Category Archives: Books

The Red Army Faction is Dead — Long Live Antifa

Posted on by
7

The following analysis of the Red Army Faction was written by an ultra-red-diaper baby: the daughter of the communist terrorist Ulrika Meinhof, who was the “Meinhof” of the notorious Baader-Meinhof Gang.

Rembrandt Clancy has provided an introduction to the translated essay, and also an appendix containing additional translated material.

Ideologies have a powerful tendency to develop a momentum of their own and to bring forth ever new motivational drive creators who feel pressure to go one step further. Ideologies have a tendency to expand and take over more and more spheres of politics and society. All spheres of policy today are in this sense determined by ’68: be it education policy, family and gender policy; be it European policy, energy and economic policy, through to the non-existent immigration policy. The culture and subculture as well as the NGOs have been ticking until today in ’68er time. Also, the schizophrenic policy towards radical left-wing violence, be it the G20 summit in Hamburg in July of 2017 or the violent excesses against the ECB in Frankfurt in March of 2015, have to be seen in the context of the ’68er-spin. […] What must be recognised and eliminated is the worldwide “fatwa” of the genocidal mass murderer Mao Zedong against the West, against everything that is Western: against Western culture, against what Western morality is, what Western achievement is; the “fatwa” that in the sixties put so many privileged Western children on the march to blindly hate their West, to furiously destroy and attack it; precisely this “fatwa”, which for fifty years has been taking on a life of its own, raging like a lindworm throughout society and strangling the Western freedom of the individual.*

— Bettina Röhl “Die RAF hat euch Lieb” (2018)

Bettina Röhl: Daughter of the Red Army Faction (RAF)

by Rembrandt Clancy

The author of the present essay was born in 1962 and is one of the twin daughters of Ulrika Meinhof (1934-1976), who still lives on under her maiden name in that other designation for the RAF, the Baader-Meinhof Gruppe (Baader-Meinhof Gang). Ulrika’s husband, Klaus Rainer Röhl, whom she divorced in 1968, was the publisher of konkret, which was the preeminent magazine animating the Extra-Parliamentary Opposition (APO) in the Bundesrepublik from the 1960s until it was shut down in 1973. Ulrike was the magazine’s one-time chief editor. She exercised considerable intellectual and propaganda influence on the radical student movement of her time, including her feminist family concept, where the personal becomes political, an axiom in her essay which also explains why women threw tomatoes at the Shah of Iran in 1967 (cf. Die Frauen im SDS oder In Eigener Sache, “The Women in the SDS or Action On Their Own Behalf”; 1968). In May of 1976 Ulrika Meinhof was found hanged in her prison cell with a makeshift device amid circumstances which, for some, remain unclarified.

Bettina Röhl studied history and is a publicist. She has written two books treating critically of the radical ’68er student movement which threatened to destabilise the Federal Republic of Germany (Bundesrepublik Deutschland — BRD). Her first book So macht Kommunismus Spaß! (Making Communism Fun! — 2006) deals with the history of the Left in Germany from 1949 to 1968.

In her second book, Die RAF hat euch lieb (The RAF Loves You — 2018), Bettina Röhl recounts her experiences as a child in the first-generation RAF, whose most prominent names include Horst Mahler, Gudrun Esslin and Andreas Baader. The author conveys the movement’s quasi-religious, “Marxist-Leninist-Maoist” fervour among privileged students, who, mostly children of the National Socialist generation, were capable of arson, bank robberies, bombings, kidnapping, killing and a prison break.

In the light of an essay which treats of the ever-expanding reach of ideology, the meaning of the book’s title is worth a brief remark. “The RAF Loves You” is an impersonal greeting Ulrika Meinhof wrote to her 11-year old twin daughters from Cologne-Ossendorf prison in October of 1972. With this title and the chapter dedicated to it in the book, Bettina Röhl captures the abandonment of the children, as if the mother, who addressed the twins as “comrade mice” [Genossinnen Mäuse!] had confused or fused the intimate sphere with a collective persona.

“Whether you know it or not, whether like it or not, the RAF loves you. I probably know best.” (op. cit., Kindle vers. 1.28.0. München: Random House, Chapter: Die RAF hat euch lieb, para. 12):

Introduction

The intoxicating crowd-events and the brutal highlights of the early RAF years in the Bundesrepublik still live with a special atmospheric colour in the German consciousness. Now after only two months of violent assaults of the Maoist cultural revolutionary type on Western culture, the English-speaking world read Bettina Röhl’s essay on the RAF years with almost the same vivid sense of immediacy as the Germans.

Only the type of collectivist identity has changed after five decades: “The Red Army Faction is Dead”, but “Long live Antifa”. It is as if the author writes of a time-spanning protean spirit of collectivism which preternaturally modifies its external expression to adapt to the changed external political and social circumstances of each generation. Hence Röhl speaks of a spirit of the times, a “revolutionary Zeitgeist”; a “revolution-phantasm” and a “diffuse prototype” of the revolution found in specific dictatorships.

