President Trump: Face facts, only non-intervention can make America great again

Mr. President:

When I last wrote to you and asked whether you had any idea of what the term “America First” means, I focused on the single issue of moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I chose that issue because it seemed to me to betray your lack of knowledge about how many billions of dollars, thousands of lives, and the broad and steadily deepening international hatred that move and our overall relationship with Israel have cost the republic. You also seemed just as ignorant of what the yield on our investment in supporting Israel has been. Well, just FYI, it has yielded nothing but a reliably disloyal, domestic Jewish-American fifth column; a sophisticated Israeli intelligence network that suborns Americans to steal or sell secret U.S. military, industrial, and technological data for Israel’s use or for it to sell to our enemies; and a suborned Congress that really is overwhelmingly more responsive to Israel’s monetary and political demands than it is to the needs of, say, U.S. veterans, the nation’s infrastructure, or our malnourished children. There has never been a more historically accurate analysis of the always dreadful results of American interventionism – the polar opposite of America First – than that written about our unquestioning support for Israel by America’s second greatest diplomat, George F. Kennan.  On 25 April 1978, Kennan wrote in his diary that the United States had built “a fateful tie to the Israelis from which we have, in contradistinction to the Israelis, everything to lose and nothing to gain.” (1)

George Kennan, Mr. President, was a late-comer to America First, but come he did, and so there may yet be hope for you. But that hope, Sir, can only be nourished by you beginning to think for yourself, trusting your instincts, and either ignoring or shedding yourself of the Neocons-in-U.S.-nationalist-clothing that surround you, people like McMaster; Tillerson – each time his mouth opens out comes Condoleeza Rice’s voice, Niki Hailey, who eagerly whores for Israel at the UN, but refuses to protect the symbols of American tradition and history in South Carolina; and a host of other military officers, appointed officials, retired generals, and civil servants who are either acolytes or paid shills of the Globalists, Neocons, or Israel Firsters. You have a lot of fish to fry, Mr. President, but the easiest road to America First in the foreign-affairs realm is a policy based on quiet observation from afar and resolute non-interventionism. The national government’s consistent abstention from involvement in international events that do not threaten U.S. survival, together with the building of an insurmountable wall along the Mexican border, would bring the greatest degree of genuine national security Americans have experienced since Wilson unnecessarily took the republic to war in 1917 because his personal “ideals” were offended.

But let me move past Israel. With respect, Mr. President, many of your recent foreign-policy decisions could have been authored by commonsense-less, Wilsonians like Obama, either Bush, or the Clintons. For example,

–Ukraine:  The media report that the national government recently sent high-powered weaponry to the Ukrainian government’s military. Why, Mr. President? The problem in Ukraine is not Putin and Russia, but the EU and U.S. democracy mongers and media who overthrew a pro-Russia government and installed an increasingly fascist regime that wants EU and NATO membership. When the EU, the BBC, the UN, George Soros, and Hillary’s State Department deposed one regime for another, Putin did the right thing to protect Russia’s national security by re-annexing Crimea, which is home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. The EU, the media, Obama, and Hillary expected Putin to react to their coup in Kiev as supinely as European politicians do to the quickly proliferating plague of Muslim rapists of women and children that is inundating the EU. Instead, Putin reacted as a Russian patriot and left them – and McCain and Graham – to ally the West with a corrupt and authoritarian regime in Kiev and crazily sputtering like the eunuchs they are. Stop sending weapons to Ukraine, Mr. President, it is a policy that once again has America taking not first, but only the usual stinking hindmost, which is the EU’s desperation for American taxpayers — and perhaps blood — to get them out of the mess their hubris and dilettantism created in Ukraine.

-Iran: Mr. President the only principle that those who elected you demand you always obey is “America First”. No part of your base, or, I would presume, 80-percent of the republic’s entire population, gives a good god-damn about either who rules in Tehran or who can vote in Iran. You, Sir, apparently have succumbed to the now 40-year-old drumbeat that tells Americans that Iran is a threat to the United States. If Iran is a threat to the United States – which it is not, at least in a life-and death sense – it is the result of two actions by the national government: (a) unenforced immigration laws that have permitted Iran’s surrogate Hezbollah to establish narcotics networks and urban-based, Islamic, no-go zones in, at least, New York, Florida, California, Michigan, Illinois, and Texas, and (b) the unnecessary U.S. military intervention in Iraq – which you have prolonged – that placed U.S. troops in the Arab world’s heartland where they are, with a minimum of effort, easy pickings to be killed by Iran’s forces and surrogates. Stop talking about the unrest in Iran, Mr. President, and let the Iranians work out their own future, even if it requires a bloodbath. The best your intervention can do in Iran, Sir, is to produce a nearly identical nightmare to that generated by the Obama-Hillary-EU campaign supporting the “Arab Spring”; namely, tens of thousands of dead Muslims, more Muslim authoritarianism, more support for radical Islamism, more Muslim refugees, and less U.S. security. Get a grip, Mr. President, your job is to defend the American republic. Let the Iranians go their own way, stop Tillerson’s State Department from surreptitiously stirring up dissent in Iran, and henceforth focus on saving the republic through the only means now remaining – restoring the rule of law and equality before the law.

