Wednesday, August 31, 2016

The guy in the Maserati sedan

Today, up in the toney end of Fort Mudge, I saw a black Maserati sedan, like this one. Beautiful car.

The driver, who looked like an extra from The Godfather, was holding his cellphone in one hand and picking his nose with the other. Make of that what you will. Thus endeth another month.

Monday, August 29, 2016

84% of Scott Adams' readers think Clinton bigoted vs whities

From Scott "Dilbert" Adams' blog today...

Yes, I know a Twitter survey with a non-random sample has no scientific validity. And yes, I know my followers are not representative of the public. And yes, I know the survey question leads the witness.

Still, I found this interesting from a persuasion perspective:

If you'd like to read Scott's comments, in full, click here.

Why in hell wouldn't blacks vote for Trump?!

Before I begin, let me express a fervent wish that dark(ish)-complected people would decide once and for all what they want us palefaces to call them. Some of them call each other "nigger", but we can't say that. "Negro" is long gone from our vocabulary. "Darkie" is verboten, as the makers of the eponymous toothpaste discovered years ago.

"African-American" is ridiculous, IMHO. If your ancestors came here two centuries ago, whether you're in the hold of a slave ship or above decks, and you're the sixth generation to be born on this side of the Atlantic, any ties with the Old World have long since been cut. During my time in southern Africa, I've heard visiting "African-Americans" say of the natives, "Man, these dudes ain't nuthin' like us!"

So "blacks" it is, then. OK? That's the term preferred by the late, great Civil War historian Shelby Foote. Not long before his death, Mr Foote was interviewed by Tony Horwitz, for his admirable book Confederates in the Attic. Here's what he had to say about the black underclass.

"Slavery was the first great sin of this nation. The second great sin was emancipation, or rather the way it was done. The government told four million people, 'You are free. Hit the road.' Three-quarters of them couldn't read or write, The iniest fractino of them had any profession that they could enter.

"What has dismayed me so much is the behavior of blacks. They are fulfilling every dire prophecy the Ku Klux Klan made. It's no longer safe to be on the streets in black neighborhoods. They are acting as if the utter lie about blacks being somewhere between ape and man were true."

I have emphasized Mr Foote's assertion that it's no longer safe to be on the streets in black neighborhoods because, twenty years after he said that, we had fresh proof on Friday when Nykea Aldridge, a 32-year-old mother of four, was shot dead while pushing her baby in a stroller near a school in Chicago's South Side.

In broad daylight, two men walked up and fired shots at a third man, hitting Ms Aldridge (the cousin of NBA star Dwyane Wade) in the head and arm. Chicago police say she wasn't the intended target. She was just "collateral damage" in the random gun violence which afflicts American inner cities.

Two brothers Darwin Sorrells Jr., 26, and Derren Sorrells, 22, were charged with the murder of Ms Aldridge and attempted murder of the gang-banger who was the actual target.

Darwin and Derren seem to me poster boys for Donald Trump's appeal to "people of colour" [Ed., is that term OK] to vote for him because... wait for it... people of any colour should be able to walk along the streets without fear of being shot!

The US of A has endured eight years of the progressive, politically correct policies of the only President who can legitimately call himself  "African-American". Are American blacks better off today than they were 22 years ago, when Shelby Foote made those remarks? As The Donald said, if you're black and you live in some blighted project in Chicago (or Newark or Philthydelphia or wherever), why in hell wouldn't you vote for him?

Saturday, August 27, 2016

VIDEO: Alt-Right is all right!

Walt admits to having been a bit lethargic this month. Perhaps it was post-convention letdown. Once The Donald and Hellery got nominated, things kind of cooled down. Mr Trump misspoke himself a couple of times. (Ronald Reagan used to do that too, and look what happened to him!) Crooked Hillary got a bit of a bump in the polls as people averted their eyes from the lies and scandals. And the lamestream media started practising their moves for the dance on Trump's political grave. Walt tuned out because, as former Canuck Prime Minister John Diefenbaker once said, it's a long road that has no ashcans. [What does that even mean?! Ed.]

Then came La Clinton's "speech" in Reno on Thursday, in which (not having any ideas to put forward) she attacked Mr Trump yet again. And -- this is the part that got my attention -- she also demonized the 40% of Americans who support The Donald as being bigoted racists who have been seduced by the Alt-Right movement which, she claimed, had taken over the Republican Party. "Alt-Right?", I said to myself. "Wozzat?" To find out, I visited the Alternative Right blog.

Gotta love that banner illustration! It could only have been better if it had been the Confederate cavalry led by J.E.B. Stuart, but British cavalry will do nicely.

Turns out the Alt-Righters are not a political organization, but a grass-roots movement of people not unlike my goodself, who believe (for instance) that
- immigration should be halted or sharply curtailed
- political correctness has run amok
- feminism, multiculturalism and globalization are destructive
- white identity and white culture are under threat and need to be aggressively defended.

