannot focus on many more than I am at the moment.

Press on, Mr. President. Without your cunning and courage, your voters, and your alternative-media advocates of the truth, the republic would be a dead letter. But much remains to be revealed, Sir, and many miscreants remain to be punished.

The elected and appointed members of the United States national government seem to be incapable of recognizing that there is a radically and perhaps permanently disaffecting impact on the citizenry’s affection and loyalty for it when that government’s does nothing to end — or at least confront — the problems that endanger the republic’s survival. This failure to act and resolve easily resolvable problems is best seen at the moment in the prolonged period that it is taking to publish the memo written by Representative Nunez.

There seems to be nothing in that memo has anything to do with America’s overseas enemies, so the claim that its release would harm national security is a lie. All Americans and most of the rest of the world know that disclosure of the memo poses no threat of identifying invaluable sources and methods. NSA’s satellites, computers, and other technological tools — and perhaps similar CIA assets — have been publicly spoken off ad nauseum as the means by which the coup-fueling intelligence was collected. The heavily worn sources-and-methods defense against publication is thus also a lie. No one needs to know what specific technological tools that were used to collect the intelligence. If a sourcing statement is needed they can simply say “according to techie stuff,” which gives nothing away. These are lies that would not even fool a dolt like the average journalist.

The release of Nunez’s memo is being delayed because it contains the names of the coups’s leading FBI, DoJ, CIA, NSA, and National Security Council participants; the fact that Obama was and is at the helm of the effort; and that Republicans like McCain, Graham, Corker, Collins, and Flake probably were allied with the coup-makers. The delay also is meant to give Mueller a few more days to indict President Trump, and thereby make the truth look like a fabrication to hide Trump’s guilt. The delayers on both sides of the aisle are not after justice and/or the protection of sources/methods, they are trying to suppress data that will yield the magnificent and long overdue annihilation of much of the bipartisan governing elite.

A few other desperate points seem to be worth making:

Rule of Law

What to say about the unfolding story emanating from the criminals who lead Department of Justice and the FBI? First, I think it again underscores the shimmering brilliance of the Founders’ decision to leave their posterity the 2^nd Amendment. At the moment, its seems pretty clear that the FBI and DOJ were in cahoots in an effort to make sure Hillary Clinton was elected, and, when that failed, they immediately began a multi-front effort to remove President Trump from the presidency. I, of course, do not know how all of this is going to wash out. But if the story continues to proceed along its present trajectory, the Trump administration will have to arrest, indict, try, and incarcerate Obama, Hillary and Bill Clinton, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, James Comey, Robert Mueller, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, Michael Morrell, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, John Brennan, Phil Mudd, James Clapper, Valerie Jarret, and multiple dozens of others whose names and places of employment will become known to the citizenry as time passes. If the Trump administration fails to prosecute and convict, offers plea deals to the major players, or simply cocks-up the prosecution, the responsibility for cleaning out the maggots will pass to the citizenry. At that point, there will be no choice for Americans eager to preserve their country and constitution but to execute these miscreants — with guns or ropes, it does not matter which, but I would prefer public hangings — to prevent their reentry into society, or their escape to foreign lands to rest and then plot another attempt to destroy the republic. A refusal by the Trump administration to inflict all the punishment the law allows on these lawless copperheads will be the clear signal that no American leader is willing to restore the rule of law and equality before the law. In turn, that will mean it will be up to everyday Americans to use their 2^nd Amendment rights — as the Founders intended — to destroy those of their fellow countrymen who have built the tyranny that the U.S. government is today, as well as those who have been their funders (Soros, etc.), censors (Zuckerberg, Dorsey, etc.) street thugs (Antifa, BAM, BLM, etc.), abettors (Pelosi, Schiff, Finestein, McCain etc.), and media shills (too many to name, but Bill Kristol, Joe Scarborough, and Shepard Smith would be a good start).

Afghanistan

The media this week reported that 1,000 more U.S. troops and a squadron of A-10 aircraft — the Thunder Bolt II, but widely known as the “Warthog” — have been sent to Afghanistan. With these additions, the Trump administration has almost doubled the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan since the inauguration. The additions are solid evidence that the Afghan war is still lost and cannot be turned around. For the past six months, U.S. air forces have pounded hell out of targets associated with the Taliban and the Islamic State — and have had no impact on turning the war’s tide. (NB: They also are reported to have destroyed the growing opium crops, which is a small, one-time negative for the heroin-traffickers, which in the short term, will drive up their profits — as they sell reserves and wait for next year’s crop — unless chemicals were used to make the growing fields permanently barren.) The addition of more troops, and especially the superb ground-support A-10 aircraft, strongly suggests that U.S. commanders know that their programs to train an effective Afghan military have utterly failed — not even the capital of Kabul can be secured — and that they now have no choice but to try dig the mujahideen out of caves, mountains, and other difficult topography and kill them to a man. If this is the case, such a strategy would cause a steady increase in U.S. military casualties; require greatly increased funding, fueling further Afghan thievery; open the door for more and more troops because, as the Neocons’ will chant “we have suffered too much to give up now;” and still bring us no closer to any of the goals identified by President Trump and his generals. It is not time to cut and run home, it is time to cut and sprint home.

