Category: Foreigners

Sweden-Kampuchea Friendship Association 2.0: Illegal Immigrants Are the New Khmer Rouge or Something

Posted on Comments

Dana Pico was thrashing Philadelphia Inquirer liberal columnist Will Bunch, who loves Kilmar Abrego Garcia more than he loves his own mother, and it got me thinking about the utterly reflexive nature of left-wing politics. Liberals see the world as a great dramatic conflict between the Forces of Evil (Republicans generally, and Donald Trump specifically) and the Innocent Victims of Oppression. This is the only explanation for why, after Democrats lost an election in which all polling showed the electorate tilting sharply right on the immigration issue, liberals have now embraced criminal foreigners as their beloved mascots.

Over there in their Bluesky echo chambers, liberals like Will Bunch are convinced they’re on “the right side of history,” and the fact that polls show a majority of voters support mass deportation of illegal immigrants — it was a crucial issue last November — doesn’t make a dent. They claim to be defending democracy, and yet when the president actually does what voters elected him to do, liberals scream “fascism.”

“War is peace,” “ignorance is strength,” democracy is fascism.

This kind of knee-jerk reaction could have devastating political consequences for Democrats, as NBC News observed in reporting on the recent human trafficking indictment of Abrego Garcia:

The apparent strength of the government’s case could reignite debate among Democrats about the risks of focusing on Abrego Garcia’s case. For weeks, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and other Democrats emphasized that their criticism targeted Trump’s decision to unilaterally deport Abrego Garcia without judicial oversight, not a defense of Abrego Garcia himself. . . .
Van Hollen defended his stance in a CNN interview. “You know, I will never apologize for defending the Constitution,” he said. “In fact, it’s the Trump administration and all his cronies who should apologize to the country for putting us through this unnecessary situation.”

Did you catch that? The Constitution is at stake, according to this eminent Democrat, because DHS made a paperwork error, loading the MS-13 gangster onto a deportation flight without taking notice of a judge’s 2019 grant of “protected” status for Abrego Garcia.

Anyone making a common-sense assessment would say, “So what?” It would probably be easy — although requiring a court hearing or two — to rescind the “protected” status, which appears to have been granted (a) entirely on the basis of Abrego Garcia’s assertion that he would be at risk of violence from rival gangs if he were returned to El Salvador and (b) without knowledge of his criminal activities in the United States. What is known now about Abrego Garcia was not known to the judge in 2019, and therefore Abrego Garcia’s “protected” status may be regarded as invalid, yet Chris Van Hollen seems to believe the entire Constitution depends upon this, and the lunatic Will Bunch is shouting “Free Kilmar” as if the wife-beating gang-banger were a heroic martyr.

Voters elected Donald Trump for a reason, and if Chris Van Hollen, Will Bunch or anyone else thinks they’re going to fool the electorate into sharing their sympathy for Kilmar Abrego Garcia, they’re simply delusional. But we have often seen the Left enthralled by such delusions.

The Sweden-Kampuchea Friendship Association in 1978

Jan Myrdal, Marita Wikander, Gunnar Bergström and Hedvig Ekerwald were Swedish socialists who enthusiastically supported Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, a widespread sentiment in Sweden at the time:

The Indochinese revolutionary movements enjoyed widespread support in Swedish society, particularly among supporters of the Swedish Social Democratic Party. When the Khmer Rouge captured Phnom Penh [in April 1975] and expelled its inhabitants, 15,000 Swedes greeted their victory by spontaneously celebrating in the center of Stockholm.

The arrival of Year Zero in Democratic Kampuchea was, as we now know, the beginning of one of the most murderous tyrannies in all human history. The best estimates are that Pol Pot’s communist regime killed about 1.5 million people, nearly 25% of the country’s population.

The first widely noticed account of the ongoing massacre in Cambodia was published by the Reader’s Digest in February 1977, and immediately sparked widespread controversy. The Left, having embraced the Communist regime in Cambodia, denounced the Reader’s Digest account as “propaganda.” To quote Wikipedia:

According to Joel Brinkley, “Khmer Rouge apologists [among Western academics] easily outnumbered those who believed a tragedy was under way.” . . .
[H]uman-rights activist David Hawk . . . claimed that the West was indifferent to the atrocities taking place in Cambodia due to “the influence of anti-war academics on the American left who obfuscated Khmer Rouge behavior, denigrated the post-1975 refugee reports, and denounced the journalists who got those stories.”

