Archive for June 2017

New US base in S. Syria for tussle over control

June 6, 2017

New US base in S. Syria for tussle over control, DEBKAfile, June 6, 2017

The ingathering of major military forces in this part of Syria is ominous: The deployment of a US forward base in the Syrian Desert, and the arrival of the most senior Iranian and Syrian commanders at the head of elite units augur the approach of a major showdown for control of southeastern Syria and its strategic multiple border assets.

***********************

In readiness for a prospective showdown for control of southeast Syria, US Special Forces have set up a forward base at Al-Zukf in the Syrian Desert, DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources report. The location is 70km northwest of the Syrian-Iraqi-Jordanian border triangle and the Al Tanf crossing, which is controlled by US, Western allied and Jordanian special forces, together with a US-trained Syrian rebel unit, which calls itself the Revolutionary Commando.

(See the map at the top of this article.)

American sources say the Al Zukf base was set up for two objectives: One is to block the path of the Syrian army-Hizballah armored column, which has been advancing for the past fortnight from Al-Suweida in southeastern Syria toward the Al-Tanf crossing.

The other US objective is to capture the key town of Abu Kamal, a distance of 200km northwest of Al-Tanf, from Islamic State control.

However, the overriding goal of the US advance base is to thwart the Syrian, Hizballah and other pro-Iranian forces from gaining control of 300km of the Syrian-Iraqi border and so being able to open up Tehran’s coveted direct land bridge to the Mediterranean through Iraq.

The US force is not alone in its bid for control of this strategic area. It is getting pretty crowded.

The Syria Army’s 4th armored division rolled this week into the southern Syrian town of Daraa close to the Jordanian border and around 330km west of the new Al-Zukf base. The division moved in with high-grade Russian-made T-90 tanks complete with its high command, headed by Bashar Assad’s younger brother, Gen. Maher al-Assad. The general and staff officers were sighted carrying out inspections of Daraa’s terrain in advance of the resumption of hostilities. Parts of this potential battlefield are no more than 1,000 meters from the Jordanian border.

Our intelligence sources also reported that, this week, further north, al-Qods chief, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s Syrian and Iraqi fronts, crossed into Syria from Iraq along with his operations staff. They joined the Palmyra-based command and control of the Syrian force, which is heading out of the town in two columns for two towns – Deir ez-Zor, which is surrounded by Islamic State forces, and Abu Kamal, which is under ISIS control. Elements of Russian elite forces and Hizballah are fighting along with the Syrian troops.

The ingathering of major military forces in this part of Syria is ominous: The deployment of a US forward base in the Syrian Desert, and the arrival of the most senior Iranian and Syrian commanders at the head of elite units augur the approach of a major showdown for control of southeastern Syria and its strategic multiple border assets.

Total Vetting Fail: Left-Wing Snowden Fan Girl Reality Winner Gets Access to Our NSA Secrets

June 6, 2017

Total Vetting Fail: Left-Wing Snowden Fan Girl Reality Winner Gets Access to Our NSA Secrets, BreitbartJohn Hayward, June 6, 2017

(“[I]f the adventures of Reality Winner are an indication of the Deep State’s skill and discipline, Trump doesn’t have much to worry about.” Unfortunately, Ms. Winner is probably not “an indication of the Deep State’s skill and discipline.” — DM)

Facebook

Even with a valid top secret clearance, Winner had no legitimate reason to see the documents she allegedly purloined. She was only caught because the website she reportedly leaked to contacted the NSA to ask if her material was legitimate. The agency that was stunned by how much sensitive material Edward Snowden managed to abscond with still doesn’t seem to be properly compartmentalizing information and enforcing need-to-know rules.

Fans of the “Deep State” keep saying Trump made a big mistake picking a fight with them, but if the adventures of Reality Winner are an indication of the Deep State’s skill and discipline, Trump doesn’t have much to worry about. Also, it’s worth repeating that nobody voted to give the Deep Staters or Reality Winners control over America’s national security, law enforcement, and foreign policy.

Democrats created the environment in which left-wingers cannot be trusted in sensitive posts, not Donald Trump. Leftists and extreme NeverTrumpers excuse every offense against this administration by saying Trump brought it on himself, just by being himself. That’s not how the rule of law works.

This anything-goes climate has to be shut down, and fast, before permanent damage to our national interest is inflicted, if that hasn’t happened already. A few words from top Democrats about acknowledging elections, honoring their oaths, and respecting the Oval Office even if you despise the current occupant (remember that?) would be very helpful.

