“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Sunday, December 13, 2015

The Empire Files - It Will Either Bankrupt Us, Kill Us or Both -- Let's Hope It Bankrupts Us First

 An excerpt from:

A Green Light for the American Empire

Saturday March 14, 2015

...Vocal proponents of the American Empire talk about a moral imperative that requires us to sacrifice ourselves as we try to solve the problems of the world. If there was even a hint this effort was accomplishing something beneficial, it might be more difficult to argue against. But the evidence is crystal-clear that all our efforts only make things worse, both for those we go to teach about democracy and liberty and for the well-being of all Americans who are obligated to pay for this misplaced humanitarian experiment. We must admit that this 25-year war has failed. Nevertheless it’s difficult to argue against it when it requires that that we not endorse expanding our military operations to confront the ISIS killers. Arguments against pursuing a war to stop the violence, however, should appeal to common sense. Recognizing that our policies in the Middle East have significantly contributed to the popular support for radical Islam is crucial to dealing with ISIS. More sacrifices by the American people in this effort won’t work and should be avoided. If one understands what motivates radical Islam to strike out as it does, the solution would become more evident. Voluntary efforts by individuals to participate in the struggle should not be prohibited. If the solution is not more violence on our part, a consideration must be given to looking at the merits of a noninterventionist foreign policy which does not resort to the killing of hundreds of thousands of individuals who never participated in any aggression against United States — as our policies have done since the green light for empire was given.

How is this likely to end? The empire will not be ended legislatively or by the sudden embrace of common sense in directing our foreign policy. The course of interventionism overseas and assuming the role of world policeman will remain for the foreseeable future. Still the question remains, how long will that be since we can be certain that the end of the empire will come. Our military might and economic strength is now totally dependent on the confidence that the worldwide financial markets give to the value of the US dollar. In spite of all the reasons that the dollar will eventually be challenged as the world reserve currency, the competition, at present, by other currencies to replace it, is nil. Confidence can be related to objective facts such as how a country runs its fiscal affairs and monetary policy. Economic wealth and military strength also contribute artificial confidence to a currency. Perceptions and subjective reasons are much more difficult to define and anticipate. The day will come when the confidence in the dollar will be greatly diminished worldwide. Under those conditions the tremendous benefits that we in the United States have enjoyed as the issuer of the reserve currency will be reversed. It will become difficult if not impossible for us to afford huge budget deficits as well as very large current account deficits. National debt and foreign debt will serve as a limitation on how long the empire can last. Loss of confidence can come suddenly and overwhelmingly. Under those conditions we will no longer be able to afford our presence overseas nor will we be able to continue to export our inflation and debt to other nations. Then it will require that we pay for our extravagance, and market forces will require that we rein in our support for foreign, corporate, and domestic welfare spending. Hopefully this will not come for a long time, giving us a chance to educate more people as to its serious nature and give them insight into its precise cause. Nevertheless we live in a period of time when we should all consider exactly what is the best road to take to protect ourselves, not only our personal wealth but also to prepare to implement a system based on sound money, limited government, and personal liberty. This is a goal we can achieve. And when we do, America will enjoy greater freedom, more prosperity and a better chance for peace.


  1. Common sense and an uninformed public will not halt this downward spiral. Washington can't stop it because Washington is the problem.

    It will only stop when the toxic affects become undeniable. There will be hell to pay.

  2. The 'American Empire' is a false leftist meme.

    What we have is all sorts of agreements with all sorts of people all around the world.

    The nations where we have come out on top, or tied, as in Germany, Japan, South Korea, these nations are now fully sovereign. The Soviet Union was an Empire.

    The French no longer have an Empire, neither do the British, or the Germans, or the Russians, and we don't either.

    Ron Paul is a silly aging goose.

    Sometimes I wish we did have an Empire.

    The British Empire actually did some good in the world in places.

    Others not so much.

    When one thinks of some of the nations that were under empires of various European powers and their situation today it's hard to argue things are better now than then.

    1. The closest we came to Empire was after the Spanish Empire collapsed.

      We go into Iraq, depose a very bad man, and elect a new President, who takes all our troops out of there, and the whole thing collapses.

      We were trying to make them self governing but it didn't work out.

    2. When the Filipinos wanted us the close the naval base there we did that.

      An Empire wouldn't do that.

    3. Sure it would, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, when the naval base is obsolete and the Empire's economic grip on the country is assured.

      You do not understand military strategies.
      You do not understand economics, nor Empire.

  3. Some good, hopeful news from Drudge as we dance towards the New Year -

    Priest Performs Exorcism on Newspaper...

    'Lies of media'.........Drudge

  4. And they seemed like such a nice happy young couple.

    You never know. All the 'vetting' in the world isn't going to tell you.

    They’re ‘so nice,’ until they get religion and want to kill us

    By Paul Sperry

    December 13, 2015

    “Evidence exists to demonstrate that a greater level of adherence to Islamic law correlates to a greater likelihood of violence,” said FBI veteran John Guandolo, who worked some of the nation’s biggest terrorism cases out of the bureau’s Washington field office after 9/11.

    Studies back him up, including one recently published in Europe that found that Islam is the only religion in the world in which people become more violent the stronger they believe.

    Danish linguist Tina Magaard and a team of researchers spent three years examining the texts of the 10 largest religions to see if any incite violence. “The texts of Islam are clearly distinct from the other religions’ texts, as they, to a higher degree, call for violence and aggression against followers of other faiths,” she concluded. “There are also direct incitements to terror.”

    Wisdom would tell us to keep these people out of our nation.

    1. How is 'vetting' going to fix this little problem ?

      Fine folks one day, then bingo, they get 'religion' of the moslem kind, and the next day they will gun you down or blow you up, generally expecting that they themselves will also die in the effort themselves.

      By all accounts, that switch was piety. They simply got closer to their religion, immersing themselves in Islamic scripture.

      Farook and Malik devoted themselves to Islamic study, which culminated in both of them memorizing the Koran, a high honor in Islam. They began wearing traditional Islamic garb — Farook, a white tunic and skullcap, and Malik, a black veil and robe.

      Before long, Farook was slaughtering fellow Americans, many of them co-workers, shooting them at point-blank range with his wife by his side, the two of them stopping only to reload. Why? Because as US taxpayers, the 14 people they killed supported Israel and the Jews.

      We saw the same transformation in the Tsarnaev brothers of Boston, who were considered “nice” and “normal,” even partiers — until their mother made them stick their noses in their holy books and get religion. Within a matter of just a couple of years of becoming more fervent in their Muslim faith, these “typical American boys” were making shrapnel bombs and blowing off limbs of innocent bystanders at the Boston Marathon to “punish” fellow Americans for supporting wars in Muslim lands. And that was after the oldest boy, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, nearly beheaded a couple of Jews he once befriended.

      “I told Tamerlan that we are Muslims, and we are not practicing our religion, and how can we call ourselves Muslims,” Mrs. Tsarnaev said. “And that’s how Tamerlan started reading about Islam, and he started praying, and he got more and more and more into his religion.”

      The change was dramatic in both boys, who stopped partying and started hating — Jews, Christians, America. Suddenly they were growing out Islamic beards and saying they were “willing to die for Islam.”

      ‘Evidence exists to demonstrate that a greater level of adherence to Islamic law correlates to a greater likelihood of violence.’ - FBI veteran John Guandolo

      A similar change came over the Chattanooga jihadist, Mohammad Abdulazeez, who was described as “very friendly” — until he became intensely observant in his faith and saw it as his religious duty to fatally gun down five soldiers in Tennessee earlier this year.

  5. .
    There will be hell to pay.

    Hate to sound like a Cassandra but I agree. You can call the US an empire, a hegemon, whatever. That's merely word games and semantics. Only a fool would deny it. However, it goes beyond our messiah complex with the world. It's been going on for the last 50 years. We see it in the state of our culture. We see it in the sense of entitlement present in our future elites. We see it in our government where everything is for sale. We see it in the money we spend on war and the military we buy to wage it. We see it in the mercenaries we hire. We see it in the fact that our best and brightest have abandoned science, engineering, and technology in favor of finance and the big bucks. We see it in the growing inequality. We see it in the growing percentage of people who are paid to not work. We see it in the willingness with which the public accepts a growing police state and the gradual reduction of individual rights. We see it in the polarization of our society and political system.

