On the tenth anniversary of jihad massacres in Paris 1

The jihad massacres in Paris ten years ago were lessons – but who learned the message?

Bruce Bawer writes at Front Page:

Today [November 13, 2025] marks the tenth anniversary of a coordinated series of terrorist attacks committed by nine ISIS operatives who, beginning shortly after nine o’clock in the evening, took a total of 137 lives and wounded 416 people in Paris and the nearby suburb of Saint–Denis.

The scheme was ambitious. One group of three gunmen, moving quickly through a neighborhood of restaurants and cafés, mowed down thirteen people on the streets of the tenth arrondissement and inside a Cambodian eatery called La Petit Cambodge, then took five lives on the rue de la Fontaine-au-Roi in the eleventh arrondissement before murdering twenty-one people outside La Belle Équipe, a bar on the rue de Charonne. One of the three gunman, wearing a suicide vest, was then driven to the Comptoir Voltaire café on the boulevard Voltaire, where he sat down, placed an order, and then exploded his vest, injuring fifteen people.

At around the same time, in Saint-Denis, three suicide bombers arrived at the Stade de France, a sports stadium where President Hollande was attending a soccer match between France and Germany. The men intended to gain access to the stadium, but the first of them to try was stopped at security. All three ended up setting off their suicide vests outside the stadium, taking only one life aside from their own.

The third group of three terrorists were more successful. Outside the Bataclan theater on the boulevard Voltaire, they dispatched three people with their Kaloshnikovs before entering the theater, where an American band called Eagles of Death Metal was performing before an audience of approximately 1500. The ISIS members then proceeded to commit a massacre that lasted for two and a half hours. From the Guardian:

…different witnesses described the clear ripple effect of the crowd – “like a gust of wind through wheat” – as people were mown down by gunfire and rows of people dropped to the ground….Witnesses described how their faces were splattered in blood as people beside them were shot in the head and fell. The shooting continued for 10 minutes before the men reloaded and began shooting again, aiming at the head and thorax with professionalism. “It was carnage,” said Marc Coupris, 57, a legal worker. “It looked like a battlefield. There was blood everywhere, there were bodies everywhere.”…

The firing was relentless and indiscriminate….The gunmen fired up into the balconies and dead bodies fell over and down on to the stalls below.….There was lots of screaming, lots of panic, lots of blood. People threw themselves to the ground but then they then just started firing at random at the people on the ground….

And that was just the beginning. The gunmen laughed as they shot people in the back. They kicked bodies lying on the floor to make sure they were dead. One of the men stood by an emergency exit and picked off victims as they ran towards it. After one gunman exploded his suicide vest, the other two took about a hundred hostages, some of whom they employed as human shields after the police finally arrived; when one of these gunmen, too, detonated his vest, it instantly killed both him and the third gunman. The total number of people murdered at the Bataclan that evening was ninety.

At all of the sites of terrorism that evening, needless to say, there were shouts of “Allahu akbar!”

Fast forward to last Sunday night in Norway. Twenty-two minutes into the evening news at seven o’clock, state-owned NRK-TV – sandwiched between typically mendacious stories about how the Republicans are responsible for the government shutdown in the U.S. and about the incomparable suffering of the innocent inhabitants of Gaza — began a segment commemorating the tenth anniversary of that evening in Paris and environs. I was surprised to see the government channel, which is always at pains to whitewash Islam, even bringing up the memory of Bataclan. But it was soon clear why NRK was doing so.

The segment focused on two survivors of the massacre at Bataclan. One of them, a young man named Thomas, was shot in the hand. Every November 13 he gets together with other survivors of Bataclan. Being a survivor of the atrocity, he says, makes him feel as if he lives in a parallel world. But he doesn’t blame Islam. “Yes, it was carried out by Islamic terrorists,” he says. “But there are extremists who are Catholics and Jesuits. In almost all groups there are some who are more extreme than others.”

Yes, let’s not forget the obscene amount of death and destruction that has been wrought in Europe by Jesuit terrorists.

An intentionally ironical line. But seriously, please let us always remember that the Catholic Church’s Inquisitions, Papal and Spanish, sent untold thousands to the lay governments to be burned to death. That too was terrorism. The Enlightenment saved us from that fate.

The other Bataclan survivor was a woman named Gaëlle Messager. Shot in the head and arm, she lost a huge chunk of the left side of her face, including much of her jaw. Surgeons have since reconstructed her face using tissue from her leg. She has undergone no fewer than fifty-six operations and is scheduled to have several more. In fact she will have to keep getting surgery for the rest of her life.

But what does she do when she’s not under the knife? She visits a jihadist in prison.

Yes, that’s right. She talks regularly to a jihadist. She does it partly “as therapy for herself” and partly “to understand how a Muslim extremist thinks”. To be sure, the man whom she visits was not one of the perpetrators of the Bataclan massacre – they’re not available for conversation these days, having blown themselves to bits – but is indeed a believing Muslim and convicted terrorist who is convinced that “a holy war in France is necessary”.

The NRK segment didn’t tell us exactly what the man did to land in prison. But Gaëlle tells us that when she first explained to him why her face looks the way it does, “he was touched”.  She had expected, she says, “to meet someone who was totally inhuman. But the meeting had a strong impact on both him and me….He has children and a wife, he has a family.” And she experienced a revelation: “I realized that a jihadist is like everybody else.”