*****************************

The news reads like something out of a screwball comedy: a far-left activist named “Reality Leigh Winner” somehow received clearance to work for the National Security Agency, which she allegedly proceeded to rob of classified material in the name of the kookburger anti-Trump “Resistance.” In the post-Edward Snowden era, how does someone like this get anywhere near sensitive data?

Speaking of Snowden, Ms. Winner is a huge fan of his. He was one of only 50 accounts she followed on Twitter, along with WikiLeaks, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, and the Anonymous hacker collective. Her own Twitter posts were filled with foaming-at-the-mouth anti-Trump tirades such as, “Why burn a flag? Donald Trump thinks crosses burn much better.”

She was also a supporter of climate change hysteria and the Black Lives Matter radical movement. Her last Tweet, from February, was advice for rapper Kanye West to “make a shirt that says, ‘being white is terrorism.’”

She didn’t just follow the Iranian Foreign Minister, she tweeted at him. “There are many Americans protesting U.S. government aggression towards Iran. If our Tangerine in Chief declares war, we stand with you!” she gushed to Zarif.

She also referred to President Trump as “the orange fascist we let into the White House,” and some other names that cannot be reprinted at a family-friendly website without exceeding our allotment of asterisks for the day.

“On a positive note, this Tuesday when we become the United States of the Russian Federation, Olympic lifting will be the national sport,” she sneered in advance of the 2016 election.

The totality of the Reality Winner experience reads like a joke put together for a presentation by bored NSA staffers about the sort of person that should never, ever be given a security clearance. It’s as though a far-left blog downloaded itself into a human brain and chose a name by reading its own comments section.

It should also be noted that the circumstances of this Iran fangirl’s data theft are a blistering indictment of agency procedures. Even with a valid top secret clearance, Winner had no legitimate reason to see the documents she allegedly purloined. She was only caught because the website she reportedly leaked to contacted the NSA to ask if her material was legitimate. The agency that was stunned by how much sensitive material Edward Snowden managed to abscond with still doesn’t seem to be properly compartmentalizing information and enforcing need-to-know rules.

Fans of the “Deep State” keep saying Trump made a big mistake picking a fight with them, but if the adventures of Reality Winner are an indication of the Deep State’s skill and discipline, Trump doesn’t have much to worry about. Also, it’s worth repeating that nobody voted to give the Deep Staters or Reality Winners control over America’s national security, law enforcement, and foreign policy.

Some hay has been made over Winner’s support for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential election, but that’s not nearly enough reason to question someone’s security clearance by itself. It is, however, fair to ask when the media will get around to asking Sanders if he disavows his treacherous supporter – as the press would certainly be doing if a red-hatted MAGAphile supporter of Donald Trump, boasting a Twitter feed full of right-wing causes and celebrities, had looted the NSA to help a “resistance” movement take down President Hillary Clinton.

In the alternate universe where that happened, you may rest assured the media freakout about Trump saboteurs threatening the very fabric of democracy has pushed all other stories off the front page today, and the upcoming Sunday talk shows are already booked solid.

Of course, as we all know, Democrat politicians are firewalled from the misdeeds of their followers, and no left-wing Climates of Hate are ever detected. Certain Democrats have no compunctions about actually encouraging criminality, secure in the knowledge their party will never be made to pay a price for going off the rails:

Now more than ever we need whistleblowers to come forward. I created an official website on how to leak to the press https://lieu.house.gov/federal-employees-guide-sharing-key-information 

Federal Employees Guide to Sharing Key Information with the Public

Washington – On February 16, 2017, Congressman Ted W. Lieu (D | Los Angeles County) and Congressman Don Beyer (D | Virginia) released the following resource guide for federal employees who wish to…

lieu.house.gov

Remember the Democrat freak-out about President Trump supposedly compromising American secrets by warning the Russians about a terrorist plot? Some of them don’t actually seem all that concerned about real leaks of sensitive information, as long as it furthers their political goals.

Democrats have created an anything-goes, get-Trump-at-all-costs environment that’s guaranteed to drive their more loosely-wrapped supporters around the bend. If one believes, as Reality Winner evidently does, that Donald Trump is an illegitimate president who must be resisted by any means necessary, it’s not difficult to justify lawbreaking or even deliberately damaging America, for the greater good of shoving that reality-show usurper out of the White House.