The names of the street gangs change as do those of the identity groups; at one time it is social class, at another it is a particular race, at another a coalition of races, ethnic groups and sexual identities. Röhl’s intuition suggests the presence of a latent, transgenerational collectivist “Geist” which can only be inferred from the surface events she describes.

However, Antifa itself does have a history, or at least its name has a lineage. Its history as paramilitary strategy can be traced to the official founding of Die Antifaschistische Aktion of the Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD) on 10 July 1932 (Bernd Langer. 80 Jahre Antifaschistische Aktion, 2012, p. 3).

For two articles which partly depend on the above referenced history of the Antifaschistische Aktion, see The Epoch Times and Gatestone Institute, Part I and Part II.

*   Die RAF hat euch lieb Kindle vers. 1.28.0, München: Random House, Chapter: Schusswort — Conclusion; para 3, 2018)
 

The Red Army Faction is Dead — Long Live Antifa

Source: Neue Zürcher Zeitung

02 June 2020

The freeing of Andreas Baader from prison fifty years ago was the beginning of the Red Army Faction (RAF). What began with revolutionary romanticism terrorised the Bundesrepublik Deutschland (BRD) for more than three decades. Radical Left-wing terror still exists today.

by Bettina Röhl

[original German language article places an image with the RAF logo here]

Who was in a fever in the seventies? Was it the RAF? Was it the German Federal authorities and politicians? Were the media overheated? Was it the society, the establishment, that chased after the terrorists? Or was it the students who were awakened by the events surrounding 1968 — that army of student disciples in the 1970s, who in the publishing sphere time and again rolled out the red carpet for the RAF?

In the Bundesrepublik [Federal Republic] of the time, the large silent majority did not side with the ’68er-movement, much less did they side with the RAF, a movement of armed struggle in West Germany. The overwhelming majority of citizens (above all the working population) felt little attraction to terror, violence, urban guerrillas and revolution; and they looked on with vexation, somewhat paralysed at the fashionable phenomenon of “terrorism”: “being high, being free and a bit of terror must be thrown in”. The silent majority were the ones to be combatted, the “bourgeois”. That is how the young pop-Communist enthusiasts saw it; those who gravitated to Che Guevara, Ho Chi Minh and more particularly to Mao Zedong as the ‘one who fundamentally transformed society’ [Umwälzer].

Especially the so-called left-wing intellectuals became, at best, semi-critical propagators of the 1968 RAF ideology; they were the subcultural and established artists, from the writer Hans Magnus Enzensberger to solicitor and singer Franz Josef Degenhardt; from theatre director Claus Peymann to Nobel Prize winner for literature Heinrich Böll. They were ubiquitous at the time with their opinions, especially in the boom-media with their circulation in the millions, such as Der Spiegel, Stern and the “Die Zeit”; but also, they were everywhere in the powerful public sector television broadcasters of the time. Also, many journalists were completely lacking in detachment and became avid reporters for the RAF. At the same time, reportage on the RAF functioned almost like a true-crime serial, presenting the public with crimes, perpetrators and the deaths almost in real time.

Continue reading →

Spengler on Militant Religiosity

Posted on by
16

“The present can only accomplish its purification by the erasure of its past.”

Below is the third of Thomas Bertonneau’s three-essay sequence on the crisis of modernity.

Spengler on Militant Religiosity

by Thomas F. Bertonneau

Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), the German historian and philosopher, devotes a suite of three chapters (VII, VIII, and IX) in his Decline of the West, Volume II (1922), to what he calls “The Problems of the Arabian Culture.” The third of these chapters, “Pythagoras, Mohammed, Cromwell,” explores the parallelisms that, in Spengler’s view, and in his use of the word, make these figures “contemporary” with one another. The same chapter also contains Spengler’s analysis of Puritanism, but not strictly in the sense of Calvinist doctrine, although he includes Calvinism in his discussion. Spengler views Puritanism as an inevitable phase of religion, one of doctrinal hardening and literalism in which a totalitarian impulse predominates. Puritanism has manifested itself in all the Great Cultures, as Spengler calls them, such as the Chinese, the Classical, and the Gothic. By “The Problems of Arabian Culture” Spengler does not mean to confine himself to a history of Monophysitism or Islam, although these come under his three-chapter remit. Spengler subsumes “Arabian Culture” under the larger category of “Magian Culture,” which embraces both Arabia Felix and Arabia Deserta but reaches far beyond them to aspects of the late Persian and Syriac societies, to the Hellenism of Alexandria, and even to the Iconoclastic centuries of Byzantium. The term Magian also reaches back in time to the late stages of Mesopotamian society. For Spengler, St. Augustine shares rather more with Islamic theology than he does, say, with St. Thomas and the Scholastics. For Spengler, the Hagia Sophia of Constantinople anticipates the mosque. To understand the chapter-sequence on “The Problems of Arabian Culture,” however, requires that Spengler’s often shocking and sometimes counter-intuitive pronouncements, like the ones just mentioned, take their place among the over-arching assumptions of The Decline.