In the prevailing worldview of the intelligentsia, the Communists must be good, because America was bad. Therefore, reports about atrocities in Cambodia (based on accounts from those who had escaped) must be false or exaggerated. Such was the background of the August 1978 trip to Cambodia by Myrdal, Wikander, Bergström and Ekerwald as a delegation from the Sweden-Kampuchea Friendship Association (SKFA). They spent two weeks as guests of the Khmer Rouge, even having dinner with Pol Pot, and “returned to Sweden where they undertook a speaking tour and wrote articles in support of the Democratic Kampuchea regime.” Bergström expressed the belief that, under the Khmer Rouge, Cambodia could become “a very special model for the third world … an ideal society with no oppressors.” And this, keep in mind, was a brutal regime that killed a higher percentage of their national population than any known dictatorship in all human history. Among the victims were Marita Wikander’s husband. She had married a Khmer Rouge diplomat, who returned to Cambodia in 1977. During the SKFA trip to Phnom Penh in 1978, she asked to see her husband. The request was denied. It wasn’t until years later that she learned he had been executed by the regime shortly after his return to Cambodia. Such an “ideal society“!

The analogy to current liberal politics is obvious enough. Viewing Trump as the Sum of All Evils, liberals reflexively attack any policy advocated by Trump. Therefore, if Trump wishes to deport criminal illegal aliens, liberals must defend criminal illegal aliens: “Free Kilmar!”

Yeah, now, about those so-called “peaceful protests” . . .



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Blast From the Blogging Past: Saint Pancake and the Anti-Israel Cause

Posted on Comments

Certainly it is not a coincidence that Elias Rodriguez is being compared to Rachel Corrie and Aaron Bushnell by a slew of social media accounts. When people are part of an activist hive-mind, participating in a propaganda campaign on behalf of a terrorist organization, one does not expect originality in their rhetoric. As I’ve been saying for more than a decade, bad causes attract bad people, and the kind of people who think “solidarity” with Hamas is a good idea . . . Well, they’re not the sharpest tools in the shed. Like a herd of bleating sheep, they mindlessly repeat the same slogans because they’re incapable of more intelligent discourse.

Pro-Hamas terrorist Elias Rodriguez

No need to use “allegedly” here. Elias Rodriguez has admitted he murdered Israeli embassy aides Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky — shot them in the back, and kept shooting even after Milgrim, severely wounded, was trying to crawl away. Nor is there any doubt about Rodriguez’s motive. He “did it for Gaza,” he told the cops, and posted an online “manifesto” elaborating on his pro-Hamas beliefs.

February 2024: Aaron Bushnell

To quote myself:

“If you’re a Jew-hating, terrorist-supporting left-wing kook, the kind who likes to scream ‘Free Palestine’ and chant other pro-Hamas slogans, I want to encourage you to emulate Aaron Bushnell.”

Bushnell lit himself on fire in front of the Israeli embassy in Washington, livestreaming it on Twitch after declaring he would “no longer be complicit in genocide.” Brilliant idea. The world would be a better place if all the entire pro-Hamas student protesters at Ivy League universities decided to emulate Bushnell en masse. But what really drew my attention was the people comparing Elias Rodriguez to Rachel Corrie.

In case you’ve forgotten, or perhaps never knew, who Rachel Corrie was, she was a 23-year-old middle-class college kid from Olympia, Washington, who got caught up in post-9/11 “peace” activism. During the Second Intifada, at a time when the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and other terrorists were blasting Jews to smithereens on a regular basis, Rachel Corrie took up the Palestinian cause, joining a radical “direct action” group called the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). Her radicalization ultimately ended with her death in Rafah, Gaza:

Her fanaticism led Corrie to travel to Gaza in January 2003. Three weeks later, when activists organized an international protest of the impending U.S. invasion of Iraq, Corrie was photographed burning a hand-drawn fascimile of the U.S. flag, her face distorted by rage, while dozens of Palestinian children watched. . . .
So it was that, on March 16, 2003, Rachel Corrie joined six other ISM activists in a “direct action” against the Israeli military. The Israelis were destroying terrorist bases and smuggling tunnels in Gaza, an operation that ISM attempted to thwart. The circumstances of Corrie’s death have been mired in controversy for years, but there is no argument that she positioned herself in the path of an Israeli bulldozer and was fatally crushed.