The FBI

The recent exposure of the sedition, arrogance, and criminality at the top and next-to-top levels of FBI leadership caused me to reflect on my own dealings with the FBI from 1992 until 2004, and especially from 1996 to 2004. Those dealings with FBI officers left me with a decided bias against them. They always seemed to be me to have three priorities: (1) the FBI’s reputation, (2) their own career advancement; and (3) making sure they never shared any information. Leaving aside my perceptions, the fact is that they were always against any attempt to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants. They helped, for example, to prevent the execution of a covert operation to capture Khalid Shaykh Muhammad in Qatar, and instead supported the National Security Council (NSC) and State Department plan to ask Qatar to extradite KSM to the United States. The latter plan won, the request was made to Qatar, and KSM disappeared and was not seen again until a few months before 9/11. On another occasion, the FBI counterterrorism chief told us there was no reason for the FBI to assist in capturing bin Laden if they did not credit for the event. A few weeks later the FBI and NSC blocked an attempt to capture bin Laden and turn him over to an Arab country that knew how to keep a secret. Another attempt to capture bin Laden was quashed when the FBI sided with George Tenet, John Brennan and the then-U.S. ambassador in Saudi Arabia to cancel a capture-attempt operation because the Saudis opposed it — to this day I wonder which of those worthies told the Saudis about the secret operation — and promised to get bin Laden from the Taliban themselves, but not turn him over to us. As always with Saudi promises on bin Laden, nothing happened except silence. Granted that this is a pretty small sample, but it does suggest a certain attitude among senior FBI officers — and CIA and NSC officers, for that matter — that never places the United States and the lives of its citizens at the top of their priority lists.

One other point on this issue. There is a mantra currently being spoken by anyone who condemns senior FBI leaders for trying to fix the election for Hillary and then to oust President Trump. It goes along the following line: “Of course, we are not condemning the lower-level, hardworking FBI officers who are all over the country working to keep Americans safe.” Now, my own experience with the officers who are the recipients of that lavish paean, would move me to temper, just a bit, its universal application. The working-level FBI officers I dealt with from 1994 until 2004 all feared their supervisors, trembling at even the thought of a harsh word directed at them from him. First, they were all we-do-what-were-told men, never asked a question about a decision — even if it hurt U.S. interests — and were, based on my experience, the perfect kind of foot soldiers for executing without question the recent seditious activities of Comey and his lieutenants. (NB: How many of these work-a-day FBI officers, pray tell, have resigned and spoken publicly about the cabal?) Second, they were all classified-document thieves. Each working-level FBI officer I managed or knew of over the decade just mentioned did not hesitate to steal CIA documents, sometimes illegally carrying them out in briefcases and at other times filling empty copy-paper boxes to the brim with them. They were not much good at disguising their robberies, however, and were often reported for their thefts, as well as for their discussion of classified materials over unsecure telephones. But they were ultimately protected by the senior-most CIA officers and allowed to continue to work — and steal — in CIA headquarters. For reasons unclear to me, the top CIA leaders always seemed to fear the FBI, and so blithely and deliberately refused to do their sworn duty to protect sources and methods, as well as to punish those who put them at risk.

Empathy

President Trump, the elite of his party, the Democrats and their beloved criminals, slaves, and automatons, and most of the media seem to neither fully recognize nor perhaps even sense that everyday, working Americans are fresh out of empathy for illegal aliens. It apparently surprises the elite that empathy grows thin as the illegals kill, rape, mow-down while driving drunk, steal from, and rob thousands of genuine Americans. Working Americans have been paying for the well-being and defense of foreigners since the Marshall Plan; spending their kids’ lives since 1950 on losing wars that only the governing elite finds worthwhile; and watching their nation being overrun by uneducated, unskilled, non-English-speaking, and illegal immigrants who live on the dole; add massively to the cost of the school and health systems the citizenry funds, and illegally vote in elections to defeat the commonsense politicians, policies, and frugality Americans support. These illegals also come from countries without experience with republican government, only with corrupt authoritarian regimes and societies, so they naturally vote for Democrats ready to keep them on the dole, and give them legal privilege over the native-born and legal immigrant/citizen, in return for their vote. Empathy can be a worthy emotion, but it is not remotely worthy when it means Americans must be happy to commit and fund national, linguistic, and historical suicide by turning their country over to a great host of foreign scavengers who contribute little or nothing to the economy and work actively to destroy society’s cohesion. Damn them all, Mr. President, including the so-called Dreamers. Get all of them them out of the United States, Mr. Trump, and build the wall to seal them and their like out of this republic forever.

Mr. President:

When I last wrote to you and asked whether you had any idea of what the term “America First” means, I focused on the single issue of moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I chose that issue because it seemed to me to betray your lack of knowledge about how many billions of dollars, thousands of lives, and the broad and steadily deepening international hatred that move and our overall relationship with Israel have cost the republic. You also seemed just as ignorant of what the yield on our investment in supporting Israel has been. Well, just FYI, it has yielded nothing but a reliably disloyal, domestic Jewish-American fifth column; a sophisticated Israeli intelligence network that suborns Americans to steal or sell secret U.S. military, industrial, and technological data for Israel’s use or for it to sell to our enemies; and a suborned Congress that really is overwhelmingly more responsive to Israel’s monetary and political demands than it is to the needs of, say, U.S. veterans, the nation’s infrastructure, or our malnourished children. There has never been a more historically accurate analysis of the always dreadful results of American interventionism — the polar opposite of America First — than that written about our unquestioning support for Israel by America’s second greatest diplomat, George F. Kennan. On 25 April 1978, Kennan wrote in his diary that the United States had built “a fateful tie to the Israelis from which we have, in contradistinction to the Israelis, everything to lose and nothing to gain.” (1)

George Kennan, Mr. President, was a late-comer to America First, but come he did, and so there may yet be hope for you. But that hope, Sir, can only be nourished by you beginning to think for yourself, trusting your instincts, and either ignoring or shedding yourself of the Neocons-in-U.S.-nationalist-clothing that surround you, people like McMaster; Tillerson — each time his mouth opens out comes Condoleeza Rice’s voice, Niki Hailey, who eagerly whores for Israel at the UN, but refuses to protect the symbols of American tradition and history in South Carolina; and a host of other military officers, appointed officials, retired generals, and civil servants who are either acolytes or paid shills of the Globalists, Neocons, or Israel Firsters. You have a lot of fish to fry, Mr. President, but the easiest road to America First in the foreign-affairs realm is a policy based on quiet observation from afar and resolute non-interventionism. The national government’s consistent abstention from involvement in international events that do not threaten U.S. survival, together with the building of an insurmountable wall along the Mexican border, would bring the greatest degree of genuine national security Americans have experienced since Wilson unnecessarily took the republic to war in 1917 because his personal “ideals” were offended.