Richard Spencer, the "white nationalist" founder of the National Policy Institute, said that following the Clinton diatribe, "Millions of people are Googling #AltRight and thinking through our ideas for the first time." That's what I did, and I liked what I read. Like this...

Equality is bullshit. Hierarchy is essential. The races are different. The sexes are different. Morality matters and degeneracy is real. All cultures are not equal and we are not obligated to think they are. Man is a fallen creature and there is more to life than hollow materialism. Finally, the white race matters, and civilization is precious. This is the Alt-Right. Here's the video.

An Alt-Righter who tweets as "Identitarian" wrote "What the #AltRight means is that whites no longer are going to cower and will defend our own race. The #AltRight’s message isn’t one of hate, but one of love: Whites learning to love and support our own race." Sounds all right to me!

Further reading: Click here to read the text of Hellery's Reno speech, with appropriate links and illustrations, from the Alternative Right blog.

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Puzzle: Guess the real story behind the headline

The online edition of the Groan and Wail -- Canada's self-styled "national newspaper" -- has a story today with the following headline:

Frenchman stabs UK woman to death in Australia: police

So ya got yer Frenchman and yer Brit, and this happened in the land of Oz. Just the age-old enmity between the Froggies and the Limeys, right? Errr, not right. There was more to it than that.

If you haven't already guessed, a quick scan of the text will reveal that the killer was not only French, but a militant Muslim, who shouted... wait for it... "Allahu Akbar!" as he plunged the blade into his victim.

So was this a terrorist act, then? Here's the official statement from Inspector Bruce Knacker. "Initial inquiries indicate that comments which may be construed of being of an extremist nature were made by the alleged offender. This person appears to have acted alone. He is a visitor to Australia and has no known local connections, however investigations are ongoing."

Note the absence from the statement of the words "Muslim", "Islamic", "terrorist" or "jihadi". Walt wonders if the UN Agency for Political Correctness has published a reference book with lists of words and phrases to be used to downplay the inference of Islamic terrorism which most people with 80+ IQs would draw from the murderer's exclamation.

The same stylebook is obviously in use not only by the police but by the lamestream media. Any news of attacks on "infidels" by Islamic extremists is suppressed or downplayed deliberately, for political reasons. Cf. "9 'refugees' rape Austrian woman; news hushed up until after election", WWW 21/8/16. Don't bother trying to add a comment to the G&M story; comments are closed!

Do our political elites, their servants the mass media and their agents of control (read: police) really think that we are being fooled by the whitewashing of stories that portray militant Muslims in a bad light? We are not! At least I'm not. How about you?

Ukrainian Independence Day

Вiтаємо наших українських
читачів і друзів
з 25ю річницею незалежності України.

Слава Україні!
Bолт, Бідний Лен і Ед

Monday, August 22, 2016

Most Canadian photo EVER

Never let it be said that Walt [and Ed.! Ed.] don't pay attention to our readers' requests. [Notice the correct use of the apostrophe. We do have more than one reader. Ed.] Rufus Leeking, of Teaticket MA [You can look it up. Ed.] writes to enquire why we never post any pictures of beavers. Well, Rufus, we're happy to oblige!

This is Corporal Jason Pinder, of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In his spare time, Cpl. Pinder volunteers with the Salthaven West Animal Rehabilitation Centre, in Regina SK, who gave out this lovely portrait of the nice Mountie with a rescued beaver kit. How Canadian is that!

Sunday, August 21, 2016

9 "refugees" rape Austrian woman; news hushed up until after election

Last May, the Austrians held a presidential election in which the No. 1 issue was immigration -- specifically, the admission to the country of hordes of Muslim invaders posing as asylum-seekers. Anti-immigrant backlash looked like putting the anti-immigrant Freedom Party into office. But just when FPÖ candidate Norbert Hofer was measuring the drapes of the Hofburg, 1000s of postal ballots suddenly appeared, giving the edge to the incumbents. See "Absentee votes deny Freedom Party victory in Austrian election", WWW 23/5/16.

The good news is that the vote was so close, and the suspicion of electoral fraud so strong, that the Freedom Party's appeal to the Austrian Constitutional Court was successful, and a do-over has been ordered. The reply will take place on either 25 September or 2 October.

Rewind to New Year's Day in Vienna, when a white German woman went to police claiming that she had been raped by a gang of Arab foreigners. Inspektor Katzenjammer didn't exactly spring into action. Only last week -- the middle of August -- following a painstaking (and ballsachingly slow) investigation, and careful analysis of DNA evidence and CCTV camera footage, did Austrian police announce the arrests of nine (9) Iraqi "refugees". Aged between 21 and 47, all nine had applied for or been granted asylum.

Sex attacks by Muslim "migrants" from the Middle East and North Africa are nothing new in Europe, with numerous outrages being reported in Germany, Sweden and other countries that have welcomed the poor downtrodden "refugees". Austria has seen its share of attacks, not just on women but even brutal homosexual attacks on little boys at public swimming pools.

