Culture-Enricher in Aargau Breaks Teacher’s Jaw

The video and article below concern an incident of cultural enrichment in the northern Swiss canton of Aargau that was so egregious the Swiss press had to take note. A Syrian seventh-grader hit his female teacher multiple times, striking her so hard that he broke her jaw. His action was in respobnse to her impertinence in asking him to empty his pockets of knives and other implements of destruction.

To put the attack into an Islamic cultural context: It was unbearable to the boy that a mere female should treat him with such disrespect. If a woman had been so disrespectful to him in his home country, there would have been two possible outcomes, depending on the circumstances:

1.   If the woman had been a member of his extended family, the boy would have disciplined her physically, and been joined in the process by his father, brothers, uncles, etc. No woman in the family may be allowed to disrespect a male in the family; those are the rules.
2.   If the woman were a member of another clan or tribe, the boy would not have touched her. However, the woman’s male relatives — she could not have been interacting with a male outside the family if she were not accompanied by one or more male relatives — would have beaten her themselves. To have a woman of one’s family show disrespect to an unrelated male would violate the honor of the entire family, and she would thus have to be disciplined.
 

Since the teacher was unaccompanied by any male relative, she was without any protection, lacked honor, and could be disciplined with impunity. Such was the deeply-embedded sharia code that the boy was instinctively following.

The incident occurred in the town of Möriken-Wildegg. Ava Lon, who translated the video for subtitles, sends this interesting information about the name:

Please note that the town coat of arms includes a little African, because the name Möriken was thought to be derived from a diminutive of “Moor”, and thus means “Little Moors”.

I dug into the history of the name, and it seems to have originally been a form of the clan name “Mor” — i.e. “The village of Mor”. As the name evolved, the coincidental resemblance to “Little Moor” must have suggested the design for the coat of arms.

As for “Wildegg”, that comes from a phrase meaning “steep mountainside”. Nevertheless, those things in the lower part of the coat of arms look like red eggs to me. Maybe the word “egg” means “egg” in a Swiss German dialect (the German for “egg” is “Ei”, if I’m not mistaken).

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Here’s the accompanying article from the Swiss daily Aargauer Zeitung, also translated by Ava Lon:

Möriken-Wildegg: A 14-year-old Syrian hit his female teacher five to six times — he had received negative attention in the past

by Nadja Rohner

[photo caption: a young Syrian hit his female teacher (symbolic picture)]

The youth from Möriken-Wildegg talked a lot about the Quran, and during recess instructed girls to dress more modestly.

The case caused shock: last week the Argauer Zeitung published the news, that in Möriken-Wildegg a student from the Chestenberg school broke the jaw of a teacher by punching her with his fist.

He did this when she wanted to find out if the Syrian secondary-school student was carrying a knife — as he had already done in the past.

This time the case was taken up by the Weltwoche journalist Alex Baur. According to his research it is about a 14-year-old “M”.

He allegedly comes from a Syrian family with numerous children, who came to Switzerland exactly five years previously and allegedly lives on welfare. His German is good, and he is described as “quite intelligent, self-confident and quick-witted.”

Still, for a while “M.” had often allegedly been talking about the Quran. He also requested — “in Allah’s name” — that the girls from the area dress and behave more modestly. In this context he allegedly played with a knife on the Hellmatt School recess court. This, according to Weltwoche, resulted in his having to empty his pockets every time before being allowed to enter the classroom.

Two days in custody

Obviously, during such a search the attack against the teacher took place. She is said not to have touched the student, but instead only told him to show her the contents of his pockets. At that the teen has attacked her, and, according to eyewitnesses, on whose testimonies the Weltwoche author bases his story, he hit the 62-year-old female teacher five to six times with a fist and the edge of his hand.

Additionally, while she was fleeing he allegedly kicked her. The mother of two adult sons was about to retire. As Weltwoche found out from her environment, she is still in shock.

The Syrian was arrested shortly after the act. The youth has been released after having to spend two days in custody. The juvenile prosecutor is investigating.

It is not clear what will happen to him. He will not be going back to the Chestenberg district school. According to Weltwoche, one of his friends, also a Syrian, “had been expelled a year earlier from the Chestenberg district school due to discipline problems, and was put in special setting outside of the Chestenberg district school.”

André Schärer, the school district deputy from the Chestenberg school district, has neither confirmed nor contradicted the question from the Aargauer Zeitung about the research, based on anonymous sources, by Weltwoche. He could only confirm that the Syrian stood out from the beginning. So Schärer also heard that ”M.” had allegedly told the girls on the recess court to dress more modestly:

“There are clearly certain signs that he doesn’t agree with the way we are cultivating our culture.”

In the media and in the village there’s a rumor that the wounded teacher had to spend a long time in the hospital. Schärer insists that this is not the case. “The Monday after the incident she was off. On Tuesday the incident was discussed in the class concerned with the school social worker. At that point the teacher was already present [in the school] for a couple of hours. From Wednesday to Friday she took care of the class.” Schärer did not want to be misunderstood, however: “I don’t want to downplay the incident; it is serious and should be most severely condemned.”

School district deputy: ”We cannot give any more information.”

It took a week before the incident was made public. The school district deputy insists, however, that nobody wanted to sweep the case under the rug: ”It happened on Friday June 28th. One day before the Youth Festival. Already that same evening we, with the [female] president of the school district, decided on a communication strategy; we decided to actively inform male and female students and the parents as much as possible.”

Of course, it was discussed during the Youth Festival, and the district had to listen to complaints that they wanted to hide something. “This isn’t correct. We wrote a letter to the parents during the week following the Youth Festival. Our hands are tied, because of the investigation by the juvenile prosecutor. Even if we wanted to give out more information, we are not allowed to.”

