Friday, 3 April 2026
The Left’s hysterical opposition to the War | Victor Davis Hanson
Yes it’s true. Hatred of Trump trumps love of country. Trumps patriotism. Trumps the hope of destroying a clear and present threat from religious fanatics.
I find it disturbing and disgusting. I remember how political differences used to be about tax rates and health policy. It used to be about policy and policy differences. Which were debated in the halls of Congress. Now it’s about hating Trump. It’s paid protesters on the streets. It’s regular violence. It’s open calls for the murder of Donald Trump. Which I thought was a felony.
Victor Davis Hanson, calm professorial historian, ponders the questions. He talks of the hypocrisyod the Left over this war. If it were prosecuted by Obama, the media and the Left would be swooning and cheering it on. As they did with his bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
There is no doubt in my mind, in my following of politics in America, that big chunks of Democrats have become openly, even proudly, violent and anarchical. During the “mostly peaceful” No Kings protests last Saturday, I saw sprayed onto the walls of a Federal Building: “Kill your local ICE agent”, followed by the the Anarchist sign. Nothing was done. Nothing.
They hid this about Israel | Daniel Greenfield
Iran has been at war with the United States for near,y fifty years. It’s just that the United States didn’t deign to recognise it. Save for words, from president after president. “We must deal with Iran and all options are on the table”. Except they weren’t. Just talks, sanctions and deals that were immediately broken by the Mullahs.
Until Trump. Who really did have all options in the table. Which makes me realise the reason for calling the operation “Epic Fury”. You tweak the tail of the lion often enough, he turns on you with fury. Epic Fury. Because it’s taken so long to build.
Daniel Greenfield is correct approximately 100% of the time! According to my understanding in 20 years now of studying Islam, its theology, its ideology, its caliphate ambitions: he’s spot on.
I used to follow the late David Horowitz, Daniel’s predecessor and founder of the Centre Daniel now runs. Horowitz used to be a Marxist. Who changed when he understood the damage Marxism had done tomfgw world. I always identified with that, as I’d also had an eye opening time when I went to live in Cultural Revolutionary China in the 70s and saw what extreme leftism, Marxism, Maoism had done to China.
Daniel covers a lot in this talk. The current war, Hamas, the a Muslim Brotherhood, Islamophobia, and more:
- Why the media narrative around “genocide” is being pushed
- The real reason the Israel–Palestine conflict isn’t about land
- How universities became hostile to Israel and the West
- Qatar’s influence in American institutions
- Why the UN targets Israel more than any other country
- The growing divide inside the conservative movement
- And what may be driving major voices like Tucker Carlson
Time stamps at the show notes.
Mural Wars
This is crazy. And sad. And disturbing.
And also not all what you’d think?
Also: how does the mural of a beautiful young woman NOT “reflect your values”?
Vince Dao explains.
Thursday, 2 April 2026
Islamisation of Britain: Complete
Andrew Gold talks to Dave Rubin in Hungary. I've followed Andrew for many years. He's sound; a good analyst.
When I started this blog, 17 years ago, I did a spreadsheet predicting the Islamisation of various countries of Europe. I thought the Scandinavian countries would be first, then Germany and France, then the U.K. And my guess was around the 2050s and 60s.
It's happening now, much quicker than I thought. Much quicker than anyone thought. It's happening right in front of our eyes. There's even talk of civil war.
When Andrew says "I don't know why people didn't see what happened in the Middle East" he's referring to is the Islamic conquests of all those countries.
The Middle East is a lesson. No one learned it.
Except that now a civil war may be imminent in Britain then Europe. Could it be? Or will it just be the crapification of Europe, as happened in all the Islamified countries of the Middle East? Not a one of which was made better by their submission to Allah.
Those Islamic conquests across the Middle East are being replicated in Europe and the U.K.. When the Islamisation is complete, it's the whole Sharia law bit*. Women oppressed and in burkas, minorities oppressed, gays arrested or executed, churches and synagogues closed down, Jews and Christians, and even atheists, like me, driven out.
Grim. Authoritarian. Theocratic. Anti-science. Anti-modernity. Anti-fun.
ADDED: We here in Hong Kong are just fine on that front. We're not about to be Islamified. Our government won't put up with any nonsense on that front, giving in to Muslim demands to "respect Ramadan", or to "ban dogs". No way. And that's a comfort to me in my dotage. To know that we're safe from the ravages of rampant Islam.
========================
*My handy reference guide. The authoritative "What Sharia says about...", based on the Classic Manual of Islamic Jurisprudence.
Included:
“Can Iran really be stopped?” | Max Afterburner
I’ve followed the Max Afterburner channel for some time. And I’ve posted his analysis before. (By the way, “Max” is not Max as in the Mad Max, but Max as in short for “Maximum”. The “Afterburner” being the fighter jet’s booster).