In this case, Austrians are asking why it took nearly eight months to arrest the perps. Was the investigation so "protracted and difficult" as the police claim? Vienna police spokesthingy Paul Eidenberger said there was "no doubt about the gang rape according to the biological traces." And (they say now) what happened was pretty clear. The Arabs met the woman in Vienna's central Schwedenplatz, drugged her, and then assaulted her for four hours in an apartment where two of the attackers lived.

Surely the FPÖ can be forgiven for suggesting that the delay in arresting the criminals was a deliberate attempt to withhold the news during the run-up to the presidential election. But the cat is out of the bag now. News of the gang rape, combined with ongoing refugee-terrorist attacks and other criminal activities by the Muslim invaders, is expected to push even more Austrian voters into the FPÖ camp come the fall. Stay tuned.

Thursday, August 18, 2016

More Muslim refugees than Christians admitted to USA

In this final year of the too-long reign of Hussein Obama, more Muslim "refugees" than Christians are being allowed to come into the US of A. So says the non-partisan Pew Research Center, in a report made public today.

Of the 63,000 refugees -- real and bogus -- admitted during the current fiscal year (which began last October), 29,000 are Muslims. Walt will do the math for you. It works out to 46%! 44% of the refugees declared themselves to be Christians. The remaining 10% were "unknown, unaffiliated or 'other'".

The largest numbers of Muslim refugee claimants came from Syria, Somalia, and Iraq. The Democrats have made a big fuss over the handful of Christian Syrians being allowed in, as proof that they're not discriminating in favour of President 0's co-religionists (?), but the fact is that of the roughly 9000 Syrian refugees who entered this year, fewer than one percent (1%) were Christians.

But wait (as Vince Offer used to say), there's more! The total number of Muslim refugees -- nearly 29,000 -- was also the highest number recorded since the statistics became available. This is also the fourth year in a row that over 25,000 Muslims have gained entry into the USA as refugees.

Here's a final thought. The statistics collected and reported by the INS do not distinguish between "moderate Muslims" [an oxymoron, shurely! Ed.] and Islamic extremists. Should we be alarmed? Surely they can't all be jihadis! OK, let's suppose only 1% of them are. Let's see. 1% of 29,000 would be... errr... 290. How many Islamic terrorists did it take to kill dozens of people in San Bernardino? 2. How many did it take to kill dozens of people in Orlando? Errr... just one (1).

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Bill and Hellery accept the nomination

Here's a photo -- cleverly captioned by Private Eye -- of Clinton I and the would-be Clinton II accepting the Democratic nomination. Ask yourself: who's really being nominated here? Her or him? Or both of them?

Dear American readers, think about this! If Hellery is elected, you're in for either four more years of a Clinton administration or four more years of an Obama administration... or both, all rolled into one horrible package. Is that what you really want?

Why Trump and Clinton are wrong on ISIS

I want to endorse Donald Trump for President. Really I do. But I am yet to be convinced that he has the answers -- good answers -- to America's problems at home and abroad. Yesterday he made an important speech on foreign policy, on his vision for the US role in the world. His answer to the threat posed by Islamist terrorism seems to be to "crush" ISIS.

To destroy ISIS.... That's clearer and stronger than la Clinton's non-answer, which seems to be to continue the Obama policy of merely "degrading ISIL", which has failed in the Middle East and has actually made matters worse in Europe and North America, where "homegrown, radicalized Islamists" have mounted attack after attack on whatever hapless "infidels" happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

What both Ms Clinton and Mr Trump either don't understand or deliberately ignore is the reason given by the "lone wolves" for blowing themselves up or driving trucks into crowds of merrymakers. What they say in their videos is that they're protesting against American meddling in the Muslim civil war being fought out in the Arab world. (Note that there's no Islamic terrorism in such large Muslim countries as Iran, Malaysia and Indonesia -- only in the Arab states.)

The solution seems simple enough. Get out of the Middle East, leave the Arabs to duke it out amongst themselves, and they'll leave us and US alone!

Ron Paul has been saying that for years. So have I. And so has Gwynne Dyer, whose book After Iraq (St. Martin's Press, New York, 2007) I've mentioned before. See "Who really 'founded' ISIS?", WWW 14/8/16. Here are some wise words from the chapter headed "The Terrorist Bandwagon".

The United States has never been more disliked in the Arab world, and Arab regimes associated with it have a grave public relations problem at home, but there is no sign of a popular revolution brewing against even the most vulnerable regimes.

Terrorist attacks in Western countries will doubtless continue in a minor key, probably carried out for the most part by young Muslims already living in those countries who have been radicalized by the invasion of Iraq.... The invasion of Afghanistan had less effect on Muslim opinion in Western countries, since there seemed some logical justification for it, whereas the lack of such a justification for invading Iraq left many in the Muslim diaspora convinced that there really was a concerted Western assault on Islam itself.

The withdrawal of Western troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan would remove the main cause of this radicalization in Muslim communities in Western countries...and the likelihood of further attacks would then tend to diminish over time.