Video transcript:

00:00   Since he came in the school with a knife, the teacher from then on
00:04   had to search for weapons every day. Last Friday the student obviously freaked out because
00:10   of exactly such a search, and then broke the [female] teacher’s jaw, according to the doctor.
00:15   The Aargau Teachers’ Association strongly criticizes the act:
00:20   This isn’t tolerable, and it’s totally correct that we immediately take such a student
00:24   out of the school and initiate measures… The Chestenberg school district did exactly this,
00:30   but they won’t take a position in front of the camera today; they write instead
00:35   that they expelled the student who was, according to his friend,
00:38   originally from Syria, and that the juvenile prosecutor is currently
00:41   investigating. According to [unintelligible] people cannot believe what happened in their school…
00:45   It’s clear that you [as kids] would sometimes do some crap in school, and so on,
00:50   but we would certainly never have dared to hit a teacher! —To do such crap,
00:55   it did happen before, yes, but I think things became a little more brutal.
01:00   I think that today the violence is worsening and the brutality increasing.
01:05   People are becoming more aggressive. That violence against teachers is increasing
01:10   was confirmed by the Aargau Teachers’ Association. Violence, especially the verbal kind,
01:15   would not only come from the students, but also from the parents. —So on the one hand we simply
01:21   notice that the parents, say with all strength,
01:26   stand up for their children. On the one hand they have the right to stand up for their children,
01:30   but there are limits. Many parents even retained an attorney for example to polish the notes.
01:35   That someone would hit [a teacher] as in this case, in the seventh grade in Möriken-Wildegg,
01:41   it’s fortunately rather an isolated case. Still, the teacher seems
01:46   to be feeling better, since, despite her broken jaw, she came back to school.
 

38 thoughts on “Culture-Enricher in Aargau Breaks Teacher’s Jaw

  1. If a woman had been so disrespectful to him in his home country, there would have been two possible outcomes, depending on the circumstances:

    All that you managed to omit was a third and final, “Let’s all have fun!”, option where the tribal jirga—imported under family reunification laws, mind you—sentences the teacher (and her younger brothers) to sharia-sanctioned gang rape.

    • Ignorant savages; in a sane world they never would have been allowed entry into a modern civilized nation. If we were not already living in a clown world, this scum and the louts who spawned him would be booted out of Switzerland so hard that they all bounced upon hitting the tarmac in Syria.

      • Heinlein, You are far, far, far too kind, for if that had happened to one of mine, I do dare say that I would give ole Saint Vlad the Impaler a darn good run for his money for what I would rain down upon them.

        • … I would give ole Saint Vlad the Impaler a darn good run for his money for what I would rain down upon them.

          Under which heading to file this little gem?

          Raining Impalers or Reigning Impalers? Floor wax or dessert topping? Candy or breath mint? No longer are there any dead Certs.

          • Norse, When the Great Purge starts, and in my most humble opinion it will, what we now have for so called democratic form of government will be far different than what we have now. I meant what I said, Rain down upon them and what form of government would reign down upon everybody else is a crapshoot at this point, think return of the Kaiser or Military Junta for the short/medium term.

  2. ‘Egg’ (pronounced ‘eck’) is a common form in Swiss place names. In Swiss German it loosely translates as ‘corner,’ and is a term often applied (though not exclusively) to jutting out sections of mountainsides.

    Another shocking story. Thanks for the report. I was talking a while ago with a Swiss airline captain friend about the changes there, and his concern for his children and nation’s future. Been a while since I was last back in the country, but I used to be a regular visitor. Utterly heartbreaking.

    • Didn’t realize Switzerland was moving towards Sharia law like France and Sweden, the UK, etc. People I know cancelled trips in June for the E.U. I hope more do. Lawlessness abounds and even tourists are at risk ongoing.

  3. Switzerland is the most fragmented country in Europe, with quite independent provinces not even sharing the same language. So, obviously my usual solution of smaller, autonomous regions or states, does not work in all cases. I’d be interested to know if there is a central authority in Switzerland under the courts. The judiciary seems to have pretty much drawn all ruling power to itself in the United States, particularly the Supreme Court taking powers to itself not even hinted at in the Constitution.

    The big problem with the immigrants is that there are absolutely no consequences to their actions. The attacker got taken out of school, which was probably completely fine with him. But, some power in the host country, be it the judiciary, the deep state bureaucracy, or simply the highly-feminized male administrators and police, has mandated that it’s the responsibility of the European country to keep immigrants safe, regardless of their individual actions. It’s a fine example of cultural-Marxist determinism, where culture and class are everything and the individual is nothing.

    The cult-Marxists make a single exception for European males, where the slightest, most imperceptible micro-aggression becomes a genocide for which the male is fully responsible.

    • I still do not see a workable solution to the problem that doesn’t ultimately involve expelling everyone who follows this cursed religion from the West. Your proposed solutions make sense when dealing with rational individuals, but these savages which have invaded Europe with the assistance of a global elite class and an apathetic and distracted native population are incapable of responding to reason. Instead, as tribal barbarians, they understand and respond quite well to the law of the club.

      Tell me, aside from the improbability of it’s occurence, what would be the likelihood of future assaults against female Swiss teachers if the police had instead responded to the assault by wielding their truncheons against the savage, breaking his jaw and maybe a few other bones for good measure and then gone to the assailant’s home for an encore performance on his father and any other male relatives lounging about before putting the whole wretched lot of them onto a one way flight to Damascus? Violent? Yes. Excessive? Yes. Likely to ever be used? Most assuredly not. But it would have made the point in the only way that such islam-steeped savages could possibly understand that western women are off limits to their depredations, and to touch one is to bring down the displeasure of the state upon their heads in the most painful way imagineable.

      Western laws work for western populations; for the uncivilized muslim barbarian the law of the club is needed.

      • Western laws work for western populations; for the uncivilized muslim barbarian the law of the club is needed.

        My tastes run more towards the mace and morning star but in a pinch any old shillelagh will do.

        Personally, I look forward to the day when Islamically-infected Western nations adopt that time honored military catchphrase:

        Smoke ’em if you’ve got ’em.

        • Give the media anymore time & it will
          Transpire that this teacher willfully and
          Knowingly continually battered this
          Poor student’s fist with her head.

          Seriously though, how come the stafff
          Did not IMMEDIATELY walk off the
          premises in solidarity with the poor
          Unfortunate female victim.

          Undoubtedly he will repeat attend at his
          Next school, quiet possibly causing a
          Fatality to everyones dismay and surprise.

          • Seriously though, how come the staff
            Did not IMMEDIATELY walk off the
            premises in solidarity with the poor
            Unfortunate female victim.

            Far better that those race traitors didn’t.

            It leaves them all clustered up…

      • You know that every swiss household has at least one fully automatic assault rifle with 100 shots of ammo?

        A few years ago a swiss citizen showed me his rifle. And his two semi automatic versions of the same weapon.

        And in a South American Country the Police would do something like that in a Black Ops Fashion.

        And to emulate Cato:
        It is time for the Benes Decrees 2019. (For those that dont know what I mean, a few years ago I wrote a text demanding the Benes Decrees for muslims. It is long overdue.)

      • For Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

        Just to be clear, I always speak against mass slaughter, especially of individuals who may have not committed a violent or subversive act. You never saw me write anything against any violence at all. You never saw me write anything saying that violent aggressors should be treated non-violently.