–Afghanistan: When you were running your company, Mr. Trump, did you often turn for advice to other businessmen and companies that had been completely unsuccessful because they had blindly followed what they believed to be a sacrosanct business model for more than 50 years? Since you ran a successful company, I presume you did not. But as president you are now following the advice of generals who belong to – now that the Cubs have won a World Series – the losingest organization in the United States, the republic’s general officer corps. The Afghan War, Sir, was lost because these men and women have no idea of how to fight a war. They lost in Afghanistan – and Iraq – to an enemy that has been in the field since 1979, has no air cover or navy, no secure bases, no heavy artillery, almost no armor, and which wields a hodgepodge of arms that run the gamut from top-of-the-line Kalashnikovs to 19th Century Lee-Enfields. Your, generals, Mr. President, could not beat the Islamists in 2001, and they will lose to them again in 2018 or 2019, especially as Islamic State fighters are steadily moving into Afghanistan from Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. Take it from me, Mr. President, I have worked on Afghanistan since 1985 and I can recognize a botched and irretrievably lost foreign invasion of that country when I see one. Pull all U.S. forces – military, intelligence, and civil – out of Afghanistan now, provide no additional financial aid (use the savings for the border wall), and forcibly retire the generals who gave their countrymen this now 17-year-old deathtrap and money pit. Afghanistan, after all, poses no national security threat to the republic, and Americans, rightly so, do not give a hoot who rules in Kabul. Our immediate withdrawal will save military lives and limbs, free up money for domestic purposes or debt pay-down, and, best of all, leave Russia and China to bleed and spend in what will ultimately be a failed mutual effort to prevent their life-and-death national interests from being attacked by the Islamist forces now assembling in Afghanistan. Get out, Mr. President, while the getting is good The mas of commonsense-driven Americans are ready to overwhelmingly approve and applaud the withdrawal.

–Pakistan: Dear God, Mr. President, as a businessman did you expect other businessmen to do things to help you that would ruin their reputations and/or companies if you simply slipped them a few boxes of cash? I, again, presume that this is not a business model on which you would hang your hat. But Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Cheney, Obama, Hillary Clinton, and their – now your –generals eagerly did so. One of the greatest and most consistent failures of U.S. presidents, strategists, and generals is to assume that all countries will do things we want done for a bribe, more commonly known as “foreign aid” and/or “foreign military aid”. That foreign regimes will always take the money is a truism; that they will do things that hurt their nation’s genuine interests or their hold on power in return for money is seldom true. Pakistan was an exception. Under President Musharraf, the Pakistani military and intelligence services captured several dozen senior al-Qaeda leaders and turned them over to us; stood aside and let us destroy the Taleban regime that they had labored mightily to help build; allowed the U.S. State Department to oversee the emplacement of a strong Indian presence in Kabul and along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan; and, finally staged aggressive military offensives into the country’s border provinces that brought Pakistan to the edge of civil war, where it still hangs. In short, Musharraf’s Pakistan did more than any other U.S. ally in Afghanistan to assist the United States fight its war. But U.S. leaders wanted – then and now — Pakistan to win the war for America, although commonsense should have made this a momentary delusion, not a dominating, two-decade dogma. There was never a chance that Pakistan would do all what we wanted. Why? Because Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were not enemies of Pakistan until Musharraf made them so at our behest; because no Pakistani regime that helped kill or capture bin Laden could survive in a state whose population and military/intelligent services are increasingly militant in their Islamic faith; and because no Pakistani regime can ever permit its national security and even survival to be permanently endangered by creation of a pro-Western, pro-Indian, non-Islamist, and ambivalent-toward-Iran regime in Kabul. Clear you head, Mr. President, and recognize that America has lost in Afghanistan because it was  unwilling to do its own heavy lifting and because of its mad adherence to the daft and basically Pakistan-and-Afghanistan-ignorant policy of trying to buy victory with foreign aid. Lasting victory has never been achievable in Afghanistan for non-Sunni Muslims, Mr. President, so get out of there, leave the Pakistanis – like the Afghans — with no U.S. aid; chalk up the evacuation as another fulfilled campaign promise; forcibly retire more generals; and turn the mess over to Russia and China, both of which are non-Muslim countries that will be ultimately defeated there.

In closing, Mr. President, let me add that there is some urgency to complete the above-mentioned easy tasks. Get them off America’s plate, Sir, as two far worse foreign-affairs problems are just around the corner. First, Iraq and Syria are near the edge of a Sunni-Shia sectarian war, within which smaller wars between and among local tribes and ethnic groups will thrive, and the Islamic State and al-Qaeda will begin clawing back power. (NB: And do not listen to your advisers on this issue. The massive U.S. reconstruction aid they will urge you to spend to prevent the coming chaos will neither slow nor stop its advent and progress.) Second, in North Africa, while U.S. and the EU officials and experts have rejoiced in the Islamic State’s loss of the Libyan city of Surt, IS and al-Qaeda have regrouped in southern Libya and are already spreading their forces from there into western, eastern, and southern Africa, with enough leftover to begin rekindling the jihad in northern Libya. The Islamists concentration in southern Libya, moreover, also allows them to reinforce the Sinai Peninsula with men and arms, a condition which may lead to more Egyptian military defeats there and even an Islamist rebellion in Cairo and elsewhere in Egypt proper. Face facts on this one, Mr. President, Egyptian President al-Sisi’s days are numbered.

There is nothing sane that an American president can do to short-circuit the occurrence of these approaching disasters, so it is best that you get the easily solved problems of Ukraine, Iran,  Afghanistan, and Pakistan out of the way. Thereafter, Sir, prepare yourself to resist the intense pressure from Necons, Globalists, Israel-Firsters, Congress, the generals, and much of the media that will be loosed on you when the Islamists’ African campaign gathers pace and the usual war-mongering subjects in the United States slither out from under their rocks begin to clamor for a war to “liberate Africa”.

As you buckle on your armor for that fight, Mr. President, you should always remember,  that non-interventionism is a concept dearly beloved by non-elite Americans, working men and women who see no reason to spend their taxes and children’s lives on always fractious foreigners who hate the United States but love its money. Tax cuts are swell, Mr. President, but non-killed soldier-children are endlessly better. Those same people, Sir, also recall that you sold yourself to them as the champion of a non-interventionism, and can only believe that, to date, you have been close to an utter sham on that score. Words to the wise.





–1. Frank Costigliola, (Ed.). The Kennan Diaries. New York: W.W. Norton, 2014, Entry for 31 July 1978, p. 509

Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

President Trump: Do you have any idea of what America First means?