But let me move past Israel. With respect, Mr. President, many of your recent foreign-policy decisions could have been authored by commonsense-less, Wilsonians like Obama, either Bush, or the Clintons. For example,

• Ukraine: The media report that the national government recently sent high-powered weaponry to the Ukrainian government’s military. Why, Mr. President? The problem in Ukraine is not Putin and Russia, but the EU and U.S. democracy mongers and media who overthrew a pro-Russia government and installed an increasingly fascist regime that wants EU and NATO membership. When the EU, the BBC, the UN, George Soros, and Hillary’s State Department deposed one regime for another, Putin did the right thing to protect Russia’s national security by re-annexing Crimea, which is home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. The EU, the media, Obama, and Hillary expected Putin to react to their coup in Kiev as supinely as European politicians do to the quickly proliferating plague of Muslim rapists of women and children that is inundating the EU. Instead, Putin reacted as a Russian patriot and left them — and McCain and Graham — to ally the West with a corrupt and authoritarian regime in Kiev and crazily sputtering like the eunuchs they are. Stop sending weapons to Ukraine, Mr. President, it is a policy that once again has America taking not first, but only the usual stinking hindmost, which is the EU’s desperation for American taxpayers — and perhaps blood — to get them out of the mess their hubris and dilettantism created in Ukraine.
• Iran: Mr. President the only principle that those who elected you demand you always obey is “America First”. No part of your base, or, I would presume, 80-percent of the republic’s entire population, gives a good god-damn about either who rules in Tehran or who can vote in Iran. You, Sir, apparently have succumbed to the now 40-year-old drumbeat that tells Americans that Iran is a threat to the United States. If Iran is a threat to the United States — which it is not, at least in a life-and death sense — it is the result of two actions by the national government: (a) unenforced immigration laws that have permitted Iran’s surrogate Hezbollah to establish narcotics networks and urban-based, Islamic, no-go zones in, at least, New York, Florida, California, Michigan, Illinois, and Texas, and (b) the unnecessary U.S. military intervention in Iraq — which you have prolonged — that placed U.S. troops in the Arab world’s heartland where they are, with a minimum of effort, easy pickings to be killed by Iran’s forces and surrogates. Stop talking about the unrest in Iran, Mr. President, and let the Iranians work out their own future, even if it requires a bloodbath. The best your intervention can do in Iran, Sir, is to produce a nearly identical nightmare to that generated by the Obama-Hillary-EU campaign supporting the “Arab Spring”; namely, tens of thousands of dead Muslims, more Muslim authoritarianism, more support for radical Islamism, more Muslim refugees, and less U.S. security. Get a grip, Mr. President, your job is to defend the American republic. Let the Iranians go their own way, stop Tillerson’s State Department from surreptitiously stirring up dissent in Iran, and henceforth focus on saving the republic through the only means now remaining — restoring the rule of law and equality before the law.
• Afghanistan: When you were running your company, Mr. Trump, did you often turn for advice to other businessmen and companies that had been completely unsuccessful because they had blindly followed what they believed to be a sacrosanct business model for more than 50 years? Since you ran a successful company, I presume you did not. But as president you are now following the advice of generals who belong to — now that the Cubs have won a World Series — the losingest organization in the United States, the republic’s general officer corps. The Afghan War, Sir, was lost because these men and women have no idea of how to fight a war. They lost in Afghanistan — and Iraq — to an enemy that has been in the field since 1979, has no air cover or navy, no secure bases, no heavy artillery, almost no armor, and which wields a hodgepodge of arms that run the gamut from top-of-the-line Kalashnikovs to 19^th Century Lee-Enfields. Your, generals, Mr. President, could not beat the Islamists in 2001, and they will lose to them again in 2018 or 2019, especially as Islamic State fighters are steadily moving into Afghanistan from Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. Take it from me, Mr. President, I have worked on Afghanistan since 1985 and I can recognize a botched and irretrievably lost foreign invasion of that country when I see one. Pull all U.S. forces — military, intelligence, and civil — out of Afghanistan now, provide no additional financial aid (use the savings for the border wall), and forcibly retire the generals who gave their countrymen this now 17-year-old deathtrap and money pit. Afghanistan, after all, poses no national security threat to the republic, and Americans, rightly so, do not give a hoot who rules in Kabul. Our immediate withdrawal will save military lives and limbs, free up money for domestic purposes or debt pay-down, and, best of all, leave Russia and China to bleed and spend in what will ultimately be a failed mutual effort to prevent their life-and-death national interests from being attacked by the Islamist forces now assembling in Afghanistan. Get out, Mr. President, while the getting is good The mas of commonsense-driven Americans are ready to overwhelmingly approve and applaud the withdrawal.
• Pakistan: Dear God, Mr. President, as a businessman did you expect other businessmen to do things to help you that would ruin their reputations and/or companies if you simply slipped them a few boxes of cash? I, again, presume that this is not a business model on which you would hang your hat. But Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Cheney, Obama, Hillary Clinton, and their — now your —generals eagerly did so. One of the greatest and most consistent failures of U.S. presidents, strategists, and generals is to assume that all countries will do things we want done for a bribe, more commonly known as “foreign aid” and/or “foreign military aid”. That foreign regimes will always take the money is a truism; that they will do things that hurt their nation’s genuine interests or their hold on power in return for money is seldom true. Pakistan was an exception. Under President Musharraf, the Pakistani military and intelligence services captured several dozen senior al-Qaeda leaders and turned them over to us; stood aside and let us destroy the Taliban regime that they had labored mightily to help build; allowed the U.S. State Department to oversee the emplacement of a strong Indian presence in Kabul and along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan; and, finally staged aggressive military offensives into the country’s border provinces that brought Pakistan to the edge of civil war, where it still hangs. In short, Musharraf’s Pakistan did more than any other U.S. ally in Afghanistan to assist the United States fight its war. But U.S. leaders wanted — then and now — Pakistan to win the war for America, although commonsense should have made this a momentary delusion, not a dominating, two-decade dogma. There was never a chance that Pakistan would do all what we wanted. Why? Because Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were not enemies of Pakistan until Musharraf made them so at our behest; because no Pakistani regime that helped kill or capture bin Laden could survive in a state whose population and military/intelligent services are increasingly militant in their Islamic faith; and because no Pakistani regime can ever permit its national security and even survival to be permanently endangered by creation of a pro-Western, pro-Indian, non-Islamist, and ambivalent-toward-Iran regime in Kabul. Clear you head, Mr. President, and recognize that America has lost in Afghanistan because it was unwilling to do its own heavy lifting and because of its mad adherence to the daft and basically Pakistan-and-Afghanistan-ignorant policy of trying to buy victory with foreign aid. Lasting victory has never been achievable in Afghanistan for non-Sunni Muslims, Mr. President, so get out of there, leave the Pakistanis — like the Afghans — with no U.S. aid; chalk up the evacuation as another fulfilled campaign promise; forcibly retire more generals; and turn the mess over to Russia and China, both of which are non-Muslim countries that will be ultimately defeated there.