Spengler’s opus impresses the first-time reader as a colossal improvisation. Its erudition and seeming formlessness put off many would-be explorers. Spengler’s basic propositions nevertheless lend themselves to summary. Spengler rejects the idea of a universal history. He recognizes no singular history but a number of histories in the plural, each one peculiar to its own Great Culture. Thus the Classical or Mediterranean Culture begins with the palace kingdoms of Mycenaean Greece and ends with the Severan Dynasty of the Late Second and Early Third Centuries. Indian Culture begins with the Vedas and ends with Buddhism. Western or “Faustian” Culture has its earliest glimmerings in the Eighth Century but really only leaps into being after the year 1000. Western Culture preserves a profound awareness of Classical Culture but this awareness implies, for Spengler, no actual continuity. Each Great Culture constitutes itself hermetically as an organic whole without debt to adjacent or precursor cultures. Borrowings are never essential, but only ornamental. Spengler emphasizes the organic character of culture. He regards each Great Culture as a living entity, whose mortality impends as soon as it comes to birth. Each Great Culture follows the same seasonal life-course — a vivacious and creative spring, a productive summer, a crisis-afflicted fall, and an increasingly inflexible winter. Spengler also makes a distinction between culture, as such, and civilization. Culture flourishes as the vital phase; civilization takes over as the mechanical phase, becoming more and more rigid until the machine stops.

Each Great Culture first expresses itself in a springtime outburst of religion. The Classical pantheon and associated cults already existed in late Mycenaean times; Homer and Hesiod signify a literate transformation of a long existing Apollonian worldview, as Spengler calls it. By the time of Septimius Severus (reigned 193-211), the Classical religion has become a syncretic henotheism, with one god in numerous guises, complete with a church-structure wedded to the state. Whereas the springtime paganism knew nothing of prejudice, the syncretic henotheism has codified itself as a set of compulsory dogmas. Spengler distinguishes between a Magian and a Gothic Christianity, which have little or nothing to do with one another. The latter appears with the building of the Lady Churches and with the blazing out of sacred polyphony. By the time of the Baroque, however, Catholicism has become the counterpart of syncretic henotheism. A living entity no longer, the Church distinguishes itself hardly at all from the array of explicitly secular institutions. As for Magian Christianity, Spengler classifies it as one of many apocalyptic movements that participate in the same mundial vision. These dispensations show themselves initially around the time of Alexander’s campaigns. Spengler writes in Vol. II, Chapter VIII, how “the world, as spread out for the Magian waking-consciousness, possesses a kind of extension that may be called cavern-like.” A “primary dualism” governs the world-cavern of this revelation: “The light shines through the cavern and battles the darkness.” The Magian Culture reaches its final, ossified phase when Mohammed issues his unalterable Koran and commences his coercive mission.

If social, spiritual, and intellectual rigor mortis belonged to the autumnal and hibernal chapters of the cultural life-course, this would not mean that earlier chapters exhibited no forecast of rigidification. Spasms of Puritanism occur in the vernal and estival chapters but show themselves as liable to suppression by the still-vivacious environments where they arise. The first name in the title of Spengler’s third of three chapters on “The Problems of Arabian Culture” is that of Pythagoras, whose person will be familiar to most readers through its association with the theorem of the right triangle. The lifetime of Pythagoras spans most of the Sixth Century BC, with scholarship locating his birth around 570 and his death around 495. The prevailing myth treats Pythagoras in an anodyne way: Philosopher, mystic, mathematician, vegetarian, discoverer of the cosmic harmony, and champion of animals. Pythagoras invited veneration from the Florentine Humanists and again from the French Symbolists as an idealist and altruist. The truth puts Pythagoras in quite a different light. “Pythagoras was not a philosopher,” Spengler writes; but rather, “he was a saint, prophet and founder of a fanatically religious society that forced its truths upon the people around it by every political and military means.” Croton, the Greek colony in Southern Italy where Pythagoras took up residence in middle life, raised an army under his regime that “in the bitter earnest of [its] gospel of duty duly wrecked gay Sybaris and branded it forever a city without morals.” What was that “gospel”? It consists of the “enthusiasms of a sober spirit, cold intensities, dry mysticism, [and] pedantic ecstasy.”