Mr. President:

Your decision on Jerusalem, and the speech in which you announced it, are as far from any form of an America First foreign policy as it is possible to be. Your speech was a grab-bag of tired rhetoric, earnest platitudes, and wishful thinking, much like your earlier speech on Afghanistan. Your citing of the Congress’s near unanimous support for moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, moreover, suggests we elected the wrong man to go after and eliminate the corruption that has engulfed the national government. The near-unanimity of Congress, as you must know, is bought by the bribes disguised as campaign contributions paid to the so-called representatives of the citizenry by the disloyal political, social, and financial leaders of the Jewish-American community, and their enforcers in such propaganda outlets like Commentary, the Weekly Standard, Forward, and others.

When you were thinking through the decision, Mr. President, did you ask yourself the question, “What does the United States get from taking this action?” If so, what did you identify as the advantage accruing to the United States? In your statement, you specifically said that the decision to move the embassy was in the interest of the American people. Well, how will it benefit them? You seemed to indicate that moving the embassy would aid the peace process. Mr. President there is no peace process. The religious war between Israeli Jews and Muslims will continue until one or the other is wiped out. Happily, a quick look at the map will tell you that neither outcome would hurt U.S. interests nor degrade the nation’s security.

As always, Mr. President, you surely have at hand more information than any of your critics, and so your decision might be supported by what is often too loosely termed intelligence. What it is not informed by, Sir, is commonsense.

Mr. President, the United States has been involved in a “religious war” with Islam since Osama bin Laden declared war on the republic in 1996; that is, for more than 21 years. For all of those years, your predecessors and now you have railed against that reality, preaching nonsense about the war having “nothing to do with religion”, that the Islamists have bastardized Islam and it is really a “religion of peace”, and that the Islamists should not be considered anything but cowards, nihilists, bad guys, extremists, or some other term that would help hide from Americans the reality of the religious war in which the republic is mired.

This use of obfuscating terminology, Mr. President, might soothe the minds of the multiculturalists and politically correct, but they do not change the enemy’s mind about what he is fighting for, which was in 1996, and is today, to break the U.S. economy, to stop U.S. military, political, social, and economic interventionism — you know, the things that contradict any sane understanding of America First — in the Islamic world, to end the rule of Arab tyrants, to destroy Israel, and then to annihilate the Shia. If your senior advisers and generals have not explained this to you, and you believe that you are fighting pseudo-religious gangsters and winning, you are simply wrong on both counts.

Almost everything you have done in the Muslim world since your inauguration, Mr. President, has reinforced the Islamists’ motivation and helped strengthen and spread their message. Indeed, you have not been different than Obama, Bush, and Clinton, and like them you have opened the door for more war with the Islamists. In this religious war, Mr. President, your administration’s actions have

–Reinforced the hatred of the Islamists — and Muslims generally — for U.S. military intervention. From the cruise-missile strike in Syria, to the “mother-of-bombs” in Afghanistan, to sending additional troops to Iraq, Afghanistan, and — for the first time — Syria, to intensifying drone strikes in several locations in Africa, America’s reputation for having no regard “for Muslim Blood” has been amplified. The formula is simple, Mr. President, more intervention = confirmation of the mujahidin’s narrative = greater traction for the Islamists among Muslim youth = an unending religious war that is helping to break the U.S. economy.

–Reinforced the Muslim world’s belief that the U.S. national government wants them to be ruled by tyrants. Your cordial visit to and subsequent consistent praise and support for the current and future Saudi tyrants; your very public efforts to build a strong relationship with the Egyptian tyrant-president, installed by an Obama/Hillary Clinton supported military coup; and your well-publicized support for the Philippine President Duterte’s martial-law-backed war with Islamists associated with the Islamic State have all been pitch-perfect in harmonizing Bin Laden’s declaration of war and the stated positions of the Islamic State.

–Reinforced the Muslim world’s accurate view that much of the U.S. national government, Congress, and media have been suborned by wealthy and influential Jewish-Americans working for Israel and against genuine U.S. national security interests, which do not include never-ending war with Islam and the need to ensure Israel’s survival. Your administration’s decision to permanently base U.S. troops in Israel and move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem — Islam’s third holiest site — is simply more proof for radical, militant, and nominal Muslims that Israel directs U.S. policy in the Muslim world and that there is no way to change this reality other than war.

–Reinforced the reality first established by George W. Bush and Barack Obama that the United States has sided with Shia Iran and other Shia Muslims to promote Shia expansionism in the Middle East; to subordinate Sunni Muslims in Iraq and Syria to Shia regimes; and to turn a blind eye to the murderous retributions being exacted against Sunnis by the Shia regimes, their police and military forces, and their militias.

Overall, Mr. President, instead of keeping the Sunni Islamists on their back foot after the temporary destruction of their Caliphate, the announcement of your decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem has given them a base from which to start to rebuild their fortunes, as well as an issue that will have broad and enduring traction across the Sunni Muslim, especially among military-age males.

None of the foregoing is to say that the U.S. war with Islam is America’s “fault”. Al-Qaeda attack us on 9/11, and so they needed to be annihilated. The military you command, Mr. President, has utterly failed to do that, and today is celebrating the defeat of the caliphate, which is, at best, a transient victory that returns the Islamic State to what it does best, which is insurgency.

What the forgoing is meant to say, Sir, is that your decision on Jerusalem and the other actions of your administration noted above are fully consistent with those of Obama, Bush, and Clinton, all of which tenaciously, if wrong headedly, worked to strengthen the motivation and media appeal of the Islamists, and to spread the international jihad to new areas of the world. Did any of your advisers, for example, tell you to expect an IS-associated Islamist organization in the Philippines to be strong enough to capture and hold the city of Marawi for more than a hundred days? I doubt it.