Our security services absolutely must take this into account when granting clearances and sweeping sensitive departments for risky personnel. No one with Reality Winner’s political beliefs can be trusted with anything sensitive, period.

Democrats created the environment in which left-wingers cannot be trusted in sensitive posts, not Donald Trump. Leftists and extreme NeverTrumpers excuse every offense against this administration by saying Trump brought it on himself, just by being himself. That’s not how the rule of law works.

This anything-goes climate has to be shut down, and fast, before permanent damage to our national interest is inflicted, if that hasn’t happened already. A few words from top Democrats about acknowledging elections, honoring their oaths, and respecting the Oval Office even if you despise the current occupant (remember that?) would be very helpful.

US To UN Human Rights Council: End Anti-Israeli Bias Or We’re Out

June 5, 2017

US To UN Human Rights Council: End Anti-Israeli Bias Or We’re Out, Daily Caller, Ted Goodman, June 5, 2017

(If we remain in the Council, at least we will continue to get a heads-up about what it is about to do and may be able to have at least a minimal impact. Withdrawing all US funding would be a good idea whether we remain in or leave.– DM)

The U.S. is expected to issue an ultimatum to the United Nations Human Rights Council Tuesday: either remove anti-Israeli bias or America may withdraw.

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley said Saturday that Washington would decide whether to withdraw after a three-week session in Geneva, Switzerland wraps up this month, according to Reuters.

“When the council passes more than 70 resolutions against Israel, a country with a strong human rights record, and just seven resolutions against Iran, a country with an abysmal human rights record, you know something is seriously wrong,” Haley said in a Washington Post op-ed.

U.S. Diplomat Michele Sison spoke out against what the U.S. considers “unfair singling out of Israel” during a closed session of the U.N. Security Council May 24. The U.S. has long been a critic of the council, leading to a three-year boycott from 2006 to 2009 under former President George W. Bush.

The Trump administration took issue with the most recent U.N. report that asserted Israel was endangering the territorial viability of a potential sovereign Palestine by vastly accelerating the pace of housing announcements for Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

The U.S. historically vetoed U.N. Security Council resolutions that condemned Israel for years. That pattern changed in December when former President Barack Obama’s administration allowed a critical resolution to take effect by abstaining rather than vetoing the resolution.

Western nations and allies are responding now that the Trump administration is putting the U.N. on notice. Eight groups, according to Reuters, wrote to Haley in May, saying that withdrawal would actually hurt Israel more than it would help, according to Reuters.

Haley made it clear that the U.S. is looking for the U.N. to make some changes within the Council in order for it to feel comfortable as a member.

Haley also asserted that membership on the Council must be determined through competitive voting, in order to keep human rights abusers from obtaining seats. “As it stands, regional blocs nominate candidates that are uncontested,” she explained in the op-ed. “Competition would force a candidate’s human rights record to be considered before votes were cast.”

NY Times to critics – shut up

June 5, 2017

NY Times to critics – shut up, Israel National News, Jack Engelhard, June 5, 2017

She had two strikes against her. One – she criticized The New York Times first for publishing an op-ed written by imprisoned terrorist Marwan Barghouti, and then for neglecting to mention his crimes – at least 26 Israelis murdered from his work as an unrepentant jihadist.  

Two – she complained that the paper’s constant pummeling of President Donald Trump was overly aggressive and had crossed “over the line.” 

She wrote that there ought to be consequences for such un-journalistic behavior.

Instead – she became the consequence. 

Her name is Liz Spayd and for 11 months she served as the paper’s “public editor,” which translates as house watchdog, or reader’s representative.

So what was her reward for being our representative, demanding, as we do, truthful journalism?

She got fired. This happened a few days ago to the girl who must have been snubbed in the hallways and left to sit alone in the cafeteria.

So they hired her to monitor the paper’s integrity…and they fired her for doing her job.

Let that be a lesson to anyone in the building who even THINKS about speaking his, or her, mind.

Speak up, and you’re done. That goes for every newsroom that uses the Times as its oracle. They follow the leader.

Objective reporting?

These days every headline must conform to OMG proportions for anything related to Trump…and Israel, always.

The paper has been shameless and quite ridiculous in its attempt to smear Trump as a fellow-traveler to the Russians. It’s done by rumor, gossip, whispers, innuendo, hearsay and unsubstantiated accusation. Those are Red Scare tactics that were used by HUAC and McCarthyism to ruin people. It’s how Inquisitions are done.