        My hope is that the Western populations will assert themselves early enough that a rough justice will emerge. You might look to the Israel independence war of 1947-48, or the Serbian actions against the Bosnian Muslims prior to the carpet bombing by NATO on Serbia. There were wartime injustices and some atrocities, but not mass atrocities and the worst consequence would be a population transfer. Population transfers are traumatic for the people involved, but fairly common in history.

        Allowing a Muslim male who has severely assaulted a teacher to remain free, in the country, and under his parents custody is in no way an appropriate response. And yes, sometimes communities have to take care of their own justice. One of the problems is that the entire power of the state is devoted to making sure there is no community response to violent aggression. The railroading of Tommy Robinson is a prime example of this. He is likely receiving a far more heinous experience than the actual rapists.

          • Without wishing to take sides, it’s rapidly becoming apparent that all discernment about Islam—in however many shades of whatever color—merely represent distinctions without a difference.

        • RonaldB,

          I can respect that you prefer a solution to the problem of islamic invasion that doesn’t involve the mass slaughter of individuals. I too, would prefer such a solution if there was one available that didn’t just kick the can down the road to my son’s generation or his children, if any. You are well enough versed in history to know that conquering of one people by another and the subsequent slaughter of all males, or all but the prettiest females is the norm for relations between disparate groups. It is cruel and unfair to the vast majority of the subjugated population, but it is responsible for making the species what it is today. You and I are here precisely because our ancestors did not shy away from such ruthlessness and cruelty.

          I would disagree that there really is no such thing as innocent individuals in islam or just about any warring group for that matter. I am mostly libertarian in my beliefs, but I have become more pragmatic in my middle age regarding collective guilt, especially in it’s application to the muslim problem. I spent several years in my youth as an kinetic ambassador for Uncle Sam in multiple islamic paradises, and I saw the absurdity and folly of trying to separate the sheep from the goats when everyone is a goat dressed like a sheep.

          As an example, when soldiers would drive through a village, their convoy would be bombed by an IED with several soldiers killed, and several maimed for the rest of their lives. I posit the question; who was responsible and what should be done about it? Ultimately, responsibility lies with the American citizens who voted for the leaders or at least accepted soldiers being sent to a war to do half-hearted killing in their name. I don’t really blame the people in the countries we were occupying; if the shoe was on the other foot I would probably be emplacing bombs in the middle of the road to kill invaders too. My belief in collective guilt and collective punishment comes from observing what would happen next after such an attack.

          We would attempt to identify who emplaced the IED and who built it, and maybe try and find the network of support that financed and provided bomb making materials, and then a series of raids would commence at great risk of lives and great cost in material and resources to attempt to round up the individuals directly responsible. This was of course very dangerous and not very successful. Often, non-combatants would be killed or injured in these raids, which would motivate surviving male relatives to join the jihad. Of course nothing happened in a village in isolation; everyone there knew who the bomb maker was, who emplaced the IED, and who triggered the detonation. And many, in their hearts believed in what those individuals were doing and at a minimum supported them by not informing on them. Even if the villagers liked the money and roads and new buildings the Americans brought to their village, they were still muslim, and we could never be one of them because of all kinds of cultural, religious, and tribal chasms. Which brings me back to my long-winded point. In the long run, there would have been far less pain and suffering and death for all involved if in the first several instances of such IED bombings of convoys, we had responded by bombing or targeting with artillery the entire village and every last man, woman, child, goat and chicken living in it, and then gassed the rubble for good measure. The point would have been made unambiguously that you do not mess with us, and the point would have been made to other villages that if they allowed such activities against us, it was at the peril of their own lives.

          Violence, properly used, saves far more lives than it takes. The fact that we in the West are in such a situation today regarding islam is precisely because we refused to use a little violence via collective punishment when it would have been relatively cheap in cost of lives and served as a deterrent to future islamic aggression. The failure to do so ensures that when mass slaughter of civilians is used as a last resort out of military necessity or just frustration, it will take far more lives of innocents than would have otherwise been necessary.

          • Heinlein, Having chocked on the same dust as you, I saw the foolish stupidity of the hearts and minds strategy that utterly failed. You are quite correct to say we should have smoked the entire village, as a warning to the next village of what happens when you play jihadi games. Semper Fi !
            Funny story for you, when Bremmer asked me how I would handle Iraq, I looked him dead in the eye and said bring Saddam’s Generals back and put them and charge and leave.

          • Sounds a lot like the Nazis’ reaction. If we do the same to defend our culture, is it still worth defending?

          • I too, would prefer such a solution if there was one available that didn’t just kick the can down the road to my son’s generation or his children, if any.

            A central problem being that, with near-unanimity, every road down which the can is kicked dead-ends at the graveyard.

            All that’s shifted over history is the more recent ability of a better-weaponed (i.e., unconventionally armed) combatant to make numerical superiority irrelevant.

            It is cruel and unfair to the vast majority of the subjugated population, but it is responsible for making the species what it is today.

            Such a ubiquitous order of battle only becomes “cruel and unfair” when such actions are viewed through the lens of modern morality. If human endeavor has taught mankind anything, it is that “kill or be killed” merely is the prelude to a far more violent civilizational symphony.

            On that note, tuning up Islam’s off-beat (oft-beat? … beat-off?) orchestra is an afternoon’s pastime which only Politically Correct warfighting prolongs past sunset. And much like hydrogen’s miraculous transformation into hominids: Given enough time, Muslims will find that most Western conurbations have turned into sundown towns.

            … I have become more pragmatic in my middle age regarding collective guilt, especially in its application to the muslim problem.

            As have I with respect to this same coin’s reverse: Namely, another blanket strategy called, “collective punishment”. Carpet bombing is merely one scrappy panel of the crazy quilt that’s stitched up with an A-10’s Avenger. The 9-11 Atrocity was just another button on a coat of arms that will immobilize Islam like some hybrid, hair-shirt straitjacket.

            … I saw the absurdity and folly of trying to separate the sheep from the goats when everyone is a goat dressed like a sheep.

            An end result of Islam’s duplicitous, out-of-uniform perfidy is that all Muslim babies will end up being thrown out with the jihadist bathwater. Only a supremely reluctant ummah has any measurable ability to avert this otherwise inexorable outcome.

            It is Dar al-Harb’s egregious disavowal of such an ironclad equation that makes the roar of Islam’s mouse so pathetically ridiculous. Once their oily mousetrap is sprung, the sandbox will return to its original role as our world’s premier litter box.

            half-hearted killing

            Wot in hell is that?!? Aiming for the left ventricle only? Yeesh.

