My Photo
I am retired from government, law enforcement, politics and all other pointless endeavors. I eat when I am hungry and sleep when I am tired.

Friday, May 8, 2015


This is the text of a comment I left on a friends local newspaper blog.  It's the best distillation of the "Free Speech" Geller episode I have come up with yet.

What we call free speech is so incompatible with multiculturalism, it's odd that so many can't see it.
Our Western post-Christian culture espouses free speech. It can afford to as it is primarily a culture without ideals to offend. Unfortunately it also embraces Multiculturalism and openly invites people from diverse cultures and races to live within this post Christian polity. Stupidly, our post-Christian multicultural elite didn't foresee that those other cultures take their ideals and beliefs seriously.
So we now have large numbers of ungrateful foreign interlopers living among us. They view both our freedoms and the remnant elements of American culture with distain. We brought this on ourselves.
As to Pamela Geller and her kind, remember that Geller is a Zionist who will profit from the Muslim violence she provokes. It's all about "let's you and him fight." When American heartland Christians get killed by Muslims, the neoconservative party line of endless wars fought for the benefit of Israel is reenforced. It's all a deadly agitprop game.
Imagine what Geller and her ilk would say about a Muslim event mocking Judaism. Would she be a free speech heroine then?
Islam has no place in our history or traditional culture. But until we decide to live by that culture we will be subject to manipulation and worse by both Muslim interlopers and Zionist manipulators.

Monday, May 4, 2015


It looks like two Muslim gunmen found out what pulling guns on Texans means tonight.  The shooters wished to apply some robust Muslim art criticism  to a group calling itself The American Freedom Defense Initiative.  The AFDI was having a draw pictures of Mohammad contest inside.    Apart from a $10,000 prize for the best cartoon, (or should that be the worst cartoon) of Mohammad, Geert Wilders, the Dutch anti-immigration politician spoke.  He is on Al Queida's hit list.  There were about one hundred attendees inside when the shooting started.  According to police, the whole firefight took a few seconds.  The Jihadis shot an unarmed security guard and were promptly dispatched by armed police.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative is the creature of one Pamela Geller, internet blogger, organizer of anti-Muslim advertisements on metro buses and all around avenging daughter of Israeli.  She, along with Debbie Schlussel and a few others have created an industry of ginning up anti-muslim feeling.  

Given the propensities of our Muslim brothers, I can sympathize.  They are not a very lovable lot, especially when their curious beliefs are questioned.  But, as I wrote a few times before, there is an element of "Lets you and him fight" about this.  When she, or Schlussel ridicule or slander Muslims they do so with the understanding that their fellow Americans stand with them.  That is, when the Muslims react it will be American cops or soldiers or civilians who trade gunfire with with the objects of Pamela's and Debby's and Mark's agitprop.  They remind me of those provocateurs who throw things at the police from behind the front line of demonstrators.  They provoke violence, but at one remove.  

Geller is an divorced mother of four from what I can tell.  At the risk of doing her an injustice, it appears that she is either an heiress or gets funding from somewhere. I mention this because renting halls, even in Garland Texas, buying ads on public spaces in large metropolitan centers, and engaging in law-fare when those ads are rejected costs some serious money.  

So who is spending all this money just to inflame the ever volatile Muslims among us?  As the character Del'Que in the movie Jeremiah Johnson said when asked who buried him up to his chin in an anthill,  "It t'werent the Mormans!"  By this I mean that there are a lot of angry Jews scribbling the equivalent of anti-Muslim graffiti on the broad canvas of American culture.

Make no mistake, like most patriots, I favor a cessation of Muslim immigration to my country.  In fact, we and the Europeans need to start repatriating most of those already here.  Like Geller I am quick to point out all the ways in which Muslim faith and culture are incompatible with that of this country and the West.  But let's be frank, she and those like her would be the first to demand censorship of any group treating Judaism in anything like the same way that she attacks Islam.  Like an Muslim, she is extremely protective of her group.  In the same spirit of frankness let me say that in their mutual, endless hatred, Muslim and Jew seem to have more in common than either have with myself or my neighbors.  

I have the right to draw a picture of the Prophet Mohammad if I wish to to.  That is part of our Western tradition of artistic expression.  It is also part of our tradition to understand that art produced for no better purpose than to inflaming others is an exercise in bad manners.  It's not illegal, but it does tell us something about those who do it.  

She and others like her are provoking attacks. It can be foreseen that such attacks will enrage and mobilize the greater American public.  In who's interest is this?  Who funds and advises the Gellers?  Who benefits?

Geller and Schlussel and those so disposed, need to take their tribal hatreds to some neutral setting where they can fight forever without putting my countrymen at risk.  Somehow I don't think they will.   

Wednesday, April 22, 2015


The MSNBC hipster retardates think that our boarding of Iranian ships off the coast of Yemen will be the flare-point in Iranian-US hostilities.   How awfully knowing these fools think they are!   

Why for a moment would the US Navy board any of these cargo carriers?   It matters not a wit what those ships contain.  The point, if there is one, is to prevent them from discharging cargo.  Our navy can prevent this easily.  

The Iranian ships have limited fuel and therefore capacity to linger in the area.  Even if they can refuel at sea they are at risk, given the advanced age of the Iranian vessels, of embarrassing breakdowns.  Our carrier task force can replenish at sea indefinitely.  Everything we need to do can be accomplished over the horizon and beyond the ability of the Iranians to prevent.  As long as the Iranians know that we can prevent any attempt to off-load cargo onto the coast of Yemen, they are held in check.   If they attempt to off-load at sea, we could seize or disable the liters or other craft used to transfer the cargo.   If they attempt to dock and unload, the cargo can be seized by Yemeni or Saudi ground forces.  If the Iranian flotilla has landing craft, the Saudi Airforce can clobber them as they beach.  

Our options are wide while theirs are narrow.  Our surveillance of them should be good enough to detect any transfer of arms to Houthi small craft.  These could be interdicted by friendly forces we direct to the scene.  The same would apply to the transfer of arms by the Iranian flotilla to the shore by small craft.  After a few such failed attempts, I think the Iranians would get the message.  

Of course they can be counted on to declare some sort of victory and head home.  

It is obvious to all but the Lesbotardians at MSNBC that the Iranians are most vulnerable in this situation as their mission can be rendered impossible by forces they cannot checkmate. 

As stated in my last post, the point of this Iranian exercise may be to precipitate a fight that will create more martyrs for the Mullah's cause.  If so, that cannot be helped.  We can however, by using moderate techniques like those above, keep the Iranians from looking like naval heroes.  

And finally, why aren't the various Arab navies, who are equipped with the latest in British, French and Italian naval ships and technology doing this job themselves?  The last time I checked, they had quite competent air forces as well. 

Tuesday, April 21, 2015


This bit of inspired reporting from the Lolita of the AP leaves a bit to be desired regarding the Iranian naval threat.   
Apr 20, 2:32 PM ED


AP Photo
AP Photo/Steve Helber

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. Navy officials say the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is steaming toward the waters off Yemen and will join other American ships prepared to intercept any Iranian vessels carrying weapons to the Houthi (HOO'-thee) rebels fighting in Yemen.

The U.S. Navy has been beefing up its presence in the Gulf of Aden and the southern Arabian Sea amid reports that a convoy of Iranian ships may be headed toward Yemen to arm the Houthi. 

One would think from all the press reports that we are about to see a major naval display of daring-do  between our forces and the Iranian navy.  If there is any such, it will be a matter of the Iranians daring and we doing them in with lightning like precision.  

The Iranian Navy consists of three relatively capable Russian made diesel-electric submarines and a hand full for old british made corvettes.  They are no threat to our navy and could easily be defeated by other, regional navies.  In fact some of their latest attempt to deploy force at sea are somewhat comical.  As in their fierce attack Boston Whalers.


Or  their North Korean based mini-submarines.

The last time the US Navy engaged against the Iranians was in 1988, when we expunged an Iranian Corvette as a sort of live fire exercise.  It didn't have a chance.  The pride of Iran's fleet are the three remaining examples of that outmatched and now sunken ship. 

What we are seeing now may be an attempt by the Mullahs to supply the Houthi's with some weaponry.  How these weapons would get ashore is unexplained.  In a region where borders are porous just why Teheran feels the need to deliver arms in this obvious and vulnerable way is unclear.

My theory is that the Mullahs have no great love for their own navy and feel free to use it in vainglorious escapades.  Iran's navy is the least important of her military arms.  Its old officer corps was tainted by a close relationship with the ancient regime of the Shah.  Beyond patrolling her coast and making a nuisance of itself in the gulf, the Iranian navy is a drain on already constrained military budget.  And as we saw in 1988, the Mullahs are capable of sending Iranian sailors on obvious suicide missions against the Great Satan.  This is the corvette Shand after going on such a mission in 1988.

Iran does possess several old US amphibious landing ships, but it's very unlikely that these are seaworthy after so many years.  She also has a couple of recently manufactured landing craft.  

It is therefore possible for Iran to land arms to the Houthies without a friendly port.  I  must confess that I don't know if the Houthis control any such ports, but given the existence of these landing craft, they needn't.  

Iran doesn't need to deliver arms by sea to the Houthis.  The Saudi's and others in the region have superior navies.  They control the airspace. Therefore, I see this as stunt put forward for their own reasons by Iran's religious leaders to send a message and or provoke a response.

The only danger the Iranian Navy poses to our navy is via those three modern submarines.  We probably know where they are or at least can defend against them to a great degree. 

As in the case of ISIS, we seem to be engaging an enemy that the regional powers should be able to destroy on their own.  Is it in our interest to fight the Saudi Arabian Navy's battles?  Have we had a serious discussion of our national interest in the fate of Yemen?  

All good questions to ask before we lower the boom on the Iranian Navy again.  

Wednesday, April 15, 2015


The following is a comment I left on Phil Giraldi's article taking apart Netanyahu's speech before the House of Representatives.  I should have elaborated enough to make a blog article.

Perhaps a bit off topic but, I was struck by Netanyahu’s reference to Haman, enemy of the Jews in the court of Persia during his address to his dupes in our House of Representatives.
Bibi, or his speechwriters, must assume that Americans are biblically illiterate. I say this because every child who studied the Old Testament knows that had it not been for the munificence of the old Persian (Iranian) empire, there would be no Jews in the world today.
If the Bible bears any relation to historical truth, the Jews were captives of Babylonia, a Semitic empire. They lost their kingdoms and were forced to living as disposed captives in Babylon. They were pressure to assimilate into the mass population of that empire. This certainly would have happened if Cyrus the Great, Iranian Arian ruler of the Persian Empire had not crushed Babylon. He then found the Jews useful, setting them back up in their old neighborhood, Palestine.
I’m not one to commingle biblical themes into current events. That said, it’s breathtakingly insulting for any Israeli leader to throw a bogus misrepresentation of a bible story at our faces while trying to gull us into fighting a war against our own interests. That is, the very people who set them free.
In fact, this might be a better reading of the Haman story. Haman was not of Iranian blood but sought to enflame the Iranians into attacking a third party for his own gain. If this isn’t a perfect description of Netanyahu himself, I don’t know what is; a conniving foreigner inciting violence among people not his own.

If the Old Testament Bible is their guide to righteous action, shouldn’t all those Christian-Zionists understand that were it not for the Iranians, Zion would not exist?