Immediately, the anti-Israel propagandists seized on Corrie’s death to portray her as a martyr, and commenters at the Little Green Footballs blog responded by mocking her as “Saint Pancake.”

Do you know what I mean by the phrase “institutional memory”? Back when I was in the newspaper business, every newsroom had some old guys who’d been there 15 or 20 years, who could help provide guidance to the new hires. This was before you could research stuff with computers, and you had to go plowing through archives in what was called the “morgue” if you wanted to look up the background on a story. Old-timers in the newsroom were a repository of institutional memory, because they could show you the “shortcuts” (so to speak) in this kind of research.

A major problem in the 21st-century communication environment is a deficit of institutional memory. There are so many people out there blabbering away on social media — and, indeed, “professional journalists” at major news organizations — who don’t know a damned thing about what happened 15 or 20 years ago. Still fewer are those who, like me, are old enough to have watched the Six-Day War on TV news as it happened. Unless you’re my age or older, you can’t have that kind of direct historical knowledge, and you’re certainly unlikely to know the background of the so-called “Palestinian” cause. To put it bluntly, Yasser Arafat was the Fidel Castro or Ho Chi Minh of the Middle East, at a time when the Soviet Union’s geopolitical strategy was focused on sponsoring “wars of national liberation” in the Third World. Almost none of the journalists and commentators on the current situation in the Middle East are old enough to understand this Cold War background, which is a major reason why latter-day Communists — literally, I mean Communists — are able to deceive so many idiots into supporting Hamas terrorists.

The recent death of David Horowitz has deprived us of a valuable source of institutional memory on all this. Among his contributions to the cause of freedom was starting a site called Discover the Networks, a database about left-wing organizations and individuals that is extremely useful to anyone researching the Left. For example, Discover the Networks can tell you all about the Workers World Party (WWP) and its splinter, the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), both of which are connected to International ANSWER (“Act Now to Stop War and End Racism”).

David Horowitz also created Front Page Magazine, where Daniel Greenfield describes Elias Rodriguez as a “Communist terrorist,” pointing out Rodriguez’s known association with PSL and ANSWER.

We could follow this chain of connections further, to include Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans:

From 2017-2022, Evans and [her husband] Neville Roy Singham together served as the two principal funders of The People’s Forum, a New York-based organization describing itself as a “movement incubator for working class and marginalized communities to build unity across historic lines of division at home and abroad.” During that period, the couple — through an array of shell organizations and donor advisory groups — gave more than $20.4 million to The People’s Forum, a sum that accounted for almost all of the funding which the organization received.

Here’s the connection to Elias Rodriguez:

The suspected terrorist charged with gunning down two Israeli embassy workers in Washington Wednesday is associated with radical socialist groups funded by the far-left Chinese sympathizer, millionaire Neville Singham and his activist wife Jodie Evans.
Elias Rodriguez, 31, who allegedly confessed to killing the couple outside the Capital Jewish Museum and chanted “free, free Palestine!” was part of that network through his association with the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), a Communist political organization that has fielded presidential candidates since 2008.
In 2018, Rodriguez also raised $240 in a GoFundMe campaign to join the March to Fight Poverty in Washington DC and took part in demonstrations and protests around Chicago as a member of the ANSWER coalition around 2017 and 2018, another radical socialist group, according to the Anti-Defamation League.
Both the PSL and ANSWER Coalition are connected to People’s Forum – a Manhattan-based non-profit which has ties to the Chinese Communist Party – through funding from Singham, 71.
All three groups have been involved in anti-Israel protests, with the People’s Forum having a cadre of operatives embedded at Columbia University — an epicenter of protest — according to previous reports.
The People’s Forum received more than $20 million in grants from Singham, much of it filtered through the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, a fiscal sponsor, as The Post has previously reported.
Another group, the Bronx Antiwar Coalition is also connected to groups in Singham’s orbit. The Bronx group applauded the murders of the Israeli diplomats on X Thursday.
“What Elias Rodriguez did is the highest expression of anti-Zionism,” a tweet from the group proclaimed.
The Bronx Anti-War Coalition was founded by Dee Knight, a radical socialist and pro-China activist, who has worked with People’s Forum, according to reports. . . .
“The People’s Forum… and ANSWER Coalition serve as the conduit through which [Chinese Communist Party]-affiliated entities have effectively co-opted pro-Palestinian activism in the US, advancing a broader anti-American, anti-democratic, and anti-capitalist agenda,” according to [the National Contagion Research Institute].

