Thursday, May 14, 2026

China Is Not Merely a Competitor — It Is Fueling America's Enemies


President Donald Trump's visit to China this week arrives at one of the most dangerous and morally complicated moments in modern geopolitical history. The optics will be carefully choreographed: towering skylines, ceremonial handshakes, military precision, economic pledges and polished displays of state power. Beijing understands spectacle. The Chinese Communist Party has mastered the art of projecting stability, strength and inevitability to the world.

But beneath the gleaming architecture and diplomatic theater lies a far darker reality that the world continues to confront only selectively and often cowardly.

This is not merely a strategic rivalry between two superpowers over tariffs, trade imbalances, semiconductors, artificial intelligence or rare earth minerals. It is also a deeper conflict over the meaning of freedom, human dignity, sovereignty and truth itself.

The CCP wants the world to see China as modern, disciplined and indispensable to the global economy. Yet behind that carefully managed image exists one of the most sophisticated authoritarian systems on earth. Political dissidents vanish. Religious believers are monitored. Journalists are silenced. Lawyers disappear. Uyghur Muslims have faced mass detention and surveillance campaigns. Christians worship under constant scrutiny. Falun Gong practitioners have long alleged torture, imprisonment and persecution. Even ordinary citizens who criticize local officials online can suddenly find themselves erased from public life.

China represents what communism can become when fused with advanced technology, centralized state power, economic leverage and absolute intolerance for dissent.

The regime does not merely punish opposition; it seeks to eliminate independent thought itself.

Former prisoners and human rights investigators have described detention systems marked by psychological abuse, coerced confessions, forced indoctrination, isolation, relentless monitoring, beatings and, in some cases, death. Families are separated. Faith is criminalized when it competes with loyalty to the party. Surveillance is not a tool of security alone; it is a mechanism of obedience.

Yet despite these realities, much of the Western world continues to treat the CCP as simply another difficult trading partner rather than an authoritarian power with expanding global ambitions.

Why?

Because money clouds moral clarity.

Corporate America depends heavily on Chinese manufacturing and markets. Universities accept Chinese funding while often remaining silent about repression. Tech companies seek access to Chinese consumers while overlooking censorship demands. Media institutions frequently soften criticism to preserve business relationships or market access. Politicians in both parties speak aggressively about China during campaigns, yet many remain economically intertwined with the very system they condemn.

The result is a dangerous form of selective outrage: loud rhetoric paired with strategic dependency.

That contradiction becomes even more alarming when viewed through the lens of the Middle East and the growing military relationships reshaping the region.

As Trump prepares for high-level meetings in Beijing, reports and intelligence assessments continue to raise concerns about China's indirect support for Iran's military infrastructure through its deepening relationship with Pakistan. Trucks, components, dual-use technologies, drone systems, missile enhancement capabilities and logistical cooperation flowing across the region are no longer viewed as isolated developments. They are part of a larger strategic alignment among powers seeking to weaken American influence in critical global corridors.

Iran's expanding drone and missile capabilities did not emerge in a vacuum.

The Gulf region remains one of the most strategically sensitive areas in the world. American military personnel, naval assets, energy infrastructure, shipping lanes and allied nations remain vulnerable to asymmetric warfare. Drones, missile technology, cyber capabilities and proxy militias now define modern conflict as much as conventional armies do.

If Chinese-backed systems or technologies ultimately strengthen Iranian military capabilities that threaten or kill Americans in the Gulf region, then the stakes of this week's diplomatic engagement become infinitely more complex than trade negotiations or photo-ops.

This is the uncomfortable reality confronting Washington: America is economically intertwined with a nation that increasingly supports or enables forces working against American strategic interests abroad.

That does not mean diplomacy should end. Serious nations engage adversaries and competitors alike. Dialogue between nuclear powers remains essential. Economic decoupling at the scale some advocate could destabilize the global economy overnight. Trump's visit may very well reduce tensions in certain areas while opening channels for negotiation that prevent larger conflicts later.

But Americans should not confuse engagement with trust.

Nor should they allow economic interests to blind them to the ideological nature of the challenge posed by the CCP.

China's leadership is playing a long game measured not in election cycles but in generations. It seeks influence across Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, universities, tech infrastructure, ports, media platforms, supply chains and international institutions. Beijing understands that global power is no longer achieved solely through military conquest. It is secured through dependency, leverage, data, debt, energy, technology and strategic patience.

The greatest danger may not be China's visible strength but the West's willingness to ignore uncomfortable truths for the sake of convenience and profit.

The world should look beyond the skyscrapers this week. Beyond the ceremonial banquets. Beyond the staged applause and polished propaganda.

Because history repeatedly teaches that authoritarian systems often appear strongest shortly before the world fully understands the cost of empowering them.


Podcast thread for May 14

 


Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

Leftism: A Religious Cult for Psychopaths and Crazies


Two recent news stories out of Dying Europe caught my attention.  One involves the racial indoctrination of toddlers; the other involves punishing elderly citizens for their role in causing “climate change.”  Together, they show how leftist-globalism behaves as a parasite from cradle to grave.