Spayd’s firing means that the Times won’t even pretend to be a fair-minded mirror of our times.

Even as it calls itself the paper of record and serves as the template for the rest of the news media, it’s a paper intended entirely for radical leftists.

They love it when the paper goes after Trump and the Jews, and it was probably the left that made Arthur Sulzberger Jr. get rid of her.

Sulzberger says there is no longer a need for an ombudsman. The paper can be trusted to serve as its own judge. Liberals cheered. They too know what’s best.

They complained that Spayd was “controversial” – and what is controversial to them?

Anyone who departs from the gospel according to Tom Friedman and Paul Krugman is a danger.

Liz Spayd’s firing is the latest evidence that Big Brother still wants us under heel.

So if a single lonely voice is silenced because it demurs from what is official policy – how is the Times of today any different from the Pravda of yesterday?

No dissent then and there; no dissent permitted here and now.

Which means that so far as getting news that is trustworthy and reliable, we are not in America anymore. We are back in the USSR.

Man Hiding From Muslim Terrorists During London Attack Warned Against Islamophobia

June 5, 2017

Man Hiding From Muslim Terrorists During London Attack Warned Against Islamophobia, The Point (Front Page Magazine), Daniel Greenfield, June 5, 2017

Even while they’re killing us, we can always be warned against any Islamophobic outbursts. It isn’t Muslims after all. Even when they’re Muslims shouting, “This is for Islam”. Just stick your head under the table and keep repeating, “Islam is a religion of peace, Islam is a religion of peace, Islam is a religion of peace,”

********************************

The setting of the scene appears to be Katzenjammers, London’s coolest bierkeller, which, along with so many trendy nightspots, were transformed into panicked madhouses. Some bars and restaurants came directly under terrorist attack.

Others, like Katzenjammers, just had police burst in and order everyone down to the floor. But what happened during the video being shot is painfully revealing of the Stockholm Syndrome that has taken over.

At the very end of the video, in a burst of defiance, one of the men on the floor shouts, “F___ Muslim C____”.

“Don’t shout that you f____ idiot, it’s not Muslims,” he’s promptly told.

And this is in a terrorist attack in which the killers made a point of shouting “This is for Islam” and “This is for Allah”.

Even while they’re killing us, we can always be warned against any Islamophobic outbursts. It isn’t Muslims after all. Even when they’re Muslims shouting, “This is for Islam”. Just stick your head under the table and keep repeating, “Islam is a religion of peace, Islam is a religion of peace, Islam is a religion of peace,”

 

Fred Fleitz: ‘We May Have Generations of Radical Islamists in the U.K. Unless the British Government Wakes Up’

June 5, 2017

Fred Fleitz: ‘We May Have Generations of Radical Islamists in the U.K. Unless the British Government Wakes Up’, BreitbartJohn Hayward, June 5, 2017

ODD ANDERSEN/AFP/Getty

“I think 9/11 was a wake-up call. You could just see how Republicans and Democrats in Washington were working together against the threat. Now we’re challenged by political correctness, and people who are in denial, and don’t want to the let the government take the steps it has to take to go after radical Islam,” Fleitz reflected.

“Whenever there’s a radical Islamic terrorist attack, we get these lectures about Islamophobia from our leaders, leaders in the U.K. I think that is really hobbling the ability of our government to go after this threat, and that’s unfortunate. I hope what happened in London will be a wake-up call, but I’m worried in a few weeks we’ll be lectured about Islamophobia again,” he said.

***************************

Senior Vice President for Policy and Programs Fred Fleitz of the Center for Security Policy joined SiriusXM host Joel Pollak on Monday’s Breitbart News Daily to talk about the London Bridge terror attack.

Pollak began by asking if the London Bridge attack would finally provide the wake-up call needed for those who underestimate or downplay the dangers of radical Islamic terrorism.

“A lot of people who were in denial almost say the right thing after these events. They sort of can’t help themselves,” Fleitz replied.

“But what really concerns me is that yes, it’s right we have to improve security – we need better outreach, we need better intelligence – but there’s something they’re not talking about in the U.K. that really needs to be focused on: the role that the failure to assimilate British Muslims has created the situation,” he said. “There are communities where British Muslims are deliberately not assimilating, are being taught to hate British society, and this is incubating radicalism. There’s actually a parallel system of sharia law courts in the U.K. that operate.”