Pythagoreanism belongs under the category of Puritanism. Spengler defines Puritanism as a symptom of dour old-age: “It lacks the smile that had illumined the religion of the Spring… the moments of profound joy in life, the humour of life.” The destruction of Sybaris, around 510 BC, finds affirmation in both history and archaeology; the city suffered such violence that its survivors had to abandon it and take up residence elsewhere, as in Thurii. The wrath unleashed against Sybaris has lodged in the collective memory, Spengler speculates, “because it was the climax of a wild religious war… an explosion of the same hate that saw in Charles I and his gay Cavaliers not merely doctrinal error, but also worldly disposition as something that must be destroyed root and branch.” Furthermore, “A myth purified and conceptually fortified, combined with rigorous ethical precepts, imbued the Pythagoreans with the conviction that they would attain salvation before all other men.” The South-Italian cities that had come under the sway of the collective enthusiasm eventually found the furor too much to bear. Inspired by Spengler, the scholar Kurt von Fritz issued his book Pythagorean Politics in Southern Italy in 1940. Von Fritz pieces together a simultaneous multi-city uprising that in the space of a few days wreaked vengeance on the Pythagorean committees, burned down their lodges, and suppressed the fanatical portion of their following. Spengler notes that the Pythagorean writings, such as the Golden Tablets, make the promise to loyal adherents of elevation to godhood. That degree of self-satisfaction and self-righteousness could only — and soon — draw forth condign reaction.

Continue reading →

Love in the Time of Coronavirus

Posted on by
2

The title of this post has nothing to do with its content; it just seemed an appropriate header in these parlous pandemic times for an off-topic quote.

The text below is an excerpt from Baja Oklahoma by the late Dan Jenkins (who is better known as the author of Semi-Tough). Dymphna and I both loved the book. At some point back in the ’80s she photocopied the page, trimmed it, and posted it on the refrigerator. When we got a new refrigerator in about 1990, the yellowed clippings from the old one went into an envelope marked “FROM THE OLD REFRIGERATOR”. I found that envelope a few months ago when I was going through boxes of stuff, and have restored the excerpt to the refrigerator:

Mankind’s Ten Stages of Drunkenness

In only twelve years of marriage, Bonnie fancifully transformed herself from Rita Hayworth into Joseph Stalin.

Bonnie deserved all the credit for driving Slick to a unique psychological discovery, the unearthing of Mankind’s Ten Stages of Drunkenness, which were:

1.   Witty and Charming.
2.   Rich and Powerful.
3.   Benevolent.
4.   Clairvoyant.
5.   F**k Dinner.
6.   Patriotic.
7.   Crank up the Enola Gay
8.   Witty and Charming, Part II.
9.   Invisible.
10.   Bulletproof.
 

The last stage was almost certain to end a marriage.

The Canuck Stasi Interrogate Ezra Levant

Posted on by

Actually, the word “Stasi” does not provide an adequate analogy for these two amiable fellows from the Canadian federal election authority. “Stasi” connotes an air of overt menace, but these guys are low-key. Their menace is more subtle and subdued. They’re nice, the way all Canadians are expected to be. Which makes them even more menacing, when you realize what their mission is: they’re tasked by unnamed authorities with investigating Ezra Levant for writing a book during an election campaign.

His best-selling book was about the election, so releasing it during the campaign was an unremarkable business decision. And the two agents concede that books and publicity for books are exempt from the law that restricts political campaign activities. Nevertheless, they think that his book may somehow violate laws promulgated by the Supreme Canadian Soviet, so they want to know why he wrote it, when he wrote it, how he wrote it, and who helped him research it.

Mr. Levant plans to hire the best lawyers to fight the Nice Stasi, and will spare no expense in doing so. As a result he is appealing to his audience for help in funding his cause:

This video is only part 1. Part 2 should prove interesting.

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

Matt Bracken and ESW on InfoWars

Posted on by


Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff appeared recently on InfoWars via skype when Matt Bracken was sitting in as host.

She talked about her just-released book, The Truth Is No Defense, which concerns her experiences being prosecuted and convicted in Austria for “denigration of a legally recognized religion”.

She and Matt also discussed the state of free speech in Western Europe (short version: there is none) and the current assault on the First Amendment here in the USA:

For previous posts on the “hate speech” prosecution of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, see Elisabeth’s Voice: The Archives.

When the Truth Counts Against You

Posted on by

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff recently spoke in Montreal, and while she was there she was interviewed by Vlad. In the video below she discusses her conviction in an Austrian court for “denigrating a recognized religion” and her subsequent series of appeals. The entire process took almost ten years and concluded at the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled against her.

She also talks about the fact that freedom of speech has disappeared in Western Europe. She points out that the USA is headed in the same direction, given that the Demonic Convergence — the alliance of the Socialist Left and Islam — is agitating against the First Amendment in its current form.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for conducting the interview and uploading the video:

For previous posts on the “hate speech” prosecution of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, see Elisabeth’s Voice: The Archives.

The Truth Shall Get You Jailed

Posted on by

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff’s book about her encounter with Austrian “justice”, The Truth Is No Defense, will be published next month by the New English Review Press.

The Truth Shall Get You Jailed

by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

In the past week, two eerily similar polls — one in Germany (available in German only) and one in the United States — made it into the public sphere. Both concerned the pillar of freedom, free speech, and both sadly portend the end of what countless brave souls on both sides of the Atlantic who died on so many battlefields valiantly fought for.

