The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Month: August 2016

The Rule of Reason: A Last Great Hope

A Last Great Hope: April 2016


A guest column

What follows is an especially articulate
and unedited endorsement of Donald Trump,
who, following the primaries, has become the Republican Party’s de facto
nominee for President. Trump’s statements fly in the face of the political
establishment’s policy of stealth socialism and submitting America to “global”
priorities and agendas. Trump is an outsider not beholden to the socialist GOP,

and his statements and positions are already eviscerating the “Grand Old Party”
and sending its flock of status-quo hens and chickens fleeing hither and yon like
headless chickens in the Washington barnyard. We know, however, given the GOP’s
caliber, and also as the “Me, Too” party that takes its lead from the looting,
welfare state Democrats, that members of the GOP are conspiring to block Trump’s
nomination by fair means and foul.  But,
a clearer and more accurate policy statement you won’t find in the news media
or from any other former or prospective candidate.  Edward Cline

Why
Trump Deserves to Win the American Election

by Olivia Pierson  April 28, 2016

“My foreign policy
will always put the interests of the American people, and American security,
above all else. That will be the foundation of every decision that I will make.
America first will be the major and overriding theme of my
administration.”
  Donald J Trump.


If Americans still care about the legacy they once wrought out of a raw but
magnificent continent, if they still give a damn about prosperity, security and
freedom, then Trump ought to be their man.

Watching from a far off country gives one a certain measure of objectivity when
viewing the American Presidential elections, but one thing is indisputable:
love him or hate him, Trump oozes the All-American spirit of advancement,
achievement and strong familial ties.


Since 2008 and the election of President Obama, the world has watched America
slide backwards.  Grownup politics has been replaced by a revolting
imposter – Social Justice Warrior politics.  I’ve often thought Obama
looks like a guy who cares more about just getting an approving hug from any
random stranger than he does about the success of his own country; a country
which in many respects has always played an impossibly important part in
helping to forge the future of the whole world. Obama has been a boy playing at
being a president, with dangerous results.

In direct contrast to the current president, Trump is a real man, and a real
achiever.  He’s the stuff of gruff charm and hard-out competence, whose
appeal largely has its roots in the appeal of the classic Alpha male. He’s big,
bold, brash and boastful, at least he is when he’s locked in a competition –
and given that the competition to become a president is outrageously difficult,
that’s exactly the sort of spirit I want to see win.

But apart from these personality impressions, I feel a sense of relief when I
hear him state some of his policies.  I didn’t realize how much I’d given
up on ever hearing a presidential hopeful say the things which are now going to
go down in history as Trumpisms.

1. A temporary ban on Islamic immigration into the United States. 

This is way beyond important. It should have been an imperative straight after
the perpetrators of 9/11 wreaked their terrible murder on US citizens one clear
and beautiful morning. This was a profound act of war, but its soldiers were
hiding.  It doesn’t matter if many Muslims might be innocent, so long as
they are the adherents of a bloody and backward superstition which is hostile
to the West, whose holy-book not only allows for, but actually calls for acts
of murder, they should be viewed with rational suspicion by anyone who claims
to care about having a developed society. The safety and security of American
citizens needs to be upheld first, second and last by their president. The
United States is not automatically responsible for being the benefactor of all
peoples who live in foreign lands – even if they do just want to go to
Disneyland.

Now that Trump has laid out his Foreign Policy, a policy which is basically a
return to “no foreign entanglements” that are not within the
self-interest of the United States (unless they are paid handsomely for the
privilege), Americans can rest assured that if he should become President
Trump, they will have the hardest of fighters, the toughest of negotiators and
a man of immense instinctive talent representing their foreign interests.

2. The building of The Wall (which Mexico is going to pay for).

As Carly Fiorina pointed out many times in the primary debates, the stemming of
illegal immigration into the States through the southern border has been talked
about and debated, with only half-ass measures being enacted for about 30
years.  Action to actually stop this flow has been pitiful.  We now
know that  ISIS can and have sent operatives straight through that
border.
  Are people under the illusion that the Mexican government is
going to extend big efforts to put a stop to this? They don’t even stop their
own people (good and bad) from crossing.  So now a nominee who has a
spectacular history of building huge, complicated projects is stating that he’s
going to build a wall across this rogue border.  Amen!  The safety
and security of American citizens needs to be upheld first, second and last by
their president. The United States is not automatically responsible for being
the benefactor of all peoples who live in foreign lands – even if they do just
want to go to Disneyland.

3. Rethinking NATO.

It has become typical now of the news media to shriek and spit every time Trump
says something sane.  His desire to rethink NATO is a classic example of
this. As it now stands, NATO consists of: Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada,
Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherland, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United
States.

NATO’s stated purpose is this (taken from the official NATO website): the Alliance’s creation was part of
a broader effort to serve three purposes: deterring Soviet expansionism,
forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong
North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political
integration.

Not only has Soviet expansionism into Ukraine and Crimea occurred without any
backlash from NATO, the whole world has watched Europe staunchly uphold its
weak-spirited commitment to fashionable cradle-to-grave socialism and unlimited
“tolerance.” In so doing, their commitment to multiculturalism has been totally
paramount.  They have allowed unprecedented Islamic immigration into its
respective countries, (some more than others) culminating recently with the
Islamic Immigration Crisis; welfare dependent Muslims which Germany is forcing
all other countries in the EU to accept, whether they want them or not. 
EU hopeful, Turkey, is negotiating this flood of people, who are most assuredly
not just coming from war-torn Syria!  Deeply hostile to Russia, who he
accuses of intensifying the conflict and resultant refugees into his land (an
accusation I have no doubt is true), Erdogan threatens to further flood Europe
with many more millions of Muslim refugees.  Read here about the next coming Immigration Crisis.

Turkey is a deeply Islamic nation which refuses to make war on ISIS but would
happily bomb the Kurds to oblivion.  They are no longer the Turks of Kemal
Ataturk’s liberal imperatives. President Erdogan is the devout Muslim who
states that, “there is
no such thing as moderate or immoderate Islam: Islam is Islam, and that’s it!”
(And
here is the West trying to sort Islam out into nice, neat, palatable categories
– that which is lethal, that which is peaceful, that which is in between.) We
should take Erdogan at his word – he knows a thing or two about that of which
he speaks.  Peaceful, violent, latent, nominal or radical, Islam is all
one ideology.  The differing sects (among them Shia & Sunni are just
the narcissism of small difference – similar to a Methodist arguing with a
Jehovah’s Witness, except neither the Methodist nor the JW will shed each
other’s blood over their differences).  Those who kill in Islam’s name are
the ones who take their religion literally.  They are the ones whom their
prophet would call “Good Muslims.”

A return to Nationalism and a breaking away from the EU may just be the only
way for these small countries to protect their cultures from being swamped and
Islamicized (under orders from multicultural-obsessed Brussels) – yet one of
NATO’s stated reasons for existence is to forbid Nationalist militarism. 
Can you see a poisonous dilemma brewing here which America will be pulled into?
Trump can; hence his wariness on NATO and his bold statement to rethink it
all.  It will take a mighty heart and diplomatic brain to sort through the
mess that is NATO, especially with Russia fanning the flames with its dangerous
bedfellows ie: Iran and Syria. The safety and security of American citizens needs
to be upheld first, second and last by their president.  The United States
is not automatically responsible for being the benefactor of all peoples who
live in foreign lands – even if they do not want to go to Disneyland.

 4. Enough with the PC Feminazi Nonsense! (Okay, not technically a policy)


When Megyn Kelly, in the first Fox-hosted Primary debate, asked the awful
question of Trump…

    “You’ve
called women you don’t like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals… For
the record, it was way beyond Rosie O’Donnell… Your Twitter account has
several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on
the Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees.
Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as
president? And how do you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton – that you are
part of the war on women?”

…it caused a furore which went on for months and months, and to which Donald
Trump remained admirably unapologetic.  He knew he was being hit hard by
the Humourless-Harriet; politically correct feminist nonsense which has
emasculated men for several generations now.  Frankly, Kelly was dealing
with the wrong type of man, and has suffered Trump’s contempt ever since; a thing
which has hurt her as the top darling of the Fox News Channel in a contentious
election, more than it has hurt Trump.  She may as well have asked him,
“When did you stop raping your wife?”   Trump was rightly galled that
this was considered to be “good moderation” from the nation’s best
journalists.


This is where even Trump’s foibles are All-American in their essence.  He
is a lover of beautiful women, of which Kelly is one, but if women try this
emasculation shit out on the likes of him, especially drawing on examples of
his alleged behaviour from his life as a non-political businessman, they’re
toast.  He subsequently refused to be interviewed by her, he verbally
hammered her in public and he even declined to attend a debate which she was to
moderate.  The ongoing nature of the feud was devastating to Kelly, so
much so that she recently said she was thinking about not renewing her contract with Fox because it had been hard,
not only on her, but also on her boss Roger Ailes.

It is so typical of the feminist mindset to want to play hardball with the men,
then run and cry to other men to take a stand to defend you.  Kelly made
the comment that she was disappointed her colleague, Bill O’Reilly, didn’t make
more of an effort to defend her.  Why would he?  She had been warned
by her co-moderators Brett Baier and Chris Wallace, when they were running over
the questions before the fatal debate, that if she persisted in that kind of
questioning, there would be a lot of pushback (their male instincts were right
on cue).  She insisted on having her way. Well, she didn’t just get
pushback, she managed to alienate a potential future president from her network
(which since seems to have resolved itself, no thanks to Megyn’s own charms).

Kelly then invited the disgusting, sneering, morbidly obese, even uglier than
Rosie O’Donnell, Marxist lowlife, Michael Moore, on to her show to bottom -feed
with her about Trump’s decision to skip the next debate. Michael f**king
Moore!!  A man who is militantly hostile to Western values and everything
America has traditionally stood for.  They giggled and indulged in words
of admiration with each other – enough to make a grown-girl hurl. 
Suddenly Trump’s insults about Megyn’s being a “bimbo” and “overrated” started
to make an awful amount of sense. 

It has now come to light that in order to calm this feud, Kelly has reached out
to Trump personally and gone to Trump Tower for a meeting.  The result is
an upcoming one-on-one interview with Trump on Fox, scheduled for May 17th. We’ll see how that works out, but
I’m betting Grandma’s creamiest pearls that Kelly will conduct herself with a
renewed sense of respect, and for that Trump will reward her with his time and
attention.

Trump won by not fawning over an uppity little femme with a fashionably
gratuitous absorption in resentment of the opposite sex (the feminist
agenda).  If this is going to be typical of what is in store for Hillary
should he win the nomination, I can’t wait.  Especially considering that hiding in Hillary’s filthy feminist closet are
toe-curling stories about her own personal war on the women who  allege that they were
sexually assaulted by her own husban
d, and then systematically besmirched and threatened by
Hillary in the Clintons’ long ascent to attain the Whitehouse.  If she
thinks Trump is going to go easy on her because she’s choosing to build her
campaign around playing the “woman” card, then she is in for the ride of her
life.  One I believe she will lose, because some part of me still actually
believes that while scum often does rise to the top, it can be blown away by
the vim of a powerful challenger with right on his side.  I hope America
proves me right.

BIG EDIT:
I’m just going to add right here that I have noticed many, many Right-leaning
people and above all, Libertarians, suffer from a massive snob-factor in
holding on for dear life to their Trump Derangement Syndrome. People who
consider themselves “intellectuals” take issue with his apparent lack
of smarty-man clever talk about The Constitution and Individual Rights,
forgetting that the human quality of AUTHENTICTY trumps, and should trump
cleverdickness on any day of the week in human affairs. People of aesthetic
sensibility take issue with his Liberace hair do, his Nouveau Rokoko palatial,
gold-drenched residence and white piano.
People who only care about the Free Market forget
that they have never lived in one, but somehow Trump is this radical, unusual
newcomer who is going to rob them of it (forgetting America does business
everyday with countries who do not observe anything close to a free market
standard). There are also those who take issue with Trump’s wanting to ban
Islamic immigration, totally dropping context of the fact that America has been
in a war since 9.11 with Islam – that Islam has declared and America has
pretended to be oblivious to. I am so disgusted with these people for
pretending to have such “great judgment” yet are not able to see their
own shocking propensity for context dropping, despite their self-proclaimed
intellectual prowess.
They, in their various critiques, get to feel superior to Trump in
some f**ked up way – and that is the only emotion which carries them along in
their criticism and Derangement Syndrome. I hope they have the good grace to
let me know when they have created a family fortune of 10 billion plus, have
the heart, guts and competence to want to save their country from becoming a
“once was” civilization. I hope they let me know when they have 2
ex-wives as good friends, along with five high-functioning kids who absolutely
adore them – and, more importantly, want to learn from them. I won’t hold my
breath.

http://www.oliviapierson.org/blog/why-trump-deserves-to-win-the-american-election

The “Mental Illness” of Islamic PC

Daniel Greenfield comments on how the authorities
(East, West, South, and North) engage in tongue-twisting, mental gymnastics to
avoid “offending” the Islamic Ummah by ascribing the latest stabbing, rape, or
murder by a member of the Muslim flock to “mental illness” or lack of
employment opportunities, and other external drivers. The Press complies with
the explanations also for fear of raising the lice-ridden hackles of Muslims. The
latest episode occurred in Australia.

A model of madness


The
media is describing the Muslim terrorist as a French man. Because if it’s
anything the French are known for, it’s shouting “Allahu Akbar”. and
stabbing random non-Muslims
.
A
French national allegedly shouted “Allahu akbar” during and after a stabbing
attack that left a British woman dead and another Briton fighting for his life
at a backpackers hostel outside of Townsville last night.
Possible
extremist motivations for the attack are now being investigated by Queensland
Police and the Australian Federal Police, with the man yet to be questioned by
investigators.
Queensland
Police Service Deputy Commissioner Steve Gollschewski said the 29 -year-old
French man shouted the phrase following the attack at the hostel at Home Hill,
south of Townsville, but police had not determined whether the incident was
terror related.
Who
knows? Maybe the “French” stabber was expressing his Francophonic
distaste of Brits by shouting Allahu Akbar. 
“While
this information will be factored into the investigation, we are not ruling out
any motivations at this stage, whether they be political or criminal,” he told
reporters in Brisbane.
“Investigators
will also consider whether mental health or drug misuse factors are involved in
this incident.”
Many
stones will not be overturned in the
search for a motive, particularly those marked with the telltale symbol of “Islam.”
We don’t want to offend Muslims by blaming Islam for horrendous crimes randomly
committed by a “radicalized” Muslim. “Allahu Akbar” just might be his misspoken
utterance of “I’m a little teapot!” and the fellow had a speech impediment that
aggravated his emotional outbreak!
So, heads are being scratched in Australia – call
it a kind of infectious, epistemological psoriasis – in France, Britain,
Germany, and in the U.S. because, you see, anyone shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he
stabs away at a “random non-Muslim” cannot be said to be a jihadi or an
“immigrant” or a “refugee.” That would be a defamation of the man’s character,
and would come automatically under the rubric of “hate speech” and/or
“Islamophobia,” which is by PC definition a “crime.” But if the evidence is
overwhelming concerning his “motivation” and individuals refuse to grant it any
role in the crime, who is the actual mentally ill person? Or is he a kind of
mental doppelganger of the criminal?