The time has come, Mr. President, to, as the saying goes, shit or get off the pot. America First means that foreign policy decisions — especially ones dealing with war — are made by answering the single question “Is this in the interests of the American people.” Taking America to war is always the correct choice if the republic’s survival is at risk, otherwise it is never the right choice. Today, Israel’s survival, the survival of Arab tyrants, the expansion of Shia territory and power, or the survival of European governments that have signed their own peoples’ death warrants by welcoming Muslim immigration and allowing the return of foreign fighters, are not life-or-death interests of the United States. None are worth American blood or dollars.

If you are truly dedicated or at least interested in America First foreign policies, Mr. President, please realize that they begin at home. Begin by (a) squaring with Americans by telling them that the United States is engaged in a religious war that was caused by the Islamists, but that much of the oxygen it needs to thrive is supplied by U.S. interventionism in the Muslim world, which has been the status quo U.S. policy since the presidency of the first Bush; (b) by building the southern border wall immediately as a national-security emergency; (c) by dumping the amnesty-wanting head of DHS that you just appointed and appointing Sheriff David Clark to the post; (d) by immediately designating AIPAC and other Jewish-American organizations as what they are, agents of a foreign power; (e) by beginning to apply the Logan act to all public officials — elected and appointed — who take money from or work on behalf of those organizations; (f) by withdrawing from NATO so as to avoid involvement in Europe’s approaching civil wars, as citizens seek to regain their natural rights from the authoritarian EU and its dedication to imposing Muslim privilege over the native born; (f) by halting all foreign economic and military aid and apply the savings to border control and the large-scale deportation of illegal aliens; and (g) by enforcing all the laws equally against all offending citizens.

This is important, republic-saving stuff, Mr. President, and you have gotten it all wrong so far. It is time for you to get on the stick and make America First a reality, rather than a vote-gathering throw away line.

Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , | 18 Comments

On natural rights, Saudi Arabia, and John McCain

The swirl of events continues, and so I thought I would comment on a couple of them

The first deals with some media coverage of Judge Roy Moore, but my focus has nothing to do with the sexual-misconduct allegations now being directed at him. What I noticed was a clip from MSNBC in which its correspondent Chuck Todd, after Moore had won the Republican primary, expressed astonishment that Judge Moore believed that each person’s rights — his natural rights — come from God and not from the government. Now, I have written before that most of the Americans I have heard speak in the public square are more or less ignorant of U.S. history, and especially of the period from the Puritans’ arrival in New England through the decades of the early republic. Mr. Todd, however, in his ruminations about Judge Moore and the concept of natural rights, drove home for me how thoroughly ignorant so many U.S. political and media personalities are of the republic’s history and character.

Where, I wonder, does Mr. Todd think his rights come from? From the national government, the UN, George Soros, or some combination thereof? No, that cannot be it, even a bulb as dim as Mr. Todd surely must see that all three of those entities have been laboring for decades to limit and ultimately remove the natural rights of Americans. But, then again, maybe he cannot see that fact as he is part of a media world that supports all three of those rights-removing entities. The Founders — say from John Winthrop’s arrival, through John Quincy Adams’ death — believed that the natural rights of man came from God, and that it was the citizenry’s duty to ensure that the political system they devised to govern themselves did not try to amend, abridge, or abolish those rights. Jefferson, widely but mistakenly said to be irreligious, wrote this into the Declaration of Independence, and John Adams, after studying the Constitution said that no people could be governed by it who were not religious, surely meaning that the Constitution would work only for Christians and Jews.

The role of government, then, is not to create rights — it cannot do so, as the Creator completed that task long ago — but to ensure that the rights with which Americans are born are fully protected by those who govern them. In turn, the role of citizens is to jealously guard their natural rights and, if they are found to be under attack by the national government, to destroy that government and form another that will respect and defend their natural rights.  In short, the founding generations believed that God gave man human rights, and governments — if not held to account by the citizenry — tended to gradually destroy them. Come, Mr. Todd, this is such an elementary piece of knowledge about American history. Have you forgotten what you learned in grammar and high school, or did you go to an Ivy League university, where the reality of natural rights is hated and mocked? No matter, sooner or later those politicians who seek to deny citizens their natural rights end up at the business end of a rifle or a rope and are accompanied there by their supporters and apologists.

Next comes Saudi Arabia and its sudden burst of turmoil fomented by the actions of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS). A good deal of the media coverage of this event has portrayed the developments as the first breath of Western-style “progressive reform”. The clever al-Saud royals, of course, earlier set the stage for this sophomoric interpretation by issuing the earth-shaking order that women will be permitted to drive automobiles. Western governments and much of the media identified this order as the opening of a second “Arab Spring”, one in which Riyadh will eventually become Las Vegas east. The al-Sauds surely caught some heat from the Saudi religious establishment over this, but they will throw a couple of extra billions to the senior Islamic scholars and bit more control over education. The scholars will continue to publicly complain about the action, but this is not a break point between the al-Sauds and the religious establishment.

The key question is, I think, whether this will be a break point for Saudi Arabia? If past is prologue, the soon-to-be-king is not do-gooding for a future progressive, more secular kingdom, but rather is making a play to get rid of those — and there are many — whose oxes will be gored when he succeeds to the throne. MBS must get them out of the way, and permanently so, either via exiling them or something more definitive. All this said, the king-in-waiting will still be faced with a country that is terminally corrupt from top to bottom, a religious establishment that has not been tamed and still sees the late Osama bin Laden as a nearly perfect Islamic man, and a younger generation of Salafi and Wahhabi males that are more attuned to the Islamic State’s behavior than to al-Qaeda’s. A large number of the later, moreover, have been trained by one or the other group and have considerable combat experience.

The bottom line may well be that MBS finds that, even after he rounds-up and eliminates his foes, takes their money, and ascends to the throne, his only option to try to preserve the kingdom is to turn Saudi youths, as many IS and AQ fighters as can be enlisted, and as much as possible of the young Sunni Muslim world against Shia Iran. The ensuing war would tear up the region in a prolonged and bloody sectarian war to settle scores that are now more than a millennium old. It is hard to think of a better scenario for improving U.S. security as there is nothing that commonsense would permit us to do other than get out of the way watch. That is, if there is enough commonsense at hand at the time the events unfold.