These people are literally Communists, like I said, but kids nowadays don’t know enough about history to understand what’s wrong with Communism, which killed 100 million people in the 20th century.

Institutional memory matters, and I hope y’all remember yesterday’s post, in which I explained why I’m rattling the tip jar this weekend — just $5 or $10 would help — and ended with the familiar reminder that the Five Most Important Words in the English Language are:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Ain’t I Done Told Y’all? Democrats Pushed Zelenskyy to Sabotage White House Deal

Posted on

Note the time and date on that, please — shortly after 5 p.m. ET on Friday, I shared my suspicion that the real reason why that White House meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy turned into a s***show was that Zelenskyy had been encouraged by Democrats to “pull that stunt,” and now my hunch has been validated:

Before meeting Trump, Zelensky met with anti-Trump Democrats who advised him to reject the terms of the mineral deal the president was offering, according to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.).
“Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington. He confirmed that the Ukrainian people will not support a fake peace agreement where Putin gets everything he wants and there are no security arrangements for Ukraine,” Murphy’s office posted on X at 11:15 a.m. Friday.
He attached a picture of Zelensky at a conference table, with Murphy seated on the opposite side.
Forty minutes later, Zelensky arrived at the White House, where Trump met his car, smiled, shook his hand and walked him into the Oval Office.
The meeting, as the world now knows, quickly went off the rails and ended with Trump angrily ejecting the arrogant ingrate from the White House.
The earlier meeting with Dems undercuts wild claims that Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance staged an ambush. In fact, it was Zelensky who came with an ulterior motive.
The purpose of the meeting was to sign the mineral agreement he and Trump representatives had negotiated. He had twice refused to sign it after promising to, and thanks to Murphy, we now know he had no intention of signing it Friday.

An old saying, often cited by Hillary Clinton: “If you see a turtle on top of a fence post, the one thing you know is, it didn’t crawl up there by itself.” This meeting with Zelenskyy turning into a catastrophe was not a coincidence, you see. The whole thing was a setup by Democrats. In his column Michael Goodwin of the New York Post points out that this mineral deal — the whole purpose of the White House meeting was for Zelenskyy to sign the treaty — was something that Zelenskyy himself had suggested, and it was also Zelenskyy who insisted on a White House setting for the occasion. Democrats were behind the whole thing, see?

Well, let them own the consequences now. Also let me say this clearly: Fuck Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the horse he rode in on.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Zelenskyy Self-Destructed, So Why Are Media Acting Like Trump Is to Blame?

Posted on

The deal was all settled. On Thursday, the basic terms of a mineral-rights treaty had been agreed upon, and Friday’s Oval Office meeting was supposed to be a formality — a handshake, a meet-and-greet with the media. For some reason, however, Volodymyr Zelenskyy decided he should start an argument in front of the cameras. It has been pointed out that the meeting ran for about 50 minutes, and was uneventful until about the last 10 minutes. The fireworks started after Vice President J.D. Vance pointed out the difference between Biden and Trump:

Vance: “For four years, the United States of America, we had a president who stood up at press conferences and talked tough about Vladimir Putin, and then Putin invaded Ukraine and destroyed a significant chunk of the country. The path to peace and the path to prosperity is, maybe, engaging in diplomacy. We tried the pathway of Joe Biden, of thumping our chest and pretending that the president of the United States’ words mattered more than the president of the United States’ actions. What makes America a good country is America engaging in diplomacy. That’s what President Trump is doing.”
Zelenskyy: “Can I ask you?”
Vance: “Sure. Yeah.”
Zelenskyy: “OK. So he (Putin) occupied it, our parts, big parts of Ukraine, parts of east and Crimea. So he occupied it in 2014. So during a lot of years — I’m not speaking about just Biden, but those times was (Barack) Obama, then President Obama, then President Trump, then President Biden, now President Trump. And God bless, now, President Trump will stop him. But during 2014, nobody stopped him. He just occupied and took. He killed people. You know what the –”
Trump: “2015?”
Zelenskyy: “2014.”
Trump: “Oh, 2014? I was not here.”

What the hell is going on here? Why has Zelenskyy decided that now is a good time to deliver this history lecture? The word “impertinent” comes to mind. He is talking out of turn, presuming that his hosts are ignorant.