            My belief in collective guilt and collective punishment comes from observing what would happen next after such an attack.

            As runs my question about how Islam’s (mis)behavior might have been modified by making the home town of Osama’s sheltering imam, Mullah Omar, simply vanish in unirradiated MOAB mushroom clouds.

            Methinks that thereafter, merely a stern finger-wagging might have sufficiently inspired Islam to throw a towel over their tumescent supremacism. In the absence of any terrycloth triage, three words tell this entire tale:

            RINSE AND REPEAT.

            The point would have been made unambiguously that you do not mess with us, and the point would have been made to other villages that if they allowed such activities against us, it was at the peril of their own lives.

            Nearly half a millennia ago Machiavelli provided civilization with this problem’s solution.

            If you force me to do violence, I shall be so savage and so cruel, and hurt you so badly that the thought of revenge shall never cross your mind.

            Reaching back into time’s dim recesses by another thousand years, Little Boot briefed his Fascist, jackbooted Florentine forebears with:

            Oderint, dum metuant

            (“Let them hate, so long as they fear”)

            — Caligula

            Violence, properly used, saves far more lives than it takes.

            What better proof than Hiroshima for this axiom’s most exceptional case? Practically speaking, America’s Manhattan Project saved the entire Japanese race from Imperially dictated mass suicide.

            All of which beggars the centuries-old question of what it will take for Islam to renege upon its own suicidal vows. American forces declined any admonitory demonstration of their newfound atomic might to its Nipponese foe. How is it that Muslims are magically entitled to any similar forewarning?

    • Mark H,

      If we don’t aggressively and resolutely defend our culture by using all tools available including the use of force, is it still worth defending?

      Regarding the Nazis; they never had a coherent theory governing their use of violence. While they were undoubtedly quite vicious and evil, violence committed by the Nazi regime rarely had any purpose other than violence for the sake of violence. Take their slaughter of the jews for example. It served no legitimate military or political function other than allowing the confiscation of jewish assets under the guise of racial superiority. Slaughtering jews didn’t stop them from being jews. Instead it diverted scarce military resources, transport, and manpower that could have been put to more productive use at the fronts, and likely cost them the war against the USSR by turning the populace that initially viewed them as liberators from Stalin into fierce adversaries.

      Contrast this against the Mongol targeted use of violence to achieve military and political objectives. The Mongols were notorious for slaughtering entire cities that resisted their hordes, and entire nations that had crossed them. This served a military purpose, in that fear of this led to many cities opening their gates to the invaders and willingly turning over resources to avoid being slaughtered. This allowed a relatively small group of nomadic tribes from the Asian steppes to conquer China, most of the Middle East, the territory encompassing what is now Russia, and Eastern Europe all the way to the Danube. Indeed, it was said that a Mongol soldier could walk into a village and start shooting people with arrows and he would not be molested, so certain was the violent reprisal that would swiftly follow if he were harmed. Such were the examples of Mongol terror that they were able to effectively control a vast empire and enforce a Pax Mongolica upon much of the known world that allowed trade from East to West to flourish for several centuries.

      Sun Tzu and Von Clausewitz certainly understood the purpose and use of violence; the author of my avatar was very controversial in his time for writing of these truths too. So too with Mohammed, and like it or not, the muslims have a very rational theory of the use of violence to achieve political objectives. It is time we too start playing from the same page as our adversaries.

      • Sounds a lot like the Nazis’ reaction. If we do the same to defend our culture, is it still worth defending?

        Also @ Mark H: However time-honored your trope may be, please consider abandoning its shopworn corollary of: ‘Using their methods means the terrorists have won!’

        Allied forces crushed the Nazis into dust without opening one death camp. Similarly, WWII’s Pacific Theater was able to forego anything remotely resembling the rape of Nanking.

        Regardless, before that dust settled, we had Hitler at room-temperature (however briefly) and Hirohito penning us love letters—even if they did glow a bit.

        I fail to see how defeating Islam needs be any different. If it requires fusing the Arabian landscape several square miles at a time (or even just all at once), then so be it. Far better that than enduring a single incident of Iranian (or North Korean, for that matter) thermonuclear terrorism.

        Please keep in mind that the West has self-imposed boundaries with respect to military action. Muslim barbarity has no such upper limits.

        That one single dissimilarity spells Islam’s doom. Left unchecked, Muslims inevitably will commit an atrocity of such limitless depravity that unresponsive countries may well be lumped in alongside Islam for reprisal.

        There comes a time when sloth in combating pure evil becomes an unacceptably enabling force. The EU parliament has earned itself that hideous distinction in spades. Rest assured that if Israel’s last resort of the Samson Option doesn’t see Paris and Moscow vaporized, count on Iran or its proxies to finish that thought.

        The sole difference being that Israel is unlikely to initiate what Islam regularly extols.

    • Let me respond broadly to a lot of the things said in this thread.

      The consensus seems to be that in military encounters with Muslims, or any enemy, we need to fight with unrestricted violence and use total and collective punishments for insurgents and their villages or cities.

      To me, it kind of misses the point. The point is to be able to live in our civilization without the malevolent influence of Islam or Sharia law.

      Are we in the US any safer if we overthrow and destroy the Iraqi government and social order, and allow massive Iraqi immigration into the US? After 9/11 the US special forces and air power in fact decimated the Taliban forces. Read an account of the Delta teams there, serving as spotters on the Taliban fighters. But, when push came to shove, our generals decided to nation build by giving the honor of capturing Bin Laden to the Northern Alliance forces. The NA screwed it up, of course, allowing BL to escape, either through incompetence or Muslim solidarity. So, we lost the only real objective of the Afghan operation, killing Bin Laden, and instead got bogged down into nation building a Muslim country.

      Similarly, in Iraq. The US invaded Iraq on the false pretense that Saddam Hussein was working on weapons of mass destruction, other than World War I vintage chlorine bombs. So, the rational thing to do would be to depose Hussein and get the hell out. Again, we got bogged in nation building. Paul Bremmer, the US proconsul in Iraq, systematically dismantled the Iraq tools of social order: the army, the police, and the government administration. Iraqi society literally had no defenses to the fundamentalist jihadis; also, the Shi’a militias allied with Iran were able to operate. As compensation, I guess, we allowed tens of thousands of Iraqi Muslims into the US and other Western countries.

      Would wiping out Iraqi villages as retribution have made the people back home facing Iraqi Muslim immigrants any safer?