November 2019 marks the thirtieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which ostensibly ushered in the end of the Communist iron grip on Eastern Europe. Following the end of World War II, Communism had brutally separated the free West from the subjugated East, and nowhere was this partition more glaringly obvious than in individual liberty or lack thereof. Thirty years have now passed since that glorious November day. I watched the tearing down of the wall by East Berliners desperately seeking freedom — the freedom to speak, think, move, exist — live on television, having visited East Berlin only a year before. I was ecstatic for the people of East Germany, hoping they would be able to savor their hard-fought freedom as I have done over and over.

The widespread disillusionment that has set in over the past decades pains me. Just a few days ago, the Post-Communists won the parliamentary elections of the state of Thuringia in what was once East Germany, and I am quite certain post-election analyses will show that the block of Post-Communist voters consists of mostly young people who have no recollection or experience of the evil of Communism.

And so it comes as no surprise when a well-known German opinion research institute publishes a poll indicating that “nearly two-thirds of [those polled] are convinced that nowadays one must be very careful regarding the topics about which one can speak freely because there many unwritten laws indicating which opinions are permissible and which opinions are not permissible.” In addition, 58% of those polled no longer feel safe speaking freely in public, with only 17% agreeing that they can voice their opinion freely on the Internet. More than 40% sense that political correctness is overemphasized, while 35% have decided for themselves to voice their opinions only in a private setting.

The German poll is complemented by a — frankly, frightening in its ramifications — US poll: a whopping 51% of Millennials call for fines and even jail time for “hate speech.” In a survey conducted by the Campaign for Free Speech, more than 60% call for restrictions on speech in some way. While the Campaign’s director finds the results “frankly extraordinary,” they are hardly surprising. Speech restrictions coupled with hefty fines and, in some instances, even jail time have become the norm in Europe, with my case being one of countless others. Moreover, the results of both polls are what free speech activists on both sides of the Atlantic have been warning about for at least the past decade: at international forums such as the United Nations and the (perhaps lesser-known) Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, these very speech restrictions have been not only concocted, but also weaponized and successfully applied. In one case in point, at an official OSCE forum in Vienna in 2015, which I attended, we were told that speaking the truth may constitute “hate speech”, because “sometimes truth is difficult.” Secretary General Antonio Guterres of the United Nations calls for stepping up international efforts to suppress “hate speech.”

Continue reading →

It’s All for Show

Posted on by

This week’s edition of Dymphna’s Greatest Hits is a follow-up to last week’s, which discussed Annie Jacobsen’s encounter with the Syrian trombonists. This one is a review of Ms. Jacobsen’s book.

It’s All for Show

by Dymphna
Originally published on Sept. 27, 2005

Does the accumulation of four years without further terrorist attacks make you feel safer when you fly? It shouldn’t. The Bureaucratic Bunglers are out in full force and with them in charge you don’t have a prayer. Or rather, all you do have is prayer.

According to Annie Jacobsen, we’d better do our homework on this one because there is no one watching out for us. Back in April, Gates of Vienna posted on Ms. Jacobsen’s tenacity and her willingness to follow this story wherever it led. That post, “Silence of the Sheep,” proved that the author is a sheepdog indeed. Her interviews with other passengers, with government agencies, with the House Judiciary Committee, with airline personnel, and with individual people who bear the day-to-day hazard of working in this field, have made her case. The tale of her experiences is documented well in Terror in the Skies.

This is a top-down problem. The guys in harm’s way — the pilots and flight attendants — know the problems but they have no more power to address them than you do. Less than two percent of pilots are armed. Want to know why? Because in order to actually carry a firearm on board, the firearms training must be done on the pilot’s own time and it has to be done in a place far from home, squeezed into his holiday time or vacation.

And flight attendants? Again, they have to arrange self-defense training on their own time, at their own expense and without the cooperation of the airlines themselves. Think of it this way: what if Brink’s hired drivers and gave them no training in handling attempted robberies? What if they expected their employees to get training — if any — on their own time and their own dime? How long do you think Brink’s would be in business?

That’s the situation we have in the friendly skies of America. When you add to that the cruel joke of the Federal Air Marshals, the lackadaisical behavior of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the farce we all know as the Department of Homeland Insecurity, it’s enough to make you want to stay home and do your business by long-distance and email.

Let’s take just one: FAMS. This is bureaucratese for the Federal Air Marshal program. You know the old joke that goes “you’re ugly and your mother dresses you funny”? Well, for this program, the first part may or may not be the case, but for the second premise — being dressed funny — you can count on FAMS. Due to the boneheaded policies of those in charge, Federal Air Marshals are required to wear sport coats and collared shirts. Yes, that’s right: they must look like Federal Air Marshals at all times because they are a reflection of FAMS and dressing in a slovenly disguise would somehow bring disgrace to the organization. Comments about being a lovely corpse would be appropriate here.

Then there’s what they do after they’re up and dressed. Remember, they’re carrying guns, right? So obviously they can’t go through security. However, there’s a second obvious thing they can do — they can fight the current and walk through the exit lanes for deplaning passengers. How’s that for subterfuge?