In fact, Zelenskyy’s interruption — his little lecture about Putin seizing Crimea in 2014 — merely serves to illustrate Vance’s point about the failure of “the pathway of Joe Biden.” When Putin grabbed Crimea, there was a lot of tough talk from Obama and Biden, but they weren’t actually willing to risk anything over it. So when Biden returns to the White House in 2021, and then makes a catastrophic error in Afghanistan, it’s a signal of weakness that encourages Putin to invade the rest of Ukraine.

What has happened since then is that the United States has poured more than $180 billion — that’s BILLION, with a “B” — into Ukraine, and the strategic situation after three years is basically a stalemale. How many more hundreds of billions of dollars does Zelenskyy expect us to spend to keep this going? If we’re already spending a billion dollars a week just to maintain a bloody stalemate, is there any estimate of what an actual Ukrainian victory might cost? Like, if we spent twice as much money for six months, would that be sufficient to enable Ukraine to drive the Russians back across the border? Or is it the case that, however much money we give Zelenskyy, it will never be enough for Ukraine to win?

Zelenskyy seems to believe that he is entitled to more than he’s already gotten, without regard to the actual military results and with no feasible prospect of a better result in the near future. But y’all didn’t come here for a geopolitical realism lecture — readers have their own opinions about the Ukraine situation, and aren’t going to be influenced much by my ranting like this — so instead let’s get back to what happened after Zelenskyy interrupted Vance at the White House:

Zelenskyy: “Yes, but during 2014 ’til 2022, the situation is the same, that people have been dying on the contact line. Nobody stopped him. You know that we had conversations with him, a lot of conversations, my bilateral conversation. And we signed with him, me, like, you, president, in 2019, I signed with him the deal. I signed with him, (French President Emmanuel) Macron and (former German Chancellor Angela) Merkel. We signed ceasefire. Ceasefire. All of them told me that he will never go … But after that, he broke the ceasefire, he killed our people, and he didn’t exchange prisoners. We signed the exchange of prisoners. But he didn’t do it. What kind of diplomacy, JD, you are speaking about? What do you mean?”
Vance: “I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country. Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media. Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president for trying to bring an end to this conflict.”

Game. Set. Match. J.D. Vance has here summarized the essence of what’s gone wrong with Ukraine’s war effort the past couple of years — their “manpower problems.” In April 2023 (“Pentagon Leak Confirms Ukraine Suffering Shortage of Trained Manpower”) I tried to call attention to this problem, and I further pointed out in February 2024:

Even if we could give Ukraine all the weapons they need, the manpower shortage would still make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to mount an effective counter-offensive against Russia.
Merely throwing money at Ukraine’s problems won’t fix the problems. One consequence of the Russian invasion has been the discovery that the United States and its allies lack the capacity to manufacture enough artillery ammunition and other supplies in sufficient quantities quickly enough to meet an emergency demand. It doesn’t matter how many billions of dollars Congress votes to spend, we’re still not going to be able to put enough equipment into Ukraine to make complete victory over Russia a reality this year, or next year, or the year after that.

For the past year or two, some people have been living in a delusion about this situation. Ukraine’s manpower problem was apparent as early as spring 2023. One would think that the Russian invasion might have stirred such a surge of patriotism among young Ukrainians that they easily could have gotten 200,000 healthy young volunteers in the first few weeks of the war. Allow a full year for these raw recruits to get trained and equipped and organized into military units, and by spring 2023, Ukraine should have been ready to launch a major counter-offensive.

The year 2023 came and went without any such offensive, and it was not until August of this year that Ukraine made a minor incursion into Russian territory that did nothing to alter the larger strategic situation — stalemate on every front, with no end in sight. So now let’s get back to that White House transcript from Friday:

Vance: Do you disagree that you’ve had problems, bringing people into your military?”
Zelenskyy: “We have problems –”
Vance: “And do you think that is respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to prevent the destruction of your country?”

You can read the rest. My point is that it’s J.D. Vance making these arguments, not Trump, and the reason Vance went off like that is because Zelenskyy tried to use this Oval Office photo-op to embarrass the Trump administration. The way the media are spinning it, however, is that somehow Trump blew up this meeting, instead of Zelenskyy.