“We may have generations of radical Islamists in the U.K., until the British government wakes up and stops the situation,” he warned.

Pollak pointed out that the United States has unassimilated religious communities with their own internal systems of government that live peaceably alongside their neighbors, such as the Amish and Jewish communities in upstate New York.

“It’s certainly true there are some communities in the United States that have not assimilated,” Fleitz agreed. “I’m not concerned about Amish or Jewish communities, but I will tell you that there are enclaves of Muslim communities in Michigan and Minnesota that concern me. We know that in Minnesota there’s a rising rate of measles because the community has not assimilated into the rest of the community, and is not vaccinating their children. This is wrong. This is a big problem.”

“The problem with these Muslim communities is that it is making them susceptible to this radical worldview that wants to destroy modern society, create a global caliphate, and impose sharia law on everyone on Earth,” Fleitz contended. “These other communities aren’t trying to do that. They’re peaceful religious communities.”

“Also, when we have immigrants coming to a country from another country, I think they need to learn the practices and laws of the country where they’re coming to, the country that is accepting them and serving as a refuge for them. I think when people come to their new home country, they should understand and learn about the laws of this new country. That’s not happening in the U.K.,” he said.

Pollak offered the converse observation that some of the worst terrorist murderers, such as the San Bernardino jihadis, appear to be fairly well-assimilated.

“We can have homegrown radical Islamist terrorists – and I don’t really think they’re homegrown, I think they’re inspired or directed by foreign Islamist terrorist organizations – but it’s this ideology of hate that either is being communicated to them over the Internet, or is being passed on to members of separated communities in the U.K. It’s the ideology we have to confront, and I think this problem is worse in these separate communities,” Fleitz said.

Fleitz argued that measures to hinder the ability of extremists to recruit and coordinate with the Internet should be explored, with due regard for civil liberties, but he is more concerned about “radical clerics and radical mosques who are promoting this type of hate and ideology firsthand.”

“I also want to stop these ISIS videos that we know homegrown radical Islamist terrorists are taking in, and it’s playing a role in radicalizing them,” he added.

“I think 9/11 was a wake-up call. You could just see how Republicans and Democrats in Washington were working together against the threat. Now we’re challenged by political correctness, and people who are in denial, and don’t want to the let the government take the steps it has to take to go after radical Islam,” Fleitz reflected.

“Whenever there’s a radical Islamic terrorist attack, we get these lectures about Islamophobia from our leaders, leaders in the U.K. I think that is really hobbling the ability of our government to go after this threat, and that’s unfortunate. I hope what happened in London will be a wake-up call, but I’m worried in a few weeks we’ll be lectured about Islamophobia again,” he said.

“Anyone who raises concerns about radical Islam seems to be tarred and feathered as an Islamophobe in this country. I’ll let the people who peddle this term give a better explanation, but that’s my experience,” he replied when Pollak asked for a precise definition of “Islamophobia.”

Captain obvious on full throttle , the Trump Train on full speed .

June 5, 2017

Arab states’ rift with Qatar is ‘result’ of Trump’s Middle East trip – Iran officials

Source : https://www.rt.com/news/390974-iran-blame-trump-qatar/
The rising tensions between Arab League states and Qatar has to do with President Trump’s Middle East tour, Iran’s top officials believe. Tehran has urged the countries to solve their dispute peacefully through regional dialogue and diplomacy.

“What is happening is the preliminary result of the sword dance,” Deputy Chief of Staff of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani Hamid Aboutalebi tweeted, referring to a greeting ceremony in Saudi Arabia, in which US President Donald Trump took part in a traditional sword dance.

Read more

Skyscrapers in the Qatari capital Doha. © Karim Jaffar

The ongoing crisis indicates that the era of foreign superpower ‘Big Brothers’ shaping regional coalitions is over, as “political domination, security clannishness, occupation, and invasion is not going to bring about anything other than insecurity,” Aboutalebi claimed.

“The era of sanctions is over too, and cutting diplomatic ties, closing borders, laying sieges on countries, and ejecting countries out of the selfsame coalition, etc. is not the way out of the crisis,” PressTV quoted the official as saying.

Chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Alaeddin Boroujerdi also pinned the blame for the widening rift on Trump’s visit.