    I agree with Paul that we can expect there will eventually come a period of reaping. That’s the only way we are likely to get change. And I’m not speaking in a religious sense or a moral sense or even karma unless you consider that to be paying the piper.

    The optimist will likely deny this. I don’t see how a realist could. The question becomes how do we react when push comes to shove. Do we strike out with our oversized military or do we retrench and try to rebuild what we lost as Paul suggests.

    Fire or Ice.


  6. .

    "Fire and Ice" by Robert Frost

    Some say the world will end in fire,
    Some say in ice.
    From what I've tasted of desire
    I hold with those who favour fire.
    But if it had to perish twice,
    I think I know enough of hate
    To say that for destruction ice
    Is also great
    And would suffice.

    While Frost's poem isn't directly applicable to my comments on the US it still is in a general sense. And it is broadly applicable to the world we live in today.

    Greed and envy (fire) or hate (ice), we see them both at play both in the US and the world at large. In the US, we see it in the political divide and the growing inequality and broadly we see it in a world at war. Which will bring us down?


    1. .

      Will either or anything bring us down?

      the answer depends on whether you are a Pollyanna or a Cassandra, I guess.



    2. Good Grief, we don't need two people here quoting poetry.

      One is nice

      And will suffice

      Two's not so well

      And leads to hell

  7. .

    “Evidence exists to demonstrate that a greater level of adherence to Islamic law correlates to a greater likelihood of violence,” said FBI veteran John Guandolo

    I'd be interested in seeing the evidence and the studies.


    1. Look up John Guandolo. Maybe he has a book, or articles.

      It certainly stands to reason.

      If I find something at AT or Hot Air I will be sure to put it up for you.

    2. After all, these types are usually screaming allahu akbar during the assaults.

    3. By the way, one of those nice reformed fellows O'bumble released from Gitmo is now a big wig in ISIS.

    4. Hillary of course thinks that people screaming allahu akbar as they open up with semi-automatic rifles into a bunch of infidels means nothing as, according to her, Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.

      Not one little itsy bitsy thing does Islam have to do with terrorism, according to Hillary.

    5. I think Huma told her to say that, myself.

      Hillary is 'often confused' according to Huma, must continually be reminded of things, schedules, etc, and Huma must often tell Hillary what to do and say.

      Huma and her biological family is and has been tight with the Muslim Brotherhood.

    6. Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson makes dubious claims then fails to provide any real references for them.
      A schmuck by any other name, remains a schmuck.

  8. .

    Good Morning Afghanistaaaaan!

    KABUL, Afghanistan — Alarmed that large stretches of Helmand Province are falling to the Taliban, American Special Operations forces have secretly taken a more central role in the fighting to save crucial areas of the province, as more air power and ground troops have been committed to the battle, according to Western and Afghan officials.

    A Westernn diplomat said last week that United States Special Operations forces had been engaged in combat in Helmand for weeks, and that there were more American forces fighting there than at any time since President Obama last year announced a formal end to combat operations in Afghanistan.

    The extent of the American role has been kept largely secret, with senior Afghan officials in the area saying they are under orders not to divulge the level of cooperation, especially by Special Operations forces on the ground. The secrecy reflects the Pentagon’s concern that the involvement may suggest that the American combat role, which was supposed to have ended in December 2014, is still far beyond the official “train, advise and assist” mission.

    The elite ground units in Helmand include both Special Operations troops and the United States Air Force’s Special Tactics Squadron, according to the Western diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid angering his colleagues.

    The American intervention in Helmand is accelerating amid growing reports of demoralized or trapped Afghan security forces and alarm at the amount of territory the Taliban have been able to seize in Helmand this year. If the insurgents are able to sweep away the tenuous government presence in district centers and the capital, Lashkar Gah, it would be a dire setback for the Afghan government, and would give the Taliban a strong foothold in southern Afghanistan...


  9. .

    And in Iraq?


    RAMADI, Iraq — In a small army camp on the northern edge of Ramadi, a group of Iraqi soldiers listened in on a walkie-talkie, eavesdropping on an Islamic State leader as he attempted to rally his men.

    “Right now, we are suffering, but it is a test from God,” the militant’s voice crackled over the air, betraying an Egyptian accent. “Stay on this road. This is the road of honor and dignity.”

    Intercepted Islamic State communications have become increasingly desperate in recent weeks, soldiers say, as the Iraqi army has gained momentum in the fight for this city 70 miles west of Baghdad. Buoyed by advances over the past week, Iraqi commanders say they expect to regain all of Ramadi by the end of the year.

    For Iraq’s armed forces, and the Americans who are training and backing them, this is a particularly important fight. Here, the country’s Shiite militias are not taking part, and that gives the regular Iraqi military a chance to repair its image. The fall of Ramadi seven months ago struck a blow to the already tattered reputation of the security forces, and it highlighted flaws in the U.S. approach to supporting them.

    “This had to be a battle using purely the Iraqi military, in order to return the prestige of the Iraqi army,” said Maj. Gen. Ismail al-Mahlawi, head of the Anbar Operations Command, as he watched U.S.-led coalition airstrikes send thick, gray clouds into the air above the city. “The army in the past has been an army of defeats, but now we will be the army of liberation...”


  10. Syrians -

    Jihad Watch
    Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

    Switzerland: Two Muslims arrested amid Islamic State terror investigation

    December 13, 2015 11:46 pm By Robert Spencer

    Don’t these Muslims know that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam? Obama needs to send John Kerry to Geneva to explain true Islam to these men. Meanwhile, they are “of Syrian origin.” Is it really wise to take in hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees when it is not possible to distinguish jihadis among them from genuine refugees?

    Swiss police

    “Two Arrested in Geneva Amid Islamic State Terror Investigation,” by John Revill, Wall Street Journal, December 12, 2015:

    ZURICH—Police in Geneva have arrested two men amid an investigation into a suspected Islamic terrorist cell in the Swiss city, the Swiss prosecutor said Saturday.

    Two people of Syrian origin were arrested on Friday in the greater Geneva area on suspicion of making, concealing and transporting explosives and poisonous gases, the Swiss Office of the Attorney General said in a statement. The men, who haven’t been named, were also arrested on suspicion of links to banned groups like Islamic State and al Qaeda, the OAG added.

    The Geneva prosecutor said Saturday that the two men have not been clearly linked to four men with suspected ties to the Islamic State group who are wanted by Swiss authorities, the Associated Press reported.

    Authorities in Geneva, which is home to several international institutions including the United Nations, raised security levels on Thursday after being warned that at least four suspected members of terror group Islamic State were present in the region.

    Amid concerns that the four fugitives might have accomplices, Geneva prosecutor Olivier Jornot said: “No link has been established in the different cases,” the Associated Press reported.

    The men were arrested when Geneva police stopped their car in Vésenaz, a village to the east of Geneva, late on Friday afternoon. They are now being held in custody in Geneva and are being interviewed by Swiss Federal Police while the contents of the car are examined.

    Clarifying an earlier official statement, the prosecutor said no toxic gas—only traces of explosives—were found in the Syrians’ vehicle, which they told police they had only recently obtained, the AP reported.

    Police patrols were increased in areas such as the train station, airport and U.N. buildings while an investigation has been launched by OAG….

    1. Jihad Watch
      Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts
      Texas imam forced to resign over support of Trump’s Muslim immigration plan

      December 12, 2015 4:43 pm By Robert Spencer

      “Why all of a sudden this guy or this girl or that lady open fire and kill 15 people, because American Muslims are not doing their job in the country.” Why is it so rare to hear Muslim leaders in the U.S. say that?

      Nidal Alsayyed

      “Local Imam says he was forced to resign because he agrees with Trump on Muslim immigration,” by Haley Bull, KBTV-TV FOX 4, December 11, 2015 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

      A political conflict is playing out within the walls of the Muslim community in Southeast Texas. A man who was the leader of Muslims in the area said Thursday the conflict has resulted in his ousting.

      “Don’t get me involved in any political games in the name of religion. I am not here a political man,” Dr. Nidal Alsayyed said.

      But it’s political motivations he said have forced him to resign as Imam. “Sadly, it’s Clinton versus Trump,” he said.