Max Afterburner is Ryan Bodenheimer*, who sets out (0:55) his extensive experience in the U.S. Air Force, and in war, war planning and instruction. It’s extensive.
This is a man clearly proud of his country and its military, but also has a clear-headed view of the difficulties of war. In particular the difficulties of completely suppressing Iran’s IRGC. Which he sees as defaulting to terrorist mode, given its military is essentially destroyed.
The threat from Iran is and was real and explicit. You don’t have to wait, like a tethered goat, for the lion to eat you. You don’t have to wait for the first mushroom cloud to blossom. You don’t have to wait until Iran has so many missiles, so much fortification, so much drone and missile manufacturing capacity, to act. Act is what the U.S. and Israel did. They are supported by 12 Muslim nations! It’s the Europeans (and Australia) who are complicit in appeasement.
I guess this is the first time that Ryan has been on a British YouTube channel, above on Spiked, with Fraser Myers.
Timestamps:
Introduction – US War in Iran & Latest Developments
00:55 Guest Introduction – Ryan Bodenheimer, Fighter Pilot & YouTuber
03:28 Has America Won? Assessing Trump's Victory Claim
06:36 Was It Ever a Fair Fight? Iran's Military vs. the US
07:54 Kharg Island Explained – Iran's Oil Lifeline & Strategic Significance
10:45 Taking Kharg Island – Risks, Options & Special Operations
12:24 How Iran Might Retaliate – Terrorism, IEDs & Proxy Tactics
14:30 State of Iran's Proxies – Houthis, Hezbollah & Militias
16:07 US-Israel Coordination – How the Air Campaign Works
18:19 Trump vs. NATO – Is Europe Doing Enough?
21:49 European Sentiment Explained – Energy Bills, Terror Plots & Bafflement
23:12 Energy & the War – Costs for the US and Europe
25:15 China's Role – Air Defences, Rare Earth Minerals & Strategic Interests
27:44 China, Taiwan & the Bigger Picture – Why Taiwan Could Benefit
30:25 The First AI War – Drones, Surveillance & Undersea Technology
33:22 Why the B-52? Economy of Force in Modern Warfare
36:27 What People Misunderstand Most About This War
39:29 Closing Remarks
===============
*Ryan Bodenheimer is a former U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle fighter pilot with 12 years of service, including two operational assignments and 70 combat missions in Afghanistan providing close air support to Tier 1 special operations forces. He was selected for the U.S. Air Force Thunderbirds demonstration team, where he flew for two years and performed in 150 air shows before serving as an instructor.
In his squadron's plans department (PLANS), he prepared for potential conflicts involving the Taiwan Straits, Iran, and North Korea. After Afghanistan, he was chief of the PLANS department, teaching on operations against Iran, including degrading its ballistic missiles, drones, and nuclear capabilities.
After leaving the Air Force he was a commercial airline pilot for five years and later started his YouTube channel, Max Afterburner.
Why (and how) does Taiwan make 100% of the world's most advanced chips?
I found this super interesting. As someone living in the region, Hong Kong, right by China Mainland and Taiwan. By “beating” Taiwan, they’re talking of the high-end Chip manufacturing.
Everything you value -- especially your iPhone! -- relies on chips from the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.
I didn't know how important to the manufacture of consistently high-quality high-tech Chips is the fact that Taiwan is sitting on an Earthquake zone. And has huge storms.
And grows "Dongshi" oysters...Phil Andrews explains.
Wednesday, 1 April 2026
Dear Donald: you can't do that! You can't even say it FFS…
... bombing desalination plants? No, no, no. You CANNOT do that. It's like poisoning the wells.
I get the maximalist thing. I get the wanting the scare the s*it out of your enemies thing. I get the keeping if IRGC leaders off balance.
But, but... this is too much. Really. It gets even your supporters wondering about mental capacities. Knock it off. Please.
Like I'll have any effect... heh. Even his closest advisers, like the very sound and logical Foreign Secretary Marco Rubio, have no effect. I just hope he realises it’s counter productive.
Jay does Tesla. The Semi
Jay Leno is a huge car guy. He owns 180 cars kept in “Jay’s Big Dog Garage”, in Burbank CA, worth some $US 100 million. He’s loves all types of car, from steam engines, to turbines and EVs.
He’s hugely knowledgeable about them.
This Tesla Semi can go 800 km on one charge. And recharge in half an hour. It’s more aerodynamic than a Bugatti Veyron. It cost about 20% less to run than the equivalent diesel truck. It doesn’t slow down when it goes up hills, a big safety feature. Safety is built in to the whole concept, as the two Tesla guys explain.
