The World They Made by Mark Steyn

On Wednesday’s show Rush Limbaugh discussed the Trump phenomenon through the lens of a 20-year-old Sam Francis article:

“Imagine giving this advice to a Republican presidential candidate: What if you stopped calling yourself a conservative and instead just promised to make America great again?” What do you think might happen in the current climate, where the middle class in the country feels totally left out of everything going on?

They feel like they’ve been targeted by every liberal Democrat policy that has not been stopped by the Republican Party. What if you dropped [talking] about the free market,” stop all of that, “and promised to fight the elites who were selling out American jobs? What if you just stopped talking about reforming Medicare and Social Security and instead said that the elites were failing to deliver better health care at a reasonable price? What if, instead of vainly talking about restoring the place of religion in society … you simply promised to restore the Middle American core,” and everything it stands for?

Rush’s view is that “nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal” – ie, that there are insufficient takers for conservatism. It comes to something when the nation’s Number One conservative talk-show host is putting it that way, but you can see what he’s getting at.

In contrast to the ebb and flow of eternally shifting multiparty systems, America has a rigid, inflexible two-party choice:

One party is supposed to be the party of big government, the other the party of small government. When the Big Government Party is in power, the government gets bigger, and, when the Small Government Party is in power, the government gets bigger.

One party is supposed to be the party of social liberalism, the other the party of social conservatism. When the Socially Liberal Party is in power, the country gets more liberal, and, when the Socially Conservative Party is in power, the country gets more liberal.

Switzerland ‘made secret deal with PLO’ after bomb attacks By Imogen Foulkes

Controversy is growing in Switzerland over an alleged secret deal, made almost 50 years ago, between the Swiss government and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

The agreement, detailed in a new book, was apparently designed to prevent terrorist attacks on Swiss territory.

In return, Switzerland would offer diplomatic support to the PLO.

It followed a series of attacks in 1969 and 1970 by Palestinian groups that caused huge concern in Switzerland.

In February 1969 gunmen opened fire at Zurich airport on an El Al plane, whose pilot died in the attack. The Swiss arrested the attackers

In 1970, a bomb on board a Swissair flight to Tel Aviv brought the plane down just outside Zurich, killing all 47 passengers and crew

In September 1970, a Swissair flight on its way to New York was hijacked. Two other airliners, one British, one American, were hijacked at the same time. All three ended up at Dawson’s Field airstrip in Jordan, where more than 300 passengers were held hostage

The European Union Becomes Irrelevant In Resolving The Jewish-Arab Conflict, David Singer

The Council of the European Union (EU) has disqualified itself from influencing any resolution of the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict following the release of its “Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process” on 18 January.
Continuing its partisan support of Arab demands the EU has reaffirmed its July 2014 position:
“The EU recalls its willingness to engage further with regional partners on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative which provides key elements for the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict as well as the opportunity for building a regional security framework.” Key elements of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative included:
1. “Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.” 2. “The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza strip, with east Jerusalem as its capital” Israel’s agreement to negotiate with the PLO on the basis of the 2003 Bush Roadmap was contingent on the removal of all references to the Arab Peace Initiative from the Roadmap along with 13 other detailed reservations.

American Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice gave the following assurances to Israel on 23 May 2003:
“The roadmap was presented to the Government of Israel with a request from the President that it respond with contributions to this document to advance true peace. The United States Government received a response from the Government of Israel, explaining its significant concerns about the roadmap. The United States shares the view of the Government of Israel that these are real concerns and will address them fully and seriously in the implementation of the roadmap to fulfil the President’s vision of June 24, 2002.” This fundamental disconnect between the EU and Israel over the Arab Peace Initiative continues to detrimentally impact on their relationship.

Pakistan: “Christian Girls Are Only Meant for the Pleasure of Muslim Men” by Raymond Ibrahim

“Around 700 Christian women in Pakistan are abducted, raped and forced into Islamic marriage every year – that figure is almost two a day and the world does nothing.” — Wilson Chowdhry, human rights activist, citing the Muslim non-governmental organization, “Movement of Solidarity and Peace.”

“Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the community’s mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war.” – Local residents, Pakistan.

Three Christian girls in Pakistan, who rejected the advances of some wealthy Muslim young men, were recently mauled by them. One of the girls died.

The London-born Chairman of the British Pakistani Christian Association (BPCA) and human rights activist, Wilson Chowdhry, who broke the story, reported that one of the men had said: “Christian girls are only meant for one thing, the [sexual] pleasure of Muslim men.”