First, in Wales, the leftist-globalist Labour government is using taxpayer money to train childcare workers how to identify and report “racist incidents.”  The initiative teaches adults in charge of nurseries, play groups, and early education centers what constitutes “white privilege” and when young children should be reported to government authorities for exhibiting “racist” behaviors amounting to “hate crimes.”  Workers are encouraged to discuss “racism,” “skin color,” and the benefits of “diversity” with toddlers.  They are also required to formally “log” child-to-child interactions that might be “racist” in nature and merit later police involvement.  

This latest crackdown on baby racism follows similar childhood indoctrination campaigns in not-so-Great Britain, including: (1) warnings to schools that children’s artwork, music, and dance might be “blasphemous” under Islamic law; (2) lesson plans that celebrate illegal immigrants arriving in the U.K. by boat; (3) government mandates requiring teachers to “monitor and report anti-Muslim hostility” in their classrooms; (4) the rollout of a government-created video game that warns children that they may be “terrorists” for questioning mass immigration; and (5) a government investigation of a child who asked his school teachers why he had to celebrate Ramadan when he is not a Muslim.

The leftist-globalist Labour government is crazy.  All of this race-based indoctrination would constitute child endangerment in a country that hasn’t lost its collective mind.  I don’t know how the United Kingdom can pretend to be “united” much longer.  I don’t know how Great Britain can pretend to be “great” for another week.  The British Empire is dead.  Whatever residual civilization it still possessed is poisoned, foaming at the mouth, and writhing on a disgusting bathroom floor.

Not to be outdone by the leftist-globalist Brits, the leftist-globalist Danes want to punish old people for the “crime” of…checking my notes to confirm this lunacy…“causing climate change.”  That’s right, Denmark’s loony-leftist “green” party believes government-run nursing homes should limit residents’ meat rations to a scant 2.8 ounces per week!  Why?  As one leftist commissar explains, “It is precisely the generation that has screwed up the most.”  

Consider how malevolent a person must be to believe that it is sane and rational to publicly defend a program designed to starve the oldest members of society as some kind of misguided retribution for politically-constructed (and totally imaginary) “crimes.”  When an entire leftist-globalist political movement espouses similarly genocidal beliefs, we have a real problem.

As writer Samuel Short sagely observes, “Climate hysteria is pure evil, masquerading as concern for the environment.”  Leftist-globalists have invented a problem not grounded in scientific reality — that humanity’s meat consumption and use of hydrocarbon energies are causing the planet to die.  In order to tackle this imaginary problem, leftist-globalists want to ration all food and energy.  It is the most obvious and evil stratagem for creating large-scale, centralized government institutions vested with the authority to spy on and regulate every detail of every person’s life.  Furthermore, it gives leftist-globalist governments total control over who will live or die.  Denmark’s leftists-globalists are saying the quiet part out loud: Old people will be among the first to be culled in the name of “climate science.”  

Does anybody have any trouble understanding that this is indistinguishable from Aztec priests engaging in mass human sacrifice to appease their gods?  The “climate change” crazies have made Mother Earth their goddess and “net-zero” carbon emissions their religion.  And leftist-globalist political priests are willing to sacrifice any of us to prove their devotion to unscientific delusions that they worship as part of a sick and twisted misanthropic faith.  

Genocide did not stop after the Holocaust.  War did not stop after the Second World War.  Armies, militias, cartels, gangs, and tribes have been killing each other all over the planet every single year any of us has been alive.  In these murderous conflicts, terrible crimes are committed.  Mass slaughters occur each week in parts of Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas, and fresh bodies fill newly-dug mass graves.  Yet even with such present evil as a constant reminder of how wicked we humans can be, leftist-globalists cavalierly suggest restricting the diets of older people in order to punish them for “changing” the climate.  

When leftist-globalists insist on assigning culpability for their own mass delusional psychoses, the rest of us should pay attention!  Every genocide begins with one lie: Those people over there shouldn’t be regarded as human.  Right now, the people being designated as sub-human live in nursing homes in Denmark.  New categories of sub-humans will be conjured from thin air as leftist-globalist politicians require new human sacrifices to appease their false gods.

In its essence, leftist-globalism is a psychopathic religion.  It cannot countenance argument or dissent.  Everyone must be forced to believe in the exact same things.  In Wales, leftist-globalists indoctrinate toddlers to fear “white supremacy” and to love Islam, “multiculturalism,” and “diversity.”  In Denmark, leftist-globalists indoctrinate citizens to fear “climate change” and to hate older citizens for their “climate crimes.”  

These are cult-like conditioning programs meant to trap human minds in a permanent state of suicidal self-delusion.  Instead of “drinking the Kool-Aid,” toddlers are given daily diets of everything is racist!  Instead of cutting out the hearts of human sacrifices to appease certain Aztec gods, today’s leftist-globalists sacrifice people over a certain age by denying them meat.  It’s crazy, irrational dogma used to indoctrinate people from cradle to grave.  Neither Jim Jones nor Aztec priests, however, are leading this lunacy.  Instead, leftist-globalist governments are spreading this madness.