As for genuinely international Islamist terrorism against Western countries that is planned and controlled from within the Muslim world, apart from 9/11 it has never been a significant phenomenon, and 9/11 increasingly looks like a one-off. Not only would it be much harder to carry out such an operation today in the face of much-improved security measures, but the strategic motive for doing so has dwindled drastically, since it would be very difficult to sucker the United States or other Western countries into invading Muslim countries again once the troops are out.

Mr Dyer wrote that in 2007. And in that last sentence is the essence of what's wrong with Mr Trump's just-proclaimed policy. To respond to the jihadist wannabe outrages in Europe and the USA by sending the Marines into the Middle East sandpit is would be to do exactly what ISIS wants, in order to destabilize and overthrow the governments (horrible though they may be) of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon etc. Walt's advice to The Donald (and Hellery): don't get suckered in again!

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Who really "founded" ISIS?

The Donald made headlines last week by saying that Barack Hussein Obama founded ISIS, and his one-time Secretary of State, Hellery Clinton, was its co-founder. He said he meant it. Then he said he was speaking sarcastically, "but not too sarcastically". Perhaps that was going a bit far, but one can certainly make a good case that the IS "caliphate" has benefitted greatly from President 0's weak [non-existent? Ed.] foreign policy, and the ineptitude and general mismanagement of his administration in general, and Ms Clinton in particular.

Who knows why they've bungled the Middle East file so badly? Maybe the Prez really is a Muslim, as many people believe. Still, it's a bit much to give him credit for "founding" ISIS. At the beginning of the Obama-Clinton years, ISIS (or "ISIL", as they keep calling it) didn't really exist. All we had to worry about, the first eight years of this century, was Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. But it cannot be denied that ISIS sprang from Al-Qaeda, and from the mess the Paranoid States of America created in Iraq.

Who was responsible for the Iraq debacle? It wasn't Mr Obama, but a Republican. No, not Dubya -- except in the sense that he, as Supreme Commander, must bear the ultimate reponsibility -- but one his appointees, named and shamed by Gwynne Dyer in After Iraq (St. Martin's Press, New York, 2007). That would be... wait for it... Lewis Paul Bremer III, a former Managing Director of Kissinger and Associates. (Yes, that Kissinger.) Mr Bremer was appointed by President Bush II as Presidential Envoy to Iraq on 9 May 2003. His appointment declared him subject to the "authority, direction and control" of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He led the American occupation of Iraq from 11 May 11 2003 until 28 June 2004. Here's what Gwynne Dyer says, with Walt's emphasis.

[Bremer] disbanded the entire Iraqi army and police force and banned all senior Ba'ath Party members -- and anybody in the top three management layers of government ministries, government-run corporations, universities and hospitals who was a Party member at all -- from future government employment. Bremer paid no need to arguments that, until his arrival, conversations had been underway with Iraqi generals for the reconstitution of the army, purged of its Saddam loyalists, and that in all the former ruling parties of post-Communist states in the early 1990s the majority of the "senior" members had been innocent professionals who had been compelled to join in order to do their jobs.

So far as it can be discerned these were Bremer's own decisions, not imposed on him by the White House, and they had catastrophic effects. With a couple of decrees he effectively gutted the Iraqi state apparatus and abolished the only other national institutions, the army and police, that at least in theory rose above mere sectarian, ethnic, and local concerns. He also abruptly three half a million people, most of them with weapons training, serious organizational abilities, or both, onto the street in the most humiliating way.

The Sunni insurgency began at once, led initially by ex-army officers and Ba'ath officials and public justified by incidents like the killings [by US soldiers of unarmed demonstrators] at Fallujah. These "dead-enders", as they were explained away in Washington, were soon joined in the insurgency by homegrown Islamist extremists who had previously been terrorized into submission by Saddam's regime, and by some foreign Islamists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, who made themselves useful by offering to carry out suicide attacks.

By the autumn of 2004, only a year and a half after the invasion, the US authorities wwere recording between two thousand and three thousand insurgent attacks per month. The shocking pictures taken by the American torturers at Abu Ghraib had a big impact elsewhere in the Muslim world, but in Iraq they caused no particular upsurge in the violence: most people had already chosen their side.

Walt doesn't always agree with Gwynne Dyer's politics, but reads his columns in the international (non-American) media regularly, and often quotes him here. Mr Dyer earned a Ph.D. in Military and Middle Eastern History from the University of London, served in three navies and holds acade3mic appointments at the Royal Military Academy (Sandhurst) and Oxford University. I think he knows what he's talking about.

In the Introduction to After Iraq, Mr Dyer argues -- as Ron Paul has for lo these many years -- that the USA has no skin in what is essentially a Muslim civil war, and should get out of the Middle East immediately, before things get any worse. (Maybe things couldn't get any worse. Mr Dyer was writing in 2007, before ISIS swept across Iraq and Syria.) Here's what he says.

What should the rest of the world do about this? Nothing. Just stand back and let it happen. Outsiders to the region have no solutions left to peddle any more (nor any credibility even if they did have solutions), and they no longer have the power or the will to impose their ideas. For the first time in a century, the region is going to choose its future for itself -- and it may, of course, make a dreadful mess of it. Even then, outsiders should not intervene, because foreign intervention generally makes things worse -- but also because it's none of their business.