The mental illness being reported has two classes
of the afflicted: Muslims, who are by definition mentally ill (who else but
someone not in his right mind would exalt a killer, rapist, bandit, all in the
name of AllahWall – Wallah for short – as a moral ideal, and expect everyone
else to acknowledge and defer to the sanity of the insanity, or else), and the
Mainstream Media (MSM) or the Massagers of the Seven Mongoloids.
                                                                                                                
Let us examine mental illness.
A Wikipedia article
begins:
A mental disorder
(also called a mental illness,[1]
or psychiatric disorder) is a diagnosis,
most often by a psychiatrist, of a behavioral or mental pattern that
may cause suffering
or a poor ability to function in life. Such
features may be persistent, relapsing and remitting, or occur as a single
episode. Many disorders have been described, with signs and symptoms that vary
widely between specific disorders….
   
Patterns of belief,
language use and perception of reality can become disordered (e.g., delusions, thought
disorder
, hallucinations). Psychotic disorders in this domain include schizophrenia,
and delusional disorder. Schizoaffective disorder is a category
used for individuals showing aspects of both schizophrenia and affective
disorders. Schizotypy
is a category used for individuals showing some of the characteristics
associated with schizophrenia but without meeting cutoff criteria.
Common mental disorders
include depression, which affects about 400
million, dementia
which affects about 35 million, and schizophrenia,
which affects about 21 million people globally. Stigma
and discrimination can add to the suffering
and disability
associated with mental disorders, leading to various social
movements
attempting to increase understanding and challenge social
exclusion
.
Let’s just say that Islam incubates all the
categories of these “mental disorders,” especially if the “pattern of belief,”
a certain language, and a skewed “perception of reality” figure largely in a
Muslim’s daily thoughts and routines and infect everything he does or feels. From
day one of his existence he is a product of the Islamic hatchery, taught to
hove rigidly and unquestioningly in preparation to emerge as a devout Muslim
(when he reaches biological adulthood or post-adolescence) and non-entity in
the eyes of his imaginary deity. One could say that reaching maturity in an
Islamic environment has steadily undercut and sabotaged his cognitive faculties
and powers of reason, and that he is as much of “victim” of Islam as are the
many thousands of non-Muslims killed by Muslims. Let us say that he sees the
world, others, and himself with borrowed eyes, eyes as evil as Rasputin’s – or
Mohammad’s.
But few of us have ever encountered a Muslim who was
uncomfortable with the status of being a permanent mental cripple, and
who would  never risk breaking from a
lifetime habit of not thinking, of not fearing thought itself, and of  not feeling a seething hate of those who don’t
hesitate to question and think. Your average jihadi down deep to the
core of his soul (or of his mind) fears and hates reality more than he does the
infidel. In the midst of raping, knifing, bombing, or torturing his victims, aside
from shouting “Allahu Akbar!” his inner voice is screaming, “You did not
conform to my reality! This is your punishment! You cannot be allowed to
remain in existence! Wallah orders me to wipe you out! He does not really favor
the compassionate! Die! Die and suffer! Be shamed! You are conquered!”
The average Muslim is as much a prisoner of Islamic
Political Correctness
as Westerners are prisoners of secular,
mind-shackling political correctness. But while Western PC allows one some
“elbow room” to negotiate reality, Islam locks Muslims in a mental
straightjacket, one which disables whatever minimal link to reality they might
have, and turns them into self-destructive Golems, or walking-talking,
half-human automatons, many passive, others who do not feel “real” until they work
themselves into a frenzy of malice. Every criminal action committed by a jihadi
is meant to be a strike against reality, and destruction is perceived to be a
corrective remedy, destruction for destruction’s sake, of the good for being
the good. Wallah wills it! So it must be done! Else Wallah will frown at the
candidate jihadi if he fails to act and deny him that perfect state of
non-existence, Paradise.
Muslims might have an excuse for their mental
illness. There can be none for Westerners such as Commissioner Gollschewski and
his colleagues in Australia (and elsewhere around the globe). His job
necessarily requires the grasping of criminal evidence, and if he refuses to
grant evidence any role in his investigation, then he is of no use to anyone,
he is guilty of a miscarriage of justice, and may as well be abetting the
commission of more Islam-inspired crime. The same can be said about any
cravenly PC dhimmi in law enforcement anywhere.

Complicit in abetting Islamic crime is the MSM,
whose shoulders are heavily flaked with years of dandruff from its own
congenital head scratching about Islam. The MSM is as delusional about Islam as
are Muslims.

The Howlers of Our Moon Bats

Moon bat has replaced mooncalf as a colloquial term for a fool, halfwit, dunce, moron,
etc. One could just as well say it is synonymous with Muslim and Progressive
Howling at the moon is an idiom meaning making an utterly
ludicrous, transparently insane remark stated as a truism. It designates a statement
that contradicts obvious or demonstrable evidence, and is contrary to what is
clearly true, or to what is relevant to the facts. It isn’t certain yet why
wolves howl at the moon, but we are certain that Progressivism and Islam cause
human moon bats to howl at reality. Here are a few instances:
Reuters
editors and the filterers of other news sources must have snickered when on
August 17th they reported Chancellor Angela Merkel stating bald-faced that
Germany’s violence is not caused by the “immigrants” or the barbaric
“refugees.” They somehow didn’t bring rape, murder, and terrorism to Germany
(or to Sweden, France, and other European nations). It’s those nasty jihadists
who wish to terrorize Germany into submission. But they’ve already done that.
They don’t practice the same Islam as the non-entities who can be seen on
German streets pushing their welfare state paid prams of future “Germans.”
“The phenomenon of Islamist terrorism, of IS, is not a phenomenon
that came to us with the refugees,” Merkel said at an election campaign
event for her Christian Democrats in the eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
ahead of a regional vote on Sept. 4.
The influx of migrants, many of whom are Muslim, has boosted support for
the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD), which is expected to perform
well in elections in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Berlin.
“We have said clearly that an Islam that works and lives on the
basis of the constitution … belongs to Germany,” Merkel said.
She added that a type of Islam that did not stick to the constitution or
accept equal rights for women had no place in the country.
Clueless or
lying on her reelection stump, it does not occur to Merkel that Islam will not “stick to the constitution” of
Germany, as Islam regards man-made law as an abomination to AllahWalla. Under
Sharia law, there are no “equal rights” for women, nor for non-Muslim infidels,
nor for homosexuals, nor for anyone else but Muslim males.
Which see
So, set you (O Muhammad [sal-Allâhu ‘alayhi wa
sallam]) your face towards the religion (of pure Islâmic Monotheism) Hanîf
(worship none but Allâh Alone). Allâh’s Fitrah (i.e. Allâh’s Islâmic
Monotheism) with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in
Khalq-illâh (i.e. the religion of Allâh – Islâmic Monotheism), that is the
straight religion, but most of men know not. (Tafsir At-Tabarî)}
(Ar¬-Rûm:30)
And, apparently, Angela Merkel knows not of what she speaks. But,
what she worry?  Islam belongs to and in
Germany.
“Former president Wulff said Islam belongs to Germany.
That is true. I also hold this opinion,” Merkel
said at a news conference
with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, who
also took part with other world leaders in the Paris march on Sunday.” [January
12, 2015] 
Rather, Germany now belongs to
Islam, thanks to Wulff and Merkel, who opened the gates and borders to the
migrant invasion. This would be a truer statement.