As if putting an exclamation point behind this last point, election news from the United Kingdom drives home the insanity of leftist-globalism today.  After Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s leftist-globalist Labour Party suffered humiliating losses in local elections across the soon-to-be-Islamic State of Britain-istan, did the nation’s wimpy, wokey “leader” recognize that voters are incredibly concerned about the society-wide harms from mass immigration?  Of course not.  Instead, Starmer gave a speech denouncing “far-right” political factions in the U.K. as “un-British.”  That’s right, the prime minister claimed that British citizens who resist Islamic conquest are not “real Brits.”  Yowzers.  “We are not just facing dangerous times, but dangerous opponents,” Starmer announced, before defending foreign nationals and demonizing British citizens.  When the prime minister is more concerned about illegal aliens than his own people, the British people really don’t have a prime minister.

Meanwhile, a “transgender” Indian immigrant who is neither a citizen nor a permanent resident of the U.K. was just elected to the Scottish parliament as a member of the leftist-globalist Green Party.  In his victory speech, Scotland’s newest representative announced, “I am a transgender Tamil immigrant, my pronouns are they/them…I am, to some in this country, everything that the hateful despise, and I’m standing here as your MSP now with care.”  Could this be what Starmer’s “far-right” bogeymen call “demographic replacement”?  Because it looks like in-your-face-subjugation to me.

But that’s leftist-globalism in a nutshell.  It’s not, to use traitor Starmer’s own words, “progressive leadership.”  It’s indoctrination.  It’s humiliation.  It’s subjugation.  It’s hysteria.  It’s lunacy.  Ultimately, however, it’s a prescription for genocide.  Because no government can force sane people to believe such insane things.  For insanity to prevail, rational people must be eliminated.  Only then can leftist-globalists rule over a “land of crazy.”


The United Arab Emirates forges a new and vital alliance with the US and Israel

The United Arab Emirates forges a new and vital alliance with the US and Israel

The future suddenly looks a lot brighter.

Susan Quinn for American Thinker
Autism article image

The UAE is prepared to fight for its life against Iran, and has militarily joined the U.S. and Israel in taking down the region’s largest supporter of terrorism. Although it acted secretly, the UAE reportedly attacked a refinery on Lavan Island in the Persian Gulf; the attack took the facility offline for months.

Iran has attacked the UAE aggressively, sending 2,800 missiles and drones into the country. The UAE responded to these attacks, and the U.S. and Israel quietly acknowledged and welcome their support.

Out of all the Gulf countries, the UAE is the only one that has responded to Iran’s attacks. It also signaled its unhappiness with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which was supposed to contribute to cohesion among the Gulf states—the council provided logistical support but almost no political or military backing when the UAE was attacked. The Emirates leaving OPEC will also put a crimp in the activities of OPEC and the GCC.

The UAE’s military response is in part a result of their joining Israel in the Abraham Accords, along with Bahrain and Morocco. (Kazakhstan indicated it intends to join, and Saudi Arabia is non-committal.) Originally, people primarily saw the Accords as a boon to trade and communications between the nations involved, but the UAE has demonstrated the importance of the Accords concerning military matters, and their fighting is a testament to their strong relationship with Israel.

The consequences of the response against Iran are not insignificant:

People familiar with the matter told the newspaper that Emirati forces targeted a refinery on Iran’s Lavan Island in the Gulf in early April.

The UAE has not publicly acknowledged the operation. The strike reportedly triggered a large fire and disabled much of the facility’s capacity for months….

Given the rapport that has been building between the UAE and Israel over the last few years, the change in their relationship is impressive.  Israel has been assertive in its support of the Emirates:

In a historic and highly classified move, Israel deployed an active Iron Dome battery, accompanied by dozens of Israel Defense Forces operators, directly to the UAE to help defend Emirati airspace. This marked the very first time Israel deployed its premier air defense system and its own troops to protect a foreign Arab nation. Integrated with U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) and existing Emirati air defenses, the Iron Dome intercepted dozens of incoming Iranian projectiles, physically saving Emirati lives and infrastructure.

This deployment fundamentally rewrites the strategic calculus of the Middle East. It proves the original, unspoken thesis of the Abraham Accords: ‘peace for peace’ built on the bedrock of collective security against Tehran.

Ultimately the war with Iran will likely have a transformational effect on the region. The countries that remain in the GCC now realize that they can’t count on that organization for protection. They also realize that their alliance with the UAE is not as strong as it has been in the past, particularly since the Gulf countries have not provided any military support to the UAE. They also realize that the UAE has developed a powerful alliance not only with the U.S., but also with Israel. And they will be on their own against the military of Iran.

The future suddenly looks brighter.

Image generated by ChatGPT.



🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


The Iran War Is Piling Up A List Of Surprises



We keep learning new things about the war with Iran. The new revelations haven’t added up to a clear picture yet, but they suggest the characteristics of a war that’s bigger than we’ve understood it to be.