In closing, Mr. President, let me add that there is some urgency to complete the above-mentioned easy tasks. Get them off America’s plate, Sir, as two far worse foreign-affairs problems are just around the corner. First, Iraq and Syria are near the edge of a Sunni-Shia sectarian war, within which smaller wars between and among local tribes and ethnic groups will thrive, and the Islamic State and al-Qaeda will begin clawing back power. (NB: And do not listen to your advisers on this issue. The massive U.S. reconstruction aid they will urge you to spend to prevent the coming chaos will neither slow nor stop its advent and progress.) Second, in North Africa, while U.S. and the EU officials and experts have rejoiced in the Islamic State’s loss of the Libyan city of Surt, IS and al-Qaeda have regrouped in southern Libya and are already spreading their forces from there into western, eastern, and southern Africa, with enough leftover to begin rekindling the jihad in northern Libya. The Islamists concentration in southern Libya, moreover, also allows them to reinforce the Sinai Peninsula with men and arms, a condition which may lead to more Egyptian military defeats there and even an Islamist rebellion in Cairo and elsewhere in Egypt proper. Face facts on this one, Mr. President, Egyptian President al-Sisi’s days are numbered.

There is nothing sane that an American president can do to short-circuit the occurrence of these approaching disasters, so it is best that you get the easily solved problems of Ukraine, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan out of the way. Thereafter, Sir, prepare yourself to resist the intense pressure from Necons, Globalists, Israel-Firsters, Congress, the generals, and much of the media that will be loosed on you when the Islamists’ African campaign gathers pace and the usual war-mongering subjects in the United States slither out from under their rocks begin to clamor for a war to “liberate Africa”.

As you buckle on your armor for that fight, Mr. President, you should always remember, that non-interventionism is a concept dearly beloved by non-elite Americans, working men and women who see no reason to spend their taxes and children’s lives on always fractious foreigners who hate the United States but love its money. Tax cuts are swell, Mr. President, but non-killed soldier-children are endlessly better. Those same people, Sir, also recall that you sold yourself to them as the champion of a non-interventionism, and can only believe that, to date, you have been close to an utter sham on that score. Words to the wise.

Endnotes:

1. Frank Costigliola, (Ed.). The Kennan Diaries. New York: W.W. Norton, 2014, Entry for 31 July 1978, p. 509

Mr. President:

Your decision on Jerusalem, and the speech in which you announced it, are as far from any form of an America First foreign policy as it is possible to be. Your speech was a grab-bag of tired rhetoric, earnest platitudes, and wishful thinking, much like your earlier speech on Afghanistan. Your citing of the Congress’s near-unanimous support for moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, moreover, suggests we elected the wrong man to go after and eliminate the corruption that has engulfed the national government. The near-unanimity of Congress, as you must know, is bought by the bribes disguised as campaign contributions paid to the so-called representatives of the citizenry by the disloyal political, social, and financial leaders of the Jewish-American community, and their enforcers in propaganda outlets such as Commentary, the Weekly Standard, Forward, and others.

When you were thinking through the decision, Mr. President, did you ask yourself the question, “What does the United States get from taking this action?” If so, what did you identify as the advantage accruing to the United States? In your statement, you specifically said that the decision to move the embassy was in the interest of the American people. Well, how will it benefit them? You seemed to indicate that moving the embassy would aid the peace process. Mr. President, there is no peace process. The religious war between Israeli Jews and Muslims will continue until one or the other is wiped out. Happily, a quick look at the map will tell you that neither outcome would hurt U.S. interests nor degrade the nation’s security.

As always, Mr. President, you surely have at hand more information than any of your critics, and so your decision might be supported by what is often too loosely termed intelligence. What it is not informed by, sir, is common sense.

Mr. President, the United States has been involved in a “religious war” with Islam since Osama bin Laden declared war on the republic in 1996; that is, for more than 21 years. For all of those years, your predecessors and now you have railed against that reality, preaching nonsense about the war having “nothing to do with religion,” that the Islamists have bastardized Islam and it is really a “religion of peace,” and that the Islamists should not be considered anything but cowards, nihilists, bad guys, extremists, or some other term that would help hide from Americans the reality of the religious war in which the republic is mired.

This use of obfuscating terminology, Mr. President, might soothe the minds of the multiculturalists and politically correct, but they do not change the enemy’s mind about what he is fighting for, which was in 1996, and is today, to break the U.S. economy, to stop U.S. military, political, social, and economic interventionism — you know, the things that contradict any sane understanding of America First — in the Islamic world, to end the rule of Arab tyrants, to destroy Israel, and then to annihilate the Shia. If your senior advisers and generals have not explained this to you, and you believe that you are fighting pseudo-religious gangsters and winning, you are simply wrong on both counts.