Further reading: "Just How Much Should Paul Bremer Be Blamed for the Rise of the Islamic State?", in Foreign Policy in Focus, 18/3/16.

Saturday, August 13, 2016

A Canadian man walks into a bar...

Agent 9 enjoyed "A (something) walks into a bar..." so much that he sent us this contribution.

A guy goes into a bar in Toronto where there is a robot bartender. The robot says, "What will you have?"
The guy replies, "Whiskey."
The robot brings back his drink and asks, "What’s your IQ?"
The guy says, "168."
The robot continues to talk about physics, space exploration, and medical technology.

After the guy leaves and the more he thinks about it, the more curious he gets, so he decides to go back.
The robot asks, "What’s your drink?"
The guy answers, "Whiskey."
The robot returns with his drink and asks, "What’s your IQ?"
The man replies, "100."
The robot talks about the Raptors, Crown Royal, and the Leafs.

The man finishes his drink, leaves, but is so interested in his experiment that he decides to try again.
He enters the bar and, as usual, the robot asks him what he want to drink.
The man replies, "Whiskey."
The robot brings the drink and asks, "What’s your IQ?"
The man answers, "50."

The robot leans in real close and asks, "So . . . are . . . you people . . . still happy . . . with Trudeau?"

American readers may feel free to subtitute different cities, brand/team names, and candidates for the presidensity. You're welcome.

VIDEO: Walt's Muslim swimsuit issue!

Coming soon to a beach near you... Yes, YOU, even if you live in Germany or France or Britain or Canada or Australia or even... horrors... the Excited States of America. Introducing the burkini, perfectly Islamic swimwear for the modest Muslim woman.

I'm talking about the one on the right. Duh. Not the typical Middle Eastern matron shape, true, but definitely the latest thing in fashions for fastidious Islamists. If you think this is a joke, check Google Images for "burkini" and you'll see hundreds of them, available online or from your local Muslim merchant.

Believe it or not, some people find this lovely beachwear offensive. This week, the mayor of Cannes, the French resort town, has announced a ban on the wearing of burkinis, for the sake of public order. Mayor David Lisnard called the burkini a "symbol of Islamic extremism". Imagine that!

The actual decree reads as follows: "Access to beaches and for swimming is banned to any person wearing improper clothes that are not respectful of good morals and secularism. Beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation, when France and places of worship are currently the target of terrorist attacks, is liable to create risks of disrupting public order."

Can you imagine any government official in the USA, Canada or Britain being so politically incorrect as to write or say such things? I thought not.

UPDATE 15/8/16: Yes! Ed. has found a video! This comes from Canada's Global TV, with a report that the mayor of a Corsican town has banned burkinis after a clash between local residents and Muslim bathers of North African origin. Ange-Pierre Vivoni, the mayor of Sisco, told France-Info radio Monday that the ban aimed at calming religious tensions and protecting Muslims.

The French Ministry of the Interior said a clash Saturday in Sisco that left at least four people injured and three cars torched reportedly started over the presence of women in burkinis. Cannes and the town of Villeneuve-Loubet also recently banned the burkini.

Further reading (for those confused about Islamic dress): "Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?", one of WWW's most-viewed posts.

Thursday, August 11, 2016

If Hellery wins, check out the Redoubt!

Last spring, as Donald Trump's nomination looked more and more probable, and his election victory a distinct possibility, American "progressives" were falling all over themselves to find a "Plan B". What they came up with was: Let's all move to Canada! Being typical Americans,k thus ignorant of life outside of the Continental 48, they did not realize that you can't just cross the border, buy some cheap land and settle in the Great Not-So-White North. Gavin McInnes of tells it like it really is in "Advice on moving to Canada (in case Trump wins)", a great video posted on WWW 27/4/16.

Sadly, it appears now that it's not the gliberals but the real conservatives (as opposed to "cuckservatives") and libertarians who need a bolthole -- a place to hide when the Clinton shitstorm rains down on the USA come November 9th. The lamestream press are already burying The Donald with often fanciful reports of polls predicting a landslide for Hellery -- not the Big House but the White House. Where can a freedom-loving American go when the politically correct nanny statists gain control of every action, word and thought?

Don't even think about Canada! Not only are the Canucks kind of, errr, anti-American, but they're under the heel of pinkish federal and provincial governments (in Ontario and Alberta) that make the Obama administration seem like neo-Nazis! You can't even bring your gun across the border with you. As for immigrating permanently, you'll have to get in line behind 1000s of "refugees" and 10,000s of aging aunties and uncles from South Asia and the Middle East. Fugedaboudit!

