June 4, 2017

After the London Bridge terrorist attack, Theresa May calls for embarrassing conversations.

"So we need to become far more robust in identifying [terrorism] and stamping it out across the public sector and across society. That will require some difficult, and often embarrassing, conversations."

What's hiding behind that weasely "embarrassing"? She didn't deign to say anything that embarrassed her. It was all "society should continue to function in accordance with our values" and "the whole of our country needs to come together." And "conversation." Bromides. Oh, well, maybe that is embarrassing, but I don't think that's what she meant.

277 comments:

1 – 200 of 277   Newer›   Newest»
rhhardin said...

If you have muslim friends, ask them what's wrong with you fucking people.

David Baker said...

Here's what "I" heard Theresa May, with nose in the air, say:

"We remain terribly, terribly fine. And in our peerless, superior, fineness, we'll remain terribly, terribly fine. Therefore, and hereafter, know that your problem is FacingBook and Google and SnappyChat - not the lack of adequate personal self-defense, or government policy. And certainly beyond discussion or consideration, that no price is too high to pay for diversity."

That's what I heard that patronizing bitch say.

Gahrie said...

By embarrassing, she means rude. There is nothing in the world quite as embarrassed as an upper class Englishman being rude. By rude, she means non-PC. She's basically saying it's time to stop pretending we don't know what is going on.

Big Mike said...

Initial reports indicated that police were planning to arrest people for fighting back. Hopefully May has put a stop to that, if those reports were true. (It says something about not-so-Grest Britain that the reports are plausible.

iowan2 said...

She continued: “It is time to say enough is enough. Everybody needs to go about their lives as they normally would. Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values. But when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.”

Sounds a lot like President Trumps Speech in the Middle East. 'Throw them out..."

whitney said...

I'm seeing the word bromides popping up everywhere, for weeks now. My favorite was in the phrase "treacly bromides". Speaking of which, when is the candlelight vigil?

David Baker said...

Here's what I wanted to hear Theresa May say:

1. "All Muslims must remain in their homes until further notice.

2. All mosques are deemed to be permanently closed.

3. All Islamic practices will cease immediately.

4. Great Britain no longer considers Islam a "religion," but a violent political movement."

Tregonsee said...

I eagerly await the calls for reasonable gun control legislation in Britain. Not what they have now, which renders an entire populace helpless, reaching for chairs and bottles to defend themselves when seconds count, and the authorities are minutes away. Just not holding my breath that it will even come up.*

*Doing my best imitation of Progressives who use every opportunity, no matter how crass, to push their agenda. :)

gspencer said...

What she doesn't want to say is what increasing numbers of people know. Namely, that Islam is the problem. And that the more Islam in a society, then the more murderous behavior that society will experience from the practitioners of Islam.

All of it based on the plain texts of Islam.

That's what Theresa May, and she acts as the proxy for the world's politicians (including Pope Frankie), refuses to say.

Sally327 said...

I assume she meant that she and others in positions of authority are not going to be able to continue dodging the obvious discussion about how all this came to be. And then the uncomfortable discussion that would follow that discussion, which is what can be done, if anything, that would make any real difference.

Embarrassing for Her Majesty's Government, not necessarily embarrassing for people who don't have the benefit of armed security everywhere they go.

Kassaar said...

“Terrorists want the Trumps, Mays, and Le Pens to win.”

How convenient to tar everyone you don’t agree with with the same brush.
The alternative in Britain, by the way, is a long time apologist for the IRA and Hamas.

Tank said...

Mark Steyn:

After Manchester, Mrs May raised the official "Threat Level" from Mildly Perturbed to Somewhat Disturbed or whatever it was, and in order further to reassure the public put soldiers on London's streets. Soldiers aren't really much use at stopping homicidal car drivers or random stabbers. To do that, you'd have to ban motor vehicles and sharp knives, which, given the fecklessness and decadence of Europe's political class, I wouldn't entirely rule out. Absent that, it's unfortunate that the London carnage occurred before Katy Perry, Justin Bieber & Co had had a chance to hold their stupid, useless, poor-taste all-you-need-is-sentimentalist-delusional-crap pop concert for the victims of the Manchester carnage. Maybe they'll cancel it, or maybe they'll make it a twofer.

Kate said...

Yeats' "The Second Coming" has been the go-to poem for many years now. Everyone from the average twitter bum to Ross Douthat quotes it.

I'm really, really ready for a new It poem.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Terrorists want the Trumps, Mays, and Le Pens to win. They feed off of each other. They do not want the center to hold.

Considering how grotesquely wrong the malevolent left has been about the risks of importing these murderers, I trust you'll forgive us for ignoring your brain-dead bleating about what Muslim terrorists want.

John said...

"She said: “While we have made significant progress in recent years, there is – to be frank – far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."

To be fair, she was quoted as saying this in the paragraph before the excerpt. The 'embarrassing' aspect is I think she recognizes the open border policies of Europe are proving to be wrong and in her own circle of political elites she's signaling that they've been caught. Of course, the Brexit vote was a more direct signal the common citizens shared, but that was not taken seriously by the ruling class. The mayor of London still claims that "London is still the safest, global city". So that's good to know.

grackle said...

Initial reports indicated that police were planning to arrest people for fighting back.

Not surprising. The info below is also predictable. Plenty of police around but they were of course unarmed.

Witnesses said they saw two men stabbing people outside the well-known Roast restaurant in Borough market. A chef from the nearby Fish restaurant said: “I saw two guys with big knives downstairs outside Roast. They were stabbing people. The police were running away, they were community police. They were normal officers, they were running away.

The phrase, “community police,” seems to refer to some sort of civilian volunteers who are NOT “police” in any sense of the word. But I guess it makes the politicians feel better to call them “police.”

“Normal officers” seems refer to real, actual, official members of the police. But no matter whether ill-prepared legitimate police or ill-prepared community volunteers with uncertain duties, no one stayed around to face the knives except the innocent civilian bystanders – some of who managed to throw chairs and bottles at the terrorists.

Prediction: the Guardian will do its best to hide this tweet. The tweet’s link is already broken and now leads only to the generic Guardian homepage.

Sally327 said...

"The 'embarrassing' aspect is I think she recognizes the open border policies of Europe are proving to be wrong and in her own circle of political elites she's signaling that they've been caught."

The Manchester terrorist wasn't in the UK because of open borders. He was a citizen. And he was a citizen because the UK allowed his father and mother to settle there, not because of open borders, but because they were anti-Gaddafi at a time when the UK government was anti-Gaddafi as well. They were asylum seekers, granted refuge under the premise, I guess, that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

All that's not an open borders issue. It's just another embarrassing discussion, how foreign policy plays into what happens at home.

John said...

Blogger Sally327 said...
All that's not an open borders issue. It's just another embarrassing discussion, how foreign policy plays into what happens at home.


Sorry for appearing to use open borders as the primal cause. Radicalization using teachings within Islam as the doctrine is the primal cause. Tolerance and acceptance of those that practice this are secondary. Open borders just helps bring it closer to home.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

It seems they stopped making Bromo-Seltzer some time ago.

traditionalguy said...

Maybe she wants the Gospel to convert the Muslims to Christianity. That is the only thing that would work.But it should not be embarrassing to use the greatest Power in a War of Ideologies.

Maybe she meant something useless.

David Baker said...

Here's what I want to hear President Trump say:

1. The American people can no longer wait for the courts to reinstate my ban on immigration from problematic Mid-Eastern countries.

2. As of this moment, that ban will be in full effect.

3. In addition, I'll be adding other primarily Muslim-majority countries to the list, presently.

4. All flights from terror-stricken European (et al) cities are hereby halted until further notice.



John said...

...have confidence in our liberal values. Those included respect for the individual (which also means no collective punishment) and respecting freedom of religion.