Finally, as worthless a human being as is the politician John McCain, he recently performed an unwitting but enormous service to his country. Addressing the Naval Academy’s Brigade of Midshipmen on 30 October 2017, McCain, in entirely predictable and self-righteous words, said that

the American example and American leadership are indispensable to securing a peaceful and prosperous future. Our failure to remain engaged in Europe and enforce the hard-won peace of 1918 had made that clear. There could be no more isolationism, no more tired resignation – no more ‘America First.’ … (1)

McCain is, of course, a historical ignoramus or a lair. The United States had no interest at stake in World War 1 and should never have entered a war that cost America about 100,000 lives. Indeed, save for the many billions of dollars U.S. banks had lent to France and Britain, the offended personal “ideals” of Woodrow Wilson, and Wilson’s pro-Allies propaganda ministry led by George Creel, the United States would not have entered the war. In regard to what McCain calls “[o]ur failure to remain engaged in Europe”, that must be deemed the U.S. government’s only wise decision after America entered the war in 1917. The marvelous “failure to remain engaged in Europe” was the result of the work of able and stubborn Republicans senators — Henry Cabot Lodge, George W. Norris, William Borah, Robert La Follette, Hiram Johnson, and a dozen others — who successfully blocked Wilson’s eagerness to sacrifice the republic’s sovereignty and independence by joining the League of Nations. The Republicans’ success also blocked Wilson’s willingness to abide by the League covenant’s Article X — which is like, but more much expansive than the NATO Treaty — which was unconstitutional in that it removed the decision to declare war from the Congress. (2)

Adding to the nonsensical nature of McCain’s assertion is the fact that the European allies — with Wilson’s help — imposed a Carthaginian peace settlement on Germany that played a major role in creating the political environment which allowed Hitler’s rise to power. As long as that settlement stood, a more active U.S. role in Europe would have meant nothing. (3)

Senator McCain then moved on to tell the Midshipmen that their first responsibility was  not to America, its citizens, and the commander-in-chief, but rather to the internationalists and interventionists who built a post-1945 world that has featured endless unnecessary wars and has bankrupted the U.S. Treasury. McCain warned his audience that today

the associations, rules, values and aspirations that comprise the international order we have superintended for three-quarters of a century are under gathering attack from regimes that desire a world less just and less free and more corrupt. And they are under attack from forces within liberal democracies themselves, parties that preach resentful nationalism rather than enlightened self-interest, nativism rather than equal justice.

It’s time to wake up.

I believe in Americans. We’re capable of better. I’ve seen it. We’re hopeful, compassionate people. And we still have leaders who will uphold the values that made America great, and a beacon to the oppressed.

But I don’t take that for granted. We have to fight. We have to fight against propaganda and crackpot conspiracy theories. We have to fight isolationism, protectionism, and nativism. We have to defeat those who would worsen our divisions. We have to remind our sons and daughters that we became the most powerful nation on earth by tearing down walls, not building them.

But that isn’t your job. Not directly. It belongs to those of us who hold office and are responsible for making sure you’re sent where you’re needed and equipped and ready for your missions.

You will be asked to defend America’s interests overseas, and thereby to defend the ideals that encompass and transcend those interests. You will protect the international order that American politics, with all its inefficiencies and human frailties, has done so much to create. (4)

McCain’s guidance may not be treason, but it is more of the pure, mindless, and nation-killing hooey that has and will continue to produce unnecessary interventionist wars, dead U.S. military personnel, and staggering national debt. No intelligent nation fights for its ideals anywhere but at home. What it fights for overseas is to protect its genuine national security interests. Those interests are always material or geographical in nature, and they always present the nation with a life-or-death choice. These interests are never, ever trumped by what McCain says are  “ideals that encompass and transcend those interests.” (5)

McCain is at the head of the bipartisan pack of interventionists who care nothing about the welfare of Americans, let alone the maintenance of their ideals, which are spelled out with indelible clarity in the U.S. Constitution, not in the UN Charter or any other internationalist document. That McCain and his like are a feral breed is shown by their refusal to put health-care on a sound-footing; reduce the national debt; lessen taxes; stop the ongoing destruction of the 1st and 4th Amendments; halt the production of laws that are moving the nation to minority rule; demand the arrest, trial, and incarceration of the leaders of what is a thoroughly lawless political elite; end illegal immigration; and stop seeking wars against those who threaten, not the United States, but the motley group of the breed’s paymasters, who are to be found in the banking and pharmaceutical industries, Israel, the Jewish-American community, and the Saudi and other Arab tyrannies.

Near the speech’s end, McCain’s told the Midshipmen that it will be their job “to protect the international order that American politics, with all its inefficiencies and human frailties, has done so much to create.”(6)  The truth is, however, that if the U.S. military is commanded by those who agree with McCain, the American republic and its Constitution will find themselves murdered by a stab in the back from internationalists, interventionists, and New-World-Order authoritarians. Abiding by McCain’s advice can only mean a last-ditch effort to save the republic by civil war will have to occur.



–1.) The full text of McCain’s speech can be found at,

–2.) The text of Article X of the League’s covenant reads as follows: “The Members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League. In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled.” See,

–3.) World War I is the first 20th century example of the disasters that befall those who wage wars that are left unwon. The German army was not defeated when the Armistice was declared in November, 1918, and yet the allies imposed a peace settlement that treated Germany as if it had been defeated in the manner Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan found themselves beaten in 1945; that is, utterly destroyed militarily. The Allies’ failure to win decisively would later allow Hitler and others to claim that Germany had been defeated by domestic forces — communists and Jews — that stabbed the nation in the back. In the long run, the lack of a decisive win led to World War II and the Holocaust.