Much more at Instapundit, where Professor Reynolds suggests “Zelensky knew exactly what he was doing, and picked this fight on purpose,” pandering to anti-Trump sentiment in the European Union. If true, this would be the height of folly; the big problem with NATO is that Our European Allies don’t really have much in the way of military power; as allies, they’re practically worthless. How many divisions of armor or paratroopers can be deployed by France, Germany, Belgium, etc.? Even if the Europeans did want to go to war (which they certainly do not), they don’t scare anybody. Let Zelenskyy go back to Brussels and bask in the admiration of the Europeans. That will do nothing to help Ukraine.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Zelenskyy Gets Pimp-Slapped on Live TV by Trump in White House Meeting UPDATE: Lindsey Graham Blames Zelenskyy for ‘Complete, Utter Disaster’

Posted on

“Pimp-slapped,” metaphorically speaking, of course. This event has astonished the world. When it happened, my office TV was tuned to Fox News, but I immediately switched over to MSNBC to see how they were reacting and . . . Well, it would be wrong to say it’s driven them crazy, as they’ve been non compos mentis for years, but whatever else the MSNBC crowd was obsessed over before, they’ve suddenly forgotten it and will be 24/7 on this story until further notice. The big question, really, is why Trump decided to chew out the president of Ukraine in public.

My first thought was, well, a big slice of Trump’s hard-core supporters hate Zelenskyy and don’t like the way he’s been hailed as a latter-day Winston Churchill for the past three years. So, inasmuch as what Trump did was a performance, it would be applauded by that segment of Trump’s basis. But as I contemplated it a bit longer, it occurred to me that the intended audience might be Our European Allies — i.e., the deadbeats who haven’t been paying their share for NATO, and who think American taxpayers should have no higher priority than pouring billions of dollars into Ukraine. In this analysis, Trump slapped around Zelenskyy to send a message to the Europeans: “Free ride’s over, guys. Y’all want to save Ukraine, do it on your own dime.” But that’s just my guess.

Maybe Trump just lost his temper, but I think there must have been some kind of four-dimensional chess strategy involved, and I reckon the foreign policy specialists will figure it out evenutally. In the meantime, we can just sit back and watch liberals’ heads explode.

See, this is why we voted for Trump. Would we be getting this kind of quality entertainment from Kamala Harris? I don’t think so.

UPDATE: Thanks to Evil Blogger Lady for this:

Lindsey Graham, who is very pro-Ukraine, puts the blame for this “disaster” squarely on Zelenskyy, and says he should resign.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

The Future of Gaza is Neu Schwabenland

Posted on

— compiled by Wombat-socho

We interrupt your normal evening linkagery for an important post about the current geopolitical situation.
Your normal linkagery will resume in the morning.
Silicon Valley et Hamas delenda sunt.

The future flag of the Gaza-territoriet i Antarktis.

Our God-Emperor, Donaldus Trump Magnus, has decreed the creation of Mar-A-Gaza on the currently rubble-strewn land called the Gaza Strip. To do this, however, we must remove the current inhabitants to a place where they can neither 1) interfere with the demolition and construction efforts nor 2) kill Jews. The problem here is obvious. None of Israel’s Arab neighbors want any part of having the Gazans on their land, not even temporarily, and for good reason. Everywhere the Palestinian “refugees” have gone, they have caused trouble and attempted to overthrow the local governments, and so neither Egypt, Jordan, nor Lebanon want them as guests.

It has been suggested that the Gazans be deported to Greenland. Aside from immediately being a provocation to war with Denmark, from whom we are trying to buy the place, it would needlessly antagonize the Inuit, who have done nothing to deserve this sort of neighbor being inflicted on them. It has also been suggested that they be deported to Russia. Leaving aside for the moment how Russians feel about most Arabs, does anyone doubt that President Putin would genocide the lot of them if they looked at him sideways? Or worse yet, use them as meatcubes in the ongoing Ukraine war? Let’s not tempt the man.

No, the real solution is one that requires Norway to get off its oily butt and actually contribute something to the cause of world peace besides empty words. There is a section of Antarctic coast formerly called New Swabia, or Neu Schwabenland in the original German, which was briefly claimed by the Third Reich after the German Antarctic Expedition of 1938-39. World events being what they were, the German claims lapsed and were passed to Norway. This is the ideal place to dump all the obstreperous Gazans and their death cult. There is nobody around but a handful of Indian and Russian scientists hundreds of miles away in the Schirmacher Oasis, leopard seals, and penguins. UNRWA can teach Gazans how to build igloos and provide them with small wooden boats and harpoons with which to hunt seals and (maybe) whales, and the Norwegians can maintain a blockade of the coast to prevent any Gazans from leaving.

Harsh? Perhaps, but what have the inhabitants of Gaza done to deserve better? Why should the peaceful Arabs of Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon be saddled with the duty of housing these genocidal nutbags? No, let us install them in a land where they can harm nobody but themselves, until such time as they decide to start acting like peaceful, productive human beings again. Your move, Norway.

Amazon Warehouse Deals
H&R Block Tax Software – Deluxe & State With Refund Bonus Offer


 

Vindicated: Britain’s ‘Grooming Gangs’ Finally Get the Attention They Deserve

Posted on

Because Elon Musk decided to remind people of the role that Britain’s Labour Party played in the “grooming gang” scandal, suddenly millions of people who never knew about the scandal — particularly in the United States — are talking about this as if it were breaking news. And while I suppose I should be grateful that this gruesome tale is finally getting the attention it deserves, excuse me for asking: Where were these people 10 or 15 years ago, when I was frequently calling attention to this?

That was my first spate of coverage, nearly 15 years ago, and in 2014, I wrote extensively about “The Rotherham Horror”:

Imagine if more than a thousand girls, some as young as 11, were sexually exploited by members of a fundamentalist religious cult. Now imagine that authorities refused to act to stop this heinous abuse of young girls because of their fear of offending public opinion.
Except you don’t have to imagine this. It actually happened.
And the fundamentalist religious cult? Yeah: Islam.

Subsequently, I wrote about Emma Jackson, who was pimped out by these gangs beginning at age 13. What is amazing about all this is how the problem was widely known for years and yet was ignored, as I remarked when activist Tommy Robinson was arrested in 2018:

Class prejudice was clearly a factor in this. Most British journalists are from the college-educated upper classes, while the girls being raped and pimped out by these Muslim gangs were mostly from a class that Americans would call “white trash.”
It’s not as if the “grooming” gangs were a big secret, after all. Young Pakistani men were parking their cars in front of schools to pick up their 14- and 15-year-old “girlfriends” and, because these girls were generally from the welfare-dependent lower classes, nobody seemed to care. Police, educators and social-service agencies ignored what was going on, and as for the media, well, they wouldn’t want to be accused of “racism” or “Islamophobia” for reporting on this phenomenon.

Radical feminist Julie Bindel was actually the first to write about the so-called “grooming gangs” in 2007, and it was also covered at great length by my friend Pamela Geller. It was a “fringe” concern back then, and to see the story surge to the top of the headlines because Elon Musk slammed the British Prime Minister — well, welcome to the party, pal.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Voodoo Blamed for Massacre in Haiti

Posted on Comments

The last time we checked in on Haiti (“Haiti’s Zombie Apocalypse: Media Skeptical of Cannibalism Reports,” March 13), the situation was very bad, but since then it has apparently gotten even worse, leading me to ask, who had “Haiti voodoo massacre” on their 2024 bingo card?

The United Nations human rights chief said Monday that 184 people were killed over the weekend in the Haitian capital, as Port-au-Prince was rocked by a spike in gang violence that pushed the death toll from Haiti’s spiraling security crisis to at least 5,000.
“Just this past weekend, at least 184 people were killed in violence orchestrated by the leader of a powerful gang in the Haitian capital of Port-au-Prince, in the Cite Soleil area,” Volker Turk told reporters in Geneva. “These latest killings bring the death toll just this year in Haiti to a staggering 5,000 people.”
Volker appeared to be referring to a reported massacre carried out by a gang leader in the impoverished Cite Soleil neighborhood who targeted elderly people he suspected of sickening his own child by witchcraft.
The Reuters news agency quoted the National Human Rights Defense Network (RNDDH) as saying on Sunday that Monel “Mikano” Felix, leader of the Wharf Jeremie gang, had ordered the murders in Cite Soleil, and that all the victims of the attack were over 60 years old.
RNDDH said Felix had sought advice from a voodoo priest who told him elderly people in the area had harmed his child, who died on Saturday, leading to members of his gang killing at least 100 people Friday and Saturday with machetes and knives. . . .
Haiti has been gripped by political chaos for years, leaving room for heavily-armed criminal gangs to seize huge swaths of territory in Port-au-Prince and elsewhere. Much of the capital remains lawless despite hundreds of police from Kenya being sent in to help reassert law and order.
International airlines have largely stopped flying in and out of Haiti amid the chaos and bloodshed, with several U.S. carriers halting flights entirely after planes were hit by gunfire in November.

Wow, it’s even worse than Baltimore.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies