Good riddance to George Will By James Lewis

I like and respect George Will, and over the years I’ve been one of his fans. With the rise of Donald Trump, Will has decided to resign from the GOP, along with Mitt Romney and the other folks we might call “decorative conservatives” — the people who look good on the outside, but who have none of the fire in the belly that marked Teddy Roosevelt or Lincoln — not to mention the Founders, who were pretty robust and argumentative.

I believe Mr. Will has a genuine distaste for what may become Trump Conservatism. Trump represents a kind of happy warrior style of American politician, similar to Harry Truman and Rough Rider Teddy Roosevelt. It’s obviously too low-class for Will, Romney and Jeb Bush, who are all too delicate for the political blood sport that the Left has imposed on our politics. Nothing is too low for the Left. Literally nothing.

The national GOP has been in decline for years, running decrepit candidates like Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney — who actually did flinch in the last debate with Obama, as Trump points out. Candidates like Dole and McCain were picked for their seniority, which is what made them weak and doddering candidates.

On the other side, the hard Left is back in charge of the Democrats, and they are killers. Their purpose is to destroy their opponents. In response, the GOP has run certain losers.

But then we see the killer thugs of the Washington Post and New York Times hiring a decorative conservative like George Will for “balance.” Balance, my foot. George Will is protective coloration for the WaPo’s inner mafia. The WaPo doesn’t play by any rules except its own. You may not see the glint of the daggers they all carry into the fight, but come election time, every honest conservative gets the shaft.

This is going to be a nasty, vicious election, and winners have to give as good as they get. I’m sorry. Reality.

The WaPo has carried off the complete myth of Watergate to destroy a Republican President who was no worse than LBJ or Robert Kennedy, or Carter, Clinton and Obama. American journalism is now based on a deliberate lie, the false mythology of Watergate — actually a power struggle between the Permanent Government in DC and an elected President, Richard Nixon. Watergate’s Deep Throat (Mark Felt, the Assistant Director of the FBI) plotted with the Washington Post to destroy Richard Nixon. That’s all there was to it. Everything else is lies.

Nixon was destroyed because he was an anti-Communist, and today, the Democrats have racialized Communism just like Dixiecrat Huey Long did long ago. They have placed one of their own in the White House, and the policy results are disastrous. People are dying in Syria and Libya because Barack Obama is still steeped in the phony socialism of Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya. But Kenyatta was too practical to be a Marxist in an underdeveloped country like Kenya. Obama Sr., Barack’s father he never knew, preached radicalism and world revolution, so Kenyatta threw him out. Barack Obama is therefore playing out a childhood drama in his mind, a drama that lost any practical relevance half a century ago.

It’s strange how the Left always repeats the past, time after time after time, all in the cause of “Progressivism.”

Warmist guru Michael Mann tells DNC platform committee to use scary propaganda, not science, to panic voters into accepting flawed theory By Thomas Lifson

It is a sure sign of warmist desperation in the wake of the abject failure of global warming climate models to accurately predict the future. Michael Mann, one of the leading touts of warmism, yesterday told the Democratic Platform Drafting Committee:

“Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change.

“What is disconcerting to me and so many of my colleagues is that these tools that we’ve spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary because we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle….”

Please allow me to translate: The best tool we have to scare people into supporting carbon taxes and regulations that would empower the ruling elites to control every aspect of wealth generation is propaganda pretending that bad weather, like hurricanes and floods are caused by an increase in carbon dioxide, and essential atmospheric ingredient that promotes higher crop yields necessary to feed the earth’s burgeoning population. Most people do not realize that catastrophic weather events have been apart of human history forever, so we can fool them into believing that we can prevent them in the future by limiting the combustion of hydrocarbons.

Valerie Richardson of the Washington Times notes:

His comment drew hoots from climate skeptics, including the website Greenie Watch, which posted his comment under the headline, “‘Scientist’ Michael Mann says there is no need for statistics: You can just SEE global warming.”

“Unsurprising. The statistics are pretty doleful for Warmism,” the site said in a Monday post. (snip)

Skeptics have hotly challenged the link between rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and “extreme weather” events, noting, for example, that hurricane activity is on the decline.

Why Dems Try to Break Black Hearts and Only Trump Can Fix It By Karin McQuillan

Trump is the first Republican candidate we have ever had who has the temperament to fight back against the Dems’ shameful racial lies and ask blacks and Hispanics for their votes.

This election cycle is dominated by Democrat race-baiting as usual. Trump’s massively popular nationalist platform to stop illegal immigration and suspend Muslim immigration is labeled racist. What is new are perfidious Republican leaders and pundits rushing to join Democrats in their false accusation against Trump. Democrats have called every Presidential candidate for decades racist. They have to.

Telling blacks that Republicans wish them ill keeps Democrats in power. They don’t care about the damage they are doing to the country and to black lives. Blacks are cannon fodder in the Democrat war for power.

There is something profoundly depressing and pathetic that until Trump, our Republican leaders have been willing to write off the black vote and accept the Democrat poison that our party is made up of racist white people.

As I wrote on AT at the height of President Obama’s race-baiting on the Zimmerman trial:

Democrats have successfully re-written history to give themselves the starring role in the fight against racism — something they didn’t earn in the Civil Rights era and are not earning now. (snip)

Democrats cynically inflame racial fear and anger for political gain. They create false dramas of racial injustice, such as the Zimmerman trial, even though it wounds and damages blacks and the entire the country.

(snip) When the War on Poverty programs backfired, mortally wounding black families and creating nightmarish conditions for black children, Democrats found their party couldn’t do without the federal money, and the power and control it gave them over black voters.

The most recent polls on the Trump-Hillary fight show the crucial importance to Democrats of making blacks and Hispanics feel Trump, and all Republicans, are against them. Without a hurt and angry black and immigrant electorate, there would be no Democrat party, according to this analysis by John Hinderaker of why race relations in our country have deteriorated.

Michael Warren Davis History, Blood and a Revived Anglosphere

If Britain can forgive America the slights of the Obama era, and if Australia can forgive Britain hers, now is our chance to get the whole family back together. Europe loved Britain when she was submissive. We who share a common heritage can love her once again, very nearly unconditionally
Many of Australians no doubt still cringe at the humiliation of flying into the United Kingdom and having to file into the ‘non-EU’ queue for immigration and customs. Talk about ingratitude. Almost 100,000 Aussies were killed defending Britain from the Second and Third Reichs. Now the Germans get to sail through Heathrow while the grandsons of Gallipoli endure the distinct possibility of a complimentary cavity search. In 2015 the Tory MP Andrew Rosendell called for the creation of a line exclusively for ‘subjects of Her Majesty the Queen’, which, of course, failed. That was at the height of Europhilia among Britain’s elites.

Blood, history, culture: all these hallmarks of a nation’s conservatism were sacrificed at the altar of David Cameron’s One Europe liberalism. Now Britain is bidding goodbye, adieu, auf wiedersehen, and vaarwel to the European Union and David Cameron.

Europe, for that matter, is bidding goodbye adieu, etc. to Britain. At the beginning of the Brexit campaign, EU President Jean-Claude Juncker told British ‘deserters’ that they would have to ‘face the consequences’ of striking out alone. Now he’s making good, insisting the they vacate the premises ‘as soon as possible, however painful that process may be’, and that there will be ‘no renegotiation’. The Leave campaign spent months reaffirming their love for Europe and promising to remain engaged with the EU. Juncker makes it abundantly clear that Europe’s love was altogether more conditional.

All Britain had to do was clear her throat and Junker began throwing her clothes out the window and changing the locks. Which, if anything, confirmed all of the Leavers’ suspicions: that Europe was only interested in them as a dumping-ground for migrant workers and a reserve bank for failed and failing states.

One can’t help but suspect that Australia played no small part in the Brits’ decision to dump Juncker and his cronies. The EU is an unhealthy relationship for all parties involved, but only the UK has any experience with healthy relationships. Of the European states, only the UK developed fruitful bonds with their former colonial possessions in Asia and the Americas – which is to say, only the UK belongs to a real international family rooted in a common history, common values, and, yes, sometimes, common blood. There was no one to be outraged at Germany when she gave special privileges to the British at her airports. No one ever loved Germany the way Australians – and Canadians, Americans, New Zealanders et al – love the United Kingdom, which is enough to feel slighted. Or, at least, no one loved them enough to tell them so.

The Imam Celebrated by the Church of Sweden: “The Jews are Behind the Islamic State!” Part III of a Series: The Islamization of Sweden by Ingrid Carlqvist

Priests are afraid to talk about Jesus during mass. — Eva Hamberg, priest and professor, who in protest resigned from the priesthood and left the Church.

The Church of Sweden may be headed towards “Chrislam” — a merging of Christianity and Islam. Swedish priests, noting the religious fervor among the Muslims now living in Sweden, enthusiastically take part in various interfaith projects.

“There are reliable sources from Egypt, showing that the Saudi royal family is really a Jewish family that came from Iraq to the Arabian Peninsula sometime in the 1700s. They built an army with the aid of British officers fighting the Ottoman sultanate.” — Imam Awad Olwan, with whom a priest, Henrik Larsson, is cooperating in an interfaith project.

“The involvement that the Church of Sweden has shown for the vulnerability of Christian Palestinians, has been replaced with indifference to the ethnic cleansing of Christians in Syria and Iraq. In these countries, it is mostly Muslims who commit the atrocities, which is evidently enough to make the Church of Sweden concentrate on climate change and environmental issues instead.” — Eli Göndör, scholar of religion.

The Church of Sweden has departed from being a strong and stern state church. In the past, Swedes were born into it and, until 1951, no one was allowed to leave the church. These days, however, it is an institution that has very little to do with Christianity or Jesus. Sweden now, according to the World Values Survey, is one of the world’s most secular countries; every year a large number of Swedes leave the church.

It used to be that only atheists left the church; now it is the devout Christians that leave — in protest against the church’s increasingly questionable relationship to the Christian faith.

When, for example, the current Archbishop, Antje Jackelén, just before being appointed, participated in a question-and-answer session in the fall of 2013, and one of the questions was: “Does Jesus convey a more truthful image of God than Muhammad does?” surprisingly, the would-be archbishop did not immediately say yes, but instead involved herself in a long monologue about there being many ways to God. Evidently, this upset a lot of parishioners. A high-profile priest and professor, Eva Hamberg, resigned from the priesthood in protest and left the Church of Sweden.

“This made me leave faster,” she told the Christian newspaper, Dagen. “If the future Archbishop cannot stand by the Apostles’ Creed, but rather, rationalizes it, then secularization has gone too far.”

VIDEO — Geert Wilders: Stand for Freedom!

Dutch opposition leader Geert Wilders discusses the dangers of the Islamization of the West and the growing influence of Sharia law. He outlines his plans to defend the identity and civilization of the West from indoctrination.

Don’t miss our next video — subscribe free to the Gatestone Institute YouTube channel!

Obama doesn’t understand Jihadist doctrine By Mark Durie

In his June 14 address to the nation, President Obama attributed Omar Mateen’s attack on patrons of Orlando, Fla.’s, Pulse nightclub to “homegrown extremism,” saying “we currently do not have any information to indicate that a foreign terrorist group directed the attack.”

While Obama acknowledged that the Islamic State has called for attacks around the world against “innocent civilians,” he suggested these calls were incidental, emphasizing that Mateen was a “lone actor” and “an angry, disturbed, unstable young man” susceptible to being radicalized “over the Internet.”

It is a terrible thing to misunderstand one’s enemy so deeply. The doctrine of jihad invoked by terrorist groups is an institution with a long history, grounded in legal precedent going back to the time of Muhammad.

Militants who invoke the doctrine of jihad follow principles influenced by Islamic law. The point to be grasped is that the doctrinal basis of jihad generates conditions that can incite “bottom up” terrorism, which does not need to be directed by jihadi organizations.

When the Ottoman Caliphate entered World War I in 1914, it issued an official fatwa calling upon Muslims everywhere to rise up and fight the “infidels.” In 1915, a more detailed ruling was issued, entitled “A Universal Proclamation to All the People of Islam.”

Attorney General Loretta Lynch Met Privately With Bill Clinton The two were coincidentally at the Phoenix airport at the same time ????!!!!By Devlin Barrett

Attorney General Loretta Lynch met privately with former President Bill Clinton in Arizona on Tuesday, but Ms. Lynch told reporters that the two didn’t discuss the investigation into his wife’s email use as secretary of state.

Ms. Lynch said at a press conference that the Clinton meeting was unplanned. Mr. Clinton was apparently waiting to fly out of the Phoenix airport when Ms. Lynch’s plane coincidentally landed there. The former president then walked over to the attorney general’s plane to speak to Ms. Lynch and her husband.

“Our conversation was a great deal about his grandchildren. It was primarily social and about our travels,” Ms. Lynch told reporters in Phoenix on Tuesday.

“We talked about former Attorney General Janet Reno, for example, whom we both know, but there was no discussion of any matter pending for the department or any matter pending for any other body. There was no discussion of Benghazi, no discussion of the State Department emails, by way of example,” she said.

The two did discuss the recent vote in the U.K. to leave the European Union, but the Justice Department isn’t involved in that issue, she said.

An aide to Bill Clinton said no topics were discussed beyond what was described by Ms. Lynch. A spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

But others suggested the meeting could send the wrong message. “It’s probably ill-advised because it does create the appearance of impropriety,” said Ken Sukhia, a former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Florida who is now running for Congress as a Republican. “You don’t necessarily have to talk about the subject to garner some good will [from prosecutors] by having that kind of conversation.”

‘There was no discussion of Benghazi, no discussion of the State Department emails, by way of example.’
—Attorney General Loretta Lynch

Even in cases that aren’t publicly known, a lawyer or prosecutor would know that “having an unscheduled, impromptu meeting like that raises a question of was there impropriety…and particularly given the high profile of the Clintons and the very heightened attention that is being given to this issue of the emails,” Mr. Sukhia said. CONTINUE AT SITE

CIA Chief: I Don’t Talk to Iran…Personally…In a Formal Sense By Damian Paletta

Perhaps it’s a Persian riddle. Or a game of diplomatic footsy. Or just spyworld now-you-see-me-now-you-don’t headfakes.

Whatever it was, Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan gave an elaborate and cryptic response to a question about his current working relationship with Iran.

“I don’t communicate with Iran,” he told journalist Judy Woodruff at an event Wednesday hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations.
Ms. Woodruff seemed skeptical, “There’s zero communication – indirect?”

“I do not personally have any interaction,” he followed.

Ah, personally.

He went on: “I do not have any interaction, any formal liaison relationship or engagement with Iran,” he said, starting to sound like he was regurgitating something he had memorized.

Ms. Woodruff asked if others at the CIA communicated with Iran if Mr. Brennan did not.

“The agency does not,” he quickly answered.

That seemed to settle it, until he added, “no formal intelligence liaison relationship.”

This elicited laughter from the audience.

Ms. Woodruff seemed willing to leave it at, but Mr. Brennan felt compelled to add, “But we know the Iranians very well. Just saying.”

The diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and Iran has been a constant source of tension within both governments for decades. Many U.S. officials believe Iran is helping fuel chaos in the Middle East through their actions in places like Libya and Syria. CONTINUE AT SITE

Jihad in Istanbul Turkey pays a price for the slow campaign against Islamic State. Bret Stephens

Turkey suffered its 10th terrorist attack in less than a year on Tuesday when a coordinated suicide assault on Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport killed 41 people and injured more than 200. The choice of target is noteworthy. Ataturk airport is one of the world’s busiest, processing some 42 million passengers and 314,000 commercial flights last year. Among the dead were citizens of China, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, in addition to Turkish nationals. As terrorist atrocities go, it’s hard to get more global than that.

All of this suggests the attack was the work of Islamic State, though the group hasn’t taken credit at this writing. It fits a template of recent Islamic State attacks on the Brussels airport in March, on tourists near Istanbul’s Blue Mosque in January, the downing of the Russian airliner over the Sinai peninsula in October, and the Bardo National Museum in Tunis in March 2015.

These terrorist spectaculars achieve multiple aims at once: They inflict casualties on multiple nationalities, shake confidence in government security forces, harm local economies and demonstrate the reach of Islamic State.

That should temper hopes that Islamic State’s recent military setbacks in Iraq will offer relief from these sorts of attacks. The opposite might be true. Islamic State has now been territorially entrenched for years in Iraq and Syria, during which it has been able to radicalize and train thousands of recruits, including many with foreign passports. These jihadists will be paying lethal calls on crowded civilian targets for many more years, a deadly price for the Obama Administration’s gradualist policy against Islamic State and its willingness to allow Syria to descend into chaos.

The Turkish government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan also bears responsibility for allowing Islamic State to gain strength. Much like Pakistani strongman Zia ul-Haq, who made a bargain with jihadists in the 1980s so long as they attacked his enemies in Afghanistan and India, the Turkish government largely looked the other way as Syria-bound jihadists used Turkey as a staging ground and entry point for waging war against the Assad regime. Turkey has also been friendly with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, in the fatal conceit that terrorism is legitimate so long as it is targeting someone other than you.

This week’s agreement between Ankara and Jerusalem to resume normal diplomatic relations after a six-year hiatus is a sign that Mr. Erdogan may have begun to appreciate the consequences of that conceit, as well as the need for capable regional allies. Mr. Erdogan also seems to have understood that Turkey’s most dangerous enemies are Islamic State jihadists, not the Kurdish separatists on whom he has trained most of his fire. One reason to doubt Kurdish responsibility for Tuesday’s attack is that the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, generally targets Turkish police and military personnel, not civilians and foreigners.