      Going back to Machiavelli, quite a smart fellow. Machiavelli advised the prince to not make any foreign conquests unless he intended to move there. In other words, you can’t successfully administer a foreign territory from afar. Rome had terrible luck with its conquered provinces.
      The complaint is, Muslim countries are now getting the bomb, and are dire threats. But generally, a Muslim country with a bomb has a local counter. Pakistan has the bomb, and if they get too aggressive with it, India will indeed turn Pakistan into glass. In every encounter, India has beaten Pakistan. It’s not the province of the US to protect India.

      My thesis is that the greatest threat of Islam is through infiltration. It doesn’t matter how many villages we wipe out if we allow massive Muslim immigration into the country. Conversely, if we do not allow Muslim immigration into the country, there is no real need to conquer Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Syria, except as an excuse for massive government money transfers to the arms industry and the Deep State administrators.

      • RonaldB, How we deal with the muslim infiltration is relatively simple, it just takes a matter of will to get it done. As for the leftist enablers of this Islamic invasion, they too will have to suffer for their folly and treason.

      • The point is to be able to live in our civilization without the malevolent influence of Islam or Sharia law.

        What happens if the only way of doing that is by annihilating Islam?

        A rough estimate is that the global headcount of Muslim terrorists is somewhere around the population of the United States. Worse yet, these predators are larded throughout dozens of Muslim majority countries, much less numerous hordes in secular Western nations.

        This is a story with “unhappy ending” written all over it. To channel the British bards: It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury even as the burnt jihadi’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the fire.

        Similarly, in Iraq. The US invaded Iraq on the false pretense that Saddam Hussein was working on weapons of mass destruction, other than World War I vintage chlorine bombs.

        You may wish to reconsider your position. There was a reason why supposed NATO-member Turkey betrayed American forces during Operation Desert Storm.

        The US troops marshaled at Incirlik were intended to create a classic pincer movement for the purpose of interdicting movement of WMDs into Syria.

        From: Allegations of Iraqi Chemical Weapons Transported to Syria and Possible Tunnel Adits at Al-Bayda, Syria

        Version of 2014-06-22

        https://fas.org/irp/eprint/cw-syria.pdf

        http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/what-is-assad-hiding-in-his-backyard-1.292935

        What is Assad hiding in his backyard?

        Satellite photos of secret Syrian site depict at least five guarded installations whose purpose is unclear.

        By Avi Scharf
        May 30, 2010 | 2:37 AM

        The images depict at least five guarded installations whose purpose is unclear. In the center is a new residential complex with at least 40 multistory buildings whose shape and structure are distinct from the architecture in the rest of the town.

        A number of Google Earth users said they saw passageways to bunkers leading to installations underneath the mountains surrounding Masyaf.

        Other users noted that Syrian journalist and human rights activist Nizar Nayouf told the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in 2004 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smuggled his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons into Syria just prior to the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003.

        In the interview, Nayouf claimed that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were stashed in three separate sites in Syria, including an underground military base beneath the village of AlBaida, one kilometer south of Masyaf. Nayouf was imprisoned by Syrian authorities for 10 years. In 2001, he was granted political asylum in France.

        Similar accusations of Iraqi weapons smuggling into Syria were made by then-prime minister Ariel Sharon during an interview with Channel 2 news. Former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon made similar claims in an interview with the now-defunct New York Sun.

        Conversely, if we do not allow Muslim immigration into the country, there is no real need to conquer Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Syria, except as an excuse for massive government money transfers to the arms industry and the Deep State administrators.

        Iranian nuclear terrorism negates that concept.

        • I find the documents thoroughly unconvincing and unpersuasive.

          First of all, the 2003 war was sold to the American people on the basis that Iraq was working on nuclear weapons. I realize the frequent slight-of-hand allegations, where “weapons of mass destruction” is subtly substituted for “nuclear weapons”. But, the case was made in the UN and the assertion made that Iraq was looking for yellowcake uranium and working on nuclear weapons. So, the whole rationale for the invasion was phony.

          Furthermore, even on the stockpiling of the chemical and biological weapons, a lot of the information was based on journalists and Iraqi and Syrian dissidents. The Carnegie Report, cited in your document, stated

          The idea of Syria taking Iraq’s weapons is theoretically possible, but highly unlikely, says
          Joseph Cirincione, senior associate and director of the Non-Proliferation Project at the Carnegie
          Endowment for International Peace.
          “We got into a lot of trouble in Iraq by listening to exiles and dissidents,” he says, speculating
          that some dissidents may exaggerate or invent claims for attention, money, asylum, or
          influence. He says that he doesn’t want to dismiss an exile’s reports that Syria has Iraq’s
          weapons, but that he would want to see a great deal more supporting evidence before
          considering this source credible.
          Cirincione just completed work on a Carnegie Endowment report concluding that the Bush
          administration had systematically misrepresented the weapons threat from Iraq.

          So, even going by the document, at the time we invaded Iraq, the weapons were out of Iraq. Our troops searched high and low for “weapons of mass destruction” and came up with nada. Did we then leave? No. We captured Saddam Hussein and turned him over to the puppet Iraq government, itself a major violation of the rules of war. We went on to totally destroy the security structure of Iraq, leaving it open to virtual colonization by Iran. Great work!

          Is that a justification for CIA supporting ISIS and the other rebels in Syria?

          As far as Iranian nuclear terrorism, you are accusing Iran of nuclear terrorism because Iran is, or may be, or maybe will be, working on a nuclear bomb. Maybe.

          We have Pakistan and North Korea already possessing nuclear weapons. These are nice, stable, friendly regimes? Do you advocate going to war against them?

          A nuclear Iran is Israel’s problem. Israel has nuclear weapons. I am opposed to the US getting involved in a ground war against Iran unless Iran explicitly attacks US ships. If Iran presents an existential threat to Israel, it’s up to Israel to deal with it. Ditto for Saudi Arabia.

          Similarly, a nuclear Pakistan is an Indian problem. We’re basically funding the Pakistani nuclear program…why? So Pakistan won’t use their nukes? I can’t wait for the US to disengage from Afghanistan, so we can leave the area and stop dealing with Pakistan, which is an ally to the US as Turkey is an ally to the US.

          • “The (krytron) triggering device is a complex instrument; it’s the guts of an atomic bomb,” a federal investigator said. “If a country’s got these, it’s relatively easy to get the bomb.”

            According to technical experts, the krytron is a high-speed electronic switch that can be used to control the timing of a nuclear detonation. The more precise the timing, the more destructive the explosion can be.I invite anyone to try and convince me that none of those critical, highly restricted devices would have stuck to Iran’s hands in the process.