Continue reading →

Conspiracy Theories? We Have Them A-Plenty

Posted on by

Ever since J. Christian Adams, a career Department of Justice attorney, resigned in 2010 (during Obama’s first term) due to his own unwillingness to turn a blind eye to Eric Holder’s highly charged racialist program within the DOJ, I’ve been wondering when the corruption would be called to account. But it never happened. It never happens in the Democrat Deep State…unless, like Sidney Powell, you know where to look.

No, I didn’t know of her either, but I sure plan to follow what she has to say as this plotting is unloaded on a sickened American electorate. Can They manage to kill off the first capable president we’ve had in more than a generation??

This is a woman after Diana West’s own heart. Mine, too. She not only knows American jurisprudence, but she knows where (some of) the bodies are buried.

From her book page on Amazon from 2014 [five years in, and it’s still selling]:

Sidney Powell was an Assistant United States Attorney in three judicial districts under nine United States Attorneys from both political parties. She represented the United States in 350 criminal appeals and represented private parties in another 150, all resulting in more than 180 published decisions. She was the youngest Assistant U.S. Attorney when she began practicing. She is an elected member of the American Law Institute and the past president of the Bar Association for the Fifth Federal Circuit and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice is a book she prayed she would never have to write. It’s written in the style of a legal thriller to be enjoyable and understandable to non-lawyers, but it is the true, behind-the-scenes insider perspective on major litigation during the last decade. If you think you know the truth about what happened to Arthur Andersen, Merrill Lynch, Enron, and former United States Senator Ted Stevens, think again. You won’t know the truth until you read LICENSED TO LIE. It tells a very human story that every informed citizen, lawyer, and judge should know. The foreword to the book is written by Judge Alex Kozinski, one of the most brilliant legal minds in the country. He is the Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but he wrote the foreword in his personal capacity.

She also writes for the New York Observer…and her opinion pieces have received over 16,000 facebook posts, countless tweets, and other methods of “sharing.” […] They include 1. All the President’s Muses 2. Holder Protects Corrupt Prosecutors 3. War on Wall Street 4. Meet Emmet Sullivan (the IRS Judge who scheduled a hearing for July 10); 5. One Two Punch (IRS faces Two Federal Judges), and others. Her news articles and opinion pieces may be found here. These outstanding stories have been picked up multiple times by the Drudge Report, Investors Business Daily, Breitbart, Fox News, Greta Van Susternen, and countless other blogs and reporters. She is the only published authority on federal Judge Emmet Sullivan, former White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, and now Mueller team special prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, and others.

She has been featured on Fox News, the CATO INSTITUTE (broadcast on C-Span), NewsMax TV, and countless radio shows. She has spoken on the topic of prosecutorial misconduct for two federal judicial conferences and numerous bar associations. Her website is here.

This book has over nine hundred customer reviews, overwhelmingly five-star, and they have continued to accrue over the five years since the book came out.

[NOTE: This post has been moldering in my Drafts since the video was brand-new. I’m sorry it’s no longer au courant, but my health (or lack thereof) interfered. While not breaking news, the main elements in this story will continue to drag their sadsack selves through the purgatory of American national politics. If I find any further Sidney Powell commentary, I’ll post it for you.]

The Sad Reality of Memorial Day 2019

Posted on by

It’s back to work tomorrow after a weekend of Remembering with cook-outs and family gatherings.

As the wrappings around the treacheries of World War II begin to rot and drop away, the emerging truths are difficult for the average person to comprehend, much less metabolize. When you know our government policy was to leave behind living, breathing men from three generations to the mercies of Communist butchers, it is hard to memorialize what remains. Or perhaps it is easier to turn away from the despair…

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Yesterday, the nationwide group, Rolling Thunder, remembered kinetically these MIAs and POWs -more than 85,000 souls – still honoring them on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend. This year was to have been the last ride through Washington because of the expense and red tape, but President Trump and some anonymous donors have stepped in to say they will facilitate the run in 2020.

I have mirrored Diana West’s account of these losses; the cynical and barbaric disappearance of our young, then-living American POWs who were disappeared by Communists is truly tragic. And make no mistake: it has indeed been Communism that is responsible for this bleeding loss. As she says in her post,

Ever since I delved into the darkest corners of our past and came up with American Betrayal, this season of national holidays and observances, including VE-Day on May 8 (but really May 7), Memorial Day, D-Day, for my own family, the day in July my dad was wounded at the Battle of St Lo, and the anniversary of Hiroshima on August 15, has become an unnerving time of year. That’s because this annual procession of national holidays and observances serves to bury in red, white and blue bunting the amalgam of Big Lies — “court history,” error and disinformation — which Americans are instructed to hold to be as sacred as truth. As the late M. Stanton Evans put it here, all of that Establishment-history or consensus-history is “pretty much bogus.”

It is this bogus history that hides a cascade of lies and treachery, including communist and Soviet influence inside our highest government circles and even war councils, all of which becomes difficult for the American patriot to fathom, when the conditioned behavior is to look the other way at Old Glory passing by and salute.