      Dr. Al Sayyed told KFDM News he was forced to resign as religious director of the Islamic Society of the Triplex after making comments Monday in which he agrees with Donald Trump’s statements that the U.S. should temporarily stop accepting any new Muslim immigrants into the country.

      While the religious leader said he expected the call to resign eventually, he said it was sped up by politics. “I think any future candidates, presidents who do not support the fact that we need to be more safe and more cautious about whom to bring into this country, whether a Muslim or not,” Dr. Alsayyed said.

      His comments he said had nothing to do with politics, but the former Imam said Trump’s comments are in line with the Islamic religion. “The text of the holy Qur’an says the loss of one life is equivalent to killing the whole mankind,” he said.

    2. Not really. There is less to the Qur’an passage to which the imam is referring (5:32) than Western leaders and Islamic apologists claim. First, note that it is not a general prohibition of killing — there are big exceptions for those who kill “for a soul or for corruption in the land.” Second, this is not a general command, but one only for the Children of Israel. Third, “many of them, after that … were transgressors” — so all it is really saying is that Allah gave a command to the Children of Israel and they transgressed against it.

      Meanwhile, some Islamic authorities interpret this passage in a supremacist manner, as applying only to Muslims: Sa’id bin Jubayr explains: “He who allows himself to shed the blood of a Muslim, is like he who allows shedding the blood of all people. He who forbids shedding the blood of one Muslim, is like he who forbids shedding the blood of all people.”

      Also, this verse is followed by v. 33, which specifies the punishment for the corruption and transgressions of the Children of Israel: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”

      Thus this passage is explaining what must be done with Jews who reject Muhammad, not dictating lofty moral principles. Ibn Warraq sums it up: “The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. ‘Behave, or else’ is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated, and banished!”

      His viewpoint, in part, shifting after lingering questions about the backgrounds of the couple responsible for the mass shooting in San Bernardino.

      “But the way it happens when you see this mass shooting and you see some people coming with such a very peaceful background and all of the sudden the intelligences themselves, the agencies are not able to figure out what’s happening, why all of a sudden this guy or this girl or that lady open fire and kill 15 people, because American Muslims are not doing their job in the country.

      So we need to stop, we need to stop taking new ones until we fix the existing situation,” Dr. Alsayyed said. The religious leader said there is a problem with some American Muslims seeing a conflict between following their religious beliefs and their patriotism to the U.S., and an issue differentiating the religious community and its political role. He said the two should not mix.

      “I came to know this morning from some close contacts and friends over 102 Imams, religious people in Houston, were fired and forced to be basically leave their jobs, leave their mosques only because they did not get along with the political agenda for their board members,” he said. Dr. Alsayyed said he took the position to help young people here understand Islam, and it’s the youth where Islamic leaders should focus their attention….

  11. Suppress Shooters' Islamist Ties, Obama Ordered

    How the Radical-in-Chief ordered federal officials to mislead the public about the Jihadist massacre in San Bernardino.

    December 14, 2015
    Matthew Vadum

    On the day of the deadly San Bernardino, Calif. massacre, President Obama ignored FBI-procured evidence that the attack was an Islamic terrorist operation and ordered federal officials to mislead the public about the true nature of the assault.

    Although the FBI knew immediately on Dec. 2 that the mass-casualty event was a Muslim terrorist attack, Obama and FBI Director James Comey reportedly clashed over why Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, opened fire around 11 a.m. local time on Farook's municipal government workmates, leaving 14 dead and 21 wounded.

    The news comes as investigator Phil Haney, who helped to create the Department of Homeland Security, revealed on Fox News that the government shut down a database he created that might have helped to prevent the attack. Haney says he looked into groups that had ties to Farook and Malik as far back as 2012. But civil rights officials accused him of unfairly profiling Muslims, removed his security clearance, and destroyed the data he collected.

    Meanwhile in the Oval Office, the official head-scratching over the events in San Bernardino continued. "[I]mmense political pressure was brought down on investigators to avoid using the term 'terrorism,' with Obama stating, 'It is possible that this is terrorist related, but we don’t know … It is also possible that this was workplace related.'”

    President Obama blamed his favorite villains of late, gun-owning Americans, demanding "common sense gun safety laws" and a law blocking individuals on the "No Fly List" from legally purchasing firearms, a measure that would almost certainly violate the Constitution. Around the same time Attorney General Loretta Lynch took the offensive in trying to chill free discussion by publicly threatening to prosecute Americans for anti-Islam statements.

    After the shooting, Obama met at the White House with the National Security Council, Lynch, and officials from the FBI, NSA, and Department of Homeland Security. There Obama directed the officials to downplay the role that terrorism played in the Dec. 2 assault, according to SOFREP, a news website for military and Special Operations veterans. The news report notes that such high-level meetings "are not held for mass shootings."

    On Dec. 2, intelligence-gathering aircraft appeared to be surveying San Bernardino, the report seems to suggest. Such aircraft "don’t slurp up data from the skies over California unless the government is actively searching for other members of a terrorist cell. The same was done after the Boston bombings and the attempted Times Square bombing."

    1. In the spirit of make-believe that has dominated the Obama presidency, especially in its twilight years, the administration's charade continued for days until it became increasingly obvious this was a jihadist attack. The news cycle keeps interfering with Obama's preferred narrative that under his watch Islamic terrorist groups are on the run.

      According to a news report, federal investigators are on tenterhooks, anxious about getting in trouble for doing their jobs:

      The FBI is said to be frightened of crossing the White House’s party line while they attempt to investigate the San Bernardino shootings. After 9/11, and the more recent attacks in Paris, law enforcement officials served warrants, investigated known associates, and did what they needed to do to gather evidence and make arrests. Now, the FBI is afraid of investigating the mosque Farook attended, as Obama’s priority seems to be avoiding anti-Muslim backlash. All Director Comey can do is plead with the White House to allow his agents to properly investigate the crime.

      Obama has also said there is no intelligence showing that Farook and Malik received guidance or money from terrorist groups abroad. This reportedly contradicts the findings of the Department of Defense and Special Operations Command’s Threat Finance Agency which "has concluded that Malik and Farook most likely received funding from terrorists abroad ... [and] has issued alerts to the appropriate banking institutions to flag financial transitions from specific banks accounts."

      Presumably, Obama is lying and downplaying the couple's terrorist connections so he can avoid ramping up anti-Islamic State efforts in the Middle East.

      To recap what transpired on Dec. 2, the attackers in San Bernardino were killed hours after the assault in a shootout with police. Just before the attack, Malik reportedly used social media to pledge her allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Farook is thought to have previously made contact with several Muslim terrorist organizations. Days after the attack, Islamic State's official radio station praised the duo and described them as "supporters" of the group. When their rented townhouse in Redlands was searched, authorities found thousands of rounds of ammunition and a dozen pipe bombs. It was the "75th Islamist-inspired terrorist attack or plot in the U.S." since Sept. 11, 2001, according to the Heritage Foundation.

      On the day of the attack, Obama and his allies at the terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) were on the same page. Both put significant resources into misinformation efforts aimed at exonerating Islam and its followers.

      While the bodies of those sacrificed for jihad were still warm, CAIR began putting out word before much was known about the attack that Islam had absolutely nothing to do with it. They were joined by logorrheic pundits on TV who spent the afternoon that day speculating at length about the shooters, predictably blaming conservatives, Tea Party supporters, and militia groups.

      As soon as Farook was publicly identified as a suspect, CAIR set up a presser for that evening.

      "We don't know the motive," said Hussam Ayloush, the incurious executive director of CAIR's Los Angeles branch. "Is it work, rage-related? Is it mental illness? Is it extreme ideology? At this point it's really unknown to us and it is too soon for us to speculate."

      Of course, there will never be enough evidence to convince CAIR or Political Islam's legions of useful idiots that America has an ongoing problem with Muslim terrorists that is growing more serious every day.

  12. Well of course it's constitutional - they are not citizens and they enter at our pleasure, or, do not enter at our displeasure, just as we see fit.


    Trump’s Muslim Ban and Constitutional Legality
    There is no ambiguity in the law and it leaves no room for doubt.
    December 14, 2015
    Ari Lieberman

    On December 7, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.” The announcement came on the heels of the San Bernardino massacre committed by two Muslim extremists one of whom was a citizen of Pakistan who entered the United States on a K-1 (fiancée) visa.