Almost everything you have done in the Muslim world since your inauguration, Mr. President, has reinforced the Islamists’ motivation and helped strengthen and spread their message. Indeed, you have not been different than Obama, Bush, and Clinton, and like them, you have opened the door for more war with the Islamists. In this religious war, Mr. President, your administration’s actions have

• Reinforced the hatred of the Islamists — and Muslims generally — for U.S. military intervention. From the cruise-missile strike in Syria, to the “mother-of-bombs” in Afghanistan, to sending additional troops to Iraq, Afghanistan, and — for the first time — Syria to intensifying drone strikes in several locations in Africa, America’s reputation for having no regard “for Muslim Blood” has been amplified. The formula is simple, Mr. President, more intervention = confirmation of the mujahideen’s narrative = greater traction for the Islamists among Muslim youth = an unending religious war that is helping to break the U.S. economy.
• Reinforced the Muslim world’s belief that the U.S. national government wants them to be ruled by tyrants. Your cordial visit to and subsequent consistent praise and support for the current and future Saudi tyrants; your very public efforts to build a strong relationship with the Egyptian tyrant-president, installed by an Obama/Hillary Clinton supported military coup; and your well-publicized support for the Philippine President Duterte’s martial-law-backed war with Islamists associated with the Islamic State have all been pitch-perfect in harmonizing Bin Laden’s declaration of war and the stated positions of the Islamic State.
• Reinforced the Muslim world’s accurate view that much of the U.S. national government, Congress, and media have been suborned by wealthy and influential Jewish-Americans working for Israel and against genuine U.S. national security interests, which do not include never-ending war with Islam and the need to ensure Israel’s survival. Your administration’s decision to permanently base U.S. troops in Israel and move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem — Islam’s third holiest site — is simply more proof for radical, militant, and nominal Muslims that Israel directs U.S. policy in the Muslim world and that there is no way to change this reality other than war.
• Reinforced the reality first established by George W. Bush and Barack Obama that the United States has sided with Shia Iran and other Shia Muslims to promote Shia expansionism in the Middle East; to subordinate Sunni Muslims in Iraq and Syria to Shia regimes; and to turn a blind eye to the murderous retributions being exacted against Sunnis by the Shia regimes, their police and military forces, and their militias.

Overall, Mr. President, instead of keeping the Sunni Islamists on their back foot after the temporary destruction of their Caliphate, the announcement of your decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem has given them a base from which to start to rebuild their fortunes, as well as an issue that will have broad and enduring traction across the Sunni Muslim, especially among military-age males.

None of the foregoing is to say that the U.S. war with Islam is America’s “fault.” Al-Qaeda attacked us on 9/11, and so they needed to be annihilated. The military you command, Mr. President, has utterly failed to do that, and today is celebrating the defeat of the caliphate, which is, at best, a transient victory that returns the Islamic State to what it does best, which is insurgency.

What the foregoing is meant to say, Sir, is that your decision on Jerusalem and the other actions of your administration noted above are fully consistent with those of Obama, Bush, and Clinton, all of which tenaciously, if wrongheadedly, worked to strengthen the motivation and media appeal of the Islamists, and to spread the international jihad to new areas of the world. Did any of your advisers, for example, tell you to expect an IS-associated Islamist organization in the Philippines to be strong enough to capture and hold the city of Marawi for more than a hundred days? I doubt it.

The time has come, Mr. President, to — as the saying goes — shit or get off the pot. America First means that foreign policy decisions — especially ones dealing with war — are made by answering the single question “Is this in the interests of the American people.” Taking America to war is always the correct choice if the republic’s survival is at risk, otherwise, it is never the right choice. Today, Israel’s survival, the survival of Arab tyrants, the expansion of Shia territory and power, or the survival of European governments that have signed their own peoples’ death warrants by welcoming Muslim immigration and allowing the return of foreign fighters, are not life-or-death interests of the United States. None are worth American blood or dollars.

If you are truly dedicated or at least interested in America First foreign policies, Mr. President, please realize that they begin at home. Begin by (a) squaring with Americans by telling them that the United States is engaged in a religious war that was caused by the Islamists, but that much of the oxygen it needs to thrive is supplied by U.S. interventionism in the Muslim world, which has been the status quo U.S. policy since the presidency of the first Bush; (b) by building the southern border wall immediately as a national-security emergency; (c) by dumping the amnesty-wanting head of DHS that you just appointed and appointing Sheriff David Clark to the post; (d) by immediately designating AIPAC and other Jewish-American organizations as what they are, agents of a foreign power; (e) by beginning to apply the Logan act to all public officials — elected and appointed — who take money from or work on behalf of those organizations; (f) by withdrawing from NATO so as to avoid involvement in Europe’s approaching civil wars, as citizens seek to regain their natural rights from the authoritarian EU and its dedication to imposing Muslim privilege over the native born; (f) by halting all foreign economic and military aid and apply the savings to border control and the large-scale deportation of illegal aliens; and (g) by enforcing all the laws equally against all offending citizens.

This is important, Republic-saving stuff, Mr. President, and you have gotten it all wrong so far. It is time for you to get on the stick and make America First a reality, rather than a vote-gathering throwaway line.

The swirl of events continues, and so I thought I would comment on a couple of them.

The first deals with some media coverage of Judge Roy Moore, but my focus has nothing to do with the sexual-misconduct allegations now being directed at him. What I noticed was a clip from MSNBC in which its correspondent Chuck Todd, after Moore had won the Republican primary, expressed astonishment that Judge Moore believed that each person’s rights — his natural rights — come from God and not from the government. Now, I have written before that most of the Americans I have heard speak in the public square are more or less ignorant of U.S. history, and especially of the period from the Puritans’ arrival in New England through the decades of the early republic. Mr. Todd, however, in his ruminations about Judge Moore and the concept of natural rights, drove home for me how thoroughly ignorant so many U.S. political and media personalities are of the republic’s history and character.