Let’s now turn to another moon
bat, Tim Kaine, former governor of Virginia who helped to turn the cradle of
the American Republic into a “blue state” vassal of Progressivism. On August
17th, Daniel Greenfield on FrontPage
wrote of him, 

Hillary Clinton and her entourage have had everything undeservedly handed
to them on a silver platter. And yet they never stop hating America.
Tim Kaine, Hillary’s ridiculous buffoon of a VP, who is running as
number two to a female presidential candidate, decided to take his ridiculous
hatred of America to a new level by claiming that America is worse
for women than Afghanistan
.
Greenfield asks, “Does Kaine really believe that women have
more political opportunities in Afghanistan than they do in America? Is he that
stupid or does he hate his country that much?” I would answer both: He is that stupid and he hates America. But he keeps his thickness and malice in the
background. 
Next up for a baying is our Community Organizer in Chief,
Barack Obama, who, among his many other lies and gaffs, has claimed that
“climate change” is more a threat to national security than is ISIS or hundreds
of thousands of Syrian “refugees” of the Islamic persuasion who are being
invited to emulate Angela Merkel’s invasion-by-invitation of this country. As
the Free
Beacon
reported on December 1st, 2015, 
            A new
SuperCut video contrasts doomsday rhetoric from the Obama administration about
climate change with news clips of terrorist attacks, plane bombings and
beheadings by the Islamic State.
            President
Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State John Kerry offer the
following words in the video about climate change.
            “Today,
there is no greater threat to our planet than climate change.”
            “No
challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.”
            “It
is indeed one of the biggest threats facing our planet today.”
            “Climate
change is the threat multiplier.”
Far be it from Obama to realize that
he is his own “threat multiplier.” But I think he knows it. Everything he has
done over the last eight years has been to weaken the U.S. and to make it
vulnerable to Islamic terror. He has been our first, blatantly, conscious “Evil
Executive” in pursuit of unlimited and unopposed executive power. 

Of course, the Father of Hockey
Sticks, Al Gore, worried that he will be forgotten, uttered his own inanity. Truth
Revolt
reported on August 23rd, 
After the floods had
hit Baton Rouge, Louisiana, last week, former vice president and
self-proclaimed global warming guru Al Gore coined the natural disaster as “one
of the manifestations of climate change.”                                                    
As The
Washington Times
notes, news articles followed with the same line. The
New York Times
wrote, “Flooding in the South looks a lot like climate
change.” The Green Party of Louisiana declared a “climate state of emergency.”
And at least one meteorologist said “we’ve reached a new meteorological era”
because of global warming, or climate change… or whatever they call it now.
So, that’s settled, right? Not according to most experts. Some see no
evidence that links this flood to climate change, unlike global warming
alarmists….
But then again, maybe Al Gore is just excited. It is the 25th anniversary
of the World Wide Web, after all, and since he invented it, he’s probably just
celebrating with something else he invented: global warming hype.
Not to be left out of the howling, is Secretary of State John
Kerry, who competes with Vice President Joe Biden to utter the best and most
memorable inanities. In November 2015 Breitbart
put together a file of them:
BOSTON – Secretary of State John Forbes Kerry is a dunce, and
has a record of making preposterously stupid and offensive statements dating
back to 1971.
In fact, if you go onto Google and type in “John Kerry gaffe,” you will
get 350,000 hits.
At the U.S. embassy in Paris Tuesday, he did it again, with perhaps his
most obnoxious, tone-deaf public pronouncement yet. Speaking to State
Department staffers, he compared the two Muslim terrorist massacres in France
this year – shooting up the magazine offices of Charlie Hebdo and
then last Friday’s celebration of diversity, which left 129 dead.
“There’s something different about
what happened (Friday) from Hedbo,” the 71-year-old Yale graduate said, “and I
think everybody would feel that. There was a sort of particularized focus and
perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of – not legitimacy – but a rationale that
you could attach yourself to somehow and okay they’re really angry because of
this or that.”
Yes, he backed off, immediately and
then again yesterday. But however you parse it, he rationalized slaughtering people
for exercising free speech. This is the guy the Democrats promoted for
president in 2004 as being “smarter” than his fellow Yale grad, George W. Bush,
despite the fact that Kerry’s GPA was slightly lower.
Doubtless President Obama refers to Kerry, the “marry up to
riches” parasite and the guy who claims to have “swift-boated” his Army rewards
out the window, as one of his two prize dumb-ass honkies, the other being Joe
Biden.
And the MSM pack loves to hear them howl, and often joins in
the serenade with its own brand of inanity. But then the MSM is populated with its
own species of moon bats, and they’re fanged and carry rabies.

The foregoing quotations are all “howlers,” but they’re not funny. 

The Faces of Evil

Imagine for a moment you are in a U.S. post office, and while
standing in line to buy stamps, you take a look at the latest “Wanted” poster
featuring the mug shots of the “Most Wanted” killers, thieves, bandits,
rapists, and corrupt political leaders who have, after the 2016 election, been
booted out of power and sent to prison or banished from public life, never to
threaten any person’s life and livelihood ever again, either with ill-gotten
money or a submission-or-else ideology.   
They
were all sent scurrying for cover in their fortress-like enclaves, pursued by
the authorities and grand jury indictments. They are the paragons of evil unleashed
upon civilized
, unarmed citizens in America and in Europe. Now they have
been neutralized and brought up on pages of criminal charges. Some have eluded capture;
others have been cornered in their caves or “safe” houses, or lured into traps
by the Texas Rangers and local authorities working with a reconstituted FBI,
much as Bonnie and Clyde were exterminated on a back road of Louisiana. (former
FBI Director James Comey, who once detailed Clinton’s treachery and lies but
refused to recommend an indictment, was demoted to the Bureau’s mail room as a
second-assistant mail sorter and pusher of mail carts). 

George Soros, who once boasted that helping the Nazis rob condemned
Jews of their property was the “happiest” time of his life, was a billionaire
who funded many of the Progressive/left wing groups that worked to bring down America
to the level of a political stew-pot of no specific identity as long as Americans
were reduced to poverty and submission to Islam. All societies, to him, were
pliant, fungible, and open to retransformation into ones in which he was
comfortable. Once compared himself to Machiavelli.

Former President Barack Obama’s
chief goal was to destroy America and her people, to turn it into an ossuary
and the people into skeletons of their former selves. “My many minions
throughout the country are ‘shovel-ready’! I asked them here from Mexico and
Syria. It ain’t gonna be a knife fight, and I’m gonna laugh my head off
watching you honkies run! You shoot back, you get shot!”

As the Patron Saint of Lies, Hillary Clinton here
attempts to combine the insouciance of George Soros and the Mussolini-like
jutting jaw pose of Obama. The picture was taken shortly after she said during
a “Ready for Hillary” rally, “You Americans will tolerate Somali rapists and
Syrian beheaders and like it, or I’ll reopen Gitmo, just for you! Then you’ll
see what a difference it makes!”

Heikki Saukkomaa/REX  2001
Saint Angela Merkel,
former Chancellor of Germany, photographed praying that no Muslims come after
her. Advisors close to her, however, assured her that she was in no danger of
gang rape, being too plump and homely, as well. Many of her hapless citizens
were attacked with her leave. Her philosophy to Germans: “Like it and lump it.
You’re being culturally enriched. To resist rape, or any kind of assault, or blaspheme Islam by
complaining about it, is treason! Just kiss your criminal and make up!” Rather, her closest advisors said that Muslims would come after her with a sharpened ax
– but that was before the Germans got to her first in a retribution that was
long overdue.

After a bath, a visit to the barber shop for a trim,
and the return of his garb from the dry cleaners, Islamic gang-leader Mohammed posed for a quick study and
liked the image so much he forgave the defamer, but forgot to autograph it. Fled
from the scene as he was dressing in a transgender bathroom in a Target store. He
was an undocumented illegal alien and a pedophile and cradle-robber supreme. Outstanding
warrants in 50 states, the UK, Australia, Sweden, and Germany. Whereabouts unknown.
Muslims claim to have never seen him, not knowing what he really looked like.
 

“…A long train of abuses and usurpations….”

Thomas Jefferson wrote in the
Declaration of Independence, in detailing the numerous charges against King
George III, that “…mankind are disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing the same Object
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it
is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for
their future security.”