            THAT was back in 1985 and, once again, just two years ago Tehran was at the center of attempts to acquire from European sources, dual-use technology when, Iran attempted to buy nuclear technology illegally 32 times, German agency says.

            We went on to totally destroy the security structure of Iraq, leaving it open to virtual colonization by Iran. Great work!

            Is that a justification for CIA supporting ISIS and the other rebels in Syria?

            The ill-considered, imaginary Great Game machinations of a privileged, silver spoon, Ivy League poor-little-rich Nancy boy like Bush 2.0 are utterly irrelevant to anything but an effort to halt all further wastes of time engaging in Islamic nation-building. Surely, an occupation that can only be one of history’s most absolutely thankless tasks.

            All of which has exactly nothing to do with Iran’s longstanding pursuit of nuclear weapons.

            As far as Iranian nuclear terrorism, you are accusing Iran of nuclear terrorism because Iran is, or may be, or maybe will be, working on a nuclear bomb. Maybe.

            Please tell our studio audience and all the folks at home exactly where there appeared the word “maybe” in Ahmadinejad’s threat to, “wipe Israel off the map”.

            We have Pakistan and North Korea already possessing nuclear weapons. These are nice, stable, friendly regimes? Do you advocate going to war against them?

            You are attempting to cite facts in evidence. There is absolutely ZERO to indicate that “Pakistan and North Korea … are nice, stable, friendly regimes”. In fact, every piece of evidence gathered points in the diametrically opposite direction.

            Both are designated rogue nations that experience routine financial and technological sanctions. These two avowedly (not to mention cooperating) anti-Western conspirators have made individual and direct contributions to both Iran’s nuclear weapons programs and global terrorism—of which Tehran is that web’s center. There are Himalayan mountains of evidence to support this conclusion, while yours desperately lacks any burden of proof (or the Sherpas to lump it).

            A nuclear Iran is Israel’s problem.

            RonaldB, please consider stopping while you’re ahead. I’ve already noted my respect for your contributions at GoV elsewhere but in this case, you are completely off of the rails.

            Just this once I will spell out Iran’s fatal equation.

            • Despite hating Israel more than anything on earth, Tel Aviv has the Samson Option (i.e., kosher MAD).

            • Ergo, Iran, nor its Muslim cohort, under penalty of annihilation will not attack the Israeli state with WMDs of any sort. To do so will assure incineration of the entire Muslim Middle East.

            • The three other major powers that Islam hates with nearly the same incandescent rage are those that have MANMADE LAWS. This eternal affront to god-given sharia law cannot be abided. Consequently, America, Canada, and Australia represent three of the largest and most repugnant infidel bastions on Earth.

            • After the Little Satan of Israel, there is only America, the Great Satan, Islam’s penultimate foe.

            • Canada and Oz are of little consequence by comparison (until food exports enter the equation).

            • How much easier would it be to slip a containerized nuclear device onboard some Malacamax freighter originating in some other, Iranian-friendly Asian nation? How much more likely would it be to evade the notice of inspectors focused more on shipments from the Middle East?

            NOTE: – This is specifically why North Korea remains of such a vital concern to America. Do not fool yourself into believing that Pyongyang doesn’t have its own special recipe for taqiyya. The Kims were knotting Western diplo’s pudendum before North Korea finished laying in its first batch of soju. –

            The upshot of this is as follows: America is a far more likely target for Iranian nuclear terrorism than Israel, neither proximity nor genocidal obsessions withstanding. Full stop.

            I am opposed to the US getting involved in a ground war against Iran unless Iran explicitly attacks US ships.

            With your own position put well to the side, please take note that nobody here at GoV or even within the Trump administration has said ONE WORD about a ground war in Iran.

            War with Iran will likely be as follows: Using exclusively conventional weapons, US carrier-based air sorties will grind nearly all of Iran’s surface installations plus their ancillary planes, boats, subs, and sundry brass hats into dust. Current estimates for prosecuting that action hover somewhere around 24 HOURS OR LESS.

            A follow-up maritime and air traffic blockades gently strangle the entire nation into surrender through starvation and industrial collapse.

            All of this, possibly even as arms are dumped for internal dissenting factions.

            Trump then marks a spot for Ali Khamenei to enthusiastically osculate. All of which proceeds onstage under the watchful eye of brightly lit primetime cameras. And you’d best bet that this terrorist toe rag does so with astonishingly determined vigor.

            That’s because, if he doesn’t play nice, Khamenei gets to take the dirt nap along with a lot of the Iranian Majlis (preferably at the hands of exceptionally irate Persian mobs).

            At least it’s what the non-glow-in-the-dark prognosticators are forecasting for that terrorist pesthole.

            If Iran presents an existential threat to Israel, it’s up to Israel to deal with it.

            In light of previously presented data—and in the fashion of Gravesender, Mister Norman Voles—“This is where your argument falls to the ground.” Put another way, there is, to say the least, a preponderance of evidence which casts doubt upon your findings.

            Similarly, a nuclear Pakistan is an Indian problem.

            All of which explains why—after he had sought to obtain nuclear materials before the 9-11 Atrocity—bin Laden eventually was hunted down and killed inside Pakistan without notification to, or permission from, Islamabad.

            Are you aware of the fact that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons management has been playing, “button, button, who’s got the button?” with their nuclear devices?

            Terrified at the prospect of having their precious few warheads confiscated by American Special Forces Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are being carted around in UNARMORED floral delivery vans as part of some ersatz, low-budget, Minuteman dog and pony show.

            That this lunatic shell game only heightens the risk of Taliban elements—inside or out of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency—seems to have eluded all but nail-biting Western spymasters. It strains credulity to think that you might be unaware of how Taliban operatives have penetrated Pakistan’s ISI agency more thoroughly than a pervert-trained Tijuana donkey.

            I can’t wait for the US to disengage from Afghanistan, so we can leave the area and stop dealing with Pakistan, which is an ally to the US as Turkey is an ally to the US.

            Well, since that’s hours of my life I’m never getting back , we may as go ahead and end on some note of agreement.

            Gadzooks (and it’s not often I type that, Jeeves), one trembles to think what Kipling would have penned about America’s own Afghan folly. Topping that is how this thread’s original theme was about enrichment of an entirely different sort from that of Iran’s own quest for fire-in-the-hole.

          • Blast it all! Securi may have truncated my post. Needs be I must post it in parts.

            Dear Baron, please consider deleting my previous, and incomplete reply (starting with “Krytrons”. To wit:

            First of all, the 2003 war was sold to the American people on the basis that Iraq was working on nuclear weapons.