That's what assimilation into a country through a formalized immigration process is intended to do. Follow that up with a citizenship process that conveys the laws that we've agreed to be governed by and the values we hold to be true as a country. And finally, if you fail to live up to these values (break the law) we will prosecute you for this action.

We have very broad freedoms here that "allow" many things we don't all feel comfortable with. You can be part of a militia in Central Michigan or Northern Oregan or belong to a 'movement' like Antifa all you want. The second you decide to act out against another citizen for that cause using violence (terrorism, for instance) you're out.

Humperdink said...

There is a word for what is occurring in Britain (and elsewhere across Europe) with their citizenry. That word is deception. They have have been deceived by their leadership. They have swallowed hook, line, and sinker the open borders lie. A collection of sheep being led to slaughter.

Additionally, they have been rendered defenseless, swallowing the gun-control-will-make-you safe-lie. Europe is toast.

The only thing that might safe them is the Paris Peace Accords (gag me).

narciso said...


The same goes for gchq which should have been on the ball

http://nypost.com/2017/06/03/these-obama-cronies-should-be-grilled-for-his-intelligence-unmaskings/#

Rick Turley said...

"we shouldn't try to fight terrorists by taking on their values but instead have confidence in our liberal values. Those included respect for the individual (which also means no collective punishment) and respecting freedom of religion."

I highly, highly recommend you try that if anyone ever comes at you with a knife or a gun.

AllenS said...

Islam is incompatible with Western Civilization.

It's about time someone like May said those words. It can't get anymore obvious.

narciso said...

The story is much the same in lodinistan

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2017/05/bloody-hands-in-manchester.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook&m=1

Glen Filthie said...

Well well well.

Turns out those icky racists, those deplorable islamophobes, and now those "A-house hillbillies" were right about a few things. And those sanctimonious liberal social engineers were wrong about a bunch things when it comes to living under all the frooty colours of the rainbow. Who woulda thunk it?

Embarrassing conversations will include the gubbimint explaining the need for the following to stupid people:

1. Severe reprisals
2. The abolishment of politically correct double standards that allow moslems to act like animals without punishment
3. The need to dispense with the judiciary that protects and enables terrorism and does nothing to curb it
4. That Britain is NOT strong, it's NOT united, and its values are not compatible with islam.

Judging from one of our suspects here ... Those are going to be long, long conversations.

David Baker said...

"Muslims are overall one of the most law abiding good behaving immigrant groups to ever come to this country."

Nonsense. Check the crime statistics, starting in Minneapolis.

In addition, of all the groups mentioned, none engaged in random killing sprees - except Muslims.

Humperdink said...

OWT, you could be a leading candidate for political office across the pond. You're not related to Jeremy Corbyn, are you?

PS: You forgot the crusades in your screed.

hawkeyedjb said...

Let's not turn to leaders who might urge protection against the depredations of Islam, not even the slightest protection, because that's exactly what the terrorists want. Let's do the opposite of what the terrorists want. Let's import more and more and more and more Muslims. That'll show 'em.

Angel-Dyne said...

Sally327: The Manchester terrorist wasn't in the UK because of open borders. He was a citizen. And he was a citizen because the UK allowed his father and mother to settle there, not because of open borders, but because they were anti-Gaddafi at a time when the UK government was anti-Gaddafi as well. They were asylum seekers, granted refuge under the premise, I guess, that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

"Open borders" isn't a specific program, it's a description of one aspect of a whole ideology. And the state-sponsored refugee rackets in the West are very much a part of that ideology. Even if that were not the case, a small number of refugees allowed asylum for this or that foreign policy or humanitarian reason would not be a problem if the mass-migration and "diversity!" lunacy of the last several decades, which are also aspects of that same ideology, were not there to provide a virulent amplifier to whatever pathologies a particular refugee might be carrying along.

So yes, it most certainly is an "open borders" problem. I am puzzled why anybody thinks "but he was native born" or "but he's a citizen" is proof that the problem has nothing to do with immigration policy. A refusal to connect some very obviously related dots seems to be a method for avoiding painful cognitive dissonance very much in vogue these days.

traditionalguy said...

I suspect the conversation actually going on among the Englis with money is where to buy a safe house somewhere in the eastern United States where they now have a government that protects infidels and their property and women from hostile Muslim invasion looting and murder.

Europeans have been on a buying spree into wealthy communities in Florida and Georgia near International Airports , but only visiting them so far like vacation houses.

The downside to that is the Brits and others trying to tell us how things are done. One big difference is they are not community supporters, but are selfish and cheap.

Humperdink said...

"Some immigrants from Russia have also brought crime to our country. Don't see Trump targeting them."

Trolling level = 98.6%

John said...

Trump and the Althouse Hillbillies here are advocating for rounding people up and harming them whether they are responsible or not.

I've followed your comments on this blog long enough to know that you like to throw this crap into the fan, but as others have done and will continue to do, I'll call BS.

The consensus of the commenters here is to put some sanity back into the immigration process, cautiously and thoroughly vet those coming from areas of the world where radicalism is trained and supported, and protect the citizens (including current Muslims who want to live within the laws and values of this country) of the United States.

AJ Lynch said...

Future Best-selling Yard Sign: There is only race - the civilized, human race. All others must be kept out.

Virgil Hilts said...

After 9-11 I thought we were going to see more 9-11s. 9-11 just took a little planning, finding a couple dozen losers willing to die (some may have only thought it was highjacking), having a few of the losers take remedial flying lessons, and the purchase of some box cutters. When you have more than 3 terrorists willing to organize an attack and die for it, losing less than 10 people is a miracle. Maybe this will just keep going the way its going, but I keep expecting an attack organized by someone halfway intelligent (think Ramzi Ahmed Yousef) that will kill a thousand or so people. That this hasn't happened in 15+ years seems improbable.

Rusty said...

Sure thing buttercup.
You're not going to get violent are you?
Do you have anything substantive to add to the conversation or are you here to morally preen?

Michael K said...

The American people can no longer wait for the courts to reinstate my ban on immigration from problematic Mid-Eastern countries.

This was part of the strategy of the left. It was to provoke Trump, who they think has a short fuse, into doing something that could be an impeachment argument.

He has been patient and, unless the Supreme Court goes rogue, they should end the lawless behavior of the Obama packed appeals courts.

What we need is for the Congress to act and start to earn their salaries.

I'm reading a biography of James K Polk and the Congress then was as irresponsible as they are now. It's interesting to see how similar the behavior of politicians was then. Of course, that behavior is what led to the Civil War 12 years later,.

Bad Lieutenant said...

P.S. Dow Jones Average 21,206.29
PRAISE KEK!

Do you do it for the taste, Onesie, or for the nutritional value? I assume they don't pay you.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Rusty,

Preening all the way.

Sally327 said...

"So yes, it most certainly is an "open borders" problem. I am puzzled why anybody thinks "but he was native born" or "but he's a citizen" is proof that the problem has nothing to do with immigration policy. A refusal to connect some very obviously related dots seems to be a method for avoiding painful cognitive dissonance very much in vogue these days."

I was thinking about it from the standpoint that closing the borders doesn't do anything about the people who are already here or who have the right to be here(or there if we're talking about another country). The Manchester terrorist wasn't smuggled in or someone who came in on a tourist or student visa. He was a citizen. Just like the Orlando nightclub killer was a citizen.

It doesn't mean that immigration policy and border control aren't obvious and necessary discussions, I agree with that, and I also agree that the refugee / asylum seeker programs need to be looked at as well. But none of that is going to do anything about the people who already have the right to be here (or there).

And giving the government the power to tamper with the rights of citizens who haven't yet committed a crime, that's a dangerous road to agree to travel on. You give government more power to do something about the "bad" citizens, it can expand the definition of "bad" in unexpected and ghastly ways to target others for its own reasons. But then I'm not a believer in the beneficence of government when given more tools to exercise control over the citizens.

Bad Lieutenant said...

But none of that is going to do anything about the people who already have the right to be here (or there).