First, over the weekend, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Israeli military built a covert base inside Iraq to support its airstrikes against Iran, then attacked Iraqi troops who approached the base to investigate.

Second, a growing series of reports is showing that the war has involved more belligerents than we knew about. Reports over the weekend revealed that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has conducted military strikes inside Iran, bombing a refinery in retaliation for Iranian attacks. Similar reports followed about the Saudi military striking targets inside Iran. No one in any of these countries will discuss the attacks, declining comment to journalists.

Finally, in what may be a preview of what a renewed war looks like if a tenuous ceasefire breaks down, the U.S. government website that publishes notices of foreign arms sales shows a recent buying spree in which Iran’s neighbors are stocking up on weapons. Significant new disclosures in May show major arms sales to Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, and Israel, including the sale of “ten thousand (10,000) Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System-II all-up-rounds advanced (single variant)” to Qatar and to Israel, and a smaller number of an air-to-air variant to the UAE.  

That system turns unguided rockets into precision weapons, so the purchase of 10,000 units suggests that the Qataris and Israelis anticipate the near-term need to strike a large list of targets with a high degree of accuracy.

President Donald Trump said yesterday that the ceasefire in the Iran War is on “life support.”


The Democrat party just hates Jews

The Democrat party just hates Jews

More evidence is dropping every day. And the Dem Senate candidate with the Nazi tattoo isn’t helping.

Civus Americaus for American Thinker 
Autism article image

Politico just reported what most of us have known ever since Franklin Roosevelt’s administration turned away Jewish refugees on the Saint Louis: The Democrat Partydoesn’t like Jews very much.  “‘In the quarter century that has passed since then, the Democratic Party has changed,’ [Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David] Wecht said. ‘Nazi tattoos, jihadist chants, intimidation and attacks at synagogues, and other hateful anti-Jewish invective and actions are minimized, ignored, and even coddled.’”

This simply reinforces what I wrote in “Democrats Go Full Anti-Semite.”  As it comes from a former Democrat, it is a major body blow to the entire party.

More seems to drop almost every week.  In Palestine Pramila Jayapal’s own words, “yesterday, 40 Democratic senators voted for @SenSanders legislation to block the sale of more weapons and equipment to Israel.  While these measures ultimately did not pass, this is real progress — Americans do not want U.S. weapons to be used to kill innocent civilians.”  This places the vast majority of Democrat senators, with the honorable exceptions of John Fetterman (D-Pa.) and a few others, in the same camp as terrorists who shoot up peace concerts, rape Jewish women, burn them alive, kill babies, fire rockets into Israeli cities, and murder innocent Muslims by using them as human shields.  Add to this displays of terrorist flags in major U.S. cities, undesirables identifying as Hamas, and praise for the deaths of American service members as well as Israelis, and we have a pretty good view of our enemies.  “For every U.S. soldier that comes home in a casket, we cheer.”

Verbal support for terrorism is cause for visa revocation, so where is ICE when we need it?  “The grounds for inadmissibility include, but are not limited to, individuals who: ... Endorsed or espoused terrorist activity.”  This suggests that the names and photos of all international students and faculty who express support for Hamas and/or the IRGC should be sent to ICE.

Now we have senatorial candidate Graham Platner (D-Maine), supported by Chris van Hollen (D-Md.).  Van Hollen “on Thursday defended Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner (D), who has faced criticism for past controversial online posts and a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol, saying that ‘people should have second chances.’”

No, Chris, the tattoo doesn’t “resemble” a Nazi symbol — it is a Nazi symbol.  From what I saw of it, and it seems as though the Democrats have done everything possible to get it off the internet, it is the infamous SS Totenkopf.  There are, by the way, perfectly respectable Totenkopfs (Death’s Heads), just as there are perfectly respectable Native American and Asian Indian swastikas.  The former include Prussia’s Death’s Head Hussars, France’s Hussards de la Mort, USMC Marine Raiders, and many other real military organizations.  None of these is a hate symbol; the SS Totenkopf, like the Nazi swastika, is a hate symbol.  Needless to say, Bernie is just fine with the SS Totenkopf. 

This needs to become a front-and-center issue in November.  I could envision a simple GIF, and I may try to create it, of a Democrat donkey lifting his right foreleg in a straight-armed salute during a rendition of Der Platner’s Face, with due credit to Spike Jones for the original.  A Bronx cheer, as delivered by what Jones called a birdophone, accompanies each “hail.”  

Forty Democrat Senators are not loose cannons whom their party can write off as aberrations.  Neither are the Black Lives Matter director, Minyon Moore, who chaired the 2024 Democrat National Convention; Ilhan Omar; Pramila Jayapal; Rashida Tlaib; Zohran Mamdani; Hasan Piker; and Gavin Newsom.  They are the collective face of the Democrat party, and a very ugly face that is, indeed.


Image: hendricjabs via PixabayPixabay License.