But never fear! Walt has a viable alternative for you. Let me throw out some place names: Trout Creek MT, Priest River ID, Coeur d'Alene ID, Kalispell MT, Sand Point ID. Walt first visited those out-of-the-way places in 1974, at the height of the communist (= communal living), back-to-the-land movement. At that time, there was no-one there! Well, practically no-one apart from some aging hippies and a few hundred local residents who pretty much kept to themselves. Really to themselves, as in "Trespassers will be shot!"

Today, the hippies have gone back to California, and a large chunk of the Northwest -- western Montana, northern Idaho, and the far eastern fringes of Washington and maybe Oregon -- is pretty thinly populated. This picture gives some idea of why that may be.

The good news is that a lot of the people who are out there, amidst all that abundance, are the right kind of people, and I mean that in at least two ways! Some of them have come from the Rust Belt, the sinkhole that is Florida, and cuckooland California to settle in what James Wesley, Rawles -- yes, with the comma -- calls "the American Redoubt".

Mr Rawles is a former US Army Intelligence officer, technical writer and survivalist author. He's also the founder of In "The Precepts of Rawlesian Survivalist Philosophy" (not as pretentious as it sounds), Mr Rawles explains the whys and hows of moving to America's last big frontier, the better to defend yourself from the hordes of thirsty, hungry, panicked sheeple who stream out of the ungovernable cities when the balloon goes up. "Because of SurvivalBlog," he writes, "we are part of something bigger: a virtual community of some of the most brilliant people that you could ever meet. Despite our differences, we all have an interest in preparedness."

Of course the election isn't over until the fat lady shrieks. But when it's dangerous in certain areas to identify yourself as a Trump supporter, you have to start pondering the "what ifs". If you don't want to "Be Prepared" like the gay Boy Scouts, then adopt the motto of the US Coast Guard: Semper Paratus!

Footnote: You don't have to live in or even renovate an old cabin like that, you know. It's possible to buy a plot of land in northern Idaho for $50,000 or less, tear down the old buildings (save the lumber for firewood), put down some gravel and plop down a prefabricated "skid house" which can be trucked right to your lot. No permit required! What are you waiting for?

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

Signs of the times

Ed. (still) here. As reported yesterday, Walt is still immersed in funk. Fortunately our Agents are riding to the rescue. Two of them -- 34 and 9 -- have provided us with some amusing "Signs of the times", to fill space and give you, dear reader, some relief from the dire news of the day.

Thanks to Agent 34 for that one. The following, regrettably sans pictorial proof, come from Agent 9.

Where is the euphemism, please?

In a laundromat:

In a London department store:

In an office:

In an Office:

Outside a second hand shop:

Notice in health food shop window:

Spotted in a safari park:

Seen during a conference:

Notice in a farmer's field:

On a repair shop door:

Further submissions are welcome. Click on the headline to open this post in a separate window, and use the comments box at bottom.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

Headlines to be read twice

Ed. here. "Where's Walt?", I hear you ask. Walt is thinking. The sorry state of American politics -- the race downhill to the presidensity in particular -- has him in a funk. I told him that it would be a good idea to take some time off, so as not to funk up WWW. While we wait for him to regain his composure, we should thank Agent 9 for sending us the following unintentionally funny headlines from the lamestream media -- more evidence that proofreading is a lost art.

Man Kills Self Before Shooting Wife and Daughter
It took a phone call, and two or three readings by the editor of the newspaper that ran this one, before he realized that what he was reading was impossible! They put in a correction the next day.

Something Went Wrong in Jet Crash, Expert Says
Really? Ya think?

Police Begin Campaign to Run Down Jaywalkers
That's taking things a bit far, surely!

Panda Mating Fails; Veterinarian Takes Over
What a guy!

Miners Refuse to Work after Death
Good-for-nothing, lazy SOBs!

Juvenile Court to Try Shooting Defendant
See if that works any better than a trial by adults.

War Dims Hope for Peace
I can see where it might have that effect.

If Strike Isn't Settled Quickly, It May Last Awhile
Quite probably!

Cold Wave Linked to Temperatures
Who would have thought!

Enfield Couple Slain; Police Suspect Homicide
They may be onto something!

Red Tape Holds Up New Bridges
You mean there's something stronger than duct tape?

Man Struck By Lightning Faces Battery Charge
He probably IS the battery charge!

New Study of Obesity Looks for Larger Test Group
Weren't the first ones fat enough?

Astronaut Takes Blame for Gas in Spacecraft
That's what he gets for eating those beans!

Kids Make Nutritious Snacks
Do they taste like chicken?

Local High School Dropouts Cut in Half
Chainsaw Massacre all over again!

Hospitals Sued by 7 Foot Doctors
Boy, are they tall!

And the winner is....
Tornado Rips Through Cemetery; Hundreds Dead
Did I read that right?

Saturday, August 6, 2016

Another prelate disagrees with Pope, says Muslims trying to conquer us

Pope Francis keeps talking through his beanie [Ed., what's the proper term for that little white hat?] or some other place, insisting that the attacks of Islamic terrorists being felt on virtually every continent have noting to do with the Muslim jihad -- religious war -- against Christianity and western civilization. The fact is that the Muslims intend to destroy the West.