Trump had the right answer and was shouted down for it. Reprisal.

You give government more power to do something about the "bad" citizens,

Maybe if the government is powerless, the people will have to take the law into their own hands.

Plug. The Damn. Hole.

AReasonableMan said...

Having an Elvis appreciation weekend here at Chez Reasonable.

Where Could I Go But to the Lord

Fever

Steamroller Blues

An American Trilogy

Bob Boyd said...

Embarrassing conversation:

"Maybe Mr. Trump has a point."

"I...uh...are you alright? You look..."

Through hankerchief, "Don't tell anyone I said that."

"But you said we...Very well...but..."

"Let's not be hasty. This is a serious matter."

"Right. No need to be rash. Cooler heads and all that."

"Just so."



Virgil Hilts said...

One embarrassing discussion likely to occur is how England responded to the IRA with the Prevent of Terrorism Acts, portions of which remain in effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevention_of_Terrorism_Acts
The key weapon allowed police at height of IRA bombings was ability to arrest someone w/o warrant on suspicion of terrorist ties and hold them for 2-7 days exempt from normal criminal defendant protections. That is quite a weapon and coupled with lie detector equipment could be quite useful if you wanted to really make an all-out effort to ferret out potential jihadists. The IRA was responsible for about 1800 deaths over a few decades of terror, I think less than half were civilian deaths. With recent events I think we are reaching about the same point in terms of UK alarm level.

Bay Area Guy said...

Here's an embarrassing, difficult conversation to have:

Hey, British people. The idea that a commitment to multi-culturalism requires you to import Muslim people into your country is stupid and dangerous. You see, some Muslims are friendly and industrious and want to assimilate into your British culture, probably like those folks from India. That's fine.

But many are violent terrorists who hate Western society, hate your raucous open permissive culture, don't want to work, don't want to assimilate, do want to rape your women and kill your men, and would love me nothing more than to grow their ranks to start slowly imposing Sharia Law, and their backwards, Stone Age values on your culture.

Arriana Grande concerts, London Bridge throat slitting and Subway bombing is just the beginning of softening up your underbelly.

Your Left Wing Labour Party is actively enabling this process.

You might want to do something about this.

Have a nice day!

David Baker said...

"...It was to provoke Trump, who they think has a short fuse, into doing something that could be an impeachment argument."

Impeachment is a political process, which doesn't require sound, much less legal, reasoning.

So don't miss the point; the President should never, ever allow the courts to summarily usurp the constitutional authority and primacy of the Executive. Which is exactly what the courts have been doing. Even now, with SCOTUS sitting on its hands while American lives are at imminent risk.

Trump needs to brace up and ignore the false arguments. He's not a politician and should refuse to play such political games. Because when Americans die, their blood won't be on the court's hands, but on the President's. It's his sworn duty to protect American lives, not the liberal judges.

rhhardin said...

I recommend Thurber on Polk, in "Let Your Mind Alone and other more or less inspirational pieces." It's about time the man was rehabilitated.

rhhardin said...

This wouldn't happen if people drove on the right.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Does anyone have any doubt that those behind these terrorist attacks are doing them right before elections in Great Britain for a reason? Terrorists want the Trumps, Mays, and Le Pens to win. They feed off of each other. They do not want the center to hold.

If you are part of the squishy center, (and I suspect you are) you may want to consider that you will either become fodder or need to take a side.

In case you are still hiding your head in your nether regions....this is a real war. We may not all wear uniforms, but you can sure tell who has chosen a side. The ala akbars have declared.

Denying the reality does not change it.

Doug said...

My prediction? Brits will either flee, and those who stay will work hard to rationalize their acceptance of Sharia law. THAT'S where the protection from violence is.

chickelit said...

If the Brits become dismayed, the will shall follow.

BillyTalley said...

She was too embarrassed to ask the Muslim community to join the fight.

Sebastian said...

Some conversation starters:

1. For ordinary Brits: how come you kept electing people and parties that brought this on?
2. For UK officials: why, at this late date, do you euphemistically describe plain honesty as embarrassing?
3. For UK law enforcement: how can you possibly keep track of 3000+ would-be jihadis?
4. For Americans: what good is extreme vetting when "native-born" Muslims become terrorists?

David Baker said...

"For Americans: what good is extreme vetting when "native-born" Muslims become terrorists?"

To avoid adding fuel to the fire.

Michael K said...

So don't miss the point; the President should never, ever allow the courts to summarily usurp the constitutional authority and primacy of the Executive.

I agree but he is waiting to see if the USSC reverses these lawless decisions.

If the Supremes let them stand, he may have to go the full Andrew Jackson.

The Senate might not support him on the next justice. He is really alone.

chickelit said...

It's embarrassing for Brits to admit they've reached a tipping point.

Breezy said...

If government does not to protect its citizens better than this, the people will act, I predict. Throwing chairs and bottles is the beginning of the awakening of the incompetency of current laws and attitudes to protect the people from disgusting random acts in the name of Allah.

Oso Negro said...

On a related theme, I read a very interesting novel by a Turkish author, Orhan Pamuk, titled "Snow". The novel illustrates the tension in a Turkish community between fundamentalist Islam and those who prefer to stay to Ataturk's path of modernity. I would recommend it to anyone interested in better understanding Turkey specifically, and the struggle with jihadism more generally.

Angel-Dyne said...

Sally327: It doesn't mean that immigration policy and border control aren't obvious and necessary discussions, I agree with that, and I also agree that the refugee / asylum seeker programs need to be looked at as well.

That's the problem. Our "leaders" - well, they're very good at "looking into" things and having "necessary discussions", aren't they?

But none of that is going to do anything about the people who already have the right to be here (or there).

And giving the government the power to tamper with the rights of citizens who haven't yet committed a crime, that's a dangerous road to agree to travel on. You give government more power to do something about the "bad" citizens, it can expand the definition of "bad" in unexpected and ghastly ways to target others for its own reasons. But then I'm not a believer in the beneficence of government when given more tools to exercise control over the citizens.


OK, I see your point. And we can all agree that it's a good idea to be wary of giving government more "fuck with citizens" power.

But here we are. Now what? A few thoughts:

"But they're citizens" has (or shouldn't have) one goddamn thing to do with keeping out whichever non-citizens we damned well please. And yet, again, here we are. The government apparently no longer has the right to do that, either. Collapsing the distinction between citizen and non-citizen eventually destroys the rights of citizens that we claim to cherish.

And by "eventually", I mean "already". "Diversity" and mass immigration have turned Western countries into ever more intrusive surveillance states, because the state now has to protect us from all the wonderful consequences of diversity and mass immigration. While more surveillance equipment is installed and citizens are hauled up, fined, jailed, sacked for expressing opinions the Party doesn't like, Party leaders natter on at ever greater length and ever more loudly about "protecting our values".

So, just how much freedom and privacy are you willing to give up to protect "our" freedom and privacy?

Oso Negro said...

Blogger chickelit said...
It's embarrassing for Brits to admit they've reached a tipping point.

6/4/17, 9:10 AM


What practical non-genocidal choices do they have?

1) Continue with "Run, Hide, Tell" and incur continuing casualties.
2) Round up the "23,000" suspected jihadists and put them away for good.
3) Stop the practice of Islam in the UK. Allow adherents to remain if they pledge to give it up.
4) Mass deportation.

What else is out there? If you have a dog that bites, at some point you have to give up trying to understand why and put him down. People, like animals, sometimes just go bad.

Seeing Red said...

Not that long ago, the terrorists blowing up London came from an Irish Catholic background.

And the terrorist funders were American. Thanks Chappaquidfick Ted!

Then they made their mistake, they blew up too many. And enough was enough.


We already had that.

We don't want it to happen again.


But Once, meh, no biggie.

It's a risk/reward scenario. Especially since we're so big.

Paco Wové said...

"If you have a dog that bites, at some point you have to give up trying to understand why..."