Jefferson, the Judge


Does this not describe the
administration of Barack Obama? His eight-year tenure in the White House has
been nothing less than a “train of abuses and usurpations,” abuses of the
office of president and usurpations of Congressional authority. His “Object”
has always been to reduce Americans under absolute Despotism. 
In 1920, H.L. Mencken made some
observations that have proven to be prescient and not altogether irrelevant to
the character of today’s Social Justice Warriors, aspiring collectivists, and
nation transformers:
“No doubt my distaste for
democracy as a political theory is…a defect that is a good deal less in the
theory than in myself.  In this case it
is very probably my incapacity for envy….The fact that John D. Rockefeller had
more money than I have is as uninteresting to me as the fact that he believed
in total immersion and wore detachable cuffs.
“Thus I am never envious, and
so it is impossible for me to feel any sympathy for men who are. Per corollary, it is impossible for me
to get any glow out of such hallucinations as democracy and Puritanism, for if
you pump envy out of them you empty them of their life blood: they are all
immovably grounded upon the inferior man’s hatred of the man who is having a better
time. There is only one honest impulse at the bottom of Puritanism, and the
impulse is to punish the man  with a
superior capacity for happiness – to bring him down  to the miserable level of the ‘good’ men,
i.e., of stupid, cowardly and chronically unhappy men. And there is only one
sound argument for democracy, that it is a crime for any man to hold himself
out as better than other men…and the most heinous offense for him is to prove
it.

“…Such an attitude is
palpably impossible to a democrat. His distinguishing mark is the fact that he
always attacks his opponents, not just with open arms, but also with snorts and
objurations – that he is always filled with moral indignation – that he is
incapable of imagining honor in an antagonist, and hence incapable of it
himself….”*
 One hundred and forty years separate
Jefferson’s words and Mencken’s (his article “A Blind Spot”). The Founders
abhorred democracy, which they regarded as mob rule as an overture to tyranny
by the mob leader (Shall we call him a mobster?
Or her?). Mencken more than Jefferson
tagged democrats and Puritans as moved by envy and malice. Everywhere we look
today in the news, we see envy and malice at work. The MSM is rotten with
snorts against Donald Trump, “Islamophobes,” and anyone who “didn’t build that”
or is dripping with “White privilege”; fork-tongued “moderate” Muslims inveigh
with CAIR against American dress codes and work standards and drag hapless
employers to court, where they have a fifty-fifty chance of having their codes
and standards excoriated, in the name of “civil rights,” by an ignorant, pliant
justice who knows little about Islam or about leading a productive life in
truly gainful employment. Islam, after all, is not only an ideology that
nurtures crime (it’s in Mohammad’s theological and political DNA, there’s no
altering that fact), but promotes among its flocks cowardice and acquiescence among
most adult Muslims, and in young Muslims the mobster
mentality
. 
Envy and malice are the
leitmotif of Obama’s whole time in the White House. Let us draw up and itemize
his “rap sheet.”
Ø 
We learn that as part of Obama’s grand design to “transform”
America that aside from sanctioning the importation (not “immigration”) of
thousands of ideologically hostile Syrian “refugees” into the country (most of
whom will be just Muslim ballast while raising future anti-American jihadists),
that he has released some 86,000
criminal aliens
to rob, rape, and pray on the general population.
Ø 
He has Okayed the invasion of thousands of Muslims into a
wide range of American towns and cities.
More than 600,000
immigrants
with official refugee status have been resettled
in the U.S.
since 2008.  (That’s just the designated “refugees,” and
does not include other legal immigrants and illegal migrants.  The U.S.
has admitted a total of over 6.3 million
immigrants for legal permanent residence
since 2008, of which the refugees
represent roughly 10%.)
There are some out-of-the-way
communities that have a relatively long history of accepting refugees for
resettlement, at a rate significantly disproportionate to their
populations.  Twin
Falls, Idaho
is one; another is Manchester,
New Hampshire.
Donald Trump claimed, not
without some truth in the accusation, that Obama and Hillary Clinton were the
“cofounders” of ISIS. Reuters
and many liberal newspapers immediately jumped on the statement saying it was
an irresponsible utterance. But was it? Daniel Greenfield’s August 11th FrontPage
article
parses the facts:
Donald Trump has said of Obama, “he’s the founder of
ISIS”. He stated that Hillary is a co-founder of ISIS. The remarks have
touched off anger from certain media outlets, but is it true or not?
The organization we currently know as ISIS had earlier
incarnations, but it adopted its current name in response to its growing
successes in the Arab Spring which was heavily backed and championed by Obama
and Hillary. The expansion of ISIS in the Arab Spring functionally turned it
into a very different organization. It not only temporarily succeeded in
creating its Caliphate, but it went from a marginal terror group to a microstate
controlling cities, large populations and winning the allegiance of Islamic
terror groups around the world. And it was able to carry out terror attacks in
America….
There
is also no denying the fact that Obama and Hillary’s backing for the Arab Spring,
along with that of the media, proved crucial in overturning friendly regimes
and bringing Islamists to power across the region leading to chaos and
terror. 
We
might quibble over what the term “founder” exactly means, but there
is no denying that ISIS, as we know it today, rose as a direct consequence of
Obama and Hillary’s support for Islamists.
ISIS
is the consequence of their pro-Islamic policies brought to life. And that too
cannot be denied. From Benghazi to Baghdad, the wages of the left’s support for
Islamic theocracy has been terror and death.
In short,
writes Greenfield, ISIS is a direct result of Obama/Clinton policies, with a
lot of help from the pro-Islam MSM.

In another arena, it has been
revealed that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in its hurry to
micromanage and regulate every possible human activity, took a leaf from Nazi
Germany and experimented on human beings to determine whether or not
particulate matter (P.M.) was harmful to health. It was not. John Dunn and
Steve Milloy wrote in,” “EPA
Whitewashes Illegal Human Experiments
,”
Though the
EPA got away with issuing the rules, it knew they were vulnerable to challenge
because the underlying studies – all dubious statistical correlation studies –
didn’t actually show that P.M. killed anyone.  Neither did animal
toxicology studies, no matter how much P.M. the laboratory animals inhaled.
 So the EPA decided to back up its statistical claims by testing extremely
high doses of P.M. on real, live people.
Over the
next 15 years, the EPA began quietly experimenting on elderly subjects (up to
age 80), asthmatics, people with heart disease or metabolic syndrome, and
combinations of the aforesaid by placing them in a sealed chamber and making
them inhale high levels of P.M. as well as diesel exhaust, smog, and even
chlorine gas. [There’s no guarantee better of ensuring the “right” conclusion than
marking the cards or rigging jury selection.]
Doubtless if the EPA had used
Zyklon
B
instead of using doses of diesel fumes and chlorine, they’d have gotten
more
favorable results. The
Nazis did, millions of times.  
Finally, on a less dramatic
but no less important note, the federal government refuses to mark Muslim Halal
food as such, so that non-Muslims can’t tell if they’re complying with Sharia
or not. Remember that in
American supermarkets there are “Asian” aisles, and
“Hispanic” aisles, but no “Muslim aisles.”
 Pamela Geller raises the
issue of how Americans are being hoodwinked and made to submit to Islam, “The Meat You Eat is HALAL but USDA
Won’t Label It
.”
 A great deal
of meat sold in this country is halal but is not labeled is such. It’s a
scandal — but an established practice: meat packers generally do not
separate halal meat from non-halal meat, and do not label halal meat as such.
We attempted to right that wrong. But the U.S. Department of Agriculture has
for four years now ignored, shelved, or just plain refused to rule on our
petition….
Just
as those who buy meat and poultry products labeled halal or kosher should have
a reasonable expectation that the meat they’re buying was actually produced in
that manner, so also those of us who don’t want to eat halal meat for whatever
reason should also have a reasonable assurance that meat not labeled halal was
not actually slaughtered in accordance with Sharia rules. As halal slaughter
increases in the US, the likelihood of unknowingly buying meat sacrificed under
the present system also increases.
This
is a matter of simple justice and common sense. So why is the USDA stonewalling
on our petition?
Basically because
labeling meat Halal would somehow discriminate against Muslims and against the
brutal, inhumane way livestock and poultry are slaughtered, by letting them
bleed to death instead of killing them the swiftest and most economical way. But
pain and suffering are the Islamic way.

