Category: Politics

Trying not to start the public floggings

Why, Indeed?

Government Thugs, Internationalism

When it comes to disemboweling a government agency, it’s really hard to beat Matt Taibbi’s take on the CIA:

Before Trump was even a Republican nominee, a CIA Director relayed “concerns” to the FBI that “served as the basis” for years of grueling investigation that would paralyze his presidency; after his election, as we’ve learned all summer, CIA then cooked up a bogus intelligence report saying Trump won with Russian help; CIA leaked its balls off to papers like the New York Times about how Moscow worked to “install” Trump in the White House; CIA helped topple Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn by telling every reporter on earth he was a “clown” who said mean things about the CIA and secretly conspired with Russia; CIA warned foreign countries not to share intelligence with Trump because Russia held “leverages of pressure” on him; CIA stuck fictional campaign research about “compromising personal and financial information” Russia had in a report that was leaked to CNN in less time than it takes for fleas to mate; CIA accused Trump of treason; CIA got Trump impeached; CIA leaked stories that Trump let Russians kill Americans for sport; CIA banded together to call a true Hunter Biden story a Russian influence operation; CIA spent the last half-century overturning foreign governments and in this one is trying do the same at home, in such blatant violation of its charter that 77 million people last year voted to have it shot like a lame horse… But sure, yes, let’s make sure the CIA is at the President’s side when we’re trying to negotiate a peace settlement. What could go wrong?

Yeah, those days of relying on the “experts” in government agencies — any of them — are as gone as last year’s flatulence.

Disgusting Lie

Immigration, Lies and Untruths, Marxists

Seen at Twitter* (via Insty):

Ahem.  Having been through the (legal) immigration process myself, and most recently with New Wife, I can attest that the question involving prior membership of the Communist Party or similar organizations is still very much part of the interrogatory, and has been since the early 1950s.

So to say it has “no prior precedent in immigration law” is, like so many utterances from the Left, a bald fucking lie.

All that the Trumpist USCIS is doing now is broadening the scope to bring such charming little fads like  jihad and terrorsymp into the conversation.  And about damn time, too.

*All Elon’s rebranding efforts to the contrary, it will always be Twitter to me.  Screw that “X” nonsense.

Quote Of The Day

Patriotism, Resistance

Talking about the current brouhaha in Britishland over local town councils taking down British or England flags while leaving Palestinian flags flying:

“If raising your own country’s flag is seen as an act of rebellion, then maybe your country is under foreign occupation.” — Alex James

Thank goodness we have laws about this kind of thing Over Here, because let me tell you that any similar reindeer games by local municipalities would result in both lawsuits (if they were lucky) and possibly gunfire.

If I (or any other proud Americans) want to fly our national flag, it will be flown regardless of whom it might “offend” or “trigger”.

Good Question

Foreign Affairs

Over There, Richard Littlejohn asks the question:

Why do Americans care more about Britain than Labour?

On everything from Net Zero and defence to immigration and crime, they make a great deal more sense than most of the Westminster Bubble’s arrogant, out-of-touch political class.

The latest was a report from the US State Department accusing Britain of backsliding on human rights – especially freedom of speech and the frightening rise in anti-Semitism.

First out of the blocks was Vance with his damning speech in February, not just about the erosion of civil liberties but the contempt for popular democracy among the political elite.

Addressing his remarks to Europe as a whole and Britain in particular, he said: ‘No one on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants.

‘But you know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit. And agree or disagree, they voted for it.’

As Trump warned on his recent visit to Scotland, if we don’t get a grip on immigration we’re not going to have a country any more. Who, outside of the far-Left and the yuman rites brigade, could argue with that?

The President has also ordered the National Guard to take back control of the streets of Washington, America’s capital city.

In London, the police have withdrawn from the streets, leading to a surge in stabbings, shoplifting and violent phone thefts. How many people in our capital city would object to a few squaddies on the streets if it crushed crime and saved lives?

Trump reserves some of his harshest criticism for Britain’s suicidal Net Zero nosedive. He maintains that our War Of The Worlds windmills, as well as being a hideous blot on the landscape, are the ‘worst form of energy, the most expensive form of energy’.

And he simply can’t fathom why Labour refuses to exploit our vast reserves of oil and gas, which would produce great wealth for the country, support tens of thousands of jobs and slash energy bills.

As for the “why?” part of the question, it’s quite simple.  Despite all the efforts of Leftists on both sides of the Pond to sabotage the Special Relationship between us, I believe that many Murkins still feel some vestiges of affection to the Old Country.

And why not?  We inherited the concepts of parliamentary government and of human rights, to name but two, from Britain.  We share a common language and many cultural ties (once again, despite efforts of the Left to destroy them).  These are not small things;  they are the ties that bind.

But it pains us to see that despite that shared heritage of, say, free speech, we see British police arresting people for posting “anti-social” statements or “hate speech” on the Internet.

Of private ownership of guns, we will not speak — even though that same concept is a key part of why Americans aren’t being arrested for posting “anti-social” statements or “hate speech” on the Internet.

So, as I say so often on these pages, we look on happenings in the UK with something approaching dread, because we ask:  if the famously-tolerant Brits allow this shit to happen to themselves, why could it not happen Over Here too?

Back in the 1940s, Americans supported Britain in their war against tyranny.  Nowadays?  If Russia invaded Western Europe and the UK, I’m not so sure we’d raise a finger to help them.  Why should we, when those shared ties of freedom have been tossed aside unilaterally?

Never Justified

Anti-Gun Nannies, Rights, The Gun Thing

I see that someone in the Golden Shower State has come to their senses:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a mandate Thursday overturning California’s “one-gun-a-month” restriction.

The Second Amendment Foundation noted the “one-gun-a-month” restriction allows law-abiding citizens to purchase only one handgun or semi-automatic centerfire rifle (or combination thereof), from a licensed dealer within a 30-day period.

Here’s the thing about this ridiculous law.

Quite apart from its prima facie  Constitutional illegality, the 30-day restriction just makes absolutely no sense — I mean, what are they trying to achieve (other than a broad restriction, of course)?  Are they trying to stop someone from arming a group or gang? (I know, nonsensical.)

As with all laws like this, it should be looked at as part of a whole.  What is intended is to make a thicket of laws like this so that the breaking thereof becomes an inevitability — and the side-benefit (to the anti-gunners) is that the people most likely to fall foul of this nonsense would be gun owners.  (We always talk about lawful or law-abiding gun owners, but what we sometimes forget is that to the anti-gun set, all gun owners are evil, and not just the criminals.)

Anyway, it’s gone away, and good riddance.  Best of all is that because of this ruling, it’s going to apply to any and all other states who have similar nonsense in their raft of laws;  and all that’s left is for the SAF guys bring suit in each of them.

Go to it, guys.

Side note:  I have more than one friend who won’t give money to any gun lobbying group like the NRA or even GOA.  But they give lots to the Second Amendment Foundation because Alan Gottlieb and his guys are doing the work where it matters most:  in the courts.

Think about it.