Tuesday, June 19, 2018




June 19, 2018



MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey



Illegal Immigration, those Border Children, and the Treason of Mainline Christianity



Friends,

Just a short introduction today to something—in fact, several items—that you must hear and/or see.

Once again in the midst of all the hoopla over those illegally-here children detained and separated at the border from their parents who have violated American law, Tucker Carlson on his prime time program on Fox News has got it right. If you did not see it, I offer several YouTube options.

The first is a complete audio transcription which runs on for around forty minutes. Unfortunately (?), Fox has decided to encrypt the video portion of the entire event (unless you log in, etc. etc.). But the audio has escaped their censorious eyes and is definitely worth listening to:


Fox does offer on video a one time “free preview” of the first eight or nine minutes of the program, including Tucker’s brilliant introductory remarks and his interview with Thomas Homan, acting head of ICE (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement).  So, you may see that portion of the program:


And to see just the three minutes of critical comments by the ICE director Homan, the following YouTube is excellent:


Homan explains the legal situation concisely, fully answering the criticisms launched against the president on this issue, including some utterly inane and stupid comments by Republicans—including by the unfortunate, intelligence-deprived Laura Bush, the braggadocio-inclined conservative-wannabe Senator Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska), and that loathsome excuse for a candidate, Never Trumper Jeb Bush. (I am using my mildest appellations here…if you want to know what I really think of them, just ask!)

The simple facts are that it is the Democrats and the Left, with their friends and not-so-secret “fifth columnists” within the establishment GOP, who have turned this question—the question of