Where, I wonder, does Mr. Todd think his rights come from? From the national government, the UN, George Soros, or some combination thereof? No, that cannot be it, even a bulb as dim as Mr. Todd surely must see that all three of those entities have been laboring for decades to limit and ultimately remove the natural rights of Americans. But, then again, maybe he cannot see that fact as he is part of a media world that supports all three of those rights-removing entities. The Founders — say from John Winthrop’s arrival, through John Quincy Adams’ death — believed that the natural rights of man came from God, and that it was the citizenry’s duty to ensure that the political system they devised to govern themselves did not try to amend, abridge, or abolish those rights. Jefferson, widely but mistakenly said to be irreligious, wrote this into the Declaration of Independence, and John Adams, after studying the Constitution said that no people could be governed by it who were not religious, surely meaning that the Constitution would work only for Christians and Jews.

The role of government, then, is not to create rights — it cannot do so, as the Creator completed that task long ago — but to ensure that the rights with which Americans are born are fully protected by those who govern them. In turn, the role of citizens is to jealously guard their natural rights and, if they are found to be under attack by the national government, to destroy that government and form another that will respect and defend their natural rights. In short, the founding generations believed that God gave man human rights, and governments — if not held to account by the citizenry — tended to gradually destroy them. Come, Mr. Todd, this is such an elementary piece of knowledge about American history. Have you forgotten what you learned in grammar and high school, or did you go to an Ivy League university, where the reality of natural rights is hated and mocked? No matter, sooner or later those politicians who seek to deny citizens their natural rights end up at the business end of a rifle or a rope and are accompanied there by their supporters and apologists.

Next comes Saudi Arabia and its sudden burst of turmoil fomented by the actions of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS). A good deal of the media coverage of this event has portrayed the developments as the first breath of Western-style “progressive reform.” The clever al-Saud royals, of course, earlier set the stage for this sophomoric interpretation by issuing the earth-shaking order that women will be permitted to drive automobiles. Western governments and much of the media identified this order as the opening of a second “Arab Spring,” one in which Riyadh will eventually become Las Vegas east. The al-Sauds surely caught some heat from the Saudi religious establishment over this, but they will throw a couple of extra billions to the senior Islamic scholars and bit more control over education. The scholars will continue to publicly complain about the action, but this is not a break point between the al-Sauds and the religious establishment.

The key question is, I think, whether this will be a break point for Saudi Arabia? If past is prologue, the soon-to-be-king is not do-gooding for a future progressive, more secular kingdom, but rather is making a play to get rid of those — and there are many — whose oxes will be gored when he succeeds to the throne. MBS must get them out of the way, and permanently so, either via exiling them or something more definitive. All this said, the king-in-waiting will still be faced with a country that is terminally corrupt from top to bottom, a religious establishment that has not been tamed and still sees the late Osama bin Laden as a nearly perfect Islamic man, and a younger generation of Salafi and Wahhabi males that are more attuned to the Islamic State’s behavior than to al-Qaeda’s. A large number of the later, moreover, have been trained by one or the other group and have considerable combat experience.

The bottom line may well be that MBS finds that, even after he rounds-up and eliminates his foes, takes their money, and ascends to the throne, his only option to try to preserve the kingdom is to turn Saudi youths, as many IS and AQ fighters as can be enlisted, and as much as possible of the young Sunni Muslim world against Shia Iran. The ensuing war would tear up the region in a prolonged and bloody sectarian war to settle scores that are now more than a millennium old. It is hard to think of a better scenario for improving U.S. security as there is nothing that commonsense would permit us to do other than get out of the way watch. That is, if there is enough commonsense at hand at the time the events unfold.

Finally, as worthless a human being as is the politician John McCain, he recently performed an unwitting but enormous service to his country. Addressing the Naval Academy’s Brigade of Midshipmen on 30 October 2017, McCain, in entirely predictable and self-righteous words, said that

the American example and American leadership are indispensable to securing a peaceful and prosperous future. Our failure to remain engaged in Europe and enforce the hard-won peace of 1918 had made that clear. There could be no more isolationism, no more tired resignation — no more ‘America First.’ … (1)

McCain is, of course, a historical ignoramus or a lair. The United States had no interest at stake in World War 1 and should never have entered a war that cost America about 100,000 lives. Indeed, save for the many billions of dollars U.S. banks had lent to France and Britain, the offended personal “ideals” of Woodrow Wilson, and Wilson’s pro-Allies propaganda ministry led by George Creel, the United States would not have entered the war. In regard to what McCain calls “[o]ur failure to remain engaged in Europe,” that must be deemed the U.S. government’s only wise decision after America entered the war in 1917. The marvelous “failure to remain engaged in Europe” was the result of the work of able and stubborn Republicans senators — Henry Cabot Lodge, George W. Norris, William Borah, Robert La Follette, Hiram Johnson, and a dozen others — who successfully blocked Wilson’s eagerness to sacrifice the republic’s sovereignty and independence by joining the League of Nations. The Republicans’ success also blocked Wilson’s willingness to abide by the League covenant’s Article X — which is like, but more much expansive than the NATO Treaty — which was unconstitutional in that it removed the decision to declare war from the Congress. (2)

Adding to the nonsensical nature of McCain’s assertion is the fact that the European allies — with Wilson’s help — imposed a Carthaginian peace settlement on Germany that played a major role in creating the political environment which allowed Hitler’s rise to power. As long as that settlement stood, a more active U.S. role in Europe would have meant nothing. (3)

Senator McCain then moved on to tell the Midshipmen that their first responsibility was not to America, its citizens, and the commander-in-chief, but rather to the internationalists and interventionists who built a post-1945 world that has featured endless unnecessary wars and has bankrupted the U.S. Treasury. McCain warned his audience that today

the associations, rules, values and aspirations that comprise the international order we have superintended for three-quarters of a century are under gathering attack from regimes that desire a world less just and less free and more corrupt. And they are under attack from forces within liberal democracies themselves, parties that preach resentful nationalism rather than enlightened self-interest, nativism rather than equal justice.