They can't do it by force of arms in a conventional war, perhaps because they's too busy shooting at each other. So they resort to terrorist attacks on innocent civilians, hoping to make us so paranoid that we will start fighting with each other, like rats in a cage. In that they are having some success, as any traveller or would-be traveller knows. Who'd have thought that we'd see the streets of London patrolled by militarized police -- I'm scared to call them "Boobies" [watch your spelling. Ed.] any more -- clothed in bullet-proof vests and armed with assault rifles. I'd be afraid to ask one of those guys for directions!

If terrorism won't make us cower in our basements -- some folks in Europe, at least, are standing up and fighting back -- the ultimate Muslim weapon is immigration! Even German chancellor Angela Merkel, the proponent of "Willkommenskultur", as been forced to admit that the perps of recent atrocities in Germany were Muslims, with born in Germany but somehow "self-radicalized", or among the 1000s who flooded into the Fatherland disguised as "refugees" and "asylum-seekers". Same as the fanatics who killed dozens in France and Belgium.

And yet, and yet... leaders like Geert Wilders, Marion Le Pen, and (yes) Donald Trump, who call for controlling borders and resisting further immigration to our countries, are reviled as racists, Islamophobes, fascists, and so on. To my mind, they are not racists but realists! If we don't keep the Muslims out of our countries, and deport those who are already here illegally, they're going to kill us! They say so themselves...

The latest member of the Roman Catholic hierarchy to take issue with Pope Francis's assertion that the war on the West is not about religion -- see "Sorry, Holy Father, the war IS about religion", WWW 30/7/16 -- Most Rev. Gyula Márfi, Archbishop of Veszprém (Hungary) said in an interview that a desire to conquer Europe is a factor in mass Muslim migration to the continent.

"Jihad is a principle for Muslims that means they must expand," he told Il Timone today. "The earth must become dar al-Islam, that is, Islamic territory, by introducing Shariah -- Islamic law." He added that "Migration does not only have causes, it also has a purpose, such as the destabilization of Europe and the Euro. Just because we love the wolves, as God’s creatures, doesn’t mean we let them enter among the sheep, even if they come in sheep’s clothing." [Walt's emphasis.]

Further reading: You'll find the English version of the interview with Abp. Márfi on Breitbart, titled "Archbishop Warns Europe Migration Crisis Fueled by Muslims' 'Will to Conquer'".

BREAKING NEWS (6/8/16 PM) Belgian police today shot and killed a man who attacked two female cops with a machete while shouting "Allahu akbar!" Another day, another jihadist.

Wednesday, August 3, 2016

VIDEO: Guess who agrees with Donald Trump about banning Muslims?

Before you click on the "play video" button to get the answer to Walt's headline question, consider this suggestion from Catherine Crier, a former Dallas District Attorney and judge. In the aftermath of 9/11 she wrote:

Following the terror attacks, you would think the INS would be examining its records. Not closely enough. The Florida flight school where Mohammed Atta trained finally got the proper paperwork and permission from the INS to train Atta and his cohort... six months after September 11.... People are calling for the deportation of those who are here illegally. It seems that the rational place to start would be those young males from nations we know are harboring terrorists. However, political correctness and discrimination have laws are thwarting this logical approach.

Ms Crier wrote that (in The Case Against Lawyers, Broadway Books, New York) in 2002. 2002! Donald Trump was still on his first wife then, 14 years away from making his own modest suggestion of a temporary ban on Muslims entering the USA in the wake of the San Bernardino massacre.

But hey, Mr Trump's idea is just a product of his racism and paranoia. That's what the lamestream media would have you believe. Only in America (they say) would swuch a divisive and fascistic notion be entertained even for a moment. No other people (they say) would even consider anything like that, no matter how clear the connection between Islamic extremism and the terrorist attacks which now occur with alarming regularity, all over the world.

The Canadians, for example, would recoil in horror from such blatantly racist and Islamophobic measures, no matter how grave the risk of further attacks. After all, the Canadians are the world's most polite, most tolerant, most multicult-loving people. Hell, they "celebrate diversity" every day. That's what the lamestream media on both sides of the world's longest quasi-defended border keep telling us.

But hold on there. Maybe the real Canadians -- outside of Toronto and Ottawa -- are just about as concerned about Islamic terrorism as their cousins south of the border. Listen to this report of the results of a poll conducted for Canada's Global TV network on the subject of measures to ensure national security.

Now that you've watched it, let me draw your attention to what you didn't see or hear. You heard the intro by news anchor Donna Freisen. [Many are cold, but few are freezin. Ed.] But unless you saw this on tonight's Global National, you didn't hear the extro, in which she mentioned, as a kind of throwaway, that Ipsos had asked the pollees what they thought of The Donald's call for a ban on people coming from "countries affected by terrorism". Ms Freisen said if you wanted to know how they answered, you'd find the complete poll results on the Global News website.