    While Trump’s announcement received support from several quarters of the American public and conservative media, it drew immediate condemnation from many on both the Left and the Right -- with some even questioning the constitutionality of such legislation. White House Spokesman Josh Earnest let loose with a torrent of pejoratives directed at Trump, taking aim at his “fake hair” and stated that his position “disqualifies him from serving as president.” Hillary Clinton, who stands to gain most by seeing Trump surge in Republican polls, echoed those sentiments, noting that Trump’s comments were “shameful,” “wrong,” and “dangerous.”

    Numerous Republicans too expressed outrage. House Speaker Paul Ryan denounced Trump in rather harsh terms noting that Trump’s position does not reflect the ideals of the Republican Party. Republican presidential candidate Lindsey Graham said he was “disgusted” by Trump’s comments and urged his party to “tell Donald Trump to go to hell.”

    Regardless of whether one agrees with Trump’s blanket Muslim ban or not – and I do not – there is no doubt that from a legal perspective, Trump is on solid footing and is empowered to enact such restrictions under federal law by virtue of Title 8 of the United States Code. 8 USC §1182(f) states in relevant part:

    “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants…”

    There is no ambiguity in the law and it leaves no room for doubt. If the Commander in Chief recognizes or perceives a danger, he may act in a manner consistent with Trump’s December 7thproclamation. Moreover, there is ample precedent for such action. On April 7, 1980, in response to the Iran hostage saga, Jimmy Carter issued a similar ban on the issuance of visas to Iranian nationals.

    However, there was no similar indignation or public outcry when Carter issued his ban on Iranian nationals as Trump has experienced. More importantly, it was Obama’s lax attitude toward border control and failure to properly prioritize national security threats that has compelled contemplation of such drastic action. Anger and frustration should be properly directed not at Trump’s comments but at a president who was responsible for allowing our borders to become porous, who maintained a grossly lax immigration policy and who identified “climate change” — and not ISIS or a nuclear Iran or a resurgent Russia and China — as our nation’s top national security threat.

    1. While Trump’s proposal would likely withstand constitutional challenge, the salient question is whether a blanket ban represents smart policy and whether US interests might be better served by alternative plans that would properly prevent dangerous elements from entering the country without adversely affecting our relations with important Muslim allies like Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. All three nations are partners in the fight against ISIS and Saudi Arabia has played a constructive role in thwarting Iranian influence in Yemen. A blanket ban on Muslims would likely produce a negative backlash and complicate US efforts to combat the ISIS menace and Iranian imperialism.

      One alternative to a blanket ban on all Muslims would be to increase scrutiny on those coming from certain problematic countries or regions such as Pakistan, Chechnya, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Lebanon. Visas could also be withheld from those expressing anti-Semitic and anti-Israel views or other forms of xenophobia. Refugees, who request humanitarian entry into the U.S., ostensibly to escape persecution, should be disallowed from doing so if they harbor xenophobic views. Those who claim to be escaping persecution but are perfectly willing to persecute others or otherwise entertain racist views should no longer expect any mercy or latitude from the United States.

      Many refugees currently fleeing to Europe and North America from Muslim lands harbor deeply anti-Semitic viewpoints that cross into conspiracy theory. Some maintain the belief that Israel seeks to control the entire Middle East, while others subscribe to the view that the “Jewish lobby” seeks to perpetuate bloodshed in Syria. Jewish leaders in various European countries have already expressed legitimate fears that the refugee influx will produce even more anti-Semitism and xenophobia on the continent.

      Moreover, it has now come to light that the San Bernardino shooter’s father, who was living the American dream, was also deeply anti-Semitic, expressing the view that Israel would be destroyed in two years and that all Jews living there would then be shipped off to Ukraine. Sayd Farook passed his hate gene to his son, Syed Rizwan Farook, who in turn, murdered 14 people. Sayd Farook, a Pakistani national, should never have been permitted entry into the United States.

      Obama has attempted to reassure a skeptical constituency that Syrian and Iraqi refugees, as many as 100,000 of them, would be carefully screened and vetted before being granted residency in the United States, but the San Bernardino shooting has torn Obama’s credibility to shreds. Tashfeen Malik, Seyd Farook’s partner in crime and Pakistani Jihadi bride entered the U.S. on a K-1 (fiancée) visa and underwent two separate screenings by Homeland Security and the State Department before being granted a visa and underwent a third before obtaining her green card. Yet despite “rigorous vetting,” these agencies failed to uncover her social media rants, which were rabidly anti-American and supportive of terrorism.

      The case of Tashfeen Malik demonstrates with utmost clarity that the system is plainly broken. In light of San Bernardino as well as other acts of international and domestic terrorism, it would be incredibly irresponsible at best for the Obama administration to move ahead with its plan on absorbing the refugees.

      In the meantime, while Trump has been vociferously criticized for making comments that some view as being antithetical to America’s sense of values and harmful to America’s interests, he should at least be given credit for raising a serious national security issue that compels action and warrants redress. And his Muslim ban, whatever one thinks of it, is on sound and legitimate footing within the U.S. legal framework.

    2. Regardless of whether one agrees with Trump’s blanket Muslim ban or not – and I do not – there is no doubt that from a legal perspective, Trump is on solid footing and is empowered to enact such restrictions under federal law by virtue of Title 8 of the United States Code. 8 USC §1182(f) states in relevant part:

      “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants…”

      There is no ambiguity in the law and it leaves no room for doubt. If the Commander in Chief recognizes or perceives a danger, he may act in a manner consistent with Trump’s December 7thproclamation. Moreover, there is ample precedent for such action. On April 7, 1980, in response to the Iran hostage saga, Jimmy Carter issued a similar ban on the issuance of visas to Iranian nationals.

      However, there was no similar indignation or public outcry when Carter issued his ban on Iranian nationals as Trump has experienced. More importantly, it was Obama’s lax attitude toward border control and failure to properly prioritize national security threats that has compelled contemplation of such drastic action. Anger and frustration should be properly directed not at Trump’s comments but at a president who was responsible for allowing our borders to become porous, who maintained a grossly lax immigration policy and who identified “climate change” — and not ISIS or a nuclear Iran or a resurgent Russia and China — as our nation’s top national security threat.

  13. I like the author's idea of banning the burka, but I doubt that it would be found constitutional, depending on who is on the court, of course.

    The Terrorist Wears A Burqa
    What do Tashfeen Malik, “Lady Al-Qaeda,” Maryam Jameelah, and the Boston Bomber’s widow all have in common?

    December 14, 2015
    Phyllis Chesler

    A number of journalists initially claimed that a woman was behind the San Bernardino massacre, and that Tashfeen Malik radicalized her husband Syed Rizwan Farook.

    Anyone who has studied Islamic terrorist killers and radical Islamic culture knows that this is very unlikely.

    Samia Labidi, a French-Tunisian dissident and former Islamist, describes how Tunisian Islamist men infiltrated her family "very softly, by means of marriage." They also infiltrated universities by promising men to "restore their masculine dominance." Docile wives and polygamy in a post-feminist age might seem very attractive.

    Radical Islam appeals to many men for this reason, among others.

    According to Labidi, once an Islamist penetrates a single family, "the next step is to marry off the remaining sisters to Islamists." As a girl, her brother-in-law had Samia, her sisters, and their mother face-veil and subjected them to nightly at-home “political” meetings based on the Qu’ran. They were indoctrinated to believe that Islamic law “takes care of women and protects them” and that “what is good for Western women is not good for Muslim women.”

    Chillingly, Labidi writes that when such Islamists were exiled from their countries of origin they entered Europe and the internet to continue their work on a "global scale."

    Labidi views the Western feminist embrace of a woman’s alleged “religious” right to the burqa as a “betrayal” of feminism.

    I totally agree. In my view, whenever burqas, heavy face veils, and dark, Iranian-style head, shoulder, and shapeless body coverings appear in the West, we must consider this as a symbol of radical Islam--or of Islamic Jihad.

    Katherine Russell, an American convert to Islam and the widow of one of the Boston bomber's, wears very heavy head and body coverings as well as dark glasses.