Thanks to Stefan Molyneux, I had the opportunity to discuss what is the greatest American betrayal of all, the betrayal of our own fighting men, our POWs/MIAs who never came home because they were abandoned by the US government in successive wars and proxy wars against Moscow and Beijing. This includes the story of the American GIs in POW camps who, as Nazi Germany crumbled, came under Soviet control … forever.

The US government continues to pretend these American sons never existed, but, of all days, We, the People, should remember them on Memorial Day.

Here’s her eloquent dialogue with Stephan Molyneux:

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

She doesn’t mention the sudden death of General Patton, that staunch anti-Communist who was a driving force in the attempt to rescue the World War II Allied POWs held in Germany; I doubt he had any illusions as to their fate if the Russians got there first. But he died suddenly in a motor accident, and the Russians did get there first.

As Diana mentions, this also happened to the doughboys being held in World War I [welcome to the 20th century]. Yes, it really does go that far back. Our government can be forgiven its ignorance about Soviet Russia and world Communism at that point, but not in later wars.

Here’s her latest book, The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy. Only a hundred pages long, or you can get the audio or Kindle version. I read the e-book and recommend it for her detailed discoveries about the ways Communism still infects our body politic at the highest levels.

Meanwhile, read her earlier post, from Friday, in which she delineates Roosevelt’s betrayal, leaving thousands of G.I.s to be disappeared into Stalin’s gulag. The photo is a stunner.

Please Read This Book!

Posted on by

We’ve discussed the importance of American Betrayal here in the past, but JLH sends this reminder for those who have not yet read the book.

Please Read This Book!

by JLH

It’s the new McCarthyism! It’s a return to McCarthy!

I find this annoying but also amusing when I encounter it in the remarks of a left-leaning writer or politician. When I find it in the remarks of one of the many uninformed or oblivious as a parenthetical characterization, I am disappointed that there are so many of them.

But when I find it in the remarks of Republican members of Congress, or even in an essay in that most effective and informed conservative blog Breitbart, I vacillate between fury and the despair Kierkegaard referred to as “the sickness unto death.” How can it be that informed conservatives and constitutionalists are unaware of the serial vindication of Senator Joseph McCarthy — “Tailgunner Joe,” the presumptive creator of the “Red Scare”? And the REALITY of what he was uncovering when he was smeared and forced into a corner… the most memorable moment of which may have come in the Army-McCarthy hearings, when the army’s attorney Joseph Welch, reproached McCarthy for offering the information that a young man in Welch’s firm’s employ belonged to a suspect organization: “Have you no sense of decency, sir?” This cry of apparent outrage in defense of a member of his own team has become a shibboleth of McCarthy foes ever since, used as though it applied to everything he had done.

How can anyone not know of the work of the distinguished academic, M. Stanton Evans: Stalin’s Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History; or of Vladimir Bukovsky, author of To Build a Castle and co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement, and others. And if they were in fact ignorant of these and other figures who have offered a different perspective, how can they not know of Diana West’s 2013 book: American Betrayal: The Secret Assault On Our Nation’s Character.

Well, of course, it may be that “right-thinking” bookstore owners and librarians do not consider it fit for public display. The profit motive still works, though, as I found out when I ordered it through my local (need I say left-leaning, virtue-signaling) bookstore and, after reading it, donated it to my (ditto) library, because I knew they would not refuse a donation. For heaven’s sake, go find it in a public library, locate it on Amazon, just look it up online. But do not delay in finding and reading this meticulously annotated and devastating analysis of the McCarthy era, of the FDR administration, of everything you have not been told by all those who have an interest in keeping you ignorant and encouraging you to continue saying “McCarthyism” when you should be saying “socialism,” “elitism,” or “just plain damned ignorance.” So no one can say to you, “Have you no intelligence?”

Continue reading →

I Take This Woman…

Posted on by

Tabitha Korol’s latest guest-essay takes a look at the plight of women under Islam.

I take this woman…

by Tabitha Korol

The internet provides everything you’d want to know about courtships, weddings, married life, but few of them include the instructions on wife-beating. There is a brief but enlightening film, produced by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and posted on Jihad Watch, of a Muslim sociologist who demonstrates the “proper” wife-beating technique. Of course, the sociologist assures his audience that Islam is merciful, and that the man, the head of the household, should not have to beat his wife every day, and to do so lightly, never to hit her face or head, bruise, break bones or cause blood to flow (m10:12, Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law — ROTT). But the cautionary statement rings hollow when the wife’s bruises will never be seen because she must be covered from head to toe. And, should she become inured to the discipline’s sameness, there are other means of control and punishment available to him, all sanctioned by The Religion of Peace.

When is it necessary to beat one’s wife? The sociologist did posit that there are women who prefer domineering, authoritative, and even violent husbands. For the most part, however, beatings are needed when the wife has disobeyed him and the strict Islamic rules of marriage. She may have refused to wear a hijab (m:2:7-8, ROTT) or the finery he chose for her; or fancied attending school with the hope of one day having a career and earning a wage. She may have wanted to leave the house unaccompanied or without her husband’s permission; she is literally under house arrest.