It’s time to wake up.

I believe in Americans. We’re capable of better. I’ve seen it. We’re hopeful, compassionate people. And we still have leaders who will uphold the values that made America great, and a beacon to the oppressed.

But I don’t take that for granted. We have to fight. We have to fight against propaganda and crackpot conspiracy theories. We have to fight isolationism, protectionism, and nativism. We have to defeat those who would worsen our divisions. We have to remind our sons and daughters that we became the most powerful nation on earth by tearing down walls, not building them.

But that isn’t your job. Not directly. It belongs to those of us who hold office and are responsible for making sure you’re sent where you’re needed and equipped and ready for your missions.

You will be asked to defend America’s interests overseas, and thereby to defend the ideals that encompass and transcend those interests. You will protect the international order that American politics, with all its inefficiencies and human frailties, has done so much to create. (4)

McCain’s guidance may not be treason, but it is more of the pure, mindless, and nation-killing hooey that has and will continue to produce unnecessary interventionist wars, dead U.S. military personnel, and staggering national debt. No intelligent nation fights for its ideals anywhere but at home. What it fights for overseas is to protect its genuine national security interests. Those interests are always material or geographical in nature, and they always present the nation with a life-or-death choice. These interests are never, ever trumped by what McCain says are “ideals that encompass and transcend those interests.” (5)

McCain is at the head of the bipartisan pack of interventionists who care nothing about the welfare of Americans, let alone the maintenance of their ideals, which are spelled out with indelible clarity in the U.S. Constitution, not in the UN Charter or any other internationalist document. That McCain and his like are a feral breed is shown by their refusal to put health-care on a sound-footing; reduce the national debt; lessen taxes; stop the ongoing destruction of the 1st and 4th Amendments; halt the production of laws that are moving the nation to minority rule; demand the arrest, trial, and incarceration of the leaders of what is a thoroughly lawless political elite; end illegal immigration; and stop seeking wars against those who threaten, not the United States, but the motley group of the breed’s paymasters, who are to be found in the banking and pharmaceutical industries, Israel, the Jewish-American community, and the Saudi and other Arab tyrannies.

Near the speech’s end, McCain’s told the Midshipmen that it will be their job “to protect the international order that American politics, with all its inefficiencies and human frailties, has done so much to create.”(6) The truth is, however, that if the U.S. military is commanded by those who agree with McCain, the American republic and its Constitution will find themselves murdered by a stab in the back from internationalists, interventionists, and New-World-Order authoritarians. Abiding by McCain’s advice can only mean a last-ditch effort to save the republic by civil war will have to occur.

Endnotes:

1. The full text of McCain’s speech can be found at, http://time.com/5003525/john-mccain-naval-academy-speech/
2. The text of Article X of the League’s covenant reads as follows: “The Members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League. In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled.” See, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/parti.asp
3. World War I is the first 20th century example of the disasters that befall those who wage wars that are left unwon. The German army was not defeated when the Armistice was declared in November, 1918, and yet the allies imposed a peace settlement that treated Germany as if it had been defeated in the manner Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan found themselves beaten in 1945; that is, utterly destroyed militarily. The Allies’ failure to win decisively would later allow Hitler and others to claim that Germany had been defeated by domestic forces — communists and Jews — that stabbed the nation in the back. In the long run, the lack of a decisive win led to World War II and the Holocaust.
4. http://time.com/5003525/john-mccain-naval-academy-speech/
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.

There have been so many noteworthy events occurring in the world that it has been hard to decide which to focus on, and so I have written nothing. It is still not clear, at least to me, which are most important, so I thought it best to look at a few. Here goes.

Niger

The ambush of U.S. Special Forces (SF) in Niger — in which four soldiers were killed — was a small, deadly, and lamentable incident. The deaths have aroused a lot of debate and finger-pointing about why the SF unit was ambushed. Those involved in that debate — the Pentagon spokesmen, the media, senators, and congressmen — are all playing a game in which the goal is find a palatable lie to tell the American people about why their soldiers were sent into a trap in which they died. There is no need for an investigation, there is no mystery. The simple fact, which the president should share with the citizenry, is that the United States has no reliable ally anywhere in the Islamic world. U.S. Marines and soldiers will be killed in all Muslim countries where they are serving by the Islamists they are fighting, as well as by the Islamists who are members of the military and police forces they are sent to “train and assist.” In addition, the local mujahideen in that country will be helped in planning their operations against U.S. forces by Islamists in the military, police, and intelligence services, in the civil service, as well as by private citizens and their Islamic clerics and scholars. The bottom line? U.S. forces in Muslim countries — in Africa and all other regions — will be killed by those they are fighting, by those they are training and assisting, and by the growing numbers of Muslims who hate the presence of U.S. forces in their country, a hatred that will increase and take more tangible and lethal forms the longer U.S. forces remain in their country. This is a fact that is hard to lie about, but the effort will be made by any number of U.S. officials and generals.