LOL: Former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Now Claims He Wanted Biden to Close the Southern Border

LOL: Former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Now Claims He Wanted Biden to Close the Southern Border


Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is now claiming that he urged President Joe Biden to close the southern border, according to remarks he made Tuesday during an interview at the POLITICO Security Summit.

"Did you feel that you had the support from the president in order to succeed," Mayorkas was asked.

"There were areas of disagreement within immigration policy and in other areas," he replied. "But I voiced my views."

I was very pleased that in June of 2024 we took executive action that I thought made reforms that were sensible. If those again that had and that proved proved successful if those executive actions had been taken one or two years earlier. 

The executive action taken by the Biden administration in June 2024 temporarily suspended and restricted the entry of most noncitizens crossing the southern border while tightening asylum eligibility requirements. Although the policy reportedly reduced border crossings by between 30 and 50 percent, the move was widely viewed as too little, too late after years of an open-border policy approach throughout Biden’s presidency. 

It was not until President Trump’s election, supporters argue, that illegal border crossings began to fall dramatically.

And despite Mayorkas’ claims this week, his record tells a different story. During congressional hearings throughout the Biden administration, the former DHS secretary repeatedly insisted that the border was both “closed” and “secure,” even as record numbers of illegal crossings fueled widespread outrage.

Some are calling for Mayorkas to face perjury charges over his conflicting statements.


When the Villagers Finally Have Had Enough of the Pillagers Some adversaries only understand defeat.

When the Villagers Finally Have Had Enough of the Pillagers Some adversaries only understand defeat.

Some adversaries only understand defeat.

I’m watching two different things play out at the moment, and it seems awfully clear that the same rule governs the ultimate resolution of both.

Yes, I’m talking about Iran. I’m also talking about their domestic allies here in the United States, the Democrat Party.

The people in charge of Iran are eerily similar to the people running the DNC. They both boil down to something which gets described in different ways; my formulation would be to call them pillagers.

As in, the world is divided into two camps — villagers, who make their livings and express themselves based on what they build and earn and negotiate for on the basis of giving value for value, and pillagers, who get by on what they can shake out of the villagers. Democrats and millenarian Twelver Shi’ite barbarians are both pillagers.

And then there’s Zorhan Mamdani, who seems to be something like the nexus between those two groups. But that’s another column.

The thing about pillagers is that they don’t respect the rules of the village. Their view of the village hasn’t really changed from the days of the Mongols and the Huns — the village is a place where you ride in with swords and arrows drawn, slaughter the villagers and burn their buildings down after you’ve looted the place for all it’s worth, and then you head back to camp with your wagons laden with their valuables and goods, not to mention their women and children as your slaves.

Negotiations with the pillagers generally involve how much tribute they’ll let you pay them in order that they don’t ride into the village with torches burning and swords out. The idea of the pillagers agreeing to bring anything to the table in those negotiations is a pretty arcane one, but it’s not unheard of.

You get to that latter negotiation when the villagers raise an army and abjectly kick the pillagers in the teeth with it. For advice on how that’s done, you can ask Julius Caesar, for example. Or perhaps Jan Sobieski.

It generally takes a lot to raise the hackles of the villagers enough to want to engage in such unpleasantries. Consider that even in December 1941, mere hours before Pearl Harbor, there was an American consensus for staying out of World War II. That’s the underlying context behind those conspiracy theories, which had Franklin Delano Roosevelt letting the attack happen so that he could drag the public into the war.

The thing those theories miss is that it isn’t about the villagers. It’s about the pillagers. The enemy has a vote, and what he votes for is war.

The Left does this thing with the world’s various pillager regimes. It’s something of a weird anthropomorphism, whereby they pretend, for example, that the Twelver Shi’ite lunatics who run Iran — who openly espouse their goal of starting so much trouble that a 1,200-year-old imam will climb out of a well and perfect the world — were just regular guys minding their own business until Mean Donald Trump and his Hebrew overlords came along to break their rice bowls.

The thing to remember about this is that while it’s a stupid argument they’re making, it’s not one born of stupidity. It’s bad faith that underlies this, just like it was bad faith that allied the Left with Fidel Castro, Joe Stalin, Daniel Ortega, and Yasser Arafat.

Game recognizes game. Pillagers recognize pillagers. The Left in America has always fantasized — and fetishized — the kind of power a Castro or Mao or Ho Chi Minh could agglomerate, and as such, they’ve modeled themselves after those monsters. Otherwise, why would anybody wear a t-shirt with Che Guevara’s face on it? Guevara died screaming like a little bitch with no friends around, once the Bolivian villagers decided they’d had enough.

And that brings us to the lesson, which is that negotiating with these people on any terms other than those dictated by the villagers is utterly fruitless.

Donald Trump is a businessman. In Trump’s reality, there’s always a deal to be had. There’s a win-win somewhere. One of the interesting things to watch, where Trump is concerned, has been his arc in this regard. Trump, particularly in his first term, came into office with an almost charming naivete. He did strike some very good deals, and he did have a lot of successes. But the Russia hoax was a good example of how utterly unprepared Trump was for the intractability of the pillager Obama regime he was replacing, and they all but wrecked his presidency on a series of laughable lies.