            And, identical to Iran, a country with some of this planet’s largest oil reserves nonetheless felt compelled to build Osirak. When taken along with Iraq’s well-documented chemical warfare programs, the pattern of behavior being established becomes old hat.

            At day’s end, all of this was irrelevant. Regardless of whatever familial scores there were to settle (i.e. Saddam’s contract on Bush 1.0), Iraq once furnished and probably still does provide free passage or safe haven to al Qaeda, particularly during whatever roll-up there was to the 9-11 Atrocity.

            Just that alone was reason enough to crush the Iraqi cockroach.

            On the other hand, squandering trillions in the pursuit of nation-building for an Islamic country is, perhaps, one of the most surefire indicators of availability for organ harvesting.

            As to that Carnegie Report: Ever since the West’s best and brightest intelligence networks were unable to predict the USSR’s collapse, I’ve contracted a case of permanently jaundiced optics, especially when examining their more recent work product.

            The ease with which Pakistan sheltered bin Laden is stark testimony to this systemic failure.

            As far as Iranian nuclear terrorism, you are accusing Iran of nuclear terrorism because Iran is, or may be, or maybe will be, working on a nuclear bomb. Maybe.

            Although they no longer can be found online, soon after the 9-11 Atrocity, there emerged satellite reconnaissance images of a nuclear lens test station in Iran. Its site near other weapons research facilities—along with the presence of precisely positioned, radially distributed, conduits which were concentered equidistantly from a central, outdoor and physically isolated test platform—pointed towards the inescapable conclusion that test-firing of instantaneous Krytron (i.e., cold cathode trigger tube) type nuclear triggers and their HE charges were being conducted.

            Seeing as how nearly all other test facilities that perform this sort of research are configured in exactly the same way, it makes any alternative explanations rather dicey.

            From 1985: Smuggler Tried to Sell Nuclear Triggers in ‘Peace Plan’ : Iranian Claims He Offered Arms to Iraq

            A convicted Iranian weapons smuggler and his Iranian partner in London offered to sell nuclear trigger devices called krytrons to Iraq as part of a bizarre so-called “peace plan” to end the war between Tehran and Baghdad, according to court records and interviews with investigators.

            Investigators also discovered that Shooshtary and Amir Mansour, his London partner, were attempting to “get some money” from deals with the Iraqi government as well. Their primary product: a key component of an atomic bomb.

            “The (krytron) triggering device is a complex instrument; it’s the guts of an atomic bomb,” a federal investigator said. “If a country’s got these, it’s relatively easy to get the bomb.”

            According to technical experts, the krytron is a high-speed electronic switch that can be used to control the timing of a nuclear detonation. The more precise the timing, the more destructive the explosion can be.

            I invite anyone to try and convince me that none of those critical, highly restricted devices would have stuck to Iran’s hands in the process.

            [to be continued]

          • It’s too long for me to consider parsing it. Both comments are now available; you and your interlocutors can sort them out.

          • Let’s all please hope this next part trails my first portion. If not, I will ask that dear gentle readers please look the this part after the first one. Thank you, NR.

            THAT was back in 1985 and, once again, just two years ago Tehran was at the center of attempts to acquire from European sources, dual-use technology when, Iran attempted to buy nuclear technology illegally 32 times, German agency says.

            We went on to totally destroy the security structure of Iraq, leaving it open to virtual colonization by Iran. Great work!

            Is that a justification for CIA supporting ISIS and the other rebels in Syria?

            The ill-considered, imaginary Great Game machinations of a privileged, silver spoon, Ivy League poor-little-rich Nancy boy like Bush 2.0 are utterly irrelevant to anything but an effort to halt all further wastes of time engaging in Islamic nation-building. Surely, an occupation that can only be one of history’s most absolutely thankless tasks.

            All of which has exactly nothing to do with Iran’s longstanding pursuit of nuclear weapons.

            As far as Iranian nuclear terrorism, you are accusing Iran of nuclear terrorism because Iran is, or may be, or maybe will be, working on a nuclear bomb. Maybe.

            Please tell our studio audience and all the folks at home exactly where there appeared the word “maybe” in Ahmadinejad’s threat to, “wipe Israel off the map”.

            We have Pakistan and North Korea already possessing nuclear weapons. These are nice, stable, friendly regimes? Do you advocate going to war against them?

            You are attempting to cite facts in evidence. There is absolutely ZERO to indicate that “Pakistan and North Korea … are nice, stable, friendly regimes”. In fact, every piece of evidence gathered points in the diametrically opposite direction.

            Both are designated rogue nations that experience routine financial and technological sanctions. These two avowedly (not to mention cooperating) anti-Western conspirators have made individual and direct contributions to both Iran’s nuclear weapons programs and global terrorism—of which Tehran is that web’s center. There are Himalayan mountains of evidence to support this conclusion, while yours desperately lacks any burden of proof (or the Sherpas to lump it).

            A nuclear Iran is Israel’s problem.

            RonaldB, please consider stopping while you’re ahead. I’ve already noted my respect for your contributions at GoV elsewhere but in this case, you are completely off of the rails.

            Just this once I will spell out Iran’s fatal equation.

            • Despite hating Israel more than anything on earth, Tel Aviv has the Samson Option (i.e., kosher MAD).

            • Ergo, Iran, nor its Muslim cohort, under penalty of annihilation will not attack the Israeli state with WMDs of any sort. To do so will assure incineration of the entire Muslim Middle East.

            • The three other major powers that Islam hates with nearly the same incandescent rage are those that have MANMADE LAWS. This eternal affront to god-given sharia law cannot be abided. Consequently, America, Canada, and Australia represent three of the largest and most repugnant infidel bastions on Earth.

            • After the Little Satan of Israel, there is only America, the Great Satan, Islam’s penultimate foe.

            • Canada and Oz are of little consequence by comparison (until food exports enter the equation).

            • How much easier would it be to slip a containerized nuclear device onboard some Malacamax freighter originating in some other, Iranian-friendly Asian nation? How much more likely would it be to evade the notice of inspectors focused more on shipments from the Middle East?

            NOTE: – This is specifically why North Korea remains of such a vital concern to America. Do not fool yourself into believing that Pyongyang doesn’t have its own special recipe for taqiyya. The Kims were knotting Western diplo’s pudendum before North Korea finished laying in its first batch of soju. –

            The upshot of this is as follows: America is a far more likely target for Iranian nuclear terrorism than Israel, neither proximity nor genocidal obsessions withstanding. Full stop.

            I am opposed to the US getting involved in a ground war against Iran unless Iran explicitly attacks US ships.

            With your own position put well to the side, please take note that nobody here at GoV or even within the Trump administration has said ONE WORD about a ground war in Iran.

            War with Iran will likely be as follows: Using exclusively conventional weapons, US carrier-based air sorties will grind nearly all of Iran’s surface installations plus their ancillary planes, boats, subs, and sundry brass hats into dust. Current estimates for prosecuting that action hover somewhere around 24 HOURS OR LESS.

            A follow-up maritime and air traffic blockades gently strangle the entire nation into surrender through starvation and industrial collapse.

            All of this, possibly even as arms are dumped for internal dissenting factions.

            Trump then marks a spot for Ali Khamenei to enthusiastically osculate. All of which proceeds onstage under the watchful eye of brightly lit primetime cameras. And you’d best bet that this terrorist toe rag does so with astonishingly determined vigor.

            That’s because, if he doesn’t play nice, Khamenei gets to take the dirt nap along with a lot of the Iranian Majlis (preferably at the hands of exceptionally irate Persian mobs).

            At least it’s what the non-glow-in-the-dark prognosticators are forecasting for that terrorist pesthole.

            If Iran presents an existential threat to Israel, it’s up to Israel to deal with it.

            In light of previously presented data—and in the fashion of Gravesender, Mister Norman Voles—“This is where your argument falls to the ground.” Put another way, there is, to say the least, a preponderance of evidence which casts doubt upon your findings.

            Similarly, a nuclear Pakistan is an Indian problem.

            All of which explains why—after he had sought to obtain nuclear materials before the 9-11 Atrocity—bin Laden eventually was hunted down and killed inside Pakistan without notification to, or permission from, Islamabad.

            Are you aware of the fact that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons management has been playing, “button, button, who’s got the button?” with their nuclear devices?

            Terrified at the prospect of having their precious few warheads confiscated by American Special Forces Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are being carted around in UNARMORED floral delivery vans as part of some ersatz, low-budget, Minuteman dog and pony show.

            That this lunatic shell game only heightens the risk of Taliban elements—inside or out of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency—seems to have eluded all but nail-biting Western spymasters. It strains credulity to think that you might be unaware of how Taliban operatives have penetrated Pakistan’s ISI agency more thoroughly than a pervert-trained Tijuana donkey.

            I can’t wait for the US to disengage from Afghanistan, so we can leave the area and stop dealing with Pakistan, which is an ally to the US as Turkey is an ally to the US.

            Well, since that’s hours of my life I’m never getting back , we may as go ahead and end on some note of agreement.

            Gadzooks (and it’s not often I type that, Jeeves), one trembles to think what Kipling would have penned about America’s own Afghan folly. Topping that is how this thread’s original theme was about enrichment of an entirely different sort from that of Iran’s own quest for fire-in-the-hole.

          • For NorseRadish and your very nice points:

            Let me see if I can make some direct and short observations. I’ll not use irony or sarcasm, since those are subject to misinterpretations, and indicate that I’m not as good a writer as I think. So, my best approach is direct.

            0) I try to develop my opinions and views from data and logic. Sometimes they don’t come out the way others think they should come out. Sometimes, they don’t come out the way I think they should come out. But, they are the results of all the logic and data I can muster, and I do not change them except when presented with counter data and better logic.

            1) You asserted that Israel is not really in danger from Iran since Iran knows that Israel will paper Iran over with nukes if Iran makes a directly aggressive move towards Israel. However, the US is in danger from smuggled nuclear devices from Iran.

            My reply is, if Israel is able to deter Iran with the knowledge that Iran will be nuked in a serious exchange, why does that knowledge not hold for the US? In other words, a nuclear device traceable to Iran, and these things are always very traceable, will trigger a massive nuclear response from the US. I don’t see why the US is in more danger from Iran than Israel. I hold to my viewpoint that the US is better off not trying to manage Middle Eastern affairs.

            2) You talked about the lack of security for Pakistani nukes; how they are so afraid that US special forces will swoop in and grab them, that they send them around Pakistan in unguarded, unmarked trucks, susceptible to al qaeda, which has thoroughly infiltrated Pakistani ISI (intelligence) anyway.

            To me, this says the US is more secure by withdrawing special forces from anywhere near Pakistan, and thus allowing Pakistan to at least make the effort to guard their nukes creditably. As with Iran, the real deterrence is the knowledge that the US is capable of extreme retaliation. The key is retaliation and not nation-building.

            3) You mentioned possible Iraq involvement in the bombing of the Murah office building in Oklahoma City, and the contract put out by Saddam Hussein for ex-President George HW Bush.

            I have read long, long, long articles on the bombing, making very credible evidence there is some Middle Eastern, possibly Iraqi, involvement.

            The most salient points for me is that the journalistic efforts were made in spite of no cooperation from the government, in fact active government discouragement. I am not about to authorize a US government war on a country based on evidence the US government attempted to suppress. It doesn’t compute.

            Similarly, if George W Bush wants to initiate a war in revenge for an attempted hit on his father, let his say so openly. Rather than pull a story out of the air about an Iraqi program to create nuclear weapons. And let me add, the Carnegie report quotes that I included were taken from the document that you linked to. In other words, I used your source as my source. It makes it rather difficult for you to claim my source is unreliable.

            I am going to restate my original thesis. Muslims in Muslim countries are an irritant rather than an existential threat. Muslims in Western countries are a dire threat. US meddling in the Middle East has caused massive damage to Muslims and Christians without the slightest benefit to US security.

  4. If the authorities will not make examples of the barbarians, the barbarians will make examples of the authorities, which the authorities evade by passing on to everyone else.

    The authorities as I call them, are only elected and unelected bureaucrats.

    The judiciary may be as wacky in Switzerland as they can appear to be all across the West, I really do not know Switzerland.

    It is surrounded and pressured by the E.U.

    • If the authorities will not make examples of the barbarians, the barbarians will make examples of the authorities, which the authorities evade by passing on to everyone else.

      Ergo, ways must be found to ensure that, “the barbarians will make examples of the authorities”, quod erat demonstrandum.

      Clearly, Maria Ladenburger’s example was insufficient.

    • Switzerland used to be a federation of more-or-less autonomous states. Is it still composed as such? Do the Swiss cantons have the right to control movement of citizens and residents between them?

      I think in terms of California, which is making it pretty clear they will ignore US immigration law and confer citizenship on all illegals who enter there. In effect, California is seceding. I fully support California in doing so, but I think we need to have hard borders between California and the remainder of the US. If we keep the crime and welfare-dependency bottled up in California, it won’t affect the rest of us that much.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.