Las Vegas

Fifty-eight dead and more than five-hundred wounded in an attack on a country-music concert. The consensus in the media is that this was pro-Trump crowd, and the underlying tone of their pieces is the dead and wounded got what they deserved for electing Trump. That such reporting merits bloody payback for its reporters goes without saying, but lets lay aside for now a discussion of how to exact retribution. What merits intense focus is the FBI’s deceit about what occurred. These days, no matter what happens, FBI leaders grab the same well-thumbed script from the shelf and then recite, mantra-like, that: there was only one shooter; he had no help; a heroic employee stopped the attack; we are examining the shooter’s house, employment history, cars, wallet, mobile phone, bank records, and — in this case — brain tissue; and we cannot find a motive. In Las Vegas, the FBI spokesmen then walk away, showing they are deathly afraid of the casino owners’ willingness to kill them if the truth comes out, that they are determined to keep local cops intimidated and quiet, and that they will see to it that their shills in the media will drop the story. As all this occurred, the FBI looked the other way as the Hispanic non-security guard was hustled to Mexico for hiding and, if necessary, execution. Dear FBI: This drama is unnecessary. No one gives a dead rat’s ass about what you think the motivations of shooters were — yes, dear lawmen, many more than one — because the motive is clear to all, namely, the shooters wanted to kill as many as possible of those they believed were Trump supporters.

Now, G-Men, no one cares about your ballistic tests, your yellow crime-scene tapes, your syrupy pleas for the public’s help, or even about you as fellow human beings, given that you have sold out and no longer enforce the law against elite criminals. We have all seen you at your very best for the past nine years in protecting GPS Fusion and Democrat-Russian cooperation; ignoring Hillary’s innumerable felonies and Comey’s facilitating of them; the spying Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power conducted on Trump’s campaign organization and incoming administration; the Obama approved, Eric Holder-protected, and Lois Lerner-led IRS persecution of conservatives; the play-for-pay game Hillary and her husband and daughter conducted with Russia over U.S. uranium and other matters; Holder’s lethal Fast-and-Furious program and refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers’ for voter intimidation; Loretta Lynch’s tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton and her refusal to prosecute BLM, BAM, or George Soros; and the blind-eye you have turned to greatest non-prosecuted financial crime in the republic’s history, the one that the Clintons and their entourage committed through the illegal-from-the-start Clinton Foundation. I fear, dear FBI badge-wearers, that if you do not soon tell Americans what really happened in Las Vegas, and then round-up the vermin responsible, those in the citizenry who still respect law and revere truth will act to get the answers you already have and are hiding. Time is tick, tocking toward the civil war you are encouraging, or at least toward the point where armed, law-abiding citizens will have no choice but to do your job for you by eliminating those criminals and America-destroyers the FBI cannot even identify, let alone arrest and incarcerate.

Islam is the problem

First, I must admit that I am tempted never to write on this topic again as I have written about it ad nauseam inside the government, when I worked for CIA, and publicly since late 2004. But the media’s coverage of the 31 October 2017 Islamist attack in New York City is so deliberately deceitful that I thought it best to give it another go, using a focus that provides the obvious keys to prevailing against the Islamists. Four points will suffice:

1. Whenever you hear the word “radicalization” you are being duped. What happens to individual Muslims who move into the parts of Islamic theology known as Salafism and Wahhabism — both of which are valid and respected schools of that theology — is best described as “conversion;” that is moving from one valid school to another valid school of the Islamic faith. This conversion does not “radicalize” Muslims, but rather “warriorizes” them and brings them as mujahideen or, “holy warriors,” into Islamic forces. These forces, in turn, draw support, funds, prayers, and manpower from Muslims belonging to all the schools of Islam. They are waging a religious war against the United States, especially its military interventionism; its now nearly defeated European states; Israel; and the U.S./NATO-protected Arab tyrants. For the U.S. and its allies to eternally deny they are engaged in a religious war is both politically correct and fatal.
2. The expensive U.S. and European “de-radicalization” programs have been utter failures and will never work. The programs are simply a cash-rich gravy train for university professors, psychologists, Protestant and Catholic do-gooders, and other chronic losers to draw from and enrich themselves. Any dependence on de-radicalization programs will yield only two results: (a) no reduction in Islamist manpower, and (b) more dead Americans. A British cabinet minister’s recent announcement that the UK will expand the government’s de-radicalization programs — which will include counseling, housing, and job support, but, apparently, no incarceration — to cope with jihadis returning from Syria and Iraq, should be seen for what it is, Great Britain’s death knell. (NB: A UK foreign-ministry official got it right when he said the returning jihadis should just be executed, but he was shouted down by the multiculturalists and the diversifiers) Wisdom begins with an acceptance of the fact that no de-radicalizer is ever going to talk a mujahid out of his faith, or what that faith tells him he needs to do please Allah, protect Islam, and earn salvation.
3. The U.S. government has lied to the American people at every step of the way since Osama bin Laden declared war on the United States in August, 1996. The now two-decade old war against the mujahideen is preeminently a religious war, and, as noted above, it will remain so no matter how often and vociferously the national government denies its existence All of the asininities that U.S. government officials and the media believe and broadcast on this issue — “Islam is a religion of peace,” “the mujahideen are not part of Islam,” “few Muslims support the Islamist fighters,” “Muslim immigrants are not dangerous to U.S. security,” etc. — are irrelevant. Islamist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and increasing numbers of the Muslim world’s younger generations are, and have often said they are, fighting a religious war against the United States. The U.S. government is simply denying reality and, in so doing, is ensuring the non-ending slaughter of Americans and the republic’s eventual move into a martial law status to defend itself. There is no way to create a domestic environment in which the U.S. law-enforcement community can begin to adequately defend America until (a.) the southern border is shut tight; (b.) all immigration from Muslim countries is stopped (the Constitution does not forbid this action; indeed, it would be a return to long-used procedures in which republic picked the countries from which its immigrants would come); and (c) all Muslims who are in the United States illegally are rapidly hunted down and deported.
4. In all future anti-Islamist military engagements overseas, U.S. forces should operate under both Old Glory and a plain Black Flag, the latter simply meaning that no surrenders will be accepted and no prisoners will be taken on the battlefield. To be in a position that forces the adoption of such a deadly policy is a tough business, but it is the predictable cost that must be paid for the national government’s multitude of unnecessary, interventionist, and always lost wars.