At least with Iran in this term, Trump understood that in order to get a deal, he’d have to impose the villagers’ will on the mullahs. What he’s finding out now is that there is no deal to be had with this regime.

Accordingly, it seems like Trump has settled on a sustainable and correct policy, which is simply to blockade Iran and run out the clock on their regime until it dies.

That’s messy, though. We’re already seeing evidence that rather than shutting in their oil wells, the Iranians are dumping crude into the Persian Gulf — something which, if it continues, will create an ecological disaster not dissimilar to Saddam Hussein lighting all the Kuwaiti oil wells aflame during the first Gulf War. And if you think the welfare of the Iranian villagers will be held in any consideration as the blockade continues, you should think again. This is going to hurt a lot of people. But Iran getting a nuclear weapon that they will almost certainly drop on Tel Aviv at their first opportunity — because if that doesn’t raise the Mahdi, then nothing will (hint: nothing will) — hurts even more.

As for the pillagers here at home, there isn’t such a cohesive strategy. Though the fact that state legislatures throughout the South have jumped on the opportunity following the Callais decision to impose the same sorts of district maps on the Left that it has imposed in blue states does look like the presence of some fighting spirit. The naming of JD Vance as the “fraud czar” and the rapid escalation of prosecutions of welfare fraudsters who seem to have an inordinate volume of connections to the Democrat political class is another example.

Trump’s administration this time around seems to be showing more of an understanding that the pillagers can’t be bargained with. But that understanding is severely lacking among the lesser lights of the GOP.

Even there, though, I can see a bit of progress. Those primary elections in Indiana, where the RINO state senators who refused to draw new congressional maps after the governor and state House demanded them were blown out, was a strong signal that the villagers are ready to send the army to rout out the pillagers.

The fact that appeasers like John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy look like goners in Senate primary races in Texas and Louisiana, respectively, looks a lot like a change in tone. And the legislators in Tennessee who last week were unmoved by an unmitigated Charlie Foxtrot of a spectacle put on by that state’s political pillager class, passing a new Congressional map which likely has the effect of replacing a white Jewish leftist guy with a black conservative woman — as the pillagers screech about the loss of “Black representation” — deserve a special bit of mention for their pugnacity.

But we need more. Much more.

We need a Republican Party — not to mention an American majority — which is resolved to the reality that we have enemies, people who hate us and who can’t be reasoned with, and we aren’t going to be able to make peace with them any other way than by first inflicting harm on them in volumes that change their worldview.

And we don’t have it. Not yet. But it does seem like that’s coming.


Oh My: Luna Says CIA Has Taken 40 Boxes From ODNI That Gabbard Was Preparing to Declassify (Updated)


RedState 

Troubling news this Wednesday evening as relayed by GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13).

In a News Nation interview, Luna shared that the CIA has unceremoniously taken some 40 or so boxes of documents (see update at bottom of this article), which she says were related to the JFK assassination and the MKUltra files, from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's office as she was reviewing them for declassification:

LUNA: "We were actually just notified that the CIA went in and took documents out of ODNI. Multiple boxes pertaining to the JFK files as well as MKUltra."

"The reason why this is troubling is A, there was an executive order that the president had directed the full declassification of JFK, but then also to the MKUltra files."

"The CIA famously has said that, you know, all documents were released and other documents had been destroyed. So these are allegedly those documents that apparently never existed."

"And so very troubling. I did just talk to Chairman Comer and we are sending in the next hour or so a preservation of documents requests to the CIA."

"I have called into the White House to the director of the CIA himself. And so obviously, as this develops, we'll keep everyone up to date. But strange times we're living."

Watch:

Additionally, a CIA whistleblower made the following claims about the agency:

CIA whistleblower claims the agency “took back 40 boxes of JFK and MK-Ultra files” that Tulsi Gabbard was reviewing for declassification.

The whistleblower also alleges the CIA “illegally monitored the computer and phone usage” of Gabbard’s investigators during the probe into the COVID-19 origins cover-up.

“These were Americans being spied on illegally while carrying out duties directed by the President and under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence.”

Watch:

On X, Luna, who is the Chairwoman of the House Oversight Committee Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, wrote that "The CIA has 24 hours to return the documents to Tulsi Gabbard’s office or else I will make a motion to issue a subpoena. These documents have been requested by Congress." 

UPDATE: A clarification from Luna:

Post updates in the comments.


The Four Horsemen of the New Antisemitism

The Four Horsemen of the New Antisemitism

Demographic change, DEI ideology, anti-Israel radicalism, and political cowardice have mainstreamed hostility toward Jews.


Few predicted that blaming Israel and the Jews who support it would flare up in the early 21st century—and in America of all places, where there are nearly as many Jews as there are in Israel.

After all, Israel is the only consensual society in the Middle East. It holds regular elections and maintains tripartite judicial, executive, and legislative checks and balances.

Free speech is found in the Middle East only in Israel, where religious apostasy, criticism of one’s own country, gender equity, and tolerance of gays are guaranteed in marked contrast to all its neighbors.