Trucks are 1% of U.S. traffic, but consume 18% of all diesel. So Tesla trucks are going to reduce that dramatically.
Inside it’s a cool truck. Seat in the middle. Office chair for a travelling office.
Production starts this year. As do Cybercabs. So, a big year for Tesla.
These guys are some of what makes me optimistic about America. While the shenanigans go on in Washington, people are out there doing stuff, inventing stuff, improving stuff, making stuff. Making stuff to make the world better. America’s inventive can-do spirit is exemplified by these guys.
ADDED: Meantime ning nongs in Australia torched a Tesla showroom. These are the retards that thought Elon Musk was a climate hero. Until he used his brain to leave the tribe.
TESLA FSD: Chinese influencer is impressed
Chinese influencer Li Chi flew from China to California for the sole purpose of experiencing Tesla FSD — Full Self Driving— firsthand. Here are his impressions:
“Flew 25,000 km — half the globe — just to personally experience Tesla’s smart driving and compare it with Huawei’s smart driving. “I’ll skip the detailed process and go straight to the conclusion: “Under normal weather and road conditions, Tesla’s vision-based routing is first-class. (I didn’t get a chance to test in foggy conditions). In certain scenarios, Tesla outperforms Huawei. For example, when activating smart driving, Tesla can reverse to avoid a vehicle parked on the left, then go around it and rejoin the road ahead — quite impressive. “Route selection capability is also top-tier. It doesn’t just follow conventional routes but can take shortcuts through residential roads. Acceleration is crisp and decisive, without hesitation… “In short, Tesla FSD is improving very quickly. Physically removing the steering wheel would already present no real obstacles. “ I hope China will soon allow Tesla FSD to operate domestically, enabling earlier adoption of L3 and encouraging competition with local manufacturers.”h/t: @Ray4Tesla
Me: I believe Tesla FSD will soon be allowed here in Hong Kong.
How to end the war? Win it
You don’t win a war by leaving the battle ground. You can claim victory all you want, but the other side is going to say “we outlasted you”. Neither do you win a war by a ceasefire. At best that gives a “frozen conflict” like Korea. But “victory”? That’s when the other side gives up. That’s when you achieve your clearly-stated war goals.
The goals of Operation Epic Fury are clear. No matter how much CNN, BBC, MSNBC and all the rest may repeat “the war aims are not clear”; they are. The president and Foreign Secretary Marco Rubio have stated them repeatedly and clearly. Here they are, from my memory:
1. Destroy the Iranian Army. Tick.
2. Destroy the Iranian Navy. Tick
3. Destroy or decimate the Iranian ballistic missiles system. In progress
4. Destroy the military manufacturing systems, such that 1, 2, and 3 cannot be rebuilt. In progress
The projected result of these four aims >> an Iran that can no longer threaten the region and the world. An Iran that cannot build a nuclear bomb. The Iranian people an opportunity to rise up and build their own government.
ADDED: Marco Rubio sets them out, again, clearly, to George Stephanopoulos of abc's Good Morning America.
These are clear aims. I buy them. So do the vast majority of Republicans and a majority of all Americans.
 |
| Republicans on Iran war and Trump |
I’m speaking here as one who remembers clearly the 2003 invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. In this household we were against both those wars. As Richard Clark, counter-terror czar, said at the time:
“Attacking Iraq after 911 was like attacking Mexico after Pearl Harbour”.
That sure stuck in the mind…
“This time it’s different”. Well, yes, it is. For a start the clearly-expressed aims are convincing. We were never convinced by the WMD excuse for attacking Iraq. We were not convinced by Colin Powell’s pivotal presentation to the United Nations. We were never convinced that “getting” Osama bin Ladin needed a full-scale war in Afghanistan.
Iran, by contrast does have uranium to 60%; it does threaten the region and the world with death and destruction; it has killed thousands of Americans and people of all nations, and hundreds of thousands of its own people; it does support terror proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis; it does have a ballistic missile program aimed at Europe and the United States. It does threaten the world with nuclear annihilation. Even as that would annihilate Iran itself. Its religious lunatics are apocalyptic millenarians, ecstatically happy to be incinerated in a theocratic mushroom cloud.
Let’s also recall that in Iraq we did not lose the war. The war was quickly and convincingly won. We lost the peace. The whole process of “nation building” was ineptly handled; it should never have been attempted. There is no such aim in Operation Epic Fury in Iran.
That’s called “learning from experience”.
Emily Scheader makes my points better than me, in this video, Grok transcript summary below:
Islam really DOES "hate our freedoms"
This was Question number one in the 3.5 hour (!) discussion between Coleman Hughes and Dave Smith some 5 months ago.