The incident occurred on January 13 in Lahore. The three girls—aged 17, 18, and 20—were walking home after a hard day’s work. Four Muslim youths in a vehicle followed the girls and accosted them. The men “misbehaved,” yelled “suggestive and lewd comments,” and harassed the girls to get in their car for “a ride and some fun.”

The girls declined the “invitation,” and added that they were “devout Christians and did not practice sex outside of marriage.”

What Do Most of America’s Voters Really Want? Is There A “Fourth Revolution” on the Horizon in America? by Lawrence Kadish

The current political cycle reveals that many Americans are demanding unprecedented accountability from their elected leaders concerning wasteful spending and policies that have labeled our nation “The United Give Me States of America.”

A growing majority of citizens want economic growth, job creation, national security and many insist on an end to policies of political correctness that prevent the education of our citizenry and, as they believe, is unraveling our basic right of freedom of speech.

Of equal concern are the prospects of ongoing terrorist acts against our nation and our allies, the unimaginable threat of a nuclear 9/11 or the global upheaval from a bankrupt America triggered by a default on our nation’s unsupportable $19 trillion national debt.

In a recent conference entitled, “How to Think about Inequality,” author James Piereson discussed key topics explored in his books, Shattered Consensus and The Inequality Hoax.

In Shattered Consensus, Piereson suggested that America is on the abyss of a new and historic phase of economic and political upheaval he calls the “Fourth Revolution.” He cites three prior turning points in our nation’s history: Jefferson’s “Revolution of 1800,” which created popular political parties as we know them, the Civil War and the New Deal. Piereson said he doesn’t know when The “Fourth Revolution” will occur or what form it will take.

Paris Terrorists Introduced, Warn West in New ISIS Beheading Video By Bridget Johnson

ISIS released a new video today with statements from the Paris attackers, vowing to kill westerners in their homes and chiding Muslims to join jihad now.

The 17-minute film, “Kill Them Wherever You Find Them,” was released in English, Arabic and French by Al-Hayat Media Center, the ISIS media arm that recently produced a new issue of Dabiq magazine. ISIS hinted at more on the Paris attacks in last week’s issue with a page featuring the faces of the terrorists over a backdrop of the French capital and the words “Just Terror.”

“Let Paris be a lesson for those nations that wish to take heed,” the page noted.

The highly stylized video begins with news footage and the voices of CNN and Fox News anchors narrating the Paris attacks as they unfolded on Nov. 13. Red crosshairs are superimposed on victims and police in the news footage.

Brahim Abdeslam, aka Abul Qa’Qa al-Baljiki, a French ISIS member who was living in Belgium and was one of the shooters at bars and restaurants the night of the attack, is shown firing a gun at targets painted on a wall.

Belgian restaurant attacker Chakib Akrouh, aka Abu Mujaed al-Baljiki, is shown viciously beheading a man in a desert setting, as are Frenchmen and Bataclan gunmen Foued Mohamed-Aggad (aka Abu Fu’ad al-Faransi) and Ismaël Omar Mostefai (aka Abu Rayyn al-Faransi).

Belgian restaurant gunman Abdelhamid Abaaoud, aka Abu Umar al-Baljaki, speaks in what looks like a home video shot with an ISIS flag and two guns for a backdrop. Samy Amimour, aka Abu Qital al-Faransi, the third Bataclan gunman, gives a wicked smile for the camera.

You Know You’re in the Trump Cult When… By Paula Bolyard….The Cur in his own Words

At a campaign rally in Iowa on Saturday GOP frontrunner Donald Trump bragged about how loyal his followers are.

“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” Trump boasted, as he formed his fingers into the shape of a gun and pointed at the crowd:

I’m beginning to believe that Trump could do about anything at this point and his most loyal followers would find a way to justify it. He makes disgusting, sexist comments about women and his supporters think it’s hilarious —Megyn Kelly had it coming, they say. Trump makes fun of a reporter’s disability and his loyalists laugh right along with him—because they love his ability to crush people under the awesome weight of his 3rd grade insults. He tells students at Liberty University that he’s a good person and has no need for God’s forgiveness and the crowd—including the school’s president, Jerry Falwell, Jr.—goes wild. The guy is bigger than God now, I guess.

Matt Walsh wrote at the Blaze this week:

I watch it unfold feeling like a guy whose best friend just started dating the town floozy. I try to tell him that she’s sleeping around, she’s betraying him, she’ll break his heart, but he’s too smitten to hear me.

That’s exactly what it feels like when you try to have a conversation with Trump’s ardent followers. They are card-carrying members of Trump’s cult of personality now, and I fear they’re not coming back. You can’t reason people out of something they haven’t been reasoned into. Many of these people are caught up in the emotion of this moment and it doesn’t bother them one bit that a man who could quite possibly become president of the United States in a few months is openly bragging that his sycophants will blindly follow him, no matter what he does. But don’t worry. It’s all a show! He’s just entertaining the crowds and schlepping for votes. He doesn’t really mean any of this crazy stuff. Except for the stuff we like, and then we’re sure that he really, truly (pinky promise!) means all of that. Because he fights!

Prosecutions of Immigration Crimes Down by 36% in Last 5 Years By Rick Moran

The Center for Immigration Studies has determined that the federal government has becoming more and more lax in prosecuting immigration offenses over the last 5 years. Statistics compiled by the group show a 36% decline in prosecutions in that period.

Washington Examiner:

Justice Department statistics show that criminal prosecutions for crimes such as unlawful re-entry by an illegal in November totalled 4,861, down 13.2 percent over the previous month. Over the past year, that number is down 22.3 percent.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, which analyzed the data, that is a five year decline of criminal prosecutions of 36 percent.

CIS analyzed data produced by Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which publishes Justice and Homeland Security Department data on immigration. TRAC said that the top criminal prosecution charge was “reentry by a deported alien.”

TRAC also produced the “detainer” report based on Homeland Security data that showed a huge drop in the administration’s effort to grab illegals in jail. It said that there were over 25,000 detainers issued in October 2015. That dropped to 7,117 in October 2015.

Either Carry a Big Stick—Or Shut Up! By Victor Davis Hanson

Western culture is deservedly exceptional. No other tradition has given the individual such security, freedom, and prosperity.

The Athens-Jerusalem mixture of Christian humility (and guilt) and the classical Socratic introspection combined in the West to make it a particularly self-reflective and self-critical society, in a way completely untrue of other traditions.

Unprecedented Western leisure and affluence also have given Europeans and Americans a margin of error, in the sense of the material ability to indulge in ethical critique of themselves without existential danger.

But self-proclaimed moralists also developed habits of ethical nitpicking. Here I do not just mean the more recognizable jingoism so common in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Instead, today progressive global strutting showcases how magnanimous Westerners are and how they can afford to remain disengaged and nonjudgmental.

If in the 1880s Victorians could dress up conquered and dethroned Zulu King Cetshwayo in British tweed and parade him around the liberal parlors of London, today we can psychoanalyze why thugs and murderers abroad are mostly misguided, and thus without Western guidance and empathy understandably become nihilist.

Such liberal self-moralizing is never termed chauvinistic or culturally arrogant, because its practitioners are so often liberals who want all others to become as liberal as themselves. Nonetheless, many of our current tensions in the world result from our enemies’ dislike of our smug sense of moral superiority.

Lecturing Egypt to respect a “largely secular” Muslim Brotherhood’s electoral win means that the U.S. is safely distant when one-election/one-time Islamists dismantle the process that brought them to power and seek an Islamic state.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, as a champion of Western rationalism and British fair play, was convinced that he could persuade Adolf Hitler to play by Europe’s post-Versailles Marquess of Queensberry Rules. The more Hitler violated the Versailles accords, rearmed, militarized the Rhineland, gobbled up Austria and dismembered Czechoslovakia, the more Chamberlain redoubled his efforts to convince Hitler of Europe’s shared interest in peace and friendly relations instead of a Neanderthal return to Verdun and the Somme.

Why Hillary is Far Worse than Petraeus By Tom Trinko see note please

Perhaps on the issue of e-mails Hillary is worse, but frankly I shed no tears for the troubles of David of Surgeistan whose rules of engagement were more sensitive to the religious mores of barbarians than to the safety of our troops surrounded by terrorists hidden among “civilians.” rsk

Liberals are saying that since Hillary didn’t actually hand over secret data to someone she’s not guilty of anything. They also use that “reasoning” to say that her case is nothing like that of General David Petraeus who was found guilty of mishandling classified information.

The liberal position essentially holds that if General Petraeus had brought home top-secret SAP documents and left them on his dining room table in a neighborhood with a large number of recent robberies and then gone on vacation for a few years, he would have done nothing wrong.

Liberal reasoning also says that if General Petraeus had just removed the classification markings from the data he shared then he would have done no wrong.

Yet it’s hard to imagine anyone in the national security community or the military, or even the FBI or your local police department, thinking that if General Petraeus had done either of those things he’d be legally free and clear.

Essentially Hillary is guilty for two reasons: