Why CNN is now a target

Since the election of Trump, CNN has gone completely out of its way to distort reality to support its preferred narratives.  See recent example below (helpfully recaptioned at the bottom to bring us back to reality):

CNN's world

Full disclosure: I personally scrolled back through CNN’s Twitter feed to confirm that yes, they did in fact Tweet that message and image.  I also visited EuroNews to confirm the quote that was added to the bottom of the image above. (Due diligence is more important today than ever before).

This is how little respect CNN has for the average viewer’s intelligence.  (To be fair, even the college-educated aren’t necessarily prepared to think critically these days.)  It took me less than five minutes to confirm both parts of the meme above, and to cross check with other news sites that noted the more violent aspects of the G20 Summit protests.  Yet CNN boils it down on Twitter to a “we are the world” gathering of “peaceful” protestors.  Even in their own photo, the question should come up “why so many police officers there?”  But answering that question would mean looking at the long history of Leftist violence at such international meetings (such as the “Battle in Seattle.”).  There are many like me who also distrust the globalist agenda for different reasons, but you don’t (yet) see us acting like this on a regular basis.

Angry at the deception yet?  In the event you think this is just an isolated instance of malpractice on CNN’s part, here’s some more reading for you.  This isn’t new for CNN — or, for that matter, most of the corporate media world (I include Fox in that as well, for what it’s worth).  The divide between reality and their reporting has been growing for some time.  With the election of Obama, however, most of what was left of the pretense of objective journalism was jettisoned in order to enable the Anointed One’s “fundamental transform(ation)” of America.

CNN’s reputation deserves the trashing it’s currently experiencing.  But while it’s fun to see the media get a well-deserved comeuppance, let’s also remember that if there’s to be a restoration in this nation critical thinking and rational discourse MUST be taught and emphasized again — even in policy areas where the facts are very uncomfortable to the individually messianic “we can save the world” worldview.

Being the weak horse

It turns out yet again that at least one of the attackers in Saturday’s killing spree on London Bridge was known to be a radical and associate of a radical imam.  What’s more, in this particular case the attacker was even featured in a British TV documentary called “The Jihadist Next Door!”  ((words — even profane ones – fail me here! — Jemison))

The British authorities confirm he was “under investigation.”  I’m sure that will be a comfort to the grieving families of the deceased and the scores of people who will now live with the terror of that night.

Mao Tse-Tung was something of an authority on insurgency warfare (he conquered China by using it).  One of his maxims was “The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea.”  Importing large numbers of Muslims to the West has provided that “sea” in which the jihadi “fish” flourish.  I’m not saying all Muslims are guilty of these accelerating atrocities, only that the presence of large numbers of them, complete with cultural infrastructure, gives our enemies considerable support.  Separating the “sheep” from the “goats” is the rub in fighting an insurgency (see: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan), and it’s never an easy task.  It’s even harder when you continue to import part of the problem (note well that at least one of Saturday’s attackers came to Britain as a young boy when his family filed for asylum).

Right now, jihadism looks like Osama bin Laden’s proverbial “strong horse and Western security agencies look like they’re ready for the glue factory.  In the same way inner city kids look up to drug dealing gangsters because they have no other model of success, the hundreds of thousands of young Pakastani, Somali, Yemeni, Syrian, Afghani and other nationalities flooding the West can be prone to see jihad as “manly defiance” of a Western Civilization they’ve already failed to adopt.

Mao outlined three phases to insurgency warfare: organize and recruit, undermine the legitimacy of government, attack all out when strong enough.  In my view, we’re well into phase two of this insurgency, and our governments look weaker and more ineffective by the day.  So what do we do?  If we’re to succeed, we have to steel ourselves to some distasteful but necessary steps:

Most Muslims are peaceful people who disapprove of terrorism, but many are not. Opinion polls show a large and consistent minority  of 20% to 40% approves of at least some form of terrorism. Support for ISIS generally is low, but much higher for Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist groups. By any reasonable count there are a few hundred million Muslims who in some way approve of terror, although very few of them would take part in terror attacks. But they are the sea in which the sharks can swim unobserved. They may not build bombs, but they will turn a blind eye to terrorists in their midst, especially if those terrorists are relations. They also fear retaliation from the terrorists if they inform.

The way to win the war is to frighten the larger community of Muslims who passively support terror by action or inaction–frighten them so badly that they will inform on family members. Frightening the larger Muslim population in the West does not require a great deal of effort: a few thousand deportations would do. Western intelligence services do not even have to deport the right people; the wrong people know who they are, and so do many of their neighbors. The ensuing conversation is an easy one to have. “I understand that your nephew is due for deportation, Hussein, and I believe you when you tell me that he has done nothing wrong. I might be able to help you. But you have to help me. Give me something I can use–and don’t waste my time by making things up, or I swear that I’ll deport you, too. If you don’t have any information, then find out who does.”

In the end, this is simple: show resolve, close the border and start deporting thousands now, or end up fighting tens of thousands later.  As the organizer of “Sherman’s March” noted in the 1860s, “War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.”  So, are we in a “War on Terror” or not?  On this day in 1944, thousands of young men stormed ashore at Normandy.  Do we even possess this kind of grim determination anymore?

Trump promised to ‘drain the swamp’ in D.C. Mordor, and the jury is still out on whether he’ll have any success.  Just as necessary is draining the “sea” in which these known human time bombs are ticking.  Given that the UK alone has been hit three times in less than two weeks, one would think this would be the top priority.

That it isn’t tells us all we need to know about “leaders” in the West.

Leaders literally with no future

As we celebrate motherhood today, there is a significant trend worth noting.  We often hear “think of the children” when an unpopular or unwise piece of legislation is being proposed.  And yet, few of our leaders have “skin in the game” when it comes to their nation’s future:

Emmanuel Macron founded a new party, and his election as France’s president is said to herald the “revival of Europe.” Interestingly, Macron has no children.

This is not that notable in itself. After all, George Washington had no biological children. But across the continent Macron wants to bind closer together, there’s a stark pattern:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel also has no children. British prime minister Theresa May has no children. Italian prime minister Paolo Gentiloni has no children. Holland’s Mark Rutte has no children. Sweden’s Stefan Loumlfven has no biological children. Luxembourg’s Xavier Bettel has no children. Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon has no children. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, has no children.

This is too remarkable to ignore. While Macron is young—39 years old—the rest of Europe is being governed by childless Baby Boomers

It’s clear which side has political power now. But the demographics point to a different future. In 2009 Phillip Longman noted that in France (for example) a tiny minority of women are giving birth to over 50% of the children every year. These women are either practicing Catholics or immigrant Muslims.

Contemporary childless leaders, however ascendant they feel today, may be the last gasp of secularism. The future is won by those who show up, and only the religiously orthodox are having children.

Those still swimming in the ancient streams of Faith and Culture in France will have the observant offspring of two rival religions living within the borders of one nation. The second Battle of Tours, (or Vienna, or Lepanto) might be extra bloody due to the policies of today, but the authors of those policies will not be around because they will be dead, and their offspring will not be around, because they do not exist.

Surely Macron, Merkel, Juncker, and the rest would argue that they can do their crucial jobs better because they don’t have children to distract them. C.S. Lewis provides the rebuttal: “Children are not a distraction from more important work. They are the most important work.”

The elite have long been insulated from the effects of their piously pie-in-the-sky policies by doing such things as living in gated communities and sending their children to high-priced private schools.  As this article points out, they have even less reason today to worry about the effects of their futile utopianism.  This is probably a key reason why our leadership seems so out of touch with the people they allegedly lead, especially in the area of immigration.  It won’t be their children suffering from the resurgence of long-controlled diseases like measles and whooping cough.  It won’t be their children who will either have to fight or conform to alien ideologies that were allowed in through millions of adherents’ migration.   It won’t be their children who face falling wages due to competition from cheaper labor overseas and immigrant labor at home.  They can afford to wear utopian blinders in a way no parent can.

While I’ve excerpted a good bit, read the entire piece for yourself here.

Can the candles, already

For the past several years, a pattern keeps repeating:

1. Jihadist(s) conduct an attack in a Western country

2. Facebook allows users to “stand with ______” by changing their profile pic to include attacked country’s flag, while locals place piles of candles and flowers at the scene of the latest carnage.

3.  The chattering class preemptively expresses grave concern that the attack will cause locals to look less favorably on Islam, or provoke retaliatory assaults (how many of those have actually happened, by the way?).  None of our intrepid media moguls dig into the warped but widespread Islamic ideology behind the attacks…so these events are always “lone wolf” attackers, supposedly not representative of Islam itself.

4.  Authorities confirm the event was conducted by foreigners recently allowed into the country, often by requesting “asylum” (which, by the way, is where they need to be, not what they need to be given!).

5. Migrants continue to pour into the West, aided and abetted by our transnational ruling class, and the terror networks reload for the next round.

And we wonder why nothing changes.  Take, for example, this picture and caption that accompanies the Daily Mail’s (UK) coverage of the attack in Berlin:

is-this-defiance

How, exactly, do “flowers and candles defy the terrorists?” If I were a member of ISIS, I’d see photos like this as proof the West is the “weaker horse.”  Rather than create makeshift memorials, those who want to express concern should be putting extreme pressure on their ‘leaders’ to seal the $#%@ borders and start repatriations!  Why are people like Angela Merkel still in office?  The press spends more time trying to make the alternatives (like AfD or UKIP or the National Front) look like evil, when potential future assailants are being allowed into their countries daily!

When will people tire of this pattern?

When will the men of the West stand up to protect their women from a barbarous culture that places no limits on what can be done to them?

When will Westerners realize that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with our own civilization, and stop trying to force the two to coexist?

The sound of one side fighting

…while the other refuses to see–much less respond to–the ever-clearer pattern:

european_daily_terror_timeline_7-26-16-1

Far more troubling than the mounting body count and ever-more-frequent attacks is the flaccid response of Western “leaders.”  French Prime Minister Manuel Valls has said his countrymen must “learn to live” with terror attacks.  Germany’s Interior Minister warns his nation should expect more “lone wolf attacks,” while studiously avoiding the subject of how so many of those lone wolves are recent arrivals under a disastrously lax and greatly abused refugee policy.

Nor are these attitudes — or attacks — confined to the eastern side of the Atlantic.  Several years ago President Obama touted the ability of the U.S. to “absorb” another 9/11-scale attack.  In the time since, one could argue he’s made the likelihood of one much higher by importing hundreds of thousands of people from the war-torn Middle East.  Certainly we’ve seen the fruit of these attitudes in San Bernardino, Orlando, Boston and elsewhere.  So much for the idea of “fighting them over there.”

These “leaders” don’t care about the deaths of priests, doctors, or children out for a stroll on a national holiday.  All they care about is promoting their globalist aspirations and personal virtue-signalling, no matter the expense to their own people.  Globalists and multiculturalists are by definition traitors to their nation, and given the apparent consequences of their policies should be treated as such.

For the heart-on-the-sleeve hand-wringers out there who reflexively oppose any suggestion that immigration needs a time out, I have a few questions:

  1. How is it “compassionate” to support a policy that clearly results in the random deaths of your own countrymen?
  2. How is it “compassionate” to support a policy that results in seething resentment toward a group of aliens who are encouraged to migrate without assimilating, and live on the public dole?   This is no way to build bridges between peoples!
  3. How is it “compassionate” to allow such a large number of immigrants that your own nation’s cultural norms are threatened in the name of multiculturalism and tolerance?
  4. Is your compassion strong enough to lead you overseas to help, or only something you’re willing to satisfy at the expense of your own community by bringing the problems here?

I’m not immune to recognizing the suffering that goes on in other parts of the world — I’ve seen some of it first hand.  Which is why I’m not a fan of utopian “we are the world” policies that are far more likely to import such suffering here than they are to do anything else.

If our “leaders” want to show their humanitarian side, let them do it by personally going to the suffering areas of the world and working to alleviate and resolve the issues.  But let’s stop pretending the solution to all the world’s ills is to erase all the borders on the globe.  That’s clearly making the world even more of a mess.

Unless we find the backbone to shrug off juvenile name-calling as we do what needs doing to protect our own society, the war drums will only get louder as the Fifth Column gets larger.  If you think what Trump has to say on security and immigration looks scary, just let the trend depicted above continue for another election cycle or two.  His proposals will look downright cuddly compared to his political successor — and the public will be demanding even more hard lines.

There’s NOTHING “compassionate” about taking that path.  We’ve allowed the problems to fester for too long already — there are no easy, painless solutions.  And the longer we wait, the more pain will be involved.

Secure the borders – NOW!

Deport known criminals (including illegal immigrants) – NOW!

Throw the globalist traitors out of office – NOW!

The West MUST wake up

A tale of three headlines:

Paris terrorist was a Syrian refugee, says Greek government official

Syrian refugees beginning to arrive in New Orleans

Obama Increases Number of Syrian Refugees for U.S. Resettlement to 10,000

 

Nor is it just Syria from which we are likely importing future trouble.

Lots of people have posted “stand with France” type photos online or changed their Facebook profile picture to include the French flag.  When will we recognize that this accomplishes NOTHING except to give people an emotional outlet that vents the steam that should instead be fueling change?  It’s easy to conduct a few keystrokes to morally preen with the masses.  Joining those masses to demand — DEMAND! — our governments change their suicidal policies… well, that requires effort.  Can Americans and Europeans summon the will to bring their governments to heel?

The Pope today referred to a “piecemeal World War III.”  It’s true — our feckless leaders have allowed an ideology that refuses to coexist with any other to grow until it threatens all of us.  Can anyone doubt at this point that if ISIS or one of its fellow traveler groups came into possession of weapons of mass destruction that they would be used to kill thousands of civilians?  Instead of posting pictures online of Paris today, perhaps our time would be better spent imagining Paris today as a radioactive crater… then stopping to consider what needs to be done to prevent that future outcome.

There is an adage growing in prominence online: diversity + proximity = war.  Those acolytes of diversity whose impulses after an attack like yesterday are to shout “Islam is a religion of peace; not all Muslims are terrorists” would do well to realize that immigration plus terrorism is a threat to the ‘peaceful’ muslims, too.  Just ask the refugees in France whose camp caught fire last night.  A former coworker with whom I often disagree politically had this to say:

One gets tired of trying to fight against the impulse to prejudice and war. Everyone draws lines between friends and enemies. Everyone. Some say it’s the essential act of living together, which is the essential act of life. At the very least, it’s deep seated in human (as well as other animal) nature. For how long–how long–in the face of brutality and horror and loss, can people be expected to suspend judgment, make ourselves vulnerable, ignore emotionally compelling generalizations, and pay attention only to the individual, whom we know barely, if at all, without categorizing or assuming in the least? One gets tired.

And then you see that refugees who’ve fled to France to escape ISIS and the madness in Syria are being burned in their tents in Calais. The Socialist president Hollande promises to be pitiless. And terrorist attacks and astounding courage in Beirut or Kobani go completely unremarked, as if they couldn’t matter less. And you remember the pitilessness and brutality of French colonialism in Lebanon, and Syria, and so many other places, much less than a century ago. And you remember this: that people drawing bright lines between friends and enemies always, always, always do it badly, and do it even worse when they’re afraid…

Keep fighting against that ugly, mean, and cowardly prejudice, as well as brutality and horror.

He — and the Pope — have an important point here.  This clash of civilizations has been allowed to go on for close to three decades (it well precedes 9/11, though most TV-absorbed Americans could hardly be expected to realize that).  The longer such a slow-motion struggle goes on, the more it hardens the hearts on both sides.  For the sake not only of the West, but for the ability of non-jihad-inclined Muslims to live in peace, we MUST find a way to end this.  The best chance of doing so would seem to be in separating two fundamentally incompatible worldviews.

What might that look like?  Well, for starters:

  • SEAL THE BORDERS!  (I’ve been saying this for some time, and not just in the context of preventing terrorism)
  • Immediate ban on further immigration from the region of jihad: essentially an arc from sub-Saharan Africa through Iraq and Iran to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Indonesia, including — especially — Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon.  That includes ANY kind of visa, including temporary work or student visas.  For those who instantly want to cry out this is somehow unfair, I say this: pose your objections to the dead in Paris last night.  Life doesn’t always resolve into fair and unfair — sometimes it’s necessary to take a mildly distasteful act to prevent acts of carnage.  (Note: see update at bottom of post)
  • Immediate arrest and trial for treason for any figure who has in the past or in the future solicits financial or material support for ISIS, al Qada, Hezbollah, Hamas or the general concept of jihad.  Conviction — in an open courtroom subject to public scrutiny and oversight — should result in death.  It’s time to stop playing around — these people are invoking wanton death and destruction and it’s time that effort redounds to them instead.
  • A ban on any kind of ‘charitable contributions’ or financial support from the nations listed above coming into Europe or the United States.  All too often this is a network of financial support for the spreading of Wahhabism and the funding of terror networks — usually (particularly in the case of Saudi Arabia) with the complicity of the ruling families of the Middle East.  It is no less than active subversion, and should be recognized and banned as such.
  • A concerted effort, on the scale of the Manhattan Project if necessary, to develop fusion energy and other alternatives to fossil fuels, the proceeds from the sale of which end up in the hands of the House of Saud and other royal families who are far too inclined to use the profits to sow seeds of terrorism.  I’m not a climate change alarmist, but if you TRULY want to change the world, starving these groups of cash would be a good start.
  • Deglamorization of Islam in Western academia.  Yes, there have been fine works of art and literature produced in the Muslim world.  But a fair comparison of the fruits of that world compared with the advance of individual human liberty and dignity under Western Civilization should be standard fare in any education.  “By their fruits you will know them.”

In short, despite the emotional outpouring after 9/11, the growth of an unConstitutional surveillance state and the enormous expense of bumbling around in Afghanistan and Iraq, we have as a society been manifestly unserious about combating a deadly ideology that has infested our lands and continues to grow in potency.  That is why despite massive military operations overseas we have had a steady stream of violence at home: the Boston Marathon, shootings at Ft Hood and military recruiting offices, attempted violence in Texas, and the Charlie Hebdo shootings in France (not even a year ago!), just to name a few.

What good does it do to spend more on “defense” than the next 13 nations combined, when we open all the gates and allow our enemies to walk among us?  It’s time to stop worrying about being called “intolerant” for opposing real intolerance.  Our enemies have said openly that there’s only room for one system of belief.  It’s time we took that at face value and acted accordingly.  There is plenty of space in the Middle East for those who want to jihad amongst themselves.  We don’t have to import their nihilism into the West.  If we continue to do so, the day will come where intolerance results towards all Muslims, “peaceful” or not.

None of us should want that, any more than we want dozens to die in a major European capital.  So do we separate and live in peace, or do we allow our “elites” to continue their ridiculous experiment with forced diversity?  Will the next election mark a turning point in Americans demanding action of their government, or will we once again post our sympathetic pictures then hit the snooze button, waiting until a nuclear-fueled act of terror results in a backlash that will forever change the West AND the Muslim world?

Tick, tick, tick…

 

UPDATE: a friend privately messaged me that while he agrees with the overall post, an outright ban on immigration from the countries listed would be problematic because many persecuted Christians need to leave there in order to live.  He’s correct.  But as if to compound the imbecility of our immigration policy, about the only group that DOES have trouble getting access to the U.S. or the West is the Persecuted Church.  I absolutely agree we need to make accommodation for them, but I suspect our ‘leaders’ see that as possibly strengthening the very Church in the West to which they are actively hostile.

We literally live in a hell of a time…

The West is not dead yet

Poland’s “Solidarity” movement was a leader of the resistance to communism in the 1980s.  It appears that kind of spirit is still alive.  Let’s hope this kind of public expression catches on… and that it pressures our ‘leaders’ to listen:

Polish football (soccer) fans unveiled an enormous anti mass migration banner at Sunday’s Silesian Wrocław match against Poznań. Images from the match last night show a giant crusader defending Europe from invading jihadists in boats labelled USS Hussein, USS Bin Laden and USS ISIS.

Just a week after Poland voted to kick out every left-wing member of it’s national parliament, ordinary Poles have again shown the spirit which led them to elect the nationalist conservative Law and Justice party, with football fans unveiling an over-sized anti-migration banner at Sunday’s match.

The hand-painted sheet, which is estimated to have been at least 50 feet tall and 75 feet wide depicts boatloads of migrants preparing to land on the southern shore of Europe. Many of the boat’s crews make the one fingered ‘ISIS salute’. …

Underneath, another 100 foot wide banner hangs from the stalls behind the goal and reads, in a traditional Polish script: “Let Us Stand In Defence Of Christianity”.

For those who’ve forgotten — or fallen victim to revisionist history that always paints the West as the only bad guys, the original Crusades grew out of a response to several hundred years of militant Islamic expansion after 632 AD.  While I agree there were excesses that should not be repeated, the basic idea — defending Christendom from Mohammed’s misguided minions — is one worth reviving.

Let those who want the supposed advantages of multiculturalism migrate somewhere else and see how that works out for them…

Defend Christianity