5.) Ibid.

6.) Ibid.

Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

On the Niger dead, FBI’s Las Vegas deceit, and the fact that Islam, as a religion, is the problem

There have been so many noteworthy events occurring in the world that it has been hard to decide which to focus on, and so I have written nothing. It is still not clear, at least to me, which are most important, so I thought it best to look at a few. Here goes.

–Niger: The ambush of U.S. Special Forces (SF) in Niger – in which four soldiers were killed – was a small, deadly, and lamentable incident. The deaths have aroused a lot of debate and finger-pointing about why the SF unit was ambushed. Those involved in that debate – the Pentagon spokesmen, the media, senators, and congressmen – are all playing a game in which the goal is find a palatable lie to tell the American people about why their soldiers were sent into a trap in which they died. There is no need for an investigation, there is no mystery. The simple fact, which the president should share with the citizenry, is that the United States has no reliable ally anywhere in the Islamic world. U.S. Marines and soldiers will be killed in all Muslim countries where they are serving by the Islamists they are fighting, as well as by the Islamists who are members of the military and police forces they are sent to “train and assist”. In addition, the local mujahedin in that country will be helped in planning their operations against U.S. forces by Islamists in the military, police, and intelligence services, in the civil service, as well as by private citizens and their Islamic clerics and scholars. The bottom line? U.S. forces in Muslim countries – in Africa and all other regions – will be killed by those they are fighting, by those they are training and assisting, and by the growing numbers of Muslims who hate the presence of U.S. forces in their country, a hatred that will increase and take more tangible and lethal forms the longer U.S. forces remain in their country. This is a fact that is hard to lie about, but the effort will be made by any number of U.S. officials and generals.

–Las Vegas: Fifty-eight dead and more than five-hundred wounded in an attack on a country-music concert. The consensus in the media is that this was pro-Trump crowd, and the underlying tone of their pieces is the dead and wounded got what they deserved for electing Trump. That such reporting merits bloody payback for its reporters goes without saying, but lets lay aside for now a discussion of how to exact retribution. What merits intense focus is the FBI’s deceit about what occurred. These days, no matter what happens, FBI leaders grab the same well-thumbed script from the shelf and then recite, mantra-like, that: there was only one shooter; he had no help; a heroic employee stopped the attack; we are examining the shooter’s house, employment history, cars, wallet, mobile phone, bank records, and – in this case – brain tissue; and we cannot find a motive. In Las Vegas, the FBI spokesmen then walk away, showing they are deathly afraid of the casino owners’ willingness to kill them if the truth comes out, that they are determined to keep local cops intimidated and quiet, and that they will see to it that their shills in the media will drop the story. As all this occurred, the FBI looked the other way as the Hispanic non-security guard was hustled to Mexico for hiding and, if necessary, execution. Dear FBI: This drama is unnecessary. No one gives a dead rat’s ass about what you think the motivations of shooters were– yes, dear lawmen, many more than one — because the motive is clear to all, namely, the shooters wanted to kill as many as possible of those they believed were Trump supporters.

–Now, G-Men, no one cares about your ballistic tests, your yellow crime-scene tapes, your syrupy pleas for the public’s help, or even about you as fellow human beings, given that you have sold out and no longer enforce the law against elite criminals. We have all seen you at your very best for the past nine years in protecting GPS Fusion and Democrat-Russian cooperation; ignoring Hillary’s innumerable felonies and Comey’s facilitating of them; the spying Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power conducted on Trump’s campaign organization and incoming administration; the Obama approved, Eric Holder-protected, and Lois Lerner-led IRS persecution of conservatives; the play-for-pay game Hillary and her husband and daughter conducted with Russia over U.S. uranium and other matters; Holder’s lethal Fast-and-Furious program and refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers’ for voter intimidation; Loretta Lynch’s tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton and her refusal to prosecute BLM, BAM, or George Soros; and the blind-eye you have turned to greatest non-prosecuted financial crime in the republic’s history, the one that the Clintons and their entourage committed through the illegal-from-the-start Clinton Foundation. I fear, dear FBI badge-wearers, that if you do not soon tell Americans what really happened in Las Vegas, and then round-up the vermin responsible, those in the citizenry who still respect law and revere truth will act to get the answers you already have and are hiding. Time is tick, tocking toward the civil war you are encouraging, or at least toward the point where armed, law-abiding citizens will have no choice but to do your job for you by eliminating those criminals and America-destroyers the FBI cannot even identify, let alone arrest and incarcerate.

–Islam is the problem: First, I must admit that I am tempted never to write on this topic again as I have written about it ad nauseam inside the government, when I worked for CIA, and publicly since late 2004. But the media’s coverage of the 31 October 2017 Islamist attack in New York City is so deliberately deceitful that I thought it best to give it another go, using a focus that provides the obvious keys to prevailing against the Islamists. Four points will suffice:

–1.) Whenever you hear the word “radicalization” you are being duped. What happens to individual Muslims who move into the parts of Islamic theology known as Salafism and Wahhabism – both of which are valid and respected schools of that theology – is best described as “conversion”; that is moving from one valid school to another valid school of the Islamic faith. This conversion does not “radicalize” Muslims, but rather “warriorizes” them and brings them as mujahedin or, “holy warriors”, into Islamic forces. These forces, in turn, draw support, funds, prayers, and manpower from Muslims belonging to all the schools of Islam. They are waging a religious war against the United States, especially its military interventionism; its now nearly defeated European states; Israel; and the U.S./NATO-protected Arab tyrants. For the U.S. and its allies to eternally deny they are engaged in a religious war is both politically correct and fatal.