It’s been ten years since Bataclan. And neither of these victims has learned a thing. But why single them out? On November 4, twenty-four years after 9/11, the voters of New York City elected a Muslim mayor who, only days earlier, had praised a terrorist sympathizer as “one of the nation’s foremost Muslim leaders.” In the same way, the London bombings of July 7, 2005, didn’t keep Londoners from electing Sadiq Khan – sorry, Sir Sadiq Khan – and the Westminster Bridge and London Bridge attacks in 2017 didn’t keep him from being re-elected. Twice.

To my mind, it all goes back to George W. Bush. After 9/11, he made a point of defending Islam. He called it a religion of peace. Playing theologian, he said that the Al-Qaeda members who had taken down the World Trade Center had misinterpreted their religion. Everything that has happened since then has flowed from that colossal act of failed leadership by a president who thought he could turn Afghanistan and Iraq into Jeffersonian democracies – but who seemed incognizant of the existential danger that mass Muslim immigration into America represented to our democracy.

If only 9/11 had been the prelude to a comprehensive effort to educate Americans about the reality of Islam, the history of the West during the last quarter century might have been very different. Instead, millions of people in the West have been trained to think of Muslims not as villains but as victims, and to close their minds to any evidence to the contrary. A generation of young Americans and Europeans, born after the Twin Towers fell, have spent their lives being fed messages like the one that Good Morning, Britain host Adil Ray – sorry, Adil Ray, OBE – posted on November 5: “Some say Mamdani may implement Sharia Law. He might. The heart of Sharia is social justice, welfare, fairness, charity and cohesion.”

Sure, Sharia is a charity. Let’s add: stoning women to death for the sin of having been raped, and shooting infidels to death or blowing them up for not being Muslims.

Yes, some Westerners, young and old, have seen the truth about Islam. But many if not most have been cowed into silence, aware that nothing can destroy their lives more quickly than gaining a reputation as that worst of all things, an Islamophobe. A few heroic politicians like Geert Wilders – who tell the truth and promise to act on it – enjoy considerable voter support, but not enough to give them the power to save their countries from disaster. In any case, those heroes are constantly up against the insidious power of legacy media like NRK – and the BBC, CBC, CNN, the U.S. broadcast networks, and so on – which strive every day to paint Islam as virtuous and its critics as bigots. It’s thanks to those media that the West, after innumerable acts of jihad that have taken an appalling number of innocent lives – and that should have awakened everybody a long time ago – has now reached a point at which a victim of Islamic terrorism can say with a straight face that “a jihadist is like everybody else.” Should we laugh or cry? Should we keep shouting the truth into what can seem like an unanswering void, or shut up and try to enjoy what time we have left before the agents of Allah take power?

Posted under Islam, Terrorism by Jillian Becker on Thursday, November 13, 2025

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

The wages of terrorism 1

Europe’s ruling elites profit greatly from terrorism. Jews have to be sacrificed, but that’s never been a bad thing to the European elites.

The idea of a European Union Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to clean up the waste and fraud that goes on with EU taxpayer money is slowly spreading in Europe, but more than overdue. Most Europeans are completely unaware of the madness of EU spending on useless, batty projects, including NGOs that have turned out to be a way for many of the EU’s “elites” to receive nice kickbacks. …

So Robert Williams writes (in part) at Gatestone.

The European Commission …

Buddy-picked, not elected –

… has funded the celebration of post-nationalism, the promotion of transgenderism, “diversity and inclusion” and every other woke plan under the sun. That is just the NGOs.

The European Commission also funds an unknown number of other projects.

Perhaps the most notable among them, given the enormous amounts of money diverted to it, is the funding of the terrorist entities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The EU routinely boasts of being the largest provider of foreign aid to the Palestinians, although it is highly unclear how this, in any way, is in the interest of Europe’s taxpayers.

It isn’t.

In December 2023, just months after the October 7 massacre by Hamas of 1,200 innocent people in Israel, the EU boasted:

The European Union is the biggest provider of external assistance to the Palestinians which amounts to indicatively almost €1.2 billion for 2021-2024 under the European Joint Strategy, of which €809.4 million have already been adopted.

The European Union and its antecedent organizations (the EEC and EC) — have been funding the Palestinians since the 1970s at an ever-increasing rate. Since 2008, the funding has been at around 1.2 billion euros per year.

A bit of a muddle there. Well, whatever the sum, per year or per four years, the official EU mouths say they only fund “humanitarian” needs.  But –

Much of this money has been funneled through UNRWA, the UN “refugee” organization for Palestinians that has become associated with Hamas. 

“Associated with”? Hmm. More accurately, indistinguishable from Hamas. The UN and all its agencies – not all its members, but most of them – are corrupt. Filthy and rotten.

UNRWA fights along with, or as part of, Hamas. And teaches the Gazan children to hate Jews. All Jews.

So, almost all West European leaders support destructive policies because they are enriched by them. “Aprés moi le dèluge.”

There is a growing opposition to them, but –

In April, a group of Members of the European Parliament, known as Patriots for Europe, inspired by the US, actually proposed a DOGE for Europe. The initiative, however, known as TRAC (Transparency, Responsibility, and Anti-Corruption), is facing staunch opposition from the mainstream parties in the European Parliament. 

What a surprise!

The UN must be destroyed. 

Posted under corruption, Europe, Palestinians, Terrorism, United Nations by Jillian Becker on Friday, September 5, 2025

Tagged with , , , , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

Little Man and Fat Boy 1

It happened 80 years ago – the nuking of two Japanese cities by America: “Little Man” dropped on Hiroshima, August 6, 1945, and “Fat Boy” on Nagasaki, August 9, 1945. The vast destruction ended the Second World War.

The war in Europe was over – officially on May 8, 1945. It had taken millions of lives.

Hitler had ordered the genocide of the Jews. So about 6,000,000 Jewish men, women, and children were murdered – most of them gassed to death.

The British and Americans had advanced on Germany from the West, the Russians from the East.

Dresden had been flattened by the Royal Air Force and the U.S. 8th Air Force with conventional bombs.

Hitler had committed suicide in his Berlin bunker. The Germans had surrendered.

The Japanese continued to fight. They were cruel to their prisoners, both civilian and military. Their treatment of military captives was extremely brutal.

When the nuclear bombs had done their worst, Emperor Hirohito read the message: surrender or die. He chose surrender.

.

Here are Victor Davis Hanson’s arguments for the dropping of the bombs:

Disinformation and the Dropping of the Atomic Bombs

Posted under Germany, Japan, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, United States, War by Jillian Becker on Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Tagged with , , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

Islamic enemies of the world thwarted – but not defeated 2

The dark-minded Shia Muslim ayatollahs whose rule oppresses Iran came close to possessing a nuclear arsenal and had to be  stopped. They were hoping to destroy the State of Israel and eventually devastate America. They buried their nuclear productions deep underground where, they believed, no bombs could reach them. But American bombers did put an end to their project with deeply penetrating bunker bombs. The accuracy of the strikes was breathtakingly amazing.

The Israelis who destroyed Iran’s air defenses, killed Iranian officers and scientists, and found out the plans of the Iranian government, deserve all honor and gratitude.

The bombs themselves, the planes that carried them, the people who invented them, those who flew the planes and dropped the bombs perfectly on their targets are all marvelous. Glorious is the leader who ordered the operation: President Donald Trump.

The bombs were dropped on June 22nd. Then, just three days later on June 25th, in the United States itself, a Shia Muslim Communist named Zohran Mamdani won the Democrat Party’s majority vote for the candidacy of New York City’s mayor. All too probably he will be elected mayor.

Michael Barone writes at Townhall that Mamdani is “a three-term state assemblyman who calls himself a democratic socialist. He has backed a rent freeze, city-run grocery stores, free buses, putting homeless service centers in the subways, a $30 minimum wage, defunding the police, and replacing police with ‘community safety’ officers”.

His inhumane political philosophy prefers crime to law, turmoil to order, abortion to birth. He and his voters approve the earliest possible sexualization of the children who make it into the world – and the “transgendering” of as many as can be urged into wanting it. They are  for free transport, free housing, free food, free entertainment, free… well, everything. For “the poor”, that is. All to be funded by heavy taxation of “the rich”.

An uncounted number of  “the rich” voted for Mamdani – presumably knowing his agenda. (But how many of them will remain in New York if he becomes mayor?)

Is the threat of a Shia Muslim Communist mayor of New York harder to abolish than deeply buried instruments of mass destruction?

As President Trump likes to say: “We must wait and see.”

Posted under Capitalism, communism, Crime, Iran, Islam, Israel, Muslims, Technology, United States by Jillian Becker on Sunday, June 29, 2025

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 2 comments.

Permalink

Ending the Iranian tyranny 1

Israel has transformed the Middle East with a brilliant campaign against the Khamenei regime.

Victor Davis Hanson sees this. He writes (we quote his article almost in full):

Iran apparently had not adjusted to its new 2025 status—or maybe it had. Most of its bought terrorists are currently either destroyed or anemic.

There is no more ascendant Iranian “Shia crescent” in the Middle East. Russia is no longer a Middle East power, patron, and protector.

The Assad dynasty imploded, flipping Syria from an Iranian proxy into a likely Iranian enemy. Hezbollah, once supposedly the most fearsome of all the Iranian terrorist tentacles, was humiliated and neutered by a series of surreal Israeli operations.

Hamas has been reduced to a subterranean terrorist remnant.

The Houthis’ tit-for-tat encounters with Israel and the U.S. are systematically turning their Yemeni enclave into an impotent dump. At its present rate, the Houthis will likely soon launch their last rocket at Israel or the Red Sea in a country without fuel, electricity, and ports.

Iran itself, last year in a disastrous air war with Israel, lost its air defenses and is now more or less impotent and defenseless against Israeli air incursions. Its oil income has been slashed by 70-80 percent by the renewed Trump sanctions and ‘maximum pressure’ campaign. Israel can destroy all of its oil industry if it wishes and, apparently, send operatives inside Iran itself as it pleases.

Most of the Arab Sunni world is now losing its accustomed fear of Iran. While the weary pan-Islamic solidarity boilerplate of the Middle East remains the same, privately, most Arab nations rely on the U.S. or even Israel to deter Iran—and predicate their own foreign policy on the degree to which they do just that.

With the end of the Biden administration and Obama a distant memory, Iran lost all hope that it could bluster, bluff, and negotiate itself out of sanctions and embargoes—and into nuclear weapons. There are no more John Kerrys or Antony Blinkens in charge, eager to meet Iranian demands. Ben Rhodes’s “echo chamber” Iran Deal is ancient history.

Israel had done more than all of America’s Middle East wars or all of NATO’s global presence to end Iran’s claims on power and the ability to project its brand of terror and fear throughout the Middle East.

So why did a neutered Iran still sound like the fiery Iran of old, when it once terrorized the Middle East and sent its assassination teams worldwide, with its nearly weekly loud threats to wipe out the one-bomb “Zionist entity”?

What was Iran thinking in refusing to negotiate seriously with the Trump administration to disband its nuclear weapons program and “normalize” its role in the Middle East?

Apparently, given its disastrous last two years, Iran still felt its last-gasp claim both internally and externally on power was on spec to stall and delay by negotiating its way to a dozen nuclear weapons, or, barring that, a deterrent consisting of huge stockpiles of conventional guided missiles.

Such a mini-nuclear arsenal, or fleets of long-range, conventional rockets, would, in Iran’s eyes, still frighten Israel, leverage Europe and the West, and eventually recharge its terrorist legions.

To achieve that unlikely deterrent, the theocracy thought it could draw out Trump’s negotiations endlessly with a series of its trademark feints, falsities, and even threats until it had enriched enough weapons-grade uranium to deter Israel, or created a massive missile force that could overcome the Israeli Iron Dome.

Tehran naively assumed that Trump’s own MAGA base forbade him from starting or even reacting to “forever wars.” Thereby, the Iranians may have believed that Trump’s willingness to deal was a signal that he was restrained domestically or naive enough to put up with their trademark dissimulation. And thus, they wished to believe that Trump would either harness Israel or keep distant from it should Israel preempt to end the Iranian nuclear option.

But Trump had always been clear that Iran could never obtain a nuclear weapon, if deliberately unclear about how that ultimatum would actually be enforced.

Moreover, Iran had always failed to grasp that Trump is not a neo-isolationist but rather a Jacksonian. He certainly does not believe in endless wars or, for that matter, any large, preemptive military action, especially on the ground in the Middle East. He loathes nation-building, and would likely never send a single platoon into Iran.

But all that said, the prior fates of the arch Iranian terrorist general Qasem Soleimani, ISIS kingpin Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, or the Russian Wagner group in Syria might have reminded Iran that Trump will use force to restore or enhance deterrence and ensure U.S. interests.

When Trump began negotiating with Iran for an end to its nuclear program, he warned the theocracy that it had 60 days to renounce nuclear weapon acquisitions. He apparently had picked such a two-month window, given that any time beyond that date might have ensured Iran would have developed a few nuclear weapons, a reality he knew was untenable for Israel and the U.S.

Iran arrogantly gambled that Trump was bluffing and would stay in endless Iranian bartering while pressuring Israel to stand down so as not to derail his peace efforts. But anyone who knew Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump would know that staying the deadline was impossible, and Iran would likely be hit right after the two-month warning expired.

And so, the regime was hit—swiftly and decisively.

Did Iran think its new Russian and Chinese allies would intervene on its behalf or threaten Israel to stand down? But Russia is bogged down in Ukraine in a new Stalingrad that may have cost it 1 million dead and wounded, with no end in sight. Its military has been weakened. It has no desire to enter any additional foreign conflict. If anything, Putin may soon wish Trump to find him a way out of his own self-created quagmire.

Anyway, an Israeli-Iranian conflict and the subsequent unrest and uncertainty in the Persian Gulf, as far as Vladimir Putin was concerned, would only raise the price of oil and further help feed his tiring Russian war machine.

China is currently trying to avoid a catastrophic trade war with the U.S. It has no desire to prevent the U.S. from aiding Israel. Unlike Russia, China wants no conflict of any kind in the Persian Gulf. It once bought 80-90 percent of Iranian oil, and the Middle East supplies about 50 percent of Beijing’s current oil needs.

So, what was Iran’s backup strategy of resistance if its nuclear infrastructure came under attack before it obtained a bomb? Apparently, it had none.

And in some sense, that is a silly question, given the theocracy has no reason to exist if it is not an exporter of Shiite Persian-sponsored terrorism aimed at isolating Israel, bullying the Sunni Arab world, and scaring the West. Indeed, the regime always believed it would dissolve without terrorist satellites, a nuclear threat, and oil money. Yet what we are beginning to witness after nearly half a century is a terrorist regime with no terrorists, a would-be nuclear bully with no nuclear weapons, and a conventional threat that will soon not be threatening.

Posted under Iran, Israel, War by Jillian Becker on Monday, June 16, 2025

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

This Trump golden age is not only great but also fun 1

“William F. Marshall has been an intelligence analyst and investigator in the government, private, and non-profit sectors for 38 years. He is a senior investigator for Judicial Watch.”

So a note on the writer of this column tells us.

He writes at Townhall, to our delight:

Okay, I am a conservative, so I like just about everything the Trump administration has done to date. I make no bones about that. From a policy standpoint, I cannot think of a president in my lifetime who has ever truly tried to “make America great again” the way Donald Trump has, apart from the great Ronald Reagan.

But when I speak of “fun”, I am not just talking about policies. I’m talking about entertainment value. About Trump’s showmanship. His ability to dazzle, amuse and to drive his political opponents insane. It’s worth the price of admission as an American citizen.

I’m sure Barack Obama’s fans loved the insufferable, pedantic never-ending answers he gave to a few questions posed by fawning reporters, in a faux-professorial pose. I’m sure they considered that “fun” from their perspective. Fine. But that’s not what I consider fun.

Fun is watching a president who doesn’t give a rip. Or more precisely, one who doesn’t give a rip about what his political opponents, in which I include the mainstream media, think of him. In fact, he relishes confronting, berating and humiliating them. When have we ever seen that in a president?

Take for example President Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Who does that? But above and beyond that, he then actually barred Associated Press reporters from the White House for refusing to refer to that body of water by its new name. Brilliant. And hilariously funny.

Ditto in renaming Mount Denali back to its original Mount McKinley, after the late great president, throwing the press and other Democrats into a tizzy. These are pretty inconsequential moves, but for the sheer value of seeing media mavens’ blood pressure readings rocketing to near-stroke level, they were pure gold.

Then we see Trump’s head-spinning moves to annex Greenland and make Canada America’s “51st state”. What president in modern memory has made such bold proposals? Preening European leftists, dependent for generations on daddy America’s security blanket, were almost as apoplectic as the mainstream media yappers. It has been a thing to behold.

The Greenland initiative, given the vital national security position that land occupies and its immense hidden stores of mineral wealth, actually makes a lot of sense. And the idea of its acquisition by the United States is not particularly new.  The administration of the Democrats’ beloved Harry S. Truman secretly offered Denmark $100 million in gold bars for the island in 1946, also citing “national security”. 

The Canada acquisition proposal seems more of a troll by Trump, designed probably to make Canadian leftists and pearl-clutching American media wankers wet themselves in preparation for Trump’s plans to hit them with massive tariffs. After all, would we really want to take on board a country whose population is, let’s face it, dang-near socialist in its orientation? America doesn’t need 40 million more Democrats. (My apologies to you conservative Albertans. Maybe there are only 30 million socialist Canadians.)

But it’s the direct, in-your-face slamming of media personalities by Trump that is absolutely priceless and probably the most fun aspect of his presidency.

Take his recent interview with Kristen Welker of NBC News. It was a classic example of a hostile mainstream media interview Trump could expect, and something Obama would never have been subjected to due to the media’s slobbering love affair with him. And Biden? Well, the Vegetable-in-Chief would rarely agree to any interview, let alone a hostile one. 

At one point in Welker’s snarky, nasty and disrespectful questioning of Trump about DOGE and Elon Musk, Trump’s response was classic: “He’s leaving behind some very brilliant people. They were on television last night. They’re super high IQ people. I like high IQ people. The Democrats don’t have many of them.” Biting one-liners are Trump’s hallmark.

It was similar to the interview Trump gave the prior week to ABC’s Terry Moran, who tried to bait Trump with hostile questions. When Moran asked Trump if he “trusted” Vladimir Putin, Trump let loose, “I don’t trust you. Look at you. You come in all shootin’ for bear. You’re so happy to do the interview.”

What these reporters seem to forget, is that Trump spent his life in the cutthroat world of New York commercial real estate. He is able to discern the weaknesses of his opponents and exploit them to the fullest extent possible. Now add to that Trump’s lifetime spent in the media space, including 15 years as the host and brains behind a top-rated television program, The Apprentice, where he honed his public presentation to perfection. 

And these talking head news readers like Kristen Welker and Terry Moran think they can walk onto a set and make a fool of this man! 

Laugh, laugh!

We do.

President Trump makes us happy.

O Republicans, save the Supreme Court, the republic, the nation, the constitution of liberty! 1

The Republican-dominated House needs to legislate ASAP to confirm the constitutional functions of the Supreme Court.

How the law needs to be worded is a puzzle that the specialists must solve. Fast, please!

Shawn Fleetwood writes at the Federalist:

Not a day seems to go by without some activist lower court judge issuing an overreaching injunction blocking part of President Trump’s agenda.

Throughout Wednesday and Thursday [April 23 & 24, 2025] alone, judges across multiple venues handed down decrees barring numerous executive actions taken by the president since returning to office. From DEI to election policy, these cases are but a few of the more than 170 lawsuits Democrats and left-wing political actors have filed to sabotage Trump and the 77 million Americans who voted for him.

Despite this clear effort to destroy American democracy via a judicial coup, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) seems to have no interest in stopping it. The nation’s highest court has had ample opportunities to halt these lower court judges’ destructive antics but has repeatedly declined to do so.

The first notable instance of this cowardice came to fruition in early March. In a 5-4 decision, a majority on the court declined a request from the Trump administration to shut down a ruling from a Biden-appointed district court judge. The judge had ordered the State Department and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to disburse roughly $2 billion in foreign grants to nongovernmental groups.

Comprised of Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and the court’s Democrat appointees, the majority offered no rationale for the decision, a move that left Associate Justice Samuel Alito “stunned”.

Writing for the dissent, Alito underscored the overreaching nature of the lower court’s order and chastised the majority for its unwillingness to shut down such abusive behavior. He wrote, “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise.”

By declining to rein in the Biden-appointed judge’s outlandish behavior, the high court’s majority all but gave the green light to activist judges across the country to take similar actions on leftist-backed lawsuits filed in their respective jurisdictions. As previously noted, this has encouraged these judicial supremacists to issue blanket injunctions barring the Trump administration from implementing policies the American people voted for, thus effectively rendering the 2024 presidential election results moot.

SCOTUS’s inclination to tolerate judicial tyranny among the lower courts is perhaps unsurprising, however, given that a majority of the justices have indicated their own infatuation with overstepping the constitutional limits erected by America’s founding document.

In the dead of night on Easter weekend, without explanation, seven of the justices essentially usurped the executive branch’s authority over immigration by blocking Trump’s deportation of Venezuelan gang members. Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Alito dissented, with the latter once again penning a scathing opinion blasting the majority’s “unprecedented and legally questionable” actions.

It’s unclear exactly what game the high court’s majority is playing. Even for a wannabe politician like Chief Justice Roberts — whose primary concern seems to be protecting the judiciary’s “legitimacy” rather than interpreting the Constitution as written — the decisions to allow the lower courts to run afoul of America’s constitutional order and issue late-night orders are unlikely to sit well with the public. In fact, one could argue the high court’s antics are doing more damage to its reputation than leftists’ smear campaigns ever could.

Recall over the past few years when Democrats and their media allies ran hit pieces against many of SCOTUS’s Republican-appointed justices. While much of this manufactured psyop was directed at the high court’s most reliable originalists (Thomas and Alito), the end goal was the same — to delegitimize the body and its constitutional rulings in the eyes of the American public.

Yet, for all their bluster, the media’s smear campaign didn’t seem to have significantly affected non-leftists’ opinion of the Supreme Court. Pew Research data published in August shows that the decline in the court’s favorability in recent years has been driven almost exclusively by Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents, whose views of the court turned sour following the 2022 Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

But what the media couldn’t do to SCOTUS — destroying its credibility among Americans — the high court is now doing to itself. By refusing to rein in the lower courts’ lawlessness, the justices have authorized a judicial coup that is stymying the will of the 77 million Americans who voted for Trump.

The longer a majority on the high court allows this circus to continue, the more faith citizens will lose in its ability to operate as a capable branch of government.

Posted under Law, US Constitution by Jillian Becker on Saturday, April 26, 2025

Tagged with , , , , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

How woke activism destroyed Professor Bongani Mayosi 1

Violent protest by racists against “racism” on university campuses is an amusement to American students. The only victims of it are Jewish students and they of course deserve all the persecution that can be inflicted on them because – well, um, because they are Jewish.

Less powerful and safe countries imitate the jolly fun with tragic results.

Columnist Richard Wilkinson writes (in part) at the South African journal the Daily Friend:

The life-story of Professor Mayosi is one of the most extraordinary and most overlooked chapters of recent South African history. Born in 1967, Professor Mayosi grew up in the village of Nqamakwe in the rural Eastern Cape. He completed his schooling at St John’s College in Umtata where he displayed exceptional academic ability. At the age of just 15, he achieved the highest marks in the then-independent Transkei’s Matric Exams. He proceeded to the University of Natal at which he studied for Bachelor of Medical Sciences and Bachelor of Medicine degrees, both of which he achieved with distinction. After specialising in cardiology at the University of Cape Town, Professor Mayosi was awarded a Nuffield Fellowship to Oxford University where he read for a Doctor of Philosophy degree in cardiovascular medicine.

Professor Mayosi was widely regarded as one of the outstanding academics of his generation. He published over 300 peer-reviewed academic articles in leading scientific journals, including ScienceThe Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. His scholarship was acclaimed both domestically and internationally, with Professor Mayosi being elected to the Academy of Science of South Africa as well as to the American College of Cardiologists, the US National Academy of Medicine, the European Society of Cardiology and the Royal College of Physicians of London. Most notably, Professor Mayosi was part of the team which discovered a gene, CDH2, which has been linked to the life-threatening heart disease arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. This breakthrough is regarded as one of the most important advances in South African cardiology since Dr Christiaan Barnard’s pioneering human heart transplant.

Professor Mayosi played a pivotal role in developing systems to train physician-scientists. Working alongside the Minister of Health and key industry figures, he helped establish the “1,000 PhD Programme”, a transformative initiative aimed at advancing medical research in South Africa. He also secured over R 250 million in research funding, significantly boosting scientific innovation. At just 39, Professor Mayosi was appointed to lead UCT’s Department of Medicine and, a decade later, he became Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences. In recognition of his extraordinary contributions, in 2009 Professor Mayosi was awarded the Order of Mapungubwe, South Africa’s highest civilian honour.

The University of Cape Town conducted a full enquiry into the death of Professor Mayosi, culminating in a 157-page report which provides a valuable (though not entirely exhaustive) account of the events which drove him to end his life. The findings of the report are clear and damning:

The panel had no hesitation in concluding, from the testimony presented, that the eruption of the #FeesMustFall protests a few days after Professor Mayosi took up his post as Dean was the single most influential factor directly and indirectly affecting his Deanship. 

The abuse was horrific. Using the social media hashtag #OccupyFHS (i.e. Occupy the Faculty of Health Sciences), Fallist* thugs intimidated staff and students in the health faculty during October 2016, occupying the Dean’s suite of offices for two weeks and forcing Professor Mayosi and his staff to relocate. One public engagement was effectively hijacked by activists, with staff members subjected to what the report calls “crude engagement” and heckling. The situation became so intense that one staff member suffered an emotional breakdown during the meeting. The report further notes that, by this stage, Professor Mayosi had lost control over the faculty’s affairs, ultimately descending into what it describes as “a state of fear and stuttering”.

​As one Health Faculty official recalled:

Bongani was just absolutely eviscerated. When he conveyed the decision in this stammering voice … this powerful orator who kind of commanded a room had been reduced to someone who was just so unsure of himself, and so terrified, and understandably, in that situation. And, you know, he explained to them that he couldn’t close the faculty, because that was the university’s decision. And the rage was just massive…”

What caused Professor Mayosi’s depression and mental decline? The report found that Professor Mayosi faced relentless harassment, stating that “there is evidence that students showed an incredible amount of disrespect, both in face-to-face encounters with him and in numerous electronic communications with him”. Disappointingly (and inexplicably), the report does not disclose full details of the email correspondence or name any of the perpetrators of the bullying.​

However, the report does recount one notable incident in which a group of Fallist activists, who had failed to meet the minimum requirements necessary to gain entrance to the year-end exams (known at the University of Cape Town as “due performance” or “DP” status), confronted Professor Mayosi in his office late one night. Under pressure and threats, he reluctantly sent an email to faculty confirming that the students would be granted a concession. Professor Mayosi immediately regretted this decision, confiding in two colleagues that “he felt he had made a serious mistake by giving in to the student demands”. ​

The following day, overwhelmed and disillusioned, Professor Mayosi made the first of several attempts to resign as Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences. He formalised his intent in an email to the university’s Vice Chancellor, Dr Max Price:​

Dear Max

I have decided to resign my position as Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences. I believe that the faculty deserves better leadership than I have been able to provide in the past year. I am sorry to do this in the middle of a crisis. I will ask Dr Reno Morar to act as Dean while I await your decision.

Yours sincerely

Bongani Mayosi

After discussions with Dr Price, Professor Mayosi chose to withdraw his resignation.

Discussions. Discussions? Discussions!

All of this took a terrible toll on Professor Mayosi. On one occasion, he was found slumped over his desk with his head on his folded arms, unresponsive to verbal communication from colleagues. On another occasion, after failing to appear at a scheduled event, he was discovered sitting alone in his car in a car park, staring blankly into space. Attendees at a cardiology conference in Egypt, at which Professor Mayosi had been invited to present, reported that he had trouble speaking and was physically shaking. A similar incident occurred at a conference in the United Kingdom, where he failed to attend his session and was eventually found in his hotel room by a concerned friend. Professor Mayosi had wandered the streets of London alone in a despondent state.

During this period, the university’s leadership failed to take meaningful action against the disruptive Fallist activists in the Faculty of Health Sciences. Professor Mayosi was effectively abandoned, with the report describing him as “a man alone, under siege from all directions, with nowhere to turn”.  According to Professor Mayosi’s sister, he took sick leave from the university, during which time he confided in his mother that he felt an increasing sense of isolation from his colleagues and a lack of support from the university and faculty.

That Professor Mayosi achieved so much despite spending the first 25 years of his life under the constraints of apartheid is extraordinary.

Many – probably all – of these incidents involved criminal conduct. Did the university’s leadership take any action to hold those responsible accountable? The answer to this question is a resounding “No”. On the contrary, there are numerous examples of the university intervening to assist and protect Fallist activists. For example, university leaders intervened in support of the bail application of Masixole Mlandu, a key instigator of violence who somehow was never expelled from the university and would go on to preface his Honours research project with the words “ONE SETTLER ONE BULLET”. …

The university’s failure to act allowed the violence and intimidation associated with Fallism to persist for years. In December 2022, [a notorious Fallist]  repeatedly punched Professor Jeremy Seekings in the face, knocking his glasses to the floor.  And in the past few weeks, radical students disrupted lectures and sports events, bringing academics to a halt. The reality is that the month of March 2015 has lasted a decade at the University of Cape Town.​

Ultimately, thousands of people had their studies disrupted, their careers jeopardised and, in some cases, their souls destroyed when the flames of Fallism engulfed the university. Anyone who did not support the Woke Revolution was targeted. The Fallists called them “racists” if they were white; “house-niggers”, “sell-outs”, “coconuts” or “Uncle Toms” if – like Professor Mayosi – they were black. Many left academia. Others emigrated. A significant number struggled with severe psychological distress, with some expressing suicidal thoughts and many relying on anti-anxiety and antidepressant medication just to get through the day.​

For one man, it became unbearable. On Friday, 27 July 2018, Bongani Mayosi took his own life. He was 51 years old.

 

*Fallist: In the context of South Africa, “Fallist” refers to individuals or movements that advocate for the “fall” of structures and systems perceived as oppressive, particularly within universities. [From the internet.]

Posted under Marxism, Race, South Africa by Jillian Becker on Monday, April 7, 2025

Tagged with , , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink

Just one of President Trump’s personal superpowers 5

Pool via AP

… driving his enemies insane, says Kurt Schlichter.

We reproduce what got us laughing today – his article at Townhall:

[President Trump] has several superpowers, but his most powerful may be the ability to convince his opponents to defend the least popular possible positions just because he supports them. Not just contrary positions, not just positions that reasonable people can disagree with, but insanely unpopular positions that all normal people look at and are repelled by. There’s not a garbage hill they won’t choose to die on. It’s an incredibly useful superpower to have.

Of course, the most recent one is the 80/20 polling proposition against men pretending to be women and being allowed into women’s intimate spaces to steal their athletic achievements. What lunatic would possibly take the position that it’s OK for some dude with the whole sausage store swinging to walk into your daughter’s locker room and expect to be called Martha? Well, it’s not just one lunatic. It’s a whole party of lunatics. This is a sacred Democrat belief, maybe its most sacred belief. Just the other day, every single Democrat senator voted to continue this nonsense. But in the real world, eight out of 10 normal people understand that it’s insane, and the other 20%, probably half of them, don’t agree with the majority because they can’t wrap their minds around the fact that it’s actually happening.

Of course, Trump opposes it, and of course, he rubbed it in their faces at that glorious not-State of the Union address the other night. Naturally, the Democrats highlighted their embrace of this bizarre, creepy fringe belief system right in front of 36 million Americans. It’s no wonder that 76% of the people who watched the thing supported the president. Politically, it’s just insane to draw the battle lines about weirdos and perverts, but the Democrats do it. It kind of tells you what their main constituency is – weirdos and perverts and the SSRI [anti-depressants] ridden, Chardonnay wine Munchhausen Mommies that love them.

Embracing it makes absolutely no sense politically unless their entire focus is maintaining their psychotic leftist activist base. And, of course, their entire focus is maintaining their psychotic leftist activist base. You might think they would reach out in a systematic way to normal people, and some have tried. Gavin Newsom, the guy whose unalloyed support for kiddie castration and against penis-free female environments helped make California the sexual confusion capital of America, recently went on with Charlie Kirk and hinted that, well, you know, maybe it’s kinda unfair to let some hairy ape pretending to be a ballerina win the gold medal in a girl track meet. Don’t get the idea that he is actually going to do anything about it. California is still a gender freak state where every pervert is a king, and every normal person is liable to be leered at in the locker room – and, in his trash state, if you complain that some dude in a skirt is drooling over you while you slip on your panties, you’re a hate criminal. Other Democrats have realized that this is electoral cyanide, and they’ve tried to thread the needle by suggesting that maybe local governments should decide whether the perverts rule or not. They don’t think that about anything else, like abortion, just this, and they don’t really think it. If they get federal power back, you can be sure that the full force of law will come down in support of weirdo transvestites getting a free pass at exposing themselves to little girls.

Trump is somehow able to maneuver them into being all for such loathsome demographics as federal workers. Yeah, Americans feel sorry for the kind of person who tells them they can’t sign their VA form in blue ink. Not a lotta sympathy there. And Americans seem to like the idea of cutting government waste. Sure, the Democrats insist that we’re about to launch a Third World genocide by refusing to fully fund Ecuadorian transgender mime troupes, but normal people look at that and hear that it’s being cut, and they think it’s a good thing. This is because it is, objectively, a good thing. To support this stuff is, objectively, an insane thing.

Now, it’s not crazy in the sense that doing so does support the Democrat position that all normality and civilization must be overthrown in favor of the bizarre, creepy freak show utopia that they hope to impose upon us. It’s insane because it’s electoral poison. Look at what happened to Kamala Harris when she got up there and had to try and tap dance about subsidizing illegal alien transsexual surgeries. It’s hard to explain this sort of stuff, and it should be hard because this sort of stuff is stupid and horrific. A few Democrats understand that this stuff repels normal people. That’s their problem. And that’s Trump’s edge.

What’s the latest? Some Third World Muslim scumbag terrorist-lover who somehow got into our country and somehow got into one of our allegedly prestigious schools is using that as a base to demand the murder of Jews and everybody else. Remember – they don’t just want to stop [at] killing all the Jews. They want to kill you and me, too. They will tell you that if you listen, and thanks to the fact that we have broken the gatekeeping model of the regime media, conservative media, and social media can now tell you. You can go read what this scumbag’s positions are. He wants October 7 all over the world. That means you and your kids and your sons and your daughters are being raped and murdered on videotape for the delight of Third World semi-humans. Yeah, we’re totally morally obligated to let this creature onto our soil.

It’s been said before: The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Now, the reasonable position among Americans is that this kind of walking, talking pile of refried goat excrement shouldn’t be anywhere near our country. It’s not a matter of free speech. You don’t get to come here and start setting up your garbage revolution. Do the Democrats agree with that view? No. They’re perfectly happy to let the genocidal jihadi to do his thing. In this monster, they have finally found some “free speech” they’re concerned with protecting. They were never concerned with free speech on campus when it was conservatives trying to speak freely. They were never concerned when the federal government launched a pogrom against normal Americans who went to protest a bogus election and dared to walk through the Capitol that they own. Even now, Democrats are positively gleeful that Elon Musk’s participation in our government is being met by leftist-funded terrorists burning down Tesla stores. But this Hamas-sucking mutant who literally wants to murder you and your entire family? No, he’s got to be here. He’s got to get a free megaphone. He has every right to come here and destroy our country and kill your kids. Because of reasons and shut up, fascist.

That’s the Democrat position. But why do they hold such a manifestly politically unpopular position? Because that’s what the black, shriveled heart of the Democrat Party believes. And also because Donald Trump feels differently. One thing is for certain – Donald Trump’s superpower is in full effect, and right now, he’s laughing.

Posted under Humor, United States by Jillian Becker on Thursday, March 13, 2025

Tagged with , , , , ,

This post has 5 comments.

Permalink

A looming constitutional crisis? 1

If President Biden actually signed no documents throughout his term except just one – as is now alleged – will we experience America’s biggest ever constitutional crisis?

From an article by Matt Margolis at PJ Media:

The Biden presidency might have been the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the American people. A shocking investigation by the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project has revealed that virtually every document bearing Joe Biden’s signature during his presidency was signed by an autopen — except for one.

What makes this revelation particularly damning is that the only document confirmed to have Biden’s actual signature was his letter announcing his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race. Let that sink in for a moment.

Remember when House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) revealed his discussion with Biden when Biden couldn’t recall signing the executive order halting LNG exports? Now we know why — he probably didn’t. The real question is: Who did? Who was running the country while Biden was not all there?

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is demanding that the Department of Justice investigate whether Biden’s obvious cognitive decline allowed unelected bureaucrats to essentially run the government without presidential oversight.

If this is true every executive order, every pardon, and every official action taken under Biden’s name could be constitutionally void.

The evidence is overwhelming. We know that Biden’s handlers desperately tried to prevent anyone from meeting with him one-on-one. Even Democratic insiders admit the truth. DNC fundraiser Lindy Li recently spilled the beans and acknowledged that Biden wasn’t running the show; his staff, his wife, and Hunter were.

The implications are staggering. We essentially had a presidency by proxy, with unelected staffers wielding presidential power while the man himself was barely cognizant enough to read a teleprompter.

This isn’t just a scandal; it’s potentially the biggest constitutional crisis in American history.

Who wielded the autopen?

If this allegation is found to be  true – what will happen? We eagerly await developments.

Older Posts »