    Female Jihadists themselves are often heavily head-, shoulder-, and body-covered, if not face-veiled. Pakistani-born Aafia Siddiqui, “Lady Al-Qaeda,” was a neuroscientist and wore dark head- and body-coverings; Pakistani-born Tashfeen Malik, studied to be a pharmacist. Her hijab is dark, heavy, and decidedly unfriendly.

    Perhaps the most interesting (and most mentally unstable and dangerous) female Jihadist was American-born convert Margaret Marcus (Maryam Jameelah), who fled to Pakistan to become a propagandist and translator for Maulana Abul Ala Mawdudi, who adopted Maryam. She helped him as an editor and translator in his influential work which argued the case for militant Islam against the West and which justified Sharia law. Maryam wore an Afghan-style burqa.

    Daniel Pipes has argued that the West should ban the burqa for reasons of security, which include crimes committed by men wearing burqas. I have argued for such a ban on the grounds that the burqa and niqab are sensory deprivation isolation chambers and, as such, violate the wearer’s human rights. In addition, the increasing appearance of heavy hijab, niqab (face veils) and burqas on Western streets, psychologically rattles infidel and secular women. First, they cannot free these women—who also function as a warning: If radical Islam succeeds, this can happen to them.

    While I don’t think that women are the masterminds behind male Jihadists, I do think that our myths about female pacifism or passivity are dangerous. Women suicide killers and human bombs have a long history of killing civilians, including children, for nationalist and Islamic religious purposes.

    1. I have argued for such a ban on the grounds that the burqa and niqab are sensory deprivation isolation chambers and, as such, violate the wearer’s human rights.

      This is quite ingenious.

    2. When Danial Pipe argues that the Alawites of Syria are not Muslims, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, you dismiss his validity as an expert.

      You are a hypocrite, Robert

    3. Just yesterday you argued that it was for the women to decide what cultural customs should be followed, and that the women should not be disputed, in regards to body mutilation.

      Now you wish to regulate the clothing styles and accessories that women can wear on their bodies.

    4. Let the women decide about sexual circumcision, but men should regulate their clothing ...

      You are a blabbering fool, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson.

    5. I said the man had a quite ingenious idea there.

      This is quite ingenious.

      Doesn't mean I necessarily support it. Just said I kinda like the idea.

      In fact I said it was probably unconstitutional, you idiot. I don't support ideas that go against our constitution.

      You are back to your bad habit of following me around.

      No go back to your hole.

  14. Interesting point that the US proxy in Egypt makes ...

    Cairo (CNN) Egyptian investigators have so far found no evidence of terrorism in October's deadly crash of a Russian passenger jet in Sinai, authorities said Monday, offering a sharply contrasting view from that of Moscow.

  15. .

    Terrorist attack or not, it's not in Egypt's interest to admit it was a terrorist attack. Tourism is a big part of the Egyptian economy and has been recovering in 2015 from a drop off of 40-50% in recent years.


    1. REUTERS - Egypt is to hire a foreign company to help improve the country's airport security, seen as a weak link in the air safety chain since a Russian plane crashed in the Sinai on October 31.

      The government said in a statement on Monday that it had found no evidence of terrorism or other illegal action linked to the crash of the Russian passenger plane in Sinai that killed all 224 people on board.

      Russia and several Western states have said the Airbus A321 operated by Metrojet was likely brought down by a bomb, and the Islamic State militant group said it had smuggled an explosive on board.

      The plane took off from Sharm al-Sheikh, a Red Sea resort popular with Russian and British holiday makers. Those two countries have suspended flights to the destination and Egypt's tourism industry in general has suffered.

      The government statement said Egyptian officials recently met with several international companies and one would be chosen.

      But Egypt's civil aviation ministry said it had completed a preliminary report on the crash and had so far found no evidence of a criminal act.

  16. SOUTHWEST ASIA, December 14, 2015 — U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.

    Officials reported details of the latest strikes, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.

    Strikes in Syria

    Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted three strikes in Syria:

    -- Near Dayr Az Zawr, a strike struck an ISIL gas and oil separation plant.

    -- Near Manbij, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

    -- Near Mar’a, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and damaged an ISIL staging area.

    Strikes in Iraq

    Bomber and fighter aircraft conducted 13 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of the Iraqi government:

    -- Near Huwayjah, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL mortar position.

    -- Near Kisik, three strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed three vehicle bombs, two ISIL improvised bombs, five ISIL fighting positions, an ISIL heavy machine gun, and an ISIL light machine gun.

    -- Near Mosul, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL mortar tube.

    -- Near Ramadi, three strikes struck three ISIL staging areas, denied ISIL access to terrain, and destroyed an ISIL bed down location, two ISIL staging areas, and an ISIL command and control node.

    -- Near Sinjar, three strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed four ISIL fighting positions and two light machine guns.

    -- Near Tikrit, a strike destroyed two ISIL oil tanks.

    Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is a strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target.

  17. .

    Natural Gas: $1.88 (a 13 year low)


  18. .

    Copper prices: $2.11

    The 5 year trend is interesting.


  19. .

    The Biggest 4-Pinnocio Clams of 2015

    Trump tops the list with 11 4-Pinoccio woppers with perhaps the biggest being his continuing lies about 'thousands and thousands' of New Jersey Muslims cheering at 9/11.

    Donald Trump falsely and repeatedly asserted that he saw television images of Muslims in New Jersey celebrating the collapse of the twin towers after the 9/11 attacks. Despite repeated debunking of this claim, Trump continued to assert he was correct, even though he could produce no evidence except a handful of news stories that made brief mentions of alleged celebrations — which never could be confirmed.


    1. Good old Quirk-O, he never admits he is wrong.

      Something admirable about that, in an odd sort of way.

      It's a little like Bill Cosby, who in a high balled cocky way just filed suit against all his accusers !

  20. Seems like ISIS has backed themselves into a trap there.

  21. TRUMP: 41%..........Drudge

    Trump hits a new high in national poll

    The billionaire businessman surges to 41 percent after releasing proposal to ban all Muslims from entering the U.S.

    By Nick Gass

    12/14/15 12:00 PM EST

    Updated 12/14/15 12:48 PM EST

    Donald Trump just got a little more vault in his ceiling. Nationwide, the polling-obsessed Manhattan multi-billionaire and leading Republican presidential candidate broke into the 40s on Monday.

    According to the results of the latest Monmouth University poll surveying voters identifying as Republican or independents leaning toward the GOP, Trump earned 41 percent, nearly tripling the support of his closest rival, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who took 14 percent...........

    Read more:

    Lots of people like his proposal to temporarily ban moslems from entering the USA because of the security risk they pose.

    I like the idea for that reason, too.

    1. December 14, 2015
      Donald Trump: Right as Usual
      By Steven Simpson

      When the next Islamist atrocity spills more blood in the streets of America, many now criticizing Donald Trump for his call to ban Muslim immigration temporarily may reconsider. And whether it is the GOP establishment elite or the hysterical and maniacal media that are gunning for him, Donald Trump is saying things that grassroots conservative Americans only dare think.

      In the wake of the atrocities of Paris and San Bernardino, why not have a temporary ban on Muslim immigration? And why has the GOP establishment declared Donald Trump Enemy Number One?

      Mr. Trump's recent call for such a ban in the wake of the Muslim massacre in California has sent the political-media axis from right to left and from coast to coast spinning into a mass apoplectic attack. Forgetting that it is Islamic supremacists who are at war with America – and living among us – Donald Trump's enemies have brought out the long knives against him while performing the most incredible verbal gymnastics in defending the "religion of peace" and acting as apologists for so-called "violent extremists."

      What is unfolding in the wake of Mr. Trump's views is nothing short of sheer insanity. Whether it is likening the proposed immigration ban to Hitler's extermination of the Jews or simply calling Trump (what else?) a racist, it appears that America's political puppeteers have become completely unhinged.

      For those Americans eager to show their love of perverse diversity, let us remember this: Islam (or "radical" Islam) has declared war on America. The September 11, 2001 attacks were not the beginning, and they certainly were not the end. Bending over backwards to show "tolerance" and "sensitivity" while scourging and crucifying Donald Trump will have no effect on our Islamist enemies. Even if Donald Trump were to be stripped of his citizenship and expelled from America, the Soldiers of Allah would not stop their war on America right here in the homeland.

      The fact that the female Muslim murderer in California was a recent "immigrant" here on a K-1 visa should be enough to shut down all immigration for a period of time. Indeed, it is long overdue to review, revise, and overhaul our immigration policies, which seem to favor the coming of people to these shores who are openly inimical and antithetical to traditional American values and laws. Whether it is illegal aliens from Latin America or jihadists from the Muslim world, America seems to be committing suicide – or homicide against its citizens – in welcoming such "immigrants."

      Unfortunately, no corrective action will take place with the current occupant in the Oval Office and his adjutants, who are enforcing his leftist and racialist ideology.

    2. Mr. Trump is not a madman, racist, clown, or demagogue, despite how his pathetic Republican rivals have slandered him. Trump might not be a traditional conservative in the mold of Ted Cruz, but he is a man who cares deeply about America. And because he is not a professional politician, Mr. Trump tells the truth in a down-to-earth manner, even if it is unpolished. The fact that he is leading in most polls shows that his message – and his blunt talk – are resonating with a good portion of the American people.

      But what is particularly galling and hypocritical is the GOP attempt to take down Mr. Trump at any and all costs. Let us take a brief look at some of his opponents and their positions and actions.

      Jeb Bush talks about the "love" that illegal aliens have for this country, ignores the crime that they commit, and supports Common Core. Marco "Gang of Eight" Rubio is in the same league regarding illegals and amnesty, though more clever in clothing himself as a conservative. He has curiously uttered a veritable panegyric to Huma Abedin, possibly a stealth Islamist who was Hillary Clinton's former deputy chief of staff and now is her campaign vice chairwoman. Chris Christie, who now talks tough on Islamists and Obama, appointed an Islamist to a judgeship in New Jersey and has relationships with Muslim supremacists. Christie, the head of the Republican Governors Association, would not endorse New York's Republican gubernatorial candidate. Rand Paul smiles and shakes hands with the racial charlatan Al Sharpton, proudly posing for a picture with this con man. Carly Fiorina has been in a love fest for years with the other racial con man, Jesse Jackson.

      Is this the best that the GOP can put forward? And these candidates have the gall and audacity to criticize Donald Trump for not being a "real" conservative?

      It is absolutely astounding and appalling at how low the Republicans have fallen. As for the Democrats, there is nothing to be said other than that they appear to have acquired huge parts of the GOP as a subsidiary. The unified hatred of Donald Trump in both parties shows this.

      Is Donald Trump a perfect conservative candidate with a perfect conservative background? The answer is no. There are many questions that he needs to answer, including on the matter of liberal and racial policies that he might have held in the past.

      But if Trump has discarded the liberal elements and sincerely embraced the conservative cause, and if the Trump juggernaut continues unabated, conservatives can expect the GOP elitists to sabotage his campaign at every opportunity. Indeed, it will not come as a shock to grassroots conservatives that the GOP establishment will prefer Madame Hillary and a Democrat majority in Congress to a Trump presidency. And in that case, why shouldn't Donald Trump make a third-party run? Doubtless, Trump in his business life never acquired the number of cutthroats, snakes, and sharks he has now come across in politics and the media.

      At this juncture, the election is almost a year away. Much will occur in that period. One thing is for sure: Donald Trump is his own man, and as long as the Man Upstairs protects him from all his enemies, he is not going away. The political elitists of both parties had better accept it. Perhaps the Silent Majority is indeed back again.

    3. The United States, and the West in general, ought to be worrying about and doing something for the Christians and others in the Middle East who are facing genocide, and not the moslems.

  22. The suicide rate is soaring in Alberta and Saskatchewan due to layoffs in the oil fields there.

    Everyone else is happy about lower oil prices except the laid off workers.


    It's sad.

    I would have thought Canada would have enough social programs in place to prevent this from happening.

  23. Sarah Palin I have a political crush on Marion Maréchal-Le Pen

    Hot Air


    I said Marion was the Sarah Palin of France.


    Marion is quite the bright young lady, kind of a political whiz kid, like Sarah is her style and presentation.

    The National Front did well in the latest elections, but due to Sarkozy's party joining up with the Socialists, if you can believe it, the turds, the National Front wasn't able to capture the elected positions they wished.

  24. The Islamic State Is Going Down

    Posted by Ronald Tiersky on December 14, 2015

    This is no time to panic. Above all, it's a mistake to lash out in the heat of tragic circumstances that do not justify out-of-proportion reactions.

    It's understandable that the San Bernadino terrorist attack has mesmerized many Americans, terrorized by Islamic State's capacity to inspire or to command mass killings and bombings. It's all too easy for people to be swept up in the fear that the Islamic State group is unstoppable; to believe that ISIS is "making war on the world," as one typically over-dramatic CNN headline put it a week ago.

    But a more sober and realistic view - one that imagines how the events of the now might look to future historians - provides a different picture. First of all, look at the Islamic State's position in Syria and Iraq - the so-called caliphate as it exists today. It's hardly conceivable that this fighting force - comprising a couple of tens of thousands of fighters, or maybe somewhat more - can win its war against the array of internal and outside military powers that are now bent on destroying it. This is all the more so after the successful attacks in Paris, San Bernadino, and elsewhere: The result of the Islamic State's terrorism abroad will be to increase the determination of its enemies to go after the group. All the conflicting interests and strategies of the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, the Kurds, the Assad regime, and others will tend to diminish in light of what is now the overriding purpose: the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq must be eradicated. No outside government will now be willing to accept a tacit armistice with Islamic State.No one is afraid the group could possibly win in Syria and Iraq, but ISIS's very existence increases the terrorism threat across the globe, including those governments for which it is still for now a second priority. For governments from Washington to Moscow, and from Paris to Istanbul, allowing the Islamic State to survive has become an unacceptable risk.

    1. The most likely next stage - I understand this is a controversial forecast - will be that Islamic State in Syria and Iraq will be dismantled by military defeats and ousted from the Middle East. In effect, the Islamic State as a coherent structure will be shoved off the Eurasian continent entirely. Its leadership is already preparing for this by setting up new headquarters in Libya in the city of Sirte (Moammar Gadhafi's hometown). A move to North Africa will not constitute some dramatic expansion of the Islamic State's governance - the addition of a Mediterranean beachhead to bolster its governance in Syria and Iraq. It will be the result of a strategic defeat for ISIS.

      The Islamic State in Syria and Iraq is going down. It has already lost significant territory. The Kurds and other ground forces have clawed back 25-30% percent of what ISIS once controlled - and much of that territory is empty desert anyway. An accurate map of its extent shows that Islamic State is not a contiguous territory the size of Indiana or Oregon, but rather a mass of tentacles that are fragile and can be cut up. (The Kurdish ouster of ISIS from Sinjar cut the main road link between Raqqa and Mosul. Raqqa is now under direct attack, and Mosul has been surrounded for weeks.) ISIS has lost control of several cities - Kobani, Tikrit, Sinjar - and an attack on Ramadi is getting under way. Only about 300 ISIS fighters defended Sinjar at the end. Whether they escaped, were allowed to run away, or were killed, is not clear. Perhaps 500 to 1,000 fighters control Ramadi, and they are surrounded by a force of 10,000 that has entered the city with success. Effective ISIS control on the border between Syria and Turkey has been drastically shrunk, and it now amounts to a narrow band of territory wedged between Kurds and the Assad regime's control of Aleppo and its suburbs. Ankara has now committed to completely eliminating ISIS from that border.

      As outside governments attack with greater determination, the Islamic State's footprint and military capacity will diminish still more..........

    2. ISIS has made too many enemies.

    3. But then there's this -

      A nightmare scenario in the Middle East

  25. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the normalization of ties between his country and Israel would benefit the entire Middle East.


    Relations between Israel and Turkey broke down after the May 2010 Mavi Marmara incident, in which nine Turkish citizens were killed in an Israeli commando raid of a Turkish boat in a flotilla seeking to break Israel’s naval blockade of the Gaza Strip

  26. "You can tell a lot about a man by the way he plays poker"

    from The Adages of Rufus

    You can also tell a lot about a Gentleman or a Lady by their cell phones -

    Hundreds of 'Refugees' Caught With ISIS Images on Phones...Drudge

  27. Paul Bedard Obama eyes Cuba visit, says Castro not “an ideologue”

    Hot Air

    Well, f... me altogether, I would have never guessed that !

    1. Mo was born on December 24th !

      December 14, 2015
      United Arab Emirates declares December 24 holiday: 'Mohammed's birthday'
      By Thomas Lifson

      I checked, and this does not appear to be an Onion-like spoof. Emirates 24/7 appears to be a legitimate news site based in Dubai, with stories like “New hospitals in Dubai: Meraas Healthcare launched” and “New UAE rules on import of pesticides.”

      It reports:

      Hussain bin Ibrahim Al Hammadi, Minister of Education, and Chairman of the Federal Authority for Government Human Resources, has declared Thursday, December 24, an official holiday for the public sector to mark the birth anniversary of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), postponed from December 23.

      A circular issued by the Minister of Education stated that the decision is in implementation of the provisions of Paragraph 5, Article 100 of the Cabinet Resolution No. 13 of 2012 and regulations of the decree of Federal Law No. 11 of 2008 on human resources in the federal government and its amendments, which defines the public holidays of ministries and federal authorities in the country.

      Just coincidentally upstaging Christmas. And putting the holiday on the Gregorian calendar used by the West, not on the lunar calendar used by Islam.

      Of course, Christmas on December 25 is a convention; nobody knows the exact date of Christ’s birth, just as nobody knows Mohammed’s, either.

      This is just pathetic in my book. Of all the Arab states, the UAE tends to be the least offensive to Western sensibilities. But not today.

      Well, f... me altogether, I would have never guessed that !

  28. .

    Everyday, the Trump toadies offer confirmation of the old saying, "There's a sucker born everyday."

    Trump said, "And I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering.

    Most people shook their heads and smirked at what could only be viewed as a blatant lie. Trump's poorly educated, low-information base giggled and chortled, "I knew it."

    This, despite the fact that Trump's statement is obviously a lie. He has previously said he was in Manhattan on 9/11, and even though Trump's eyes are no doubt, 'faaaabulous, the best ever' he would probably have needed the assistance of real-time images from the Hubble telescope to see those 'thousands and thousands' of Muslims dancing around on rooftops 'celebrating' in Jersey City.

    But the yahoos who support Trump say well his memory, while 'faaaabulous', might not be all that 'faaaabulous'. He must have seen it on the videos. And Trump’s story did change. Faced with mockery and contempt over his initial statement, Trump told George Stepanopolous that he saw it on television. Yet, in this information age, the age of YouTube and cell-phone videos, there are no videos, at least, none anyone has been able to find or document. Likewise, no one else has reported seeing 'thousands and thousands' of Muslims parading through the streets of Jersey City (or on the rooftops).

    So where do the supporters of ‘Birther Man’ go next? When confronted with the absurdity of Trump’s claim, they rationalize that while Trump may not have actually seen the ‘thousands and thousands’ dancing in the streets of Jersey City, there were so many ‘reliable’ reports about Muslims celebrating that Trump was justified in his lie. The problem of course is there are no reliable reports stating that.

    A LexisNexis search of newspaper and television stories from September to December, 2001 turned up only two instances of stories talking of Muslims celebrating that came from mainstream sources.

    The Associated Press, on Sept. 17, 2001, described "rumors of rooftop celebrations of the attack by Muslims" in Jersey City. But the same report said those rumors were "unfounded."

    The Washington Post, on Sept. 18, 2001, published an article that claimed "law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate-style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river." The Post story includes no source for this information, and we found no evidence that any of these allegations ever stuck

    The Post subsequently issued another article denying the celebrating happened. The author of the original article has also admitted the story wasn’t properly vetted. No doubt, the fools and conspiracy theorists who support Trump will say the stories were only changed because of government pressure, as if the government had nothing better to do on September 18, 2001.



    1. {...}

      But then the Trump apologists argue, Trump’s team of crack researchers, “…they are really, really, very good…the BEST…”, came up with 5 or 6, maybe even 7 other sources that reported on the Muslim celebrations in New Jersey. However, as noted before, Trump’s base is made up of largely poorly educated and frustrated people who are willing to accept any source that provides confirmation to their biases and bigotry. They likely do not understand that once a report shows up on AP or Drudge, it will immediately be duplicated on numerous other sites, sites like Howard Stern,, Breithart,, etc. Being poorly educated and unsophisticated, they fail to understand that all those numerous incidents represent 1 event, or rather one alleged event, an event that if it even existed could have just as easily have been a bunch of ME Christians barbecuing shish-kabob or a group of Jews celebrating a bat mitzvah.

      Trump’s claims have been de-bunked by a number of fact-checking sites, publications and news outlets including FOX. In all cases, the claims have been found wanting, worse absurd. The WaPo fact-checker gives Trump 4 Pinocchios. Politifact calls his claim an ‘urban myth’. Others simply call it a lie.

      So Trump’s lies about ‘thousands and thousands’ of Muslims have been debunked. But that means nothing to his supporters. He says he saw it all on televisions but that also has been debunked. So his supporters say he was right even though he may have innocently erred in his remembrances and that what he actually remembered were the many reports which if you add them all up would give the ‘impression’ that there were thousands and thousands of Muslims dancing in the street or on rooftops.


      Perhaps, to some ill-informed yahoo but certainly not to anyone with an ounce of common sense.

      But Trump continues to argue, “It was on television. I saw it…It was well covered at the time…”

      His supporters argue the absence of any proof or documentation merely provides proof of a massive government/media cover-up.

      And IMA states, he has to be right. I read it on

      They continue to attempt to lipstick the pig hoping in their simplicity that repeating the lie enough times will eventually convince anyone with a brain that Trump's lies are true. A fools errand.


    2. .

      The quotes at the end of the first page of my post above came from


    3. Give it up, Quirk-O, give it up.

      Everybody knows you lost the argument.

      Time to cut your loses.

      Time to quit making a fool out of yourself.

    4. I was thinking of a campaign position for you. A few say you are quite creative.

      But you're really a loser.

      I can't stand losers.

      You're fired.

      Without ever being hired.

      Good luck to you. You will need it.

      It's all you've got.

    5. By the way, Quirk-O, my health is astonishingly excellent.

      You're exhausted after walking your inbred mutt to the corner fire hydrant.

      You're a low energy loser.

      Care to compare physical exams ?

      You're a loser, Quirk, low energy.

      'Astonishingly excellent': Donald Trump releases report saying he'd be the healthiest president 'ever'

      Colin Campbell

      donald trumpAP Photo/Charlie Neibergall

      Real-estate mogul Donald Trump's campaign released a report on Monday that declared he'd be the healthiest president "ever."

      Dr. Jacob Bornstein of Lenox Hill Hospital wrote that Trump's laboratory results were "astonishingly excellent" and that Trump's "physical strength and stamina are extraordinary."

      "If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency," he concluded.

      In a statement accompanying the report, Trump suggested that his health report shows that he is well-prepared to make the country great again:

      I am proud to share this report, written by the highly respected , stating that I am in excellent health. I am fortunate to have been blessed with great genes — both of my parents had very long and productive lives. I have truly enjoyed working on the campaign trail with one objective in mind, to Make America Great Again! People have been impressed by my stamina, but to me it has been easy because I am truly doing something that I love. Our country will soon be better and stronger than ever before.

      Earlier this month, Trump said he would release a report showing his health was "perfection" after Politico ran a story questioning it

    6. .

      Dr. Wazzoo said that Trump's health is "astonishingly excellent, the most tremendously excellent in recorded history, and that Trump, standing 6'4" at 220 pounds is not only huuuuuuge, he is the most physically perfect specimen of humanity Wazzoo has ever been hired to examine. The doctors report indicates that Trump has a rare condition called enormes bolas (a good thing) as well as testosterone readings that are off the charts.

      The doctor went on to say that separate psychological testing showed that Trump's I.Q. is way above that five year old kid that had the highest I.Q. in history...well, until Trump was tested that remember the kid, he was from the Midwest somewhere and was all over YouTube and was on NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt a few weeks ago.

      Also, in a startling announcement, Dr. Wazzoo said that gene testing showed that Trump had an additional gene which has since been named the 'wisdom gene' which is absolutely faaaabulous and the best gene ever.

      Plus Trump has great hair and it is huuuuuge.

      Dr. Wazzoo's affidavit concluded with an opinion that Donald Trump will end up being the most fabulously, exciting, smart, kick-ass, MF, bad-assed president there ever was.

      Please note: Dr. Wazzoo's health reports are available at Box 888888888, San Diego, Ca.

      Prices negotiable.


    7. Dr. Wazzoo's Check Your Health LLC is a subsidiary of Quirk's Quick Quack Medical Exams out of Detroit, Michigan, a world renowned provider of health care to Hollywood stars, Bollywood stars, international politicians, and moguls around the world.

    8. (Dr. Wazzoo graduated with a degree in Veterinary Medicine from Washington State University, Pullman, Washington aka 'Wazzoo')

  29. Replies
    1. :)

      Wish I could get the audio too.

      All I want for X-Mas is a new computer.

  30. Vegas showgirl spectacle Jubilee to end after 30-plus years 14 / 28

    Associated Press

    Danica Patrick, Jubilee Showgirls: by Frank Micelotta/Invision/AP, File© Photo by Frank Micelotta/Invision/AP, File by Frank Micelotta/Invision/AP, File

    LAS VEGAS — The showgirls of the long-running Las Vegas spectacle Jubilee are hanging up their elaborate headdresses.

    Caesars Entertainment announced Sunday that the show at Bally's Las Vegas casino-hotel would end Feb. 11.

    Jubilee got its start in 1981. It's the longest-running show currently on the Strip.
    What's On In Vegas - is rated
    (4520 reviews)
    206000+ followers on Twitter
    AdGet Vegas Show Tix Up To 60% Off. #1 Site For Las Vegas Show Tickets
    Concerts & Headliners

    Cirque du Soleil Shows
    Magic Shows

    Show Ticket Deals

    The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority citing UNLV records says the Folies Bergere showgirl show was the longest running show at 50 years before it ended in 2009.

    Caesars has said hundreds of thousands of Swarovski crystals were used on the costumes when the show debuted 34 years ago.

    The show had recently been reimagined to coincide with renovations at Bally's Las Vegas, including a tower of hotel rooms dubbed the Jubilee Tower.

    The company says it's considering a new show featuring showgirls.


  31. The Wolf Pack Profile

    The disturbing pattern of terrorism in America becoming a family affair.

    December 15, 2015

    Dawn Perlmutter

    The American obsession with looking to psychology to explain every aspect of life is in itself a cultural construct. Prior to the introduction of the field of psychology inexplicable events were interpreted in terms of religious and moral values, in concepts of good and evil. Behavioral psychologists attempt to categorize expressions of good and evil into normative universal characteristics of human behavior. Another goal of criminal psychology is to attempt to identify the characteristics that predispose offenders to violence such as childhood abuse, social, economic and other factors. The flaw in this methodology, particularly for counterterrorism, is that it is based on the myth of universality, that all people share the same basic desires. The opposite more effective method is based on a methodology that utilizes relativism, interpreting violent crime from cultural (or sub-cultural) beliefs including ethical, religious and moral values. In cultural anthropology this difference in analysis is referred to as ‘etic’ and ‘emic’. An etic analysis is an extrinsic approach that views a culture from the perspective of an outsider while an emic analysis is an intrinsic approach that views culture from the natives’ point of view.

    A cultural analysis of the motivations for the San Bernardino mass murder is based on the premise that the offenders were Islamic true believers. From this cultural perspective they would consider themselves to be good and righteous Muslims who were obligated to kill Satanic infidels (dis-believers). As Islamic true believers the violence would be justified as warriors, martyrs, waging holy war (jihad) against evil. As martyrs they believe they will go immediately to a higher level of paradise where they will be protected from the torments of the grave and significantly can intercede on behalf of the infant they left behind to join them in Paradise and be a family again for eternity not just their temporary time on earth. From this perspective Tashfeen Malik would be considered a good mother, one that sacrificed her life for her child. Farook would be considered a good father and son who gave up his life to intercede for his mother, daughter and other family members in Paradise. These beliefs do not meet any of the criteria for psychopathy, in fact their killings were rational choices based on their religious beliefs. The fact that most Americans find it incomprehensible demonstrates Western behavioral bias and the inability to name the enemy and comprehend the Islamic ideology that motivates the violence.

    Good Grief.

    What can one say ?

    1. What can one say ?

      How about not letting any more of them into our country ?

      That's what I say.

      Current attempts to combat recruitment are based on the concept that offenders fall into certain age groups, tend to be male, uneducated and other characteristics that make some people more susceptible to indoctrination than others. However males and females of any age, ethnicity or country of origin can be recruited. Previous jihadist recruits have included Colleen LaRose an American middle aged divorcee from Pennsylvania dubbed Jihad Jane and Jamie Paulin Ramirez a 35 year old Colorado mother dubbed Jihad Jamie. It should not be shocking that Tashfeen Malik, the 29 year old Pakistani National, mother of an infant, who entered the United States on a K-1 fiancée visa, was pretending to live the American dream while plotting terrorist attacks. By massacring 14 people she achieved a level of honor that women in her culture are ever prohibited from attaining.

      The lone wolf offender has emerged from the basement with a sense of purpose and belonging camouflaging their true beliefs so they do not provoke suspicion. Essentially the Islamic State recruits the misfits, the true believers and every one in between advising them through social media how to blend into society and hide in plain sight until they go operational. Even if the Islamic State has not made direct contact with the misfit, by pledging allegiance they have a sense of belonging and justification turning their personal grievances and desire for vengeance into righteous slaughter.

      The Islamic State understands that to incite people to mass murder they have to remind them of their humiliation, disrespect and shame. That is one of their propaganda tactics. The misfit already longing for vengeance instinctively understands that violence will feel good. The Islamic State provides the moral justification that allows the loner to act upon his desires. ISIS makes clear that killing in the name of Islam is not only justified but obligatory. The misfit becomes a virtuous mass murderer whose humiliation is replaced with honor and respect by killing in the name of Allah. Jihadist mass murder functions to restore honor, serve vengeance, attain purity, save face and achieve everlasting life in paradise. And now they are hunting in packs.

  32. alteration of mimeme, from mim- (as in mimesis) + -eme

    noun \ˈmēm\
    Definition of MEME
    : an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture

    Origin of MEME
    alteration of mimeme, from mim- (as in mimesis) + -eme
    First Known Use: 1976
    Rhymes with MEME
    beam, bream, cream, deem, deme, dream, gleam, neem, Nîmes, ream, scheme, scream, seam, seem, seme, steam, stream, team, teem, theme

    Learn More About MEME

    plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
    quand même
    tout de même

  33. The San Bernardino Terrorists Weren’t Radicals -- They Were Mainstream
    A huge tiny minority of extremists.
    December 15, 2015
    Daniel Greenfield

    While officially Pakistan is our ally, it’s a fairly thin line between ISIS and the ordinary Pakistani.

    83% of Pakistanis favor stoning adulterers, 80% support cutting the hands off thieves and 78% want to kill anyone who leaves Islam. Looking at numbers like these, we have to ask when the 4 out of 5 Pakistanis, or 144 million people were radicalized? That’s certainly a huge tiny minority of extremists.

    A majority of Pakistanis grieved for Osama bin Laden and 44% believed that the dead terrorist leader was a martyr.

    Pakistan carefully hid Osama bin Laden. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has been accused of meeting with the Al Qaeda leader by former officers of its ISI intelligence agency. Documents show that his brother attempted to negotiate with Al Qaeda and “reestablish normal relations” with the terror group.

    The politics of Pakistan might seem far away to us, but Tashfeen Malik’s uncle is an important political figure with Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz party. The family is described as having connections to “militant Islam”, but then again so does the entire Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz party.

    Its antecedents were in the Muslim League which committed horrifying atrocities in India to carve out an Islamic State. The atrocities committed by the Muslim League’s Islamic butchers might have even turned the stomach of ISIS. Long before ISIS, the Muslim League created its “impossible dream” of a Muslim Pakistan through mass murder, mass rape and terror aimed at Hindus, Sikhs and other worse than ISIS.

    80 million Hindu dead by the moslems over the centuries.