It was once common knowledge that Israel had survived the huge numbers of its enemies because its tiny population was better educated, freer, more adept at Western technology, more tolerant of dissent—and because it enjoyed the goodwill and bipartisan support of the United States.

True, the recent affluence of the Gulf States has presented a thin veneer of Westernism that has fooled many in the new anti-Israel media. But just because Qatar did not censor a celebrity newsman’s broadcast from Doha does not mean Qatar is a free society. After all, no Western journalist would dare schedule a broadcast from Qatar with a Qatari who had condemned the regime for its intolerance or announced his religious apostasy from Islam.

So why and how did millions of Americans begin to express hatred for Israel and, albeit more subtly, the Jews who support it?

There are four converging fronts in this perfect storm.

Demography

First, in demographic terms, the US Muslim population is expanding exponentially, due almost entirely to recent immigration and higher birth rates than the American norm (e.g., 2.5–8 versus 1.6–1.7).

There are now nearly five million Muslim Americans. These numbers are anticipated by 2030 to surpass the Jewish American population.

Moreover, increasing numbers of Jews are not just secular or intermarried but no longer identify so strongly as Jewish, much less as supporters of Israel. More importantly, billions of dollars in the last few years from the Gulf states—primarily Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait—have flowed into American universities.

These enormous sums bankroll weaponized Middle East studies programs and enrich left-wing NGOs, nonprofits, and sympathetic politicians. The new antisemites talk nefariously of the money of “International Jewry,” and “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby,” but in truth, Gulf money dwarfs Israel’s lobbying budget.

An entire generation of young American elites has been groomed in universities to despise Israel and, by extension, to express hostility toward Jews. After October 7, the scab was torn away, revealing what had festered underneath for years.

Any visitor to a contemporary American campus who talks at length to protesting students quickly arrives at two general conclusions:

First, many have been taught to despise Israel and simply parrot the indoctrinated talking points of their professors—“apartheid,” “genocide,” “war crimes,” “settler colonialism,” and so on.

The result is that it is now “cool” on campus to trash Israel, utter the platitude that “hating Israel is not hating Jews,” and then either make life uncomfortable for Jewish students or remain silent when witnessing such harassment firsthand.

Second, today’s students know little to nothing of the modern Middle East. Most have no idea what the eliminationist slogan “From the River to the Sea” actually portends. Few anti-Israeli demonstrators could identify either the Jordan River or the Mediterranean Sea, much less distinguish between them. Yet all understand that chanting the hip and approved slogans earns social acceptance in and outside the classroom.

DEI

The DEI binary fuels both anti-Israel and anti-Jewish animus. In this Marxist moral schema, the world abroad—and within the United States—is divided into “white oppressors” and “nonwhite victims,” despite the fact that people commonly classified as white comprise only a small minority of the global population. The dichotomy is reductive and often absurd, collapsing immense differences in class, wealth, power, culture, and historical circumstance into a crude racial narrative. Instead, in this paradigm, superficial appearance—including something as trivial as adding accents to names or adopting some sort of virtue-signaling head dress or garb—can brand one as a nonwhite victim. Once so identified, the supposedly oppressed are granted collective grievances against their victimizers and, increasingly, exemptions from censure.

Thus, DEI offers a pass from charges of antisemitism on the theory that the oppressed cannot themselves become oppressors. Muslim students on American campuses were often graphic in their chants and placards wishing deaths upon Israelis, unapologetic in roughing up Jewish students, and confident—often correctly—that their purported victimhood exempted them from consequences.

The idea that minorities cannot be antisemites is, of course, not new. For example, graphic antagonism toward Jews—long at the forefront of the Civil Rights movement has long been expressed by prominent black leaders with little downside (e.g., Rev. Jeremiah Wright: “dem Jews”; Jesse Jackson: “Hymietown”; Al Sharpton: “diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights”; Malcolm X: “bloodsuckers”; Louis Farrakhan: “termites” and “gutter religion”).

Thus, Jews in America found themselves classified among the whitest and most privileged of the oppressor class, perhaps by virtue of their material success, while Israel abroad was deemed a white colonialist settler state because it repeatedly defeated neighboring enemies.

Key to the DEI demonization of the Jews has been the diminution of the horrors of the Holocaust to ensure Jews are excluded from the victim side of the ledger. The murder of six million had once been a principal reason for many to support the idea of an independent sanctuary in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people. Downplaying the Holocaust—or treating it as irrelevant or understandable—therefore calls postwar Zionism into question.

When Tucker Carlson declared that the unpublished podcaster Daryl Cooper was the preeminent historian of World War II, his praise rested neither on Cooper’s comprehensive scholarly work (there was none), nor bestselling popular accounts of the war (there were none), nor distinguished public lectures, seminar classes, or journal articles on the war (there were none).