–2.) The expensive U.S. and European “de-radicalization” programs have been utter failures and will never work. The programs are simply a cash-rich gravy train for university professors, psychologists, Protestant and Catholic do-gooders, and other chronic losers to draw from and enrich themselves. Any dependence on de-radicalization programs will yield only two results: (a) no reduction in Islamist manpower, and (b) more dead Americans. A British cabinet minister’s recent announcement that the UK will expand the government’s de-radicalization programs – which will include counseling, housing, and job support, but, apparently, no incarceration — to cope with jihadis returning from Syria and Iraq, should be seen for what it is, Great Britain’s death knell. (NB: A UK foreign-ministry official got it right when he said the returning jihadis should just be executed, but he was shouted down by the multiculturalists and the diversifiers) Wisdom begins with an acceptance of the fact that no de-radicalizer is ever going to talk a mujahid out of his faith, or what that faith tells him he needs to do please Allah, protect Islam, and earn salvation.

–3.) The U.S. government has lied to the American people at every step of the way since Osama bin Laden declared war on the United States in August, 1996. The now two-decade old war against the mujahedin is preeminently a religious war, and, as noted above, it will remain so no matter how often and vociferously the national government denies its existence All of the asininities that U.S. government officials and the media believe and broadcast on this issue – “Islam is a religion of peace”, “the mujahedin are not part of Islam”, “few Muslims support the Islamist fighters”, “Muslim immigrants are not dangerous to U.S. security”, etc. — are irrelevant. Islamist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and increasing numbers of the Muslim world’s younger generations are, and have often said they are, fighting a religious war against the United States. The U.S. government is simply denying reality and, in so doing, is ensuring the non-ending slaughter of Americans and the republic’s eventual move into a martial law status to defend itself. There is no way to create a domestic environment in which the U.S. law-enforcement community can begin to adequately defend America until (a.) the southern border is shut tight; (b.) all immigration from Muslim countries is stopped (the Constitution does not forbid this action; indeed, it would be a return to long-used procedures in which republic picked the countries from which its immigrants would come); and (c) all Muslims who are in the United States illegally are rapidly hunted down and deported.

–4.) In all future anti-Islamist military engagements overseas, U.S. forces should operate under both Old Glory and a plain Black Flag, the latter simply meaning that no surrenders will be accepted and no prisoners will be taken on the battlefield. To be in a position that forces the adoption of such a deadly policy is a tough business, but it is the predictable cost that must be paid for the national government’s multitude of unnecessary, interventionist, and always lost wars.

Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

The Founders’ 2nd Amendment exists so the citizenry can kill American tyrants

Last weekend’s attack in Las Vegas — probably conducted by people attached to the Democratic Party and inspired by the mainstream media — has, not surprisingly, sparked the usual tear-filled, moronic debate on the supposed need for gun control.

The issue on which Democrats and some Republicans have fixed their tyrannical goal is something called a bump-stock, which is a gadget that is said to accelerate the rate of fire from a semi-automatic rifle. With the vast amount of firepower that the increasingly tyrannical U.S. national government can potentially turn on its citizenry, this device is a god-send for gun-owning Americans. Banning this device — like banning machine guns in the 1930s — is a clear “infringement” of the 2nd Amendment, as it limits the citizen’s right to defend himself against domestic tyrants to the extent he desires to do so. It is, as well, another step toward what the Founders believed must never be allowed, a national government monopoly on the tools of violence.

Now, both the Democratic and Republican parties, the establishments of each, and the mainstream media have worked to strengthen centralized tyranny for at least three decades. Today, it is clear they have succeeded to a significant extent.

–Criminal politicians walk the streets, kill opponents, ignore the Constitution, and grow rich from corruption, graft, and theft because they are above the law. Examples? Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and Eric Holder, to name only a few.

–Leaders and their followers in both parties have knowingly bankrupted this country; used federal agencies to persecute political opponents, started unconstitutional and unnecessary wars that never end; and refused to enforce legitimate laws passed by the national legislature.

–Democrats have demanded the end of any place whatsoever for Christianity in the public square, and on most occasions Republicans have either acquiesced or failed to undo the Democrats’ damage to 1st Amendment guarantees after they win power.

–Both parties have allowed the country to be overrun by unwanted, unneeded, and uneducated illegal aliens, people have shattered and criminalized American society and now staff the Democratic party’s terrorist organizations– like Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and By Any Means — as well as much of the federal civil service and the ranks of domestic Islamist organizations.

–The republic is ruled by the nine, unelected, arrogant, and unaccountable tyrants who sit on the Supreme Court, men and women who stick their noses into every facet of American life. These paragons of injustice have facilitated the suppression of the Christian faith in America; the murder of 60-plus million unborn Americans by calling it a “right”; and empowered Democrat-favored minority groups that are obviously unable to govern themselves let alone the nation. The Founders never intended the Supreme Court to become the absolute monarchy it is today, and so left Congress the constitutional ability to limit its purview, as well as that of all other federal courts. Neither party is willing to rein in the federal courts, apparently hoping at some point to make it a complete dictatorship from the right or the left.

The foregoing realities are among the reasons the Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment. They also are the reason the Founders specifically forbid the “infringements’ to it that they knew would be advocated by would-be political tyrants seeking to incrementally erase the citizen’s right to own arms to kill tyrants. The 2nd Amendment is the most important of all the amendments to the Constitution because it is the only one that ensures Americans will always have the option of killing the politicians that are trying to eliminate the God-given rights that are embedded in and protected by the Bill of Rights, as well as those in several of the other amendments adopted subsequent to it.

After the Democrats’ highly lethal and well-planned terrorist operation in Las Vegas — with those they ran in Charlottesville and Berkeley — they and some Republicans are breathlessly eager to lawlessly infringe on the 2nd Amendment to further limit the ability of Americans to defend themselves. One can only assume that these would-be tyrants believe they govern a citizenry that has no stomach for defending their rights and faith, and will do anything to avoid a civil war. On this point, they may want to think twice.