Ed. went to the website and, not without difficulty, hunted up the page from which this video was taken. Here's the text -- the entire text -- that accompanies the video. "Eric Sorensen breaks down the results of an Ipsos poll for Global News that shows some Canadians are willing to give up some freedoms for the sake of security."

That's it, that's all. No poll numbers, no information on how the poll was conducted, and no answer to the question: how many Canadians agree with Donald Trump's proposal to ban Muslims from entering the USA (or Canada)? Ed. had to dig down deeper into the Global news site to find the answer. Here it is.

"Half of Canadians support travel ban to protect Canada from terrorism: poll"

That's right, gentle reader. Fifty-one percent (51%) of the Canucks polled by Ipsos strongly or somewhat supported banning people from "all countries compromised by terrorism" as a means to ensure national security. The article quotes Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Global Public Affairs, as saying he was somewhat surprised by the response. "But given the events over the space of the last year, in places like Nice (France) and other places, there continues to be this generic concern about people coming into the country, who may have interest in doing us harm."

Hm. Wonder why that part of the story wasn't mentioned on Global National. Limitations of time, perhaps. Wonder why there was no link in the web page with the report by Eric Sorensen. Hmmm. Political correctness, perhaps?

Monday, August 1, 2016

VIDEO: Canuck expert says MH370 deliberately flown into ocean

Just as the search for MH370 is about to be wound down -- December 31st is the ABF closing date -- a new piece of evidence emerges to support the theory of Larry Vance, a Canadian aviation expert, that the disappearance of the Malaysian Airlines plane in March of 2014 was no accident.

Walt has asked before -- click here for a complete list of WWW posts on "MH370" -- why the FBI is involved in the search for answers to the riddle, but involved they are. This week CNN reported that an FBI forensic examination shows the pilot of MH370 conducted a flight simulation on his home computer that closely matched the suspected route of the missing Boeing 777 in the southern Indian Ocean, according to a Malaysian government document obtained by New York magazine.

The confidential document summarizes Malaysia's police investigation into Zaharie Ahmad Shah, the captain of the plane that has been missing for more than two years. Mr Shah was a Muslim, by the way. Just thought I'd throw that in. Why would an Islamic extremist commit suicide just to kill 238 innocent people? Oh, wait...

According to the magazine, citing the document, the FBI analyzed hard drives from a flight simulator Mr Shah had built using Microsoft Flight Simulator X software. The FBI was able to recover data points from a simulated flight made less than a month before the plane vanished that pointed to the southern Indian Ocean, which is where the Americans and other "authorities" have claimed the plane went down. Why they haven't been able to find it remains a mystery.

Larry Vance, the Canuck expert, doesn't say anything about terrorism, nor does he mention the new flight simulator evidence. All he says is that some of the pieces of debris found on Réunion and other shores of the western part of the Indian Ocean had a specific type of erosion on them, which leads him to believe the plane was deliberately landed in the sea.

Speaking to Canada's Global News via Skype from his home in Ottawa, he said "I believe that somebody intended to take the airplane to someplace out in the ocean, and to land it on the ocean in a place where it was the least likely to be found." He added that the plane was "landed in such a way that it would sink to the bottom without any -- or very much -- wreckage appearing at the surface." Could be. As Mr Vance says, the mystery is why!


Who killed Captain Humayun Khan?

You've seen the videos. The Democrats found a righteous Pakistani-American, Khizr Khan, to make a very righteous speech to their convention, attacking Donald Trump for his "anti-Muslim" views and speeches. Flanked by his wife, Ghazala, Mr. Khan said they had made a great sacrifice for their adopted country, in that their son, US Army Captain Humayun Khan, was killed in 2004 by a car bomb while on duty in Iraq.

Why it took Mr and Mrs Khan 12 years to voice their grief and outrage publicly was not explained. Nor did the Gold Star parents have anything to say about US foreign policy, which led to their son's presence in the armpit of the world. Nor did they talk about the likelihood that, if elected, Hellery Clinton would change that policy, possibly because the chances of that change are slim and none.

Nooooo... The way Mr Khan talked, you'd think it was somehow Mr Trump's fault that their son died 12 years earlier. Mr Trump wants to discriminate against "Muslim-Americans", he said. He added that discrimination on the basis of religion is prohibited by the American Constitution, and wondered aloud if Mr Trump had even read the Constitution. If not, he said, he would gladly lend his copy for the candidate's perusal.

Mr Trump understandably felt insulted, and launched his own counter-attack, which has been roundly condemned by the lamestream media, the Prez, the Democratic presidential wannabe, and several Republicans, notably Senator John McCain. How, they ask, could Mr Trump show such disrespect to the family of a "Muslim-American hero"? Presumably they keep calling him "Muslim-American" to distinguish his from the thousands of "Catholic-Americans", "Jewish-Americans", "Baptist-Americans" etc who died needlessly getting into the middle of what is really a Muslim civil war.

And that -- as Mr Trump finally said this afternoon -- is the real point. Capt. Khan died in Iraq, and he died in the line of duty, right enough. But, Walt asks, who killed him? Could it have been some fellow Muslims? Errr... could be!