Instead, the reason for such hagiography was that Cooper, in his podcast, had downplayed the Holocaust in narratives of the war, whitewashed Germany, and cited a nefarious, shadowy group of you-know-who for pushing supposedly naïve or sinister leaders like Churchill and Roosevelt into an aggressive and unwarranted war against a supposedly victimized Hitler and Nazi Germany.

From Underdog to Overdog

Third, Israel is no longer the Israel of 1947, 1956, 1967, or 1973, nor the Israel mired in the various Lebanon and Intifada quagmires that followed.

In the early 21st century, Benjamin Netanyahu helped open the Israeli economy and foster a meritocratic, free-market boom. Only oil-rich Qatar and the UAE surpass Israel in regional per capita income.

Its military, honed over generations of warfare, has become more capable than those of France, Germany, or the UK in key areas, especially combat aviation, the number of combat aircraft, and pilot quality. In short, tiny underdog Israel—surrounded by hundreds of millions of aggressive Muslims—has somehow been recast as the settler “overdog” bully. With a mere 18 percent of collective Arab GDP and outnumbered 50,000 to one, Israel is depicted as poised to carve out a “Greater Israel” from the impotent but simultaneously more virtuous and richer Arab Middle East.

October 7 and its aftermath, counterintuitively, accelerated the anti-Israel, anti-Jewish hatred. If Israel had not responded to the massacre, the new anti-Israel cohort would have claimed their inaction was a passive admission of prior guilt for which the attack was merely partial payment.

Yet once Israel moved to destroy Hamas, it was branded genocidal. Early Israeli calls for Gazans to turn over the planners and perpetrators of the massacre were dismissed by the Palestinians as absurd or unserious—mere jest. Few in the West called on the Palestinians to surrender their mass murderers.

Yet few of Israel’s critics could ever explain exactly what the Jewish state was supposed to do after suffering mass murder in peacetime from an enemy that had abducted more than 240 hostages—to the cheers of most Gazans.

How was the IDF—or any army—supposed to descend into a billion-dollar, booby-trapped labyrinth of tunnels, its exits and entries hidden beneath schools, private homes, mosques, and hospitals, to free hostages and kill terrorists while the media effectively shilled for Hamas?

The New Jacobin Agenda 

Hating Israel—and, by association, Jews—was voiced not merely by DEI or the radical new wing of the Democratic Party. Anti-Israelism instead merged into a broader leftist potpourri of open borders, illegal immigration, anti-ICE violence, Green New Deal-style wokism, and Trump Derangement Syndrome.

These causes came to be viewed as an inseparable package whose elements were interconnected and tolerated no apostasy from any of them.

Thus, Jacobinism became an all-or-nothing litmus test. As a result, even though Totenkopf tattoos might have been the last thing seen by Jews as they were herded by the tens of thousands into the gas chambers, such Satanic iconography scrawled into the flesh was apparently no longer disqualifying for a Democratic Senate nominee in Maine.

For figures like Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, or Chuck Schumer to forcefully challenge hatred of Israel—and, by extension, of the Jews—would now be treated as political heresy, a career-ending death wish. Defending Israel and calling out antisemitism became as unfashionable in progressive circles as praising secure borders, deportations, or fossil fuels and pipelines. And so the old party largely kept mum and sanctioned the new loathing.

As for conservative podcasters and internet influencers who now seem unrecognizable from what they had professed only months or years earlier, many had grown tired of being ostracized from popular culture and the establishment hallmarks of media and entertainment.

How else to explain their sudden hatred of Trump for the current Iran war, or his support for Israel, when the remaining 90 percent of his agenda has matched their own life-long conservative views, and were antithetical to the Left they now sometimes court?

But once figures like Candace Owens or a newly radicalized Tucker Carlson became fixated on the Jews, the Left found them useful as both shields and validators. Their rhetoric suggested that virulent anti-Israelism was not merely a left-wing fixation but something shared across the political spectrum.

The more such figures received establishment tolerance—or even praise and social acceptance—like addicts, the madder and louder they became until they were very nearly indistinguishable from the leftists they had so long warned about. Thus, Carlson, a once eloquent conservative, came full circle and effectively rationalized the idea of allowing Iran to have a nuclear bomb. That notion, after all, was the subtext of Obama’s Iran Deal and his morally neutral idea of a powerful Tehran-Damascus-Beirut-Gaza axis to balance moderate Arab regimes and Israel.

The Left praised these new right-wing opponents of Israel, as if they were Liz Cheneys—who were not so bad after all. Such praise from the corridors of cultural influence and power apparently was seen as welcome shelter from the prior left-wing hailstorms that had pelted them for years.

The final irony?

The only meaningful resistance to the anti-Israel crowd is not the DEI coalition, not the new Democratic Party, not the coastal and credentialed and supposedly enlightened left-wing white elite, not the supposedly “character is destiny” Never Trumpers, and certainly not the allegedly brave mavericks who have bolted from the MAGA base.

Instead, what is left in the pathway of demonizing Israel and blaming Jews, here and abroad, is the supposed bigot Donald Trump and his “irredeemable,” “deplorable” MAGA movement—for now, the last dam holding back the rising flood.