“The first impression of the US President Donald Trump’s visit to the region is the recent tension in the countries’ relations,” IRNA news agency quoted Boroujerdi as saying. Boroujerdi, along with other top officials, urged Arab nations to solve the dispute through dialogue and diplomacy themselves without the involvement of any outside powers.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has always believed, however, that regional issues should be settled by regional countries themselves,” Mehr news agency quoted the official as saying.

READ MORE: Qatar spat reveals double standards: Terrorism supporters accuse others of supporting terrorism

“To resolve regional disputes and the current dispute, they should adopt peaceful methods, transparent dialogue and diplomacy,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi stressed, according to Reuters. “No country in the region will benefit from the heightened tension.”

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain severed ties with Qatar on Monday, accusing it of supporting and financing terrorism, namely al-Qaeda and Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).

FULL Measure: June 4, 2017 – No Immigrants

June 5, 2017

FULL Measure: June 4, 2017 – No Immigrants via YouTube, June 5, 2017

 

The Niceties Lose to the Necessities

June 5, 2017

The Niceties Lose to the Necessities, PJ MediaRichard Fernandez, June 4, 2017

— DM)

Feckless politicians have let things get to the point where all the remaining options are bad. By allowing the margin of superiority to slip, they are making the descent from the Marquess of Queenbury Rules to street fighting inevitable. Perhaps the most revealing illustration of this sad transition occurred during the recent London Bridge attack, when a taxi driver and eyewitness to the London Bridge terror attack described “how he tried to ‘ram’ the men who were killing innocent civilians . . . .”

Yet we brought it on ourselves. An unsustainable program of political correctness killed the very thing it swore to protect.

*****************************

Civility, like anything else, requires resources. U.S. troops in WWII generally did not have to loot to avoid starvation, often had enough manpower to guard POWs, and could afford a training mechanism that instilled and maintained discipline in the ranks. This made it feasible for them to observe a higher standard of humane behavior than most armies, inasmuch as such things are possible in war.

But kindness is a luxury on the battlefield, where survival takes priority over everything else, and first to be jettisoned in resource starvation.

The UK is running low on counter-terror resources. The Times of London reports:

[I]ntelligence officers have identified 23,000 jihadist extremists living in Britain as potential terrorist attackers … about 3,000 people from the total group are judged to pose a threat.

The British police simply don’t have enough men to watch an insurgent army of this size, and have had to cancel famous public events like the Changing of the Guards to release police from duties like crowd security or road closures. “The sad truth about the Government’s decision to deploy up to 5,000 troops on British streets is that it is an admission of failure,” wrote Robert Verkaik. In particular, it is a failure to anticipate the threat and to provide enough resources to maintain the required superiority which makes the civilities possible.

Not surprisingly, tolerance has become the first casualty of the new correlation of forces. The smiling British bobby has had to become more peremptory in the face of a deadly foe. British PM Theresa May, in a speech responding to the London Bridge attack, announced not only more regulations (including proposed restrictions on the Internet), but warned that things were reaching a tipping point:

We believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face. As terrorism breeds terrorism and perpetrators are inspired to attack, not only on the basis of carefully constructed plots after years of planning and training, and not even as lone attackers radicalized online, but by copying one another and often using the crudest of means of attack.

The Lone Wolves — emboldened by success — are forming a pack, and the lurkers are coming out of the woods to pull down their larger but helpless victim.

When that happens, it’s No More Mr. Nice Guy.

May’s plan to regulate the Internet has the advantage of being easier to implement than watching 23,000 jihadis. When you can’t do what you should then you do what you can. The West is in the “Three Stooges” phase of terrorism policy: if Larry can’t hit Moe, he hits Curley Joe. Later they may in despair all hit each other. To be fair, it’s forced upon them by a relative lack of resources. Europe is beginning to admit it has doesn’t have enough hard force to deal with the new threats. Hence the reliance on candles, tweets, dimmed lights. It’s not virtue, it’s necessity. But when the candles stop working they will be forced to Plan B.

Feckless politicians have let things get to the point where all the remaining options are bad. By allowing the margin of superiority to slip, they are making the descent from the Marquess of Queenbury Rules to street fighting inevitable. Perhaps the most revealing illustration of this sad transition occurred during the recent London Bridge attack, when a taxi driver and eyewitness to the London Bridge terror attack described “how he tried to ‘ram’ the men who were killing innocent civilians”:

The driver, only known as Chris, told LBC Radio that he desperately tried to stop the attack.

“I said to the guy in my cab I was going to try and hit him, I was going to ram him.

“I turned around and tried, but he side-stepped me.