Almost from the arrival of the first Protestant English setters in New England, the grounding of American freedom has been based on the knowledge that neither God nor legitimate law require a people to live their lives passively, silently, and submissively under the arbitrary power of either an absolute monarch or a tyrannical oligarchy wielding the same kind of arbitrary power. In January, 1750, Johnathan Mayhew, the Congregationalist pastor of Boston’s West Church, preached a sermon that explicitly made this point. The tyrant that Mayhew spoke of was England’s King Charles I, whose tyrannical behavior provoked Parliament and its supporters to overthrow and behead him. In the sermon, Mayhew defended those who removed and executed the king and, in so doing, explained that their actions offended neither the law nor the Lord.

Till people find themselves greatly abused and oppressed by their governors, they are not apt to complain; and whenever they do, in fact, find themselves thus abused and oppressed, they must be stupid not to complain. To say that subjects in general are not proper judges when their governors oppress them, and play the tyrant; and when they defend their rights, administer justice impartially, and promote the public welfare, is as great treason as ever man uttered;–’tis treason,–not against one single man, but the state–against the whole body politic;–’tis treason against mankind;–’tis treason against common sense;–’tis treason against God. And this impious principle lays the foundation for justifying all the tyranny and oppression that ever any prince was guilty of. The people know for what end they set up, and maintain, their governors; and they are the proper judges when they execute their trust as they ought to do it;–when their prince exercises an equitable and paternal authority over them;–when from a prince and common father, he exalts himself into a tyrant–when from subjects and children, he degrades them into the class of slaves;–plunders them, makes them his prey, and unnaturally sports himself with their lives and fortunes. … For a nation thus abused to arise unanimously, and to resist their prince, even to the dethroning him, is not criminal; but a reasonable way of indicating their liberties and just rights; it is making use of the means, and the only means, which God has put into their power, for mutual and self-defense. And it would be highly criminal in them, not to make use of this means. It would be stupid tameness, and unaccountable folly, for whole nations to suffer one unreasonable, ambitious and cruel man, to wanton and riot in their misery. And in such a case it would, of the two, be more rational to suppose, that they that did NOT resist, than that they who did, would receive to themselves damnation. (1)

I previously have quoted from Reverend Mayhew’s sermon and other works, and have earned some scoffing-at for claiming that Mayhew’s words could have any pertinence to contemporary America. I think that criticism is quite wrong. The good pastor used his words to describe the tyrannical rule of Charles I, but without much modification they could be used to describe the tyrannical, eight-year rule of Barack Obama and his lieutenants. The same words, without question, eventually could have been used to describe the tyranny that Hillary Clinton and her mad-feminist clique would have installed had she succeeded to Obama’s throne. In addition, Mayhew’s words are timeless in their description of the proper popular response to a tyrant.

The three people just mentioned constitute a trio of tyrants that no people would be required by God or law to forego overthrowing and executing. So far, sadly, only one member of the tyrant trio has received his just comeuppance. The other two, their party, and their Republican acolytes, given their post-election behavior, rhetoric, and funding for riots meant to kill Americans, may yet get their just deserts. To crib from what Pastor Mayhew said of Charles I, it seems fair to say that Obama and Clinton and their entourages “are black with guilt and laden with iniquity.”(2) Because the result of voting no longer seems to bring the republic tranquility and order, but rather chaos, violence, and corpses, it would be well if Mayhew’s assessment that the citizenry is bound by its duty to God and country to eliminate tyrants becomes fixed in the minds of contemporary Americans, and perhaps be acted upon before long.

As to Mayhew’s credibility, John Adams testimony out to be sufficient. Mayhew, Adams said, was “transcendent genius … who threw all the weight of his great fame into the scale of the country in 1761, and maintained it there with zeal and ardor till his death. … If the Orators on the 4th. of July, really wish to investigate the principles and Feelings which produced the Revolution .., they ought to study Dr. Mayhew’s Sermon on Passive Obedience and Non Resistance.”(3) Later, Adams would write,

Another gentleman, who had great influence in the commencement of the Revolution, was Doctor Jonathan Mayhew…. This divine had raised a great reputation both in Europe and America, by the publication of a volume of seven sermons in the reign of King George the Second, 1749, and by many other writings, particularly a sermon in 1750, on the 30th of January, on the subject of passive obedience and non-resistance, in which the saintship and martyrdom of King Charles the First are considered, seasoned with wit and satire superior to any in [Jonathan] Swift or [Benjamin] Franklin. It was read by everybody; celebrated by friends, and abused by enemies. … Mayhew seemed to be raised up to revive all their animosities against tyranny, in church and state, and at the  same time to destroy their bigotry, fanaticism, and inconsistency.(4)

Then, in 1818, Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson that he had read Mayhew’s 1750 sermon “a year before I entered Harvard Colledge and I read it, til the Substance of it was incorporated into my Nature and indelibly engraved on my memory.”(5)

If that sermon’s words had such a profound and enduring impact on a man like John Adams, Mayhew’s admonitions are clearly pertinent to those Americans who still prize liberty and hate tyranny, people who are, not coincidentally, the most jealous guardians of the 2nd Amendment. (6)


–1.) Jonathan Mayhew, “A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers,” 30 January 1750, See,

–2.) Ibid.

–3.) andJohn Adams to William Tudor, Sr., 5 April 1818, at

–4.) John Adams to H. Niles, 18 February 1818, at

–5.) John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 18 July 1818, at

–6.) The five foregoing endnotes are meant to give readers fairly easy access to the cited sources. Fortunately, however, there is now available a new, superb, and beautifully written and argued biography of Jonathan Mayhew that covers all the material in this piece and much more. The book restores Reverend Mayhew — after centuries of near total neglect — to his rightful place as a key founder of the American republic. It also places his writings where they rightfully belong, which is alongside those of the authors whose writings were most influential in convincing and inspiring Americans to shed themselves of British tyranny, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and John Dickinson. Following is the citation for this wonderful book: J. Patrick Mullins. Father of Liberty. Jonathan Mayhew and the Principles of the American Revolution. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2017.


Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 7 Comments