The Shari’a marriage contract contains her virginity status, the dowry amount, and grants sexual intercourse rights to the male, giving him total control over his wife or wives. Should she refuse his advances, be too ill or too young to have sex, or if she engages in sex with another man or was raped, he could stop her daily (financial) maintenance. The woman is considered a she-devil, equal to a domestic animal, harmful and with crooked character. Therefore, he may disallow her to sleep in his bed; or lock her in a room, naked, and without food. Should he choose to enact a simple divorce by repeating “I divorce you” three times — she may receive no more than three months’ maintenance and could lose her children older than age seven.

The Muslim husband has the right to accuse her of adultery, in which case he might gather his friends and neighbors together to bury her almost up to her shoulders and stone her to death. The film The Stoning of Soraya M portrays the true story of Soraya, in Iran, whose husband Ali convinced their two sons and the townsfolk that she was committing adultery so that he could marry a 14-year-old girl. The Internet has an actual film of a Syrian woman being stoned to death by ISIS. About four women per day are murdered in “stove bursts” in Pakistan, by husbands or in-laws who claim the wives’ scarves caught fire while they were cooking.

Continue reading →

On Being Snookered by Penny-ante Political Obfuscations

Posted on by

Hey, Jordan Peterson! Your descriptions of what young men need if they are ever to mature in our Western world are spot on. But as a political philosopher, you lack the foundation to address the ugly divisions the Left has driven into the heart of civil discourse.

Which is unfortunate for us all. You are good at stating what you don’t know, but sometimes you enter into the realms of what you don’t know that you don’t know, i.e., what you have glossed over or failed to comprehend. Yes, you want your reach to transcend politics but it can’t since the Left has inextricably bound the political into every facet of life, a merging the right rejects categorically. You say the right can be seen by its identity politics but you don’t say the left does exactly the same thing. Try saying “All Lives Matter” in public and see where it gets you.

People are anxious to pigeonhole your ideas and you want to allay their fears that you might be -gasp! – right wing. You attempt to declare your political agnosticism while refusing to bow to an overweening leftist identitarianism. When you refuse the strictures of compelled speech from the rulers of Canada, you are speaking from the right. Compelled speech is a leftist/socialist trope; it is the Right which defends freedom of speech.

By the way, how many rightwingextremists have shown up to disrupt your talks, trash your ideas, or make you feel unsafe in public? And if you think Charlottesville was reality-based, you’ve been snookered, sir. We live near there; we watched it go down. From the beginning, the whole mess was a false flag set-up.

Read Tomas Sowell, sir. Across more than fifty years, his body of work, his opera of conservative political philosophy, has been consistently correct. In his eighties now, he’s still sharp. Here’s his Amazon Page It’s a wealth of information that never stale dates.

Meanwhile, listen to Dr. Turley explain why Nazism -National Socialism- is leftist. It did not come from the Right.

Now tell us why wanting to be a nation-state with one’s own peculiar culture, language and traditions is not a good thing. Ask Les Québécois why they won’t give up and join you Anglos. Do you think they should? If not, why not? Compare and contrast.

Loopies and Kooks

Posted on by

During the past week Dymphna and JLH have discussed Diana West’s new book, The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy, which extends the theme of her previous book American Betrayal. I’ll take this opportunity to recycle a graphic I made several years ago. It didn’t draw much attention at the time, because by then the intense controversy over American Betrayal had faded into background muttering. But it was one of my better productions, so here it is again:

This delicious and nutritious breakfast cereal requires some explanatory context.

In the early months (summer and fall of 2013) of the “barroom brawl” prompted by Diana’s book, various indefensibly nasty things* were written by a number of neoconservatives, most of them stars in the David Horowitz constellation.

In one of several vituperative pieces, Conrad Black called her “a right-wing loopy” who had not yet been “house-trained”, and described her book as a “farrago of lies”. In reference to Diana and those who agreed with her, Mr. Black decried the “unutterable myth-making and jejune dementedness, as they hurl the vitriol of the silly and the deranged” (August 16, 2013).

As soon as that little literary delicacy was published, Ronald Radosh sent Diana a triumphant email with the subject line “Conrad Black tears you apart”. To make sure she understood, he enclosed the text of Mr. Black’s essay, with the introduction: “Sorry to upset you once again, Diana, but I’m afraid you’ve lost, big time.”

David Horowitz himself said that she had “organized a kook army”.

Since then Mr. Horowitz and Mr. Radosh have supposedly had a falling-out. I’m not sure about Conrad Black; I haven’t heard much about him recently. However, if I recall correctly, he’s an adamant #NeverTrump guy.

This is just a little taste of the background for the discussion we’ve been having for the last few days.

*   For additional source links to these and other ad-hominem insults, see “An Addled Barroom Brawler”. But it’s been six years; some of them may be stale by now.