“I spun the cab round, I was about to ram one of them, but he side-stepped and three police officers came running towards them with their batons drawn.”

The old and the new stand frozen in time, captured by that image. The cabbie, prepared to use his two-ton vehicle as a weapon, represents the sad new.  The bobbies “running towards [terrorists] with their batons drawn” as the cab driver incredulously watches represent the gallant old. It has all the pathos of a First World War cavalry charge against a line of entrenchments on the Western front, of a kindly old order vainly struggling against extinction by a harsh, Terminator-type world of cold repression that governments by slow degrees will be forced to implement. How long before the taxi-ram, not the baton, becomes the new normal?

Yet we brought it on ourselves. An unsustainable program of political correctness killed the very thing it swore to protect.

DHS Officers Humiliate Judges by Enforcing Immigration Laws, Declares Judge

June 5, 2017

DHS Officers Humiliate Judges by Enforcing Immigration Laws, Declares Judge, BreitbartNeil Munro, June 5, 2017

(Poor baby. Since he is humiliated by doing his job, perhaps he would prefer to be appointed Supreme Rules of the Universe. — DM)

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Reinhardt’s intemperate language, said Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge, suggests that the court’s decisions are political biased. “There is no ‘cold neutrality’ in the Ninth Circuit’s ruling,” Arthur wrote about the court’s preliminary ruling in the Hawaii case. “It is personal, visceral, and vindictive.”

**********************************

Judges are humiliated and dehumanized whenever they must enforce the nation’s immigration laws, according to a senior judge on the far-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The judge’s cry of outrage came when he could not block the orderly repatriation of an illegal immigrant who has two drunk driving convictions, plus a U.S. wife and three children.

“We are unable to prevent [Andres] Magana Ortiz’s removal, yet it is contrary to the values of this nation and its legal system,” complained Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who wishes to extend citizens’ rights to illegal foreign migrants. He said:

We are compelled to deny Mr. Magana Ortiz’s request for a stay of removal because we do not have the authority to grant it. We are not, however, compelled to find the government’s action in this case fair or just. …

The government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz diminishes not only our country but our courts, which are supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of justice. Magana Ortiz and his family are in truth not the only victims. Among the others are judges who, forced to participate in such inhumane acts, suffer a loss of dignity and humanity as well. I concur as a judge, but as a citizen I do not.

The judge, who is married to a former top leader in the ACLU, also lamented the authority of ordinary DHS agents to enforce the law despite protests from well-paid, high-status “civil rights” lawyers:

On January 25, 2017, the President [Donald Trump] signed a series of executive orders dismantling the system of priorities that had previously guided Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol in determining whom to deport. The orders also gave far greater authority to individual agents and officers, who are now removing non-citizens simply because they are here illegally, regardless of whether they have committed any offense. In light of the breadth of these orders and the lack of any apparent limit on agents’ discretion, the undocumented must now choose between going to work, school, hospitals, and even court, and the risk of being seized.

In contrast, the new Supreme Court Justice appointed by Trump, Neil Gorsuch, has a more humble vision of his job as a judicial referee, saying in a 2013 award ceremony that:

As my daughters remind me, donning a [judicial] robe doesn’t make me any smarter … It serves as a reminder of what’s expected of us—what [Irish philosopher Edmund] Burke called the “cold neutrality of an impartial judge.” It serves, too, as a reminder of the relatively modest station we’re meant to occupy in a democratic society. In other places, judges wear scarlet and ermine. Here, we’re told to buy our own plain black robes — and I can attest the standard choir outfit at the local uniform supply store is a good deal. Ours is a judiciary of honest black polyester.

The judges on Reinhardt’s Ninth Circuit are expected to release soon a decision blocking Trump’s Executive Orders limiting the entry of people from six terror-prone Muslim countries. The decision is based on a Hawaiian case, in which an Egyptian-born Islamic cleric claimed his constitutional rights were infringed by Trump’s efforts to reduce Islamic jihad in the United States.

The court’s decision may have been delayed by the Islam-inspired bloody attacks in Manchester and London, at least one of which was conducted by the sons of Muslim refugees and migrants from Libya.

Reinhardt’s intemperate language, said Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge, suggests that the court’s decisions are political biased. “There is no ‘cold neutrality’ in the Ninth Circuit’s ruling,” Arthur wrote about the court’s preliminary ruling in the Hawaii case. “It is personal, visceral, and vindictive.”