...and just let it eat the family. Maybe you'll be last.

pacwest said...

May calls for difficult and embarrassing conversations. Yet she will not say anything difficult or embarrassing herself. That is not a leader. I like Trump. You can't always get what you want, but sometimes you get what you need.

MaxedOutMama said...

She meant they had to shed the PC and discuss the problem. For the British, this is very embarrassing.

The Didsbury Mosque vid, where they are having a public panel about how Didsbury Mosque is all love and they are distraught and they reported this deviant (and it turns out to be a lie - no one from the mosque ever reporting the MB guy) - and then in the middle of all this truth and reconciliation one old dude gets up and starts reading from a leaflet he was given at the mosque's "Open Door Sundays":
"Living in a society in which people have accepted western lifestyle as their way of life brings immorality into every step. Modesty, shame and honor have no place in western civilization."

And then you watch everybody run away from this. They just can't deal with the reality. This guy is the one who is wrong for bringing it up. So yes, they need to dump the ruling psychology.

David Baker said...

"I agree but he is waiting to see if the USSC reverses these lawless decisions'

By "waiting" he's abdicating his lawful, sworn duty. And everyone knows the courts overstepped their bounds. Not a scintilla of rocket science involved.

As for SCOTUS, they could've acted yesterday, or the day before that. But this is the "Robert's" court, where liberal justifications are invented via extra-legal legislation. So they sit, and fiddle, in essence ruling against Trump and in favor of Islamic immigration: i.e., Let as many terrorists in before their refutation of the Constitution becomes a deadly, self-fulfilling prophecy.

So again, I would urge President Trump to ignore the courts on matters that don't concern them.

Seeing Red said...

Have confidence in our liberal values.

Until there's enuf to tip the vote, you moron. Then kiss them goodbye.

mockturtle said...

The difference between pre-WWII German Nazis and Muslims is that the Nazis wanted expansion [lebensraum] while Muslims want the whole world. Unlike Nazi Germany, however, declaring war on Islamic jihad is a little awkward since they have dispersed themselves throughout the globe. This is a long-planned strategy.

Michael K said...

I would urge President Trump to ignore the courts on matters that don't concern them.

It may come to that but not yet.

chickelit said...

Black Bone asked:

What practical non-genocidal choices do they have?

1) Continue with "Run, Hide, Tell" and incur continuing casualties.
2) Round up the "23,000" suspected jihadists and put them away for good.
3) Stop the practice of Islam in the UK. Allow adherents to remain if they pledge to give it up.
4) Mass deportation.


Are the Brits "hindered" by an Establishment clause which might prevent infiltrating mosques to rat out the losers?* Many of the losers have tells. For one, they often do not pray alone.
______________________
*I mean that in a good way. If our country were in such a situation, we may not be able to do anything about it. Cf. the hate-preaching at the Orlando mosque.

mockturtle said...

David Baker writes: So again, I would urge President Trump to ignore the courts on matters that don't concern them.

Hear, hear! I'll email him again today with just that advice.



madAsHell said...

That's not leadership. Conversations is not a plan.

Bay Area Guy said...

One trained, courageous man on the London Bridge with a gun could have shot a few of those Muslim terrorists before the stabbings.

Thank God for the 2nd Amendment here in the US.

Don't listen to Leftists - they are dangerous enablers who will get you killed.

On racial policy, they will turn your city into Detroit.

On economic policy, they will turn your country into Venezuela.

On education policy, they will turn your college into Evergreen State.

On immigration policy, they will turn your city into Londonistan.

Don't listen to Leftists.

Rene Saunce said...

Leftwing Christian hating/ Christian blaming fascist progressives have created an anti-free speech environment where ISIS is delicate and radial Islam cannot be named by name.

Rene Saunce said...

Tank - thanks for the Mark Steyn quote.

Rene Saunce said...

"But... abortion doc killer in the 1980's." "But... Timothy McVeigh." But. but. but.

Rehearsed regurgitated collective leftwing buts are embarrassing.

Michael said...

You can be sure that islamists give not one shit about elections, the outcome of elections or the process itself. If you do not get this you are hopelessly out of touch, or a sophomore in a second rate high school.

David Baker said...

Also consider the disastrous precedent President Trump is setting by allowing the courts, any court, and for any political reason, to arbitrarily overrule the Executive.

This is not what was intended regarding the separation of powers. The new, liberal approach also inadvertently implies that the president may, for his part, unilaterally reverse SCOTUS decisions, such as Roe v Wade. And he should issue an executive order doing just that - as an object lesson.

mockturtle said...

The British have a very long fuse and it is very British to call a massacre a bit of 'unpleasantness'. But, at least historically, they have shown to be dogged and determined once aroused to battle. Ms. May is not the ideal leader at present but, good grief! Jeremy Corbyn would be a disaster.

William said...

The left points out that our drone bombing program has, on occasion, killed innocent civilians. The murder of these innocents has caused many Muslims to join the jihadis. The left claims that our bombs have thus created far more jihadis than they have killed.......Here's a starter for an embarrassing conversation: why are we not allowed to react in a similar way to events like the Manchester bombing?

readering said...

If UK had Second Amendment those men would not have emerged from van holding long knives.

I grew up in England with Irish last name. I had no embarrassing conversations. Britain survived the Troubles and that problem seemed more unsolvable than this does.

hombre said...

'May said the attack was driven by the same "evil ideology of Islamist extremism."'

First, let's stop stupid PC comments from the dumbest political class ever. Islam intends to dominate the world - by force, if necessary. Not "Islamist extremism," Islam.

Paco Wové said...

"Britain survived the Troubles and that problem seemed more unsolvable than this does."

Well, that's nice, but what's your solution? Or are you just saying you don't have one, but surely one must be out there somewhere, because?

William said...

Here's a fair question for Once: It's my understanding that the Muslim Brotherhood is subject to a certain amount of persecution by the Sisi government in Egypt. As is also obvious, the Coptics there are subject to persecution. My question is this: should we treat Muslim Brotherhood members and Coptics exactly the same when they apply for asylum in the United States?

Drago said...

readering: "Britain survived the Troubles and that problem seemed more unsolvable than this does"

Take a look around the world and you will see that the IRA analogy doesn't hold up.

We are dealing with something vastly different in global expansionist islamist supremacy which explicitly and consciously utilizes the most horrific methods to advance the fear ahead of the sword. Mass beheadings by the thousands in hundreds of different places (including London itself),thousands of women and little, including very little girls, kidnapped for sexual slavery and abuse, burning people alive in cages, etc.

Keep telling yourself that dealing with the IRA provides some insight into how this can be overcome.

They are telling you what they want and demonstrating what they will do to get it and it only has to be a relatively small percentage actually performing the acts to achieve their goals.

They've been at this for about 1,400 years so perhaps, perhaps, the IRA comparison ought to be discarded so we can assess this threat for what it is independent of some other framework that makes us feel better.

hombre said...

"Terrorists want the Trumps, Mays, and Le Pens to win. They feed off of each other. They do not want the center to hold."

Is there no limit to the delusional stupidity of the left? "The center?" Good lord!

Angel-Dyne said...

Breezy: If government does not to protect its citizens better than this, the people will act, I predict.

Remember Tony Martin? He was that British guy who, tired of the state not holding up its side of the social contract and protecting him from criminals, protected himself.

The usual idiots came out of the woodwork decrying his "vigilantism". Richard Dawkins, iirc, started bloviating about how vigilantism undermined our sacred Rule of Law, the foundation of our civilization. He failed to notice (oddly for such a quiz kid like him), that non-stop, unpunished depredations on property by the criminal class is a pretty solid indication that the fucking Rule of Law has already long since broken down.

Or maybe he really believes that the state's monopoly on violence isn't part of a two-party contract, but merely a God-given (hahaha) state monopoly. You can't defend yourself because that's our job? No, you can't defend yourself because you're not allowed to defend yourself, regardless of whether we're protecting you or not.

I bring this up because many progressive types apparently believe this, if only implicitly. They reify Rule of Law to such an extent that they think it can exist apart from flesh-and-blood adherents, and that it will hold up not only under small matters like chronic burglaries, but large ones like regularly-scheduled terrorist attacks and the destruction of the cultural fabric. The law-abiding will just keep obeying the law, no matter how much law we dump on 'em to shut 'em up. If we can't (or won't) protect them, they still owe allegiance to The Law, right? And Our Values?

Original Mike said...

"I was thinking about it from the standpoint that closing the borders doesn't do anything about the people who are already here or who have the right to be here(or there if we're talking about another country)."

First rule of holes...

Who has a "right" to be here?

hombre said...

Nothing to do here other than to respond with the Obama thing: "Blah, blah, blah.

Bay Area Guy said...

John Kerry is on Meet the Press, expostulating on the Muslim terrorism on the London Bridge.

Thank you George W Bush for defeating him in 2004.

Original Mike said...

""Diversity" and mass immigration have turned Western countries into ever more intrusive surveillance states, because the state now has to protect us from all the wonderful consequences of diversity and mass immigration."

Yep, it's a twofer. We end up with both terrorists and an intrusive surveillance state, ostensively to control them, but just as likely turned on us.

Original Mike said...

"John Kerry is on Meet the Press, expostulating on the Muslim terrorism on the London Bridge."

I had to turn MTP off 10 minutes in.

rcocean said...

The Americans always seem more upset at these attacks then the Brits. Look at the correct UK election polls, almost 40% of Brits want that crazy-loon Corbyn for PM. The guy wants defacto open borders and supported the IRA terrorism. He makes Bernie Sanders look like Ronald Reagan.

We inherited our race problem, the Brits deliberately created theirs, cause they love diversity and "people of color". They also dislike free speech.

It's going to take about 50 more of these attacks before they wake up, if they ever do.

rcocean said...

"Thank you George W Bush for defeating him in 2004."

Yeah, he's a horrible person. Its no surprise he and johnny mccain are best friends forever.

JAORE said...

"... foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, who was once London’s mayor, also said attitudes had to change, saying: “The wells of tolerance are running empty.”

"The wells of tolerance are running empty."

Now would it not be better to take reasonable action, even if distasteful to some, to keep the well from running dry?

Or is it better to see what people in the pangs of extreme thirst will do to survive?

rcocean said...

"If government does not to protect its citizens better than this, the people will act, I predict."

What baloney. "The people" talk tough - but never do anything.

rcocean said...

Look for candle makers, florists, and teddy bear vendors to make a fortune in the next couple years.

Bay Area Guy said...

Al Gore is coming on to This Week to discuss our withdrawing from the Paris Climate Change Accords..

I will turn it off, so you don't have to.

ps Thank you George W Bush for defeating him in 2000.

Angel-Dyne said...

Kate: I'm really, really ready for a new It poem.

Less fecklessly turning in a gyre, more action, you say?

Oh, I can think of a few candidates.

readering said...

Global expansionist supremacy. Is that the slogan of the U.S. Defense Department? Read the NY Times today on the debate within the Trump Administration on another surge.

Chris N said...

Gor Blimey!

Kevin said...

"By "waiting" he's abdicating his lawful, sworn duty."

He also has a duty to respect the power of the other branches of government. Until the SC rules, the courts have not yet fully acted.

bagoh20 said...

What would be wrong with declaring that killing a proven terrorist before or after being proven as such will not be charged as a crime? Let them know they are risking their lives being a part of the dark side, and tell your citizens they have the clear right to protect themselves from pure evil. Being wrong about your victim would still be murder, even if suspicion was reasonable, so make that clear as well. Be sure, but be determined.

Definition: Terrorist - any person actively supporting or acting to murder innocent people for political purposes outside of military or police approved actions.

And for God's sake, let your people arm themselves.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

readering: "Britain survived the Troubles and that problem seemed more unsolvable than this does"

Take a look around the world and you will see that the IRA analogy doesn't hold up.


No doubt. Talk about an understatement.

Original Mike said...

Blogger BillyTalley said..."She was too embarrassed to ask the Muslim community to join the fight."

That about says it all.

Kevin said...

"John Kerry is on Meet the Press, expostulating on the Muslim terrorism on the London Bridge."

Came on to blast Trump for Climate change, had to talk about Muslim extremism?

Priceless!

Bruce Hayden said...

"After Manchester, Mrs May raised the official "Threat Level" from Mildly Perturbed to Somewhat Disturbed or whatever it was, and in order further to reassure the public put soldiers on London's streets. Soldiers aren't really much use at stopping homicidal car drivers or random stabbers. "

They aren't immune from this. I was working in SLC on 9/11/01, and was flying back to DEN every other week to see my kid. In response, they put uniformed National Guard in the airport with M16s, but without ammunition or radios. The NG soldiers I talked to thought that it was as silly as I did (and one of them brought up the radio problem).

bagoh20 said...

The IRA's goal was not complete destruction of all non-Irish and pursuit of heavenly reward through mass murder.

Sammy Finkelman said...

I'm not sure what she means, but it doesn;t sound good.

What's necessary is that some Muslim clerics need to be confronted. And because this is going on in Islam, (and not elsewhere - for now) their preaching and teaching (and not that of others) needs to be examined.

There perhaps need to be some clear rules. Some religious doctrines that need to be opposed and prohibited. And this has to apply no matter how high a status anyone has. And any such problematical clerics certainly need to be kept out of prisons.

Jupiter said...

Ms. May must walk a fine line. Terrorists vote too, you know.

That's why it's a bad idea to let them in. Muslims make lousy citizens.

rcocean said...

"The IRA's goal was not complete destruction of all non-Irish and pursuit of heavenly reward through mass murder."

Yeah, they were the good terrorists.

William said...

Thank God Britain is a democracy. If you find fault with May's somewhat mealy mouthed expressions, you can protest her by voting for Jeremy Corbyn.

Seeing Red said...

The Troubles didn't last as long. And yes, I'm going back a few centuries to even things out.

We are talking 1500 years of this.

Seem is a weasel word btw.

Maybe you should commune with Charles the Hammer.


Bruce Hayden said...

I should add to my last post that what made the whole thing with the UT NG thing so ludicrous was how obvious it was. It wouldn't have been so obvious if they had been issued empty magazines for their M16s. But, that isn't the way that the military works, so they were standing there, guns in hand, with empty magazine wells and no place to store magazines. Would have done better with WW II M1 Garands that have internal magazines.

Which reminds me of a photo I saw last year of an attractive young woman in Israel. She had her M16/M4 slung on her back, and a 30 round magazine in the back pocket of her tight fitting jeans. She looked just like an American co-ed - except for the casual addition of the assault rifle and magazine, with probably a cell phone in the other rear pocket. If I were a terrorist, would I act up around that young woman or the uniformed UT NG soldier first?

Seeing Red said...

The IRA wanted what's theirs without interference.

Islam wants what's yours without interference. And if they were pushed out after colonization, it's still theirs and they want it back. Gaul, Vienna, some believe/are taught even the US was colonized by Muslims.

I think the Vikings would have an issue, tho.

Seeing Red said...

Same at the embassies, which I think is one reason Iran was able to take our embassy. Guns were for show. We couldn't even protect our embassies.

Seeing Red said...

Then there's India.

Steve Uhr said...

The Ariana Grande One Live Manchester concert starts in 90 min. Can see it live on youtube I believe.

Yancey Ward said...

That May couldn't/wouldn't clarify what she meant actually speaks volumes, doesn't it? This is what is called leading from behind.

Drago said...

Steve Uhr: "The Ariana Grande One Live Manchester concert starts in 90 min. Can see it live on youtube I believe"

That'll show 'em!

Drago said...

Yancey Ward: " This is what is called leading from behind."

This is what is called not leading at all.

Original Mike said...

"The Ariana Grande One Live Manchester concert starts in 90 min."

Bad idea.

mockturtle said...

From Richard II
"This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,—
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England."

Steve Uhr said...

Grande deserves a lot of credit for not being intimidated.

Yancey Ward said...

If I were British, May's address this morning would be enough convince me to vote for Labour this week. At some point, you have to realize your own complicity in things. A similar reckoning is coming for the Republicans in Congress- count on it.

Yancey Ward said...

Shush!, Drago!

Original Mike said...

"Grande deserves a lot of credit for not being intimidated."

Bullcrap. She's not at risk.

cubanbob said...

The only conversation Mrs. May needs to have with the British people is whether or not they want mo Moe's.

As for Trump, he should simply start enforcing his EO's despite the lower court's rulings under the premise that immigration is strictly a federal matter and thus the States have no standing and if the States deem themselves to have standing the only court of origination in this matter is the Supreme Court as per the Constitution.

Original Mike said...

I thought I had never heard of Grande, but then I remembered this:

"Videos surfaced on TMZ Wednesday of Ariana Grande, showing her visiting Wolfee Donuts in California, licking a doughnut on a counter and declaring "I hate America." ... I hate Americans.".

Charming.

David Baker said...

"He also has a duty to respect the power of the other branches of government."

Not when the branch in question summarily infringes of the constitutionally mandated prerogative and power of the Executive.

No, what the courts have done and continue to do is reject our duly elected president. And in order to find some thread of justification, they ventured well beyond their own authority and precedents by arguing that prior campaign statements constitute prima facie evidence of purpose and intent. By this standard, even things Trump said in grade school are prima facie "evidence." And never mind that Islam's adherents mean to kill us, have killed us, and will continue killing us.

Meanwhile, I understand the abject fear and crippling timidity regarding any rejection of the "omnipotent" courts. It's the same fear that has paralyzed so-called conservatives and their comfortable government paychecks for years. But Trump is his own man, and shouldn't be beholden to any collective of the DC swamp.

JAORE said...

"Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,"

I note that in olden days they did not build a Chunnel under the moat and post a welcome sign.

readering said...

Hopefully our president will get some inspiration this afternoon on his golf course.

AJ Lynch said...

It is way past time to take the gloves off. That is what Teresa May should have said.

TWW said...

"The men, described as being 'of Mediterranean origin'..."

So they came from the sea? 

Maybe a start to solving our problems would be to stop speaking in 'Code', creating 'Straw men' and pretending that Political Correctness is the most important objective?

Like stop using weasel words like 'embarrassing'.

Steve Uhr said...

She may not be at much personal risk but she is bringing a lot of happiness to a community that has had a very rough couple of weeks. Not to mention raising millions for the families of the victims.

As for the donut incident:

"I am EXTREMELY proud to be an American and I've always made it clear that I love my country. What I said in a private moment with my friend, who was buying the donuts, was taken out of context and I am sorry for not using more discretion with my choice of words. As an advocate for healthy eating, food is very important to me and I sometimes get upset by how freely we as Americans eat and consume things without giving any thought to the consequences that it has on our health and society as a whole. The fact that the United States has the highest child obesity rate in the world frustrates me. We need to do more to educate ourselves and our children about the dangers of overeating and the poison that we put into our bodies. We need to demand more from our food industry. However I should have known better in how I expressed myself; and with my new responsibility to others as a public figure I will strive to be better."

She is not perfect (as are many commentators on this blog).

walter said...

readering said...Hopefully our president will get some inspiration this afternoon on his golf course.
--
Good luck working that line after Obama.

It's really hard to engage in those "embarrassing conversations" when your throat is being slit from behind. Maybe wear some sort of sign on the back..to get them to re-think engaging in Knife Violence.

gbarto said...

The problem is not Islam, per se. It's not like Jews and Christians go about stoning prostitutes, though there are things in the Bible that might point in that direction. What makes the difference is peoples who adopt a more nuanced interpretation of the holy books. When Muslims who don't go for this scorn the Jihadists as backward losers, as most Christians regarded, e.g., Donald Wildmon, this will get better. In the mean time, though, we must stop giving respect to any Muslim who won't denounce this. Right now, if a Muslim speaks out against the barbarians, he's on his own. The lunatics condemn him and the left worries he'll promote Islamophobia. Time to back those Muslims who speak out, but also scorn those who don't. If there's a price for opposing the extremists but no price for going along with them, what do you think will happen?

Matthew Blaine said...

The U.K. banned Michael Savage. Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were banned by Theresa May herself. They get lots of returning jihadis though. Maybe that's what's embarrassing.

May is going to be unemployed soon anyway.

mockturtle said...

As an advocate for healthy eating, food is very important to me and I sometimes get upset by how freely we as Americans eat and consume things without giving any thought to the consequences that it has on our health and society as a whole. The fact that the United States has the highest child obesity rate in the world frustrates me.

So Grande is not only an Ameriphobe, she is a food Nazi, as well. My, but these entertainers are sanctimonious.

Quaestor said...

Big Mike wrote: Initial reports indicated that police were planning to arrest people for fighting back. Hopefully May has put a stop to that, if those reports were true. (It says something about not-so-Great Britain that the reports are plausible.

I don't know about that, but I did see video of the Metropolitan Police herding British citizens along the sidewalk with their hands on the heads as if they were prisoners of war. Maybe there is a good tactical reason for that, but I saw it as emblematic of back-to-front thinking in the UK ruling class, mostly Labour but the gutless Tories are almost as bad. The British are POWs in their own country. mainly because they can't bring themselves to take the action necessary to safeguard their freedom. Freedom of religion is NOT a guaranteed right in Great Britain. There was a time when Catholicism was banned in England. It was necessary because Pope Pius V banned their Queen, offered money and absolution for her assassination, and tried to organize a crusade against England. It's time for the English time to ban Islam. The Muslims can either conform or get out. Or less drastic, armed police should be stationed in every mosque with powers to arrest any preacher who incites or advocates violence in any way, or expresses any sympathy with terrorism, or any makes any condemnation of Jews, Israel, Christians, "Crusaders", Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, other Muslims, or atheists. Granted under those restrictions the imams will have little to talk about, but that's what murderers should have to deal with at the very least. Any Muslims who choose to meet or worship outside the controlled mosques should be arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy.

bagoh20 said...

Embarrassing conversations are usually involved in solving problems between people. The fantasy that you could somehow avoid such things even when murder is the problem was always the stupidity of PC bullshit.

Matthew Blaine said...

We need an international agreement to regulate the internet, according to May. You know what? We deserve this by abdicating any moral responsibility that our liberty conferred upon us.

walter said...

gbarto,
+100

There's the high profile Zhudi Jasser calling for a reformation.
I don't get the sense he has much support from fellow Muslims though.
And last time I went to his organization's website, there was a pull down for reformation (maybe called it something else), but there was initially a blank page..later a small bit of text.
Sometimes I get the sense he is simply making a career out of this issue. I follow his Facebook page and it seems like every other post of his has a fairly gratuitous and large picture of himself.
FWIW, he grew up in Neenah, WI

Lem said...

Maybe by embarrassing, she means to opaquely reference a Trump style response to terror to be included in "conversation". Fighting fire with fire? calling things by their politically incorrect names and other "embarrassing" unpleasantries.

It's safe to say Trump detractors found his tweet re-endorsing his proposed travel ban, on the very day of the attack, embarrassing.

This kind of detachment and acceptance by the elite is the real legacy of our 44th president of the United States.

Drago said...

Steve Uhr: "Grande deserves a lot of credit for not being intimidated."

Try being a non-muslim in the East End of London these days. Those folks don't have the army of security that will be surrounding Grande.

Paco Wové said...

"Hopefully our president will get some inspiration this afternoon on his golf course."

As I asked you previously upthread:

"Well, that's nice, but what's your solution? Or are you just saying you don't have one, but surely one must be out there somewhere, because?"

Just trying to have a discussion here, hopefully not too embarrassing.

Drago said...

Steve Uhr: "She may not be at much personal risk but she is bringing a lot of happiness to a community that has had a very rough couple of weeks."

Well, I'd like to see links for that one.

And what constitutes "a lot"?

Sounds like Uhr is about halfway down the "Nobel for Grande" lane.

Drago said...

Lem: "It's safe to say Trump detractors found his tweet re-endorsing his proposed travel ban, on the very day of the attack, embarrassing."

Indeed.

I'm sure these same folks still find it hard to believe that FDR would comment so aggressively against the Imperial Japanese when the bodies were still being attended to and men were still trapped on sunken vessels at Pearl Harbor on December 7th.

readering said...

Solution. Folks come here for solutions? I. Thought they came here to try out variations on "those leftists ...."

Quaestor said...

Terrorists want the Trumps, Mays, and Le Pens to win

As a late-comer to this conversation, I assume that quote, which I see referenced many places, originated as a moronic provocation from a troll who is no longer among the living, as it were.

readering said...

Trolling means what?

walter said...

Speaking of golf:

Although he didn’t act on it, Carrey said he had his own fantasy about the president.

“I had a dream the other night that I was playing golf with Donald Trump,” Carrey said. “I was standing beside him with a club in my hand and I was considering my options when I suddenly woke up. It was one of those dreams where you want to go back to sleep so you can finish it, you know? But I’ve taken up golf anyway.”

Paco Wové said...

"She may not be at much personal risk "

Then she doesn't have any reason to be intimidated, does she? I suspect she's much better protected than her fans, or other average residents of Manchester.

Big Mike said...

What o like best about rendering is the way he (it?) and Toothless and Inga have dropped even the slightest pretense of caring about ordinary people. As Peggy Noonan once pointed out, we are patronized by our inferiors. And we told them to eff off, and they are butt hurt.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

So Grande is not only an Ameriphobe, she is a food Nazi...

A food "Nazi?" No wonder Republicans never get anything done. They're all about the most ridiculous and ignorant hyperbole anyone's heard.

Americans eat horribly and have outrageously high obesity and obesity-complication rates. Nowhere else in the world do they have half ton lardasses that require cranes to be moved out of their houses. Only America. Most people are sane enough to think that there's nothing wrong with encouraging our kids to eat better and improving access to healthy foods in destitute places where they've been swamped out by processed garbage. But that's because normal, sane Americans aren't whores to the cheap, artificial processed factory-foods industry, the way apparently a number of Republicans are.

Republicans will defend anything if it has enough money behind it. Hence, they can't even criticize Trump's embarrassing attempt to suck up to the worst proliferators of terrorist ideology and terrorist culture of all: The Saudi Arabians. He was there getting flattered, dancing with swords, putting his hands on some magical glowing orb that will defeat terrorism, and being served banquets upon banquets of lavish meals in palaces bigger than those in which even he lives. And he loved it. He lapped it up. He dropped on them an arms deal, because everyone knows how aggressive the Saudi Arabians are at quashing regional threats to modernity and stability like ISIS. And because everyone knows that the Saudis need us to help prevent other nations (like Iran) breaking into their terrorism and tyranny monopoly in the region.

Make America Second-rate Again.

William said...

So far as I can tell Ariana Grande doesn't have tattoos and has not released any sex videos. I'd be willing to forgive one incident of donut licking. She's young. We all make mistakes. Who among us have not licked a donut. Beyond this, there's the fact that she was the headline performer at an event than ended in mass murder. That's got to be a traumatic event. She obviously didn't suffer the greatest trauma, but it was a horrendous event, and it has to have had an effect on her. I saw some pictures where she visited bombing victims in the hospital. One little girl was thrilled to get a hug from her, and Ariana looked thrilled to hug her. I'm inclined to throw Ariana some slack for her past transgressions against donuts.....Of course, all bets are off if she or any of the concert performers use the event to proclaim their hatred for Trump. But until such time, I'm supportive of Ariana.

Paco Wové said...

From M. Blaine's link:

The Conservative manifesto pledges regulation of the internet, including forcing internet providers to participate in counter-extremism drives and making it more difficult to access pornography.

[Insert facepalm emoticon here]

Paco Wové said...

"Thought they came here to try out variations..."

Ok, you're just here to be a dick. Noted.

William said...

Embarrassing conversation: How do you politely tell someone that their colostomy bag is leaking? How do you politely tell Muslims that they are producing far too many psychotic mass killers and need to practice better hygiene.?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The problem is not Islam, per se. It's not like Jews and Christians go about stoning prostitutes, though there are things in the Bible that might point in that direction. What makes the difference is peoples who adopt a more nuanced interpretation of the holy books.

Maybe. But Jews and Christians don't have the religious imperative known as "jihad," or a teaching of how it should be used to stop the "fitna" that supposedly arises from dar al Islam's subservience to or even competition with dar al Harb.

readering said...

Weak variations....

William said...

The Manchester bombing was a supremely hateful act, but we are cautioned against hating Muslims for it. Trump has tweeted some disagreeable observations. We are urged to hate Trump and his supporters just as much as is humanly possible for such tweets.

walter said...

Arianna better be careful indeed..she's treading dangerously close to offending the Left's PC culture ready to lynch her for body-shaming.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

What o like best about rendering is the way he (it?) and Toothless and Inga have dropped even the slightest pretense of caring about ordinary people. As Peggy Noonan once pointed out, we are patronized by our inferiors. And we told them to eff off, and they are butt hurt.

So Mike are you saying that you're inferior or ordinary? Or both?

Rabel said...

"What's hiding behind that weasely "embarrassing"?"

May is limited as to what she can say by Britain's Public Order Act. If she uttered many of the comments seen in this thread she would be subject to arrest.

So we get bromides.

FullMoon said...

The Toothless Revolutionary calmly espouses..


......Republicans never get anything done. They're all about the most ridiculous and ignorant hyperbole anyone's heard.

Republicans will defend anything if it has enough money behind it

the worst proliferators of terrorist ideology and terrorist culture of all: The Saudi Arabians.

...because everyone knows that the Saudis need us to help prevent other nations (like Iran) breaking into their terrorism and tyranny monopoly in the region.



Meanwhile, the sun is shining here, no record temps anywhere killing humans or animals. Polar bear population increasing, Al Gore on talk shows impressing morons. Life is good.

Mr Wibble said...

Maybe the embarrassing conversation could start with, "So why are we disarmed and prevented from defending ourselves if you won't or can't do it?"

Big Mike said...

@Toothless, I'm a mathematician, so I am not only smarter than you are , I'm smarter than you can even comprehend. Now go scurry off into a corner and be all butt hurt, you worthless son of a five dollar whore.

Rene Saunce said...

@ Quaestor

It's time for the English to ban Islam. The Muslims can either conform or get out. Or less drastic, armed police should be stationed in every mosque with powers to arrest any preacher who incites or advocates violence in any way, or expresses any sympathy with terrorism, or any makes any condemnation of Jews, Israel, Christians, "Crusaders", Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, other Muslims, or atheists.

Agreed. Sadly, the PC fascist death cult adoring left will never let it happen.

Big Mike said...

Interesting factoid courtesy of Piers Morgan. Back when she was Home Secretary Theresa MY cut the country's police force by 20,000 officers. And she's up for reelection in just four days.

John said...

Slightly off topic but I feel relevant.

2-part question:
1)What is the motivation of "immigrants" to move themselves and/or their entire family to a new country?
2) What should the motivation be?

readering said...

One solution: return of national service.

readering said...

I live with immigrants from PRC. Motivation: religious and political liberty.

n.n said...

John:

On a related note...

What is the motivation of people to promote immigration reform, especially in large numbers, while ignoring, denying, or preventing emigration reform?

readering said...

Interesting to recall early reports from last night: 3 separate attacks, including Vauxhall. 5 attackers from van. Turns out to be one attack, 3 attackers.

John said...

readering said...
I live with immigrants from PRC. Motivation: religious and political liberty.


Strong motivations. Fewer countries available to find those freedoms, unfortunately. I hope they embrace their new found freedoms and fully embrace all the US has to offer.

readering said...

What would emigration reform look like?

n.n said...

re: immigration reform

This is a particular problem for people, groups, and parties that have irreconcilable conflicts of interest.

John said...

n.n said...
John:

On a related note...

What is the motivation of people to promote immigration reform, especially in large numbers, while ignoring, denying, or preventing emigration reform?


I'm sorry. I haven't found myself or anyone I'm aware of having difficulty emigrating from the US. Is this an issue?

n.n said...

For one, end elective wars and elective regime changes, and take responsibility when causing catastrophic anthropogenic climate change that is a first-order forcing of immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises) without sufficient support to maintain a stable environment.

Angel-Dyne said...

John:

Slightly off topic but I feel relevant.

2-part question:
1)What is the motivation of "immigrants" to move themselves and/or their entire family to a new country?
2) What should the motivation be?


1) Primarily for material improvement in their lives. Secondarily to get away from other unpleasant conditions in their country aside from relative poverty. Nought wrong with either of those motivations, but:

2) Like Part 1, Part 2 of this question should be subsequent, and entirely subordinate, to the essential question: do the people whose country the immigrants want to migrate to want them there?

(And by "people", I don't mean "that minority of the population who want the migrants there for whatever reason, regardless of the preferences of most of the population, who don't want them there for whatever reason".)

Seeing Red said...

Global warming? Bwaaaaa

The climate has never been stable.

It's like the dust bowl never happened. Face palm.

Or the Thames never froze over.

Char Char Binks said...

She means we should openly say what we think, so the government can literally bar those who say the wrong things about anyone from a protected class.

John said...

n.n said...
For one, end elective wars and elective regime changes, and take responsibility when causing catastrophic anthropogenic climate change that is a first-order forcing of immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises) without sufficient support to maintain a stable environment.


1- not sure what 'elective wars and regime changes' have to do with immigration. Perhaps refugees - but that's an entirely different topic.

2- doesn't 'climate change' impact the the globe? Can you really emigrate away from climate change?

Char Char Binks said...

And maybe put them behind bars.

John said...

Blogger Angel-Dyne said...

1) Primarily for material improvement in their lives. Secondarily to get away from other unpleasant conditions in their country aside from relative poverty. Nought wrong with either of those motivations, but:
Agreed, as long as that improvement is through opportunity unavailable in their current country - not for "free stuff".

2) Like Part 1, Part 2 of this question should be subsequent, and entirely subordinate, to the essential question: do the people whose country the immigrants want to migrate to want them there?

Not sure I personally care if the country they're leaving wants them to go or not - unless the country is clearing their prisons.

John said...

Seeing Red said...
Global warming? Bwaaaaa

The climate has never been stable.

It's like the dust bowl never happened. Face palm.

Or the Thames never froze over.


History's a bitch, ain't it. Especially when you realize [takles longer with some] it didn't begin and end with your own, personal life.

Alex said...

Given Londonistan is so utterly cucked at this point, how many terrorist attacks/day will it take to un-cuck them or is it impossible? Are we witnessing the destruction of Britain?

Hyphenated American said...

""For Americans: what good is extreme vetting when "native-born" Muslims become terrorists?"

Logically, this is an argument that USA and EU are everwhelmed with the exuding Moslem population and have no idea how to assimilate it. And we should not allow any new Moslem immigration. Agreed?

mockturtle said...

TR rants: Americans eat horribly and have outrageously high obesity and obesity-complication rates. Nowhere else in the world do they have half ton lardasses that require cranes to be moved out of their houses. Only America. Most people are sane enough to think that there's nothing wrong with encouraging our kids to eat better and improving access to healthy foods in destitute places where they've been swamped out by processed garbage. But that's because normal, sane Americans aren't whores to the cheap, artificial processed factory-foods industry, the way apparently a number of Republicans are.

I have always eaten healthily as have my children because we chose to. I never eat donuts or pastry of any kind nor have I ever been obese. But it's not because some puerile pop star has shamed me out of it. For all I know, she is slim because she pukes up half her meals. Why should these entertainers think they are the purveyors of moral truths? Look at all the rock stars who have died of substance abuse and yet 'rock stars' go about lecturing the public on global warming, 'racism' and other imagined sins. Give me a break.

Angel-Dyne said...

John:

Not sure I personally care if the country they're leaving wants them to go or not - unless the country is clearing their prisons.

?

Not sure what this is a response to. I didn't say anything about what their country of origin wanted or didn't want.

The Cracker Emcee said...


"Sadly, the PC fascist death cult adoring left will never let it happen."

Which puts them in a rather awkward place. They can't cop to a problem that has the potential to destroy them.

Alex said...

Americans eat horribly and have outrageously high obesity and obesity-complication rates. Nowhere else in the world do they have half ton lardasses that require cranes to be moved out of their houses. Only America.

Mexico and Samoa have higher obesity rates. Saudi Arabia is right up there as well.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

@Toothless, I'm a mathematician, so I am not only smarter than you are , I'm smarter than you can even comprehend.

No, you're just more boring, hated and socially outcast. But that's not ALL you have in common with Ted Kaczynski!

Now go scurry off into a corner and be all butt hurt, you worthless son of a five dollar whore.

Jesus! Listen to the mouth on you. Is that what your wife said to you when she left your sorry ass?

I'm sure you mind busily calculated the value proposition of the five dollars upon hearing it, while you took decades to wonder if it would come in as as handy an insult against the non-mindblinded someday.

Drago said...

Alex: "Mexico and Samoa have higher obesity rates. Saudi Arabia is right up there as well"

Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea have already solved the obesity "crisis".

Drago said...

TTR: "Americans eat horribly and have outrageously high obesity and obesity-complication rates. Nowhere else in the world do they have half ton lardasses that require cranes to be moved out of their houses."

We shall be judged by the opposite of the "least of us".

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I have always eaten healthily as have my children because we chose to. I never eat donuts or pastry of any kind nor have I ever been obese. But it's not because some puerile pop star has shamed me out of it. For all I know, she is slim because she pukes up half her meals. Why should these entertainers think they are the purveyors of moral truths? Look at all the rock stars who have died of substance abuse and yet 'rock stars' go about lecturing the public on global warming, 'racism' and other imagined sins. Give me a break.

What kind of a break? One that magically transports you to live in a world where you:

1. Don't resent people more popular, successful and beloved than you?
2. Pretend that factory food manufacturers don't collude with Republican cowards to inundate the poorest neighborhoods with the worst foodstuffs?
3. Pretend that drug epidemics aren't an even much bigger problem in red states and the other socially/culturally impoverished areas that make up proud, politically conservative America?
4. Pretend that natural environments are immune to human impact?

That would be quite a break, indeed!

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The massive amounts of Antarctica and the North that are breaking off into the ocean really must be part of that awesome stability.

Inga said...

In the meantime our idiot President keeps tweeting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/us/politics/britain-attack-trump-twitter-storm.html

WASHINGTON — President Trump and his team renewed a trans-Atlantic feud with the mayor of London on Sunday, portraying him as soft on terrorism a day after seven people were killed and dozens more wounded in the latest attack in the British capital.

Mr. Trump assailed Mayor Sadiq Khan by mischaracterizing his comments following the attack. After condemning the “cowardly terrorists,” Mr. Khan told Londoners not “to be alarmed” by seeing more police officers on the streets. Mr. Trump presented it as if Mr. Khan had meant they should not be alarmed by terrorism. The mayor’s office fired back, calling Mr. Trump “ill informed.”

“At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is ‘no reason to be alarmed!’” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter."

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 277   Newer› Newest»