Slit their throats while they are still conscious.


There is, of
course, Obama’s ram-rodding ObamaCare through the legislative grinder, packing
the Supreme Court with Progressive ideologues, his ongoing destruction of the U.S.
military, his kneejerk denigration and humiliation of the American people, sympathizing with the thugs of Black Lives
Matter, and exacerbating race relations in the country, and just generally
following the Alinsky playbook together with that of the Muslim Brotherhood. He
adheres to his mentor’s  Rules
for Radicals
as well as Islam’s “Rules for Conquering America” per the 1991
Memorandum
Neither Jefferson nor Mencken could have imagined the scale of evil that
Obama represents, far, far greater than that threatened by George III. Hopefully,
the train of abuses and usurpations will come to an end in November.
*pp. 76-77.  The
Vintage Mencken
, gathered by Alistair Cooke. New York: Knopf/Random
House.  1955. 240 pp.

Review: Western Values Defended

Olivia Pierson’s Western
Values Defended: A Primer
, is just what its title says it is, a primer
for those unread in what those values are that need to be upheld and defended.
It is a short book, just a general survey of the Western values that are rooted
in ancient Greece but which came to fruition in the Age of Reason and the
Enlightenment. It is only 71 pages long, but it is loaded with ideas which most
people are not familiar with. 

An Amazon review best describes
Pierson’s opus: “
Olivia Pierson is the author of To Love Wisdom – Gateway to
the Heroic for the Young
– is an introduction to philosophy for young
people aged 10-13 and Western Values
Defended: A Primer
– a  punchy and
relevant overview of the greatest gems of Western civilization, and how they
came to define the daily character of individual liberty in the West.” She
writes about politics, history and culture on her website oliviapierson.org.  A reader wrote, “An exceptionally
well-written defense of Western liberal philosophy and culture! At a time when
Western values are overwhelmingly menaced, Ms. Pierson systematically explains
just what Western values are, and why they’re so overwhelmingly important. The
West today is massively under assault from the forces of socialism and
religion, and Ms. Pierson persuasively and passionately explains how we all can
— and must! — fight back against the horrifically threatening darkness.”
For any well-read adult who is
conversant in the issues covered by Pierson, her book is “old news.” What they
must remember is that it is an introduction
to those issues. It would make an incomparable text book in elementary and
high school as an antidote to the government-mandated multicultural pap being
taught in schools today (at least in the U.S.). She introduces the issues in an
elegant, compelling style, one which “old hands” on the subjects will find
attractive and informative (I learned a few things about some of the issues I’d
not encountered elsewhere). It was difficult for me to choose my favorite
chapters in Western Values Defended: “Religious
Tolerance” (which includes a moving and much-earned tribute to Hypatia of
Alexandria, horridly martyred by early Christians because of her mind), “The
Emancipation of Women and Sexual Freedom,” “Freedom of Speech and the Press,” “A
Commitment to Scientific Inquiry,” or “Capitalism and Innovation.”
 Pierson
lays out quite clearly to what Western civilization owes its origin and continued
existence: his mind, or his rational faculty. Man is the only animal that can
change and better the conditions of his existence, by changing his environment,
and he can do that successfully by thinking, by using his mind. She quotes Francis
Bacon, the 17th century English philosopher, statesman, and essayist: “Nature,
to be commanded, must be obeyed.” Another quotation of his that came to mind at
the same time was, “Seek first the virtues of the mind; and other things either
will come, or will not be wanted.” Pierson demonstrates that when man employs
his mind in the furtherance of his life and values, he naturally exploits its
potential virtues, and the results are so multifaceted that one could make a
nearly endless list of the things that benefit and extend one’s life. 
Capitalism has been the greatest life
extender in history. Pierson writes: “What people do not seem to understand is
that a socio-economic system is itself a moral issue.” (60). It is the only
socio-economic system that has a rational basis, ergo a moral foundation. There are other such systems,
and every one of them has imposed and perpetuated misery, ill-health, poverty, subsistence
starvation, and shorter life spans: theocracies, communism, and socialism, all
of which are illusionary and fundamentally anti-mind and anti-freedom and all
of which, regardless of their “benign” inauguration in any country, must become
tyrannies and dictatorships (if things don’t work as “planned,” it must be the
fault of the producers!), not of the proletariat, but of a self-appointed
political elite, jealously kept in power with force and the secret police. (See
now the state of the “proletariat” in Venezuela,
reduced standing in line for hours for toilet paper and batteries and other
necessities, the distribution of which the government took over “in the name of
the people” and created scarcities. It’s socialism at “work.”Venezuela was once
a mildly prosperous nation, thanks to its oil reserves, which the government nationalized
and expropriated years ago.)

Venezuela was one of the original founders of OPEC).
Any government that assumes the role of wealth distribution has abandoned
reality for wishful thinking. Socialists, Social Justice Warriors, and other
collectivists wish to command nature by ignoring it, or without obeying it or
even acknowledging that it exists (e.g., the American Environmental Protection Agency).

One of Pierson’s most illuminating
chapters is the one on Freedom of Speech, and she inevitably touches on the
continuing conflict with Islam, which calls for censorship of any speech that
is in the least critical of Islam (and by extension of Muslims) and the fatal
punishment of anyone (Muslim or infidel) who dares voice a position on Islam,
serious, scholarly or satirical. She writes that freedom of speech, “happens to
stop the vast majority of ideological
conflicts
from spilling over into physical violence.” (p. 44) Muslims can
demonstrate and chant “Freedom of Speech Go to Hell” in Britain without being
attacked by skinheads but any Briton who tweaks
the noses of Muslims
in a private email can be charged by the UK government
with blasphemy or racism or “incitement” to violence. The British and other
Western governments uphold a double standard, favoring Muslims in law but “lawfully”
punishing others for saying what is on their minds about Islam.
To prohibit by force or with threats of
it from speaking one’s mind is a form of mind-control, and Islam is very good
at that, or at least effective. But the freedom of speech to insult the West
and call for its destruction has not stopped Muslims from attacking those “guilty”
of “offensive” speech. The French publication Charlie
Hebdo
is not out of the fire yet.
Nor has it stopped our own governments from
proposing blanket censorship of all communications that denigrate or “offend” Muslims,
even when they are found guilty of the most horrendous crimes. In many cases, Muslims
don’t need to resort to violence to shut people up. Western governments,
using the power of the state, will act as their proxies by suppressing speech.
Pierson writes, “When any culture
provides a robust arena for the fierce competition of ideas to be expressed without
hurt feelings derailing the issue, the men and women of such a civilization can
only improve, and not devolve.”  What many
fail to grasp, however, is that Islam fears such an arena, because it knows it
would come out the sorriest, and so it works incessantly to either suppress
free speech or get Western governments to do the dirty work for it. For all the
violence Islam is responsible for, for the thousands of deaths and
indescribable misery it has caused over its 1,400-year existence, Islam is basically an ideology of cowards
It fears the sunlight of freedom and
unfettered speech. So it skulks in the darkness and strikes you behind your
back, or while you’re sleeping or soaking in the rays on a beach. Olivia Pierson’s
Western Values Defended will help
more people, and especially the young, understand that. It will open new worlds to them, such as
the treasure trove of Western values, and the cancerous spread of statism and Islam.

 

Integration vs. Assimilation

Clarion recently sent this to  readers:

Does integration prevent
radicalization?
We want your views
My
comment, edited for typos, went as follows and it may or not be published in Clarion:
If
we are speaking of Muslims, I would say no. Muslims would need to repudiate
Islam or leave it as apostates. Because Islam is a totalitarian ideology melded
to the “religion” of Islam, such an action would require intellectual honesty,
a fealty to reality, and a dollop of courage in the face of death threats
prescribed in the Koran
or leave it as apostates.  I also base my conclusion on the record of crimes by jihadists who are
first- or second-generation Muslims, a record compiled and documented by
Clarion and numerous other sites that report on the rapes, murders, knifings,
and suicide-bombings committed by Muslims who have resided in the West for any
measurable time. The more barbarous the origins of these Muslims (Somalia comes
to mind, and there is also a racist element in Somalian crimes against
Westerners), repeatedly commit the most heinous crimes and plead ignorance of
Western mores and standards of behavior. The authorities and the MSM jump on a
“mental illness” explanation before a victim is taken away in an ambulance. 
Islam does not prepare average
Muslims for any degree of intellectual enquiry on any subject, especially when
it comes to the multitude of contradictions and fallacies inherent  in the “faith”
which would leave Socrates or Aristotle massaging their heads. Islam is
anti-mind to the core, and does not much tolerate Muslims who “want to know.”
Islam is a mortal enemy of free minds. This will help to explain why Muslim
populations in Western countries represent a “silent majority” reluctant to or will
not condemn jihadist outrages, and this silence is to my mind tacit approval of
the
crimes, even
when Muslims are collateral victims of terrorist attacks (as there were on
9/11, e.g.). This tacit sanctioning may be based on fear of reprisals or on an
inbred indifference to the death and suffering caused by terrorism. Islam is,
among other charges one may level against it, profoundly anti-life and
anti-individual, and so I shall always remain “Islamophobic.”

Is it envy or is it hatred of the good for being the good?


Clarion
prefaced its article with:
We recently reported the FBI has an
ISIS “kill list”. Many on the list belong to non-Muslim groups trying to help
young Muslims integrate culturally into American society. Pro-jihadi websites are urging
American Muslims to undertake “personal jihad” against those who are
helping Muslims study or settle in the United States. They know that one more integrated US
Muslim is one less Jihadi fighter.
Integration and education will help
combat the influence of radicalist ideology
.
Do
YOU think that integration of young Muslims into American society will prevent
their radicalization?
Please
email your comments to info@clarionproject.org.
Information we gather will be used to help our research and your comments may be
published on our website unless otherwise stated.
I
have always had a major problem with the employment of the terms
“radicalization” and “extremism” when critics of Islam attempt to pigeonhole
Islam into separate compartments,  thus divorcing the actions from the thoughts
that inspired them. Islam is nothing if not “radical” (in the political sense,
and even in the ethical sense) and practicing the ideology in any degree is
inherently “extremist.” Just as an average, due-paying member of the Nazi Party
couldn’t be more “radicalized” than he already is (whether or not  he joined the Party under duress or
voluntarily), radicalized Nazis had their share of crimes and atrocities of the
type committed as policy by the SS or the Gestapo. One could say the same thing
about being “radicalized” by Communism; if your sympathies lie with the
ideology then you’re in the club, whether or not you participate in firing
squads or smash the windows of Jewish shops in Berlin or in manning gas
chambers. 
The
term used by Clarion, “integration,” is likely used by it as a synonym for “assimilation.”
I fail to understand the purpose of the substitution when the term assimilation has been used more often than
integration when describing the
purported adoption by “refugees” and “migrants” of the culture and mores of a
Western country. To assimilate the
new culture and mores is a voluntary
action, while to integrate “refugees”
and “migrants” connotes government action, a policy very similar to the American
practice of “bussing” school children to far away schools to achieve “racial
parity.”
However,
given the resort to force employed by especially Germany it boils down to the government
adopting a policy of integrating the indigenous population to Islamic and Sharia
culture and mores. This is being accomplished by censoring social media and by penalizing
indigenous Germans (and Swedes) who speak out against the government-fostered
invasion of the country by hordes of “migrants” openly hostile to and contemptuous
of Western values and for objecting to being forced to subsidize the invaders’ “resettlement”
with welfare benefits, expropriated property to feed, clothe, and house them,
and so on, only to see the coddled beneficiaries turn on indigenous Germans and
Swedes in daily commissions of harassment, sexual crime, robbery, vandalism, and
even murder. 

The smiles soon vanished after the first episodes of rape and murder.


The
terms employed by Clarion have another cause, which may or may not be acknowledged
by the parties who want to hear what readers have to say: the unchallenged role
of altruism in the Continent’s push
for “integration.” Indigenous populations are being asked to sacrifice their
lives and identities for the sake of those who possess neither, Islam placing
no value on life, or on Muslims having no identity except as commutable, anonymous
ciphers of an anti-life philosophy/religion. After all, we have seen repeatedly
in news reports a complete absence of gratitude by the “migrants,” and instead regular
assaults on their  involuntary
benefactors not only by the “refugees,” but by the governments, as well.

What Donald Trump Should Be to Americans

John Paul Jones, American Naval Hero

Instead of an essay, I offer an image of John Paul Jones by N.C. Wyeth
(1928). It is what Trump should be on issues on the table during this
election year. He should be hammering Hillary Clinton and her statist
clique without mercy, hesitation, or apology. He should never strike the
American colors. He should call Obama and Clinton the destructive,
power-lusting creatures they are and have proven to be for years. This
image is what Americans hope he will be all the way to the White House.
He should ask for no quarter, nor offer any. He should crush Clinton
into the pathetic pond scum she is and always has been. Smashing Clinton
without reservation or regret is what this battle calls for. Clinton
and the news media should not be permitted to set the terms of the
fight. Remember, Jones not only defended American shores, but took the
battle to the British Isles and raided the towns there. Trump should be
badgering Clinton without surcease, until she has another “concussion”
and goes full wacky as she has shown the country she can be and probably
has been for a long time. In the meantime, here is an image of true
immigrants who really did “build that” country we call America.  Excuse
my hubris, but here is a passage from the Epilogue of Hugh Kenrick, Book
Two of Sparrowhawk that I think should accompany the Thompson
illustration:

“The Immigrants” by Ellen B. Thompson (1899)
Hugh came back to
life only when Iverson came by his berth to inform him that the mainland had
been sighted. Hugh smiled for the first time in weeks. He found his long-glass
and went up to the quarterdeck and, for the rest of the morning, surveyed the
shores of the alien continent. Only three other merchantmen remained from the
convoy. The others, including the warships and the transports, had already gone
their separate ways.
                A day later, the Sparrowhawk
rounded Cape May, entered Delaware
Bay, and sailed placidly up its river. Hugh paced excitedly up and
down the deck, unable to believe the immensity of the place, and believing it
at the same time. From the deck he could see tobacco fields, and fields of corn
and wheat, and great houses, and sleepy river towns, and rivers that meandered
west to vanish into unending carpets of forests. A mountain range far in that
direction ran from one invisible point north to another south. The earth seemed
larger here. He felt equal to the challenge of all its possibilities.
                John Ramshaw watched his special
passenger, and was glad.