Coleman agrees with Dave's opening claim that there's no truth to the idea that Osama bin Ladin and Al Qaeda attacked America on 911 because "They hate our freedoms".
While I'm shaking my head: but it is true!
And I have the proof. The writings of Osama bin Ladin himself.
Look at this quote from bin Ladin:
“For practically everything valued by the immoral West is condemned under Sharia law.”
Isn't that the very definition of hating the "immoral West" for its freedoms?
Bin Ladin's writings were collected and translated by Raymond Ibrahim in his book "The Al Qaeda Reader" (2002). Which I consider -- after my 20 years of reading and following the deeds and depredations of Islam -- to be a must-read for anyone trying to understand motives of the likes of ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Jihadis in general and, yes, even the Iranian mullahs today.
One of the few who does understand, who's not a Muslim, is Sam Harris. He has written well and trenchantly on the subject. EG: "What do Jihadists really want?", 26 August 2016. And the related post on ISIS.
Meanwhile, Dave Smith's belief that Jihadi Muslims are out to attack the west because of (or mainly because of) what he calls "terrestrial grievances", like the Israel-Palestine issue, colours every bit of his analyses, and ruins many of them.
One way this belief ruins his analysis is that it's western-centric. The idea that if we we fix this or that, then all will be well. No. It's not true.
We can do all the Jihadis demand, attend to all their grievances, and they will still want to kill us (unless we convert). Because that's Islam. That's what Islam demands. That's what the Koran demands. That's what Muhammad o.b.o. his god, demands.
I'm reposting below a piece I wrote here on 25 August 2009. It seems that I was responding a BBC World Service radio program of that day. I talk a lot about Ibrahim and the writings of bin Ladin.
I remember thinking that even if the BBC did nothing about my suggestion, I might educate some of its staffers in the editorial rooms. In this I have clearly had zero impact, for they are more Islamo-philic than ever.
Yet, as I re-read what I wrote 17 years ago, it's just as true today as it was then. It's been true since the birth of Islam 1,400 years ago: Submit or Die, infidel!
The post, 25 August 2009:
If we give away Israel, all will be ok.... (not)
Michael Scheuer claims on BBC Radio International (675 AM Hong Kong) that there is no "corpus of rhetoric" to show that Osama bin Laden “hates the West’s liberty, freedom or our way of life”. If we address Islamic grievances (Palestine, Iraq war, abandon Israel, and so forth) we shall be able to coexist in peace.
In this he is demonstrably wrong. Worse: he is willfully –and therefore deceitfully – wrong for he knows that such writings exist.
Demonstrably wrong:
On freedom, liberty and the West’s way of life:
“For practically everything valued by the immoral West is condemned under Sharia law.” (p.37)
On coexistence:
“Does Islam or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam; either willing submission; or payment of the jizya [tax on non-Muslims]…; or the sword – for it is not right to let the infidel live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam; or die”. (p.42)
In case we miss the point:
“In fact, Muslims are obligated to raid the lands of the infidels, occupy them and exchange their systems of governance for an Islamic system, barring any practice that contradicts the Sharia from being publicly voiced among the people…”. (p.51)
These are clear and unequivocal statements by al-Qaeda, and there are many, many more, authorized or written by bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahiri. Why does Mr. Scheuer say they “don’t exist”??
Willfully wrong: it would be one thing if Scheuer were ignorant of bin Laden’s writings. But he is not, as evidenced by the debate, in late 2008, with Raymond Ibrahim here. Scheuer says Ibrahim has been “selective”. Well, of course one has to be selective in any “Reader”…. But, as Ibrahim points out, the Reader quotes writings and speeches from al-Qaeda which are directed both at the Muslim world and those directed at the West. In any case, whatever the selectivity, to say that there is no evidence of al-Qaeda hating the West’s freedoms (“hating our MacDonalds” as Scheuer cutely puts it), is clearly false and it is equally clear that Scheuer knows of these writings.
This is too important a topic to leave the last word to Scheuer and his deceit. As Scheuer himself says, it’s a matter of “knowing one’s enemy”. Are al-Qaeda after settling grievances (Palestine, the Iraq and Afghani wars, etc), or are they after world domination of Islamic Sharia? Clearly the former does not preclude the latter. And clearly the latter – suzerainty of Islamic Sharia – is of overarching importance to al-Qaeda and their fellow travellers. To say that it’s only the former (Islamic grievances), as does Scheuer and to ignore the latter (Islamic suzerainty) is surely propagating a dangerous misconception.
I urge the BBC to invite Raymond Ibrahim to put the case that the world view of bin Laden and his cronies includes world-wide Islamic caliphate, under Sharia law.
1. The Al Qaeda Reader, Raymond Ibrahim, Doubleday, NY, 2007, p.22 et. seq.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)