Review: One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest

Nursing homes do
not have a stellar reputation as places to convalesce or be taken care of.
Private nursing homes, at least in the U.S., are largely dependent on
government benefits accrued by patients, so they can hardly be called
“private.” State-run homes are disasters in terms of the “quality” of care
(minimal) and the character of their “skilled” staff. Wikipedia notes:
In most countries, there is a degree of government oversight and
regulation over the nursing home industry. These regulatory bodies are usually
tasked with ensuring patient safety for the residents and improving the
standard of care. In the U.S. Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services
ensures that every Medicare and Medicaid
beneficiary receives seamless, high-quality health care, both within health
care settings such as nursing homes, and among health care settings during care
transitions.
To ensure that nursing homes meet the necessary legal standards, the
authorities conduct inspections of all nursing home facilities. This process
plays a critical role in ensuring basic levels of quality and safety by
monitoring nursing home compliance with the national legal requirements.
Surveyors will conduct on-site surveys of certified nursing homes on average
every 12 months to assure basic levels of quality and safety for
beneficiaries. The authority might also undertake various initiatives to
improve the effectiveness of the annual nursing home surveys, as well as to
improve the investigations prompted by complaints from consumers or family
members about nursing homes.
Nursing homes offer the most extensive care a person can get outside a
hospital. Nursing homes offer help with custodial care—like bathing, getting
dressed, and eating—as well as skilled care given by a registered nurse and
includes medical monitoring and treatments. Skilled care also includes services
provided by specially trained professionals, such as physical, occupational,
and respiratory therapists.
In  November 1975 a film appeared that ought to
have excoriated the whole notion of state-run or state-regulated nursing homes,
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,
based on Ken Kesey’s 1962
novel
of the same name, and partly on Dale
Wasserman’s 1963 Broadway play
, an adaptation of the novel.
Kirk Douglas
appeared in the Broadway version of the story.
The 1963–64 Broadway production starred Kirk
Douglas
as Randle Patrick McMurphy, Gene
Wilder
as Billy Bibbit, William
Daniels
as Harding, Ed Ames as “Chief” Bromden, and Joan
Tetzel
at Nurse Ratched. Douglas retained the rights to make a
film version of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest for a decade, but was
unable to find a studio willing to make it with him. Eventually, he gave the
rights to his son Michael, who succeeded in getting the film
produced. At that time, Kirk Douglas was deemed too old for the role of
McMurphy, and the role was given to Jack
Nicholson
.
The story is
nominally set in a psychiatric hospital,
not a nursing home. But, it is a depressing venue or environment in fiction and
in real life, regardless of the institution’s focus.
On a personal note, I detest Jack Nicholson;
his constant leering, snide persona
repels me. It is the complementary other side of Robert Mitchum’s persona, which exudes a malevolent,
menacing masculinity regardless of the role. (That attribute is especially
present in the original Cape Fear [1962] and in The Night of the Hunter [1955].)
But Nicholson was the right choice for the screen version of Cuckoo’s Nest; his Randle Patrick
McMurphy is a glib talker, a con artist, who takes nothing seriously and is
always ready to crack wise and belittle his opponents. In Cuckoo’s Nest he is faced with little else but men whose utter lack
of self-esteem and their minimal gray matter deserve belittling. But always in
the belittling is a lesson in life for the belittled. And in the course of the
story several of the objects of his derision grow up just enough to assert
themselves. He knows that is a possible consequence, which is to his
character’s credit.

His principal nemesis is Nurse Ratched, the head nurse of McMurphy’s ward.
Ratched is played to perfection by Louise Fletcher,
who plays a prim, petty, possibly man-hating tyrant who is adept at
manipulating the fears and frustrations of her luckless charges.  She talks down to them, and treats them as
clueless, manipulatable children. She does not tolerate resistance to her mind
games. In the Nicholson character she immediately recognizes a man who will not
be broken or made to be her toy, and sets out to break him. McMurphy is more
anti-authority than he is a self-made, independent man. My former landlady, the
one who evicted me from my apartment in July because she claimed that my political
column endangered her other tenants, shares many unpleasant attributes with
Nurse Ratched, and even physically resembles the Fletcher character.
McMurphy has schemed to be transferred from a prison work farm to the
far more salubrious environment of a mental institution by claiming he is
mentally ill. But he learns quickly that the hospital presents more serious
challenges to his freewheeling nonconformance than the rigors of a work farm. Many
of the patients in his ward are truly mentally ill or disturbed, such as
Cheswick (played by Sydney Lassick),
a man ruled by his emotions and who invariably behaves like a tantrum-throwing
spoiled child, and Taber (played by Christopher
Lloyd
), whose mental problems remain unexplained, except perhaps, for a
certain madness in his eyes, a characteristic which Lloyd carried to the TV
series Taxi (in which he portrayed
an eccentric and less-than-bright cab driver) and as Dr. Emmett Brown in the
three Back to the Future movies. The
most pathetic patient is Billy Bibbet, a young man with a serious stuttering
affliction (Doug
Dounif
) who is dependent on the approval of his mother and Nurse Ratched
and stammers when he fears his mother’s or Ratched’s reactions to his answers
to their questions or actions.
The most inexplicable patient is “Chief” Bromden (Will Sampson),
a giant Creek Indian who remains taciturn until he is befriended by McMurphy.
Other patients, including Nurse Ratched, believe he is deaf and dumb. He speaks
for the first time after McMurphy offers him some chewing gum. In the film, his
presence in the hospital is never explained (in the novel, which the character
narrates, it is suggested he suffers from schizophrenia). “You fooled them!”
McMurphy exclaims joyously when he discovers that Chief is an imposter like
himself.
McMurphy makes friends of Chief and Bibbit. The other patients admire
him for his standing up to Nurse Ratched and the black orderlies.
McMurphy is genuinely astonished when he learns that his incarceration
under Ratched’s “care” is to be permanent until he is evaluated and “cured,”
and is doubly astonished to learn that most of the patients in his ward have
voluntarily committed themselves to the place and can leave any time they wish.
He doesn’t understand why they tolerate the abuse, cruelty, and machinations of
Ratched and her staff. He doesn’t grasp that some of these men have a need to
be taken care of and are afraid of living independently of authority and “therapeutic
solicitations.”
Ken Kesey wrote Cuckoo’s Nest during the turbulent Civil Rights era.
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest was written in
1959 and published in 1962 in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement and deep changes to the
way psychology and psychiatry were being approached in America. The 1960s began
the controversial movement towards deinstitutionalization,
an act that would have affected the characters in Kesey’s novel.
On another level, Nurse Ratched’s ward is intended to be a microcosm of
American society in which rebels like McMurphy are unwelcome and destined to be
“cured.” The story, given the period in which it was written and became popular
(the film won several Academy awards, while the play had a long run on
Broadway) can be seen as a fable about the “dehumanization” caused by
capitalism.
Kesey, according to Wikipedia, was a real-life Randle McMurphy “countercultural”
figure, which invariably meant “left wing.” He was “an American novelist,
essayist, and countercultural figure. He considered
himself a link between the Beat
Generation
of the 1950s and the hippies of the
1960s.” Given that many of the “hippies” of Woodstock are now dominating American
academia and immersing their own hapless charges in the Marxist “therapeutic”
brainwashing of the “critical” studies regimen, had Kesey lived (he died in
2001) doubtless he would have been in the vanguard of “safe spaces” and “triggering”
behavior on campus, and have become a “social justice warrior.”

Schizophrenics being cured of their Islamophobia with
scalding steam,

a medical treatment called the Merkel/Obama/Ratched
procedure.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is one of just many prominent but subtle Hollywood productions crafted
to criticize America with slyly scripted subtexts loaded with subliminal messages
for the movie-going public. They usually well-done and salted with first-class
talent. Seven Days in May (1964)is
another anti-American production that features Kirk Douglas. The brainwashing
of Americans has been going on for a very long time. They are the products of
the doyens of the Frankfurt School who chose to remain in the U.S. after their
colleagues returned to Germany following WWII. 
Some went into academia, and some settled on Rodeo Drive and Sunset
Boulevard and the lucrative living they could enjoy there while tearing down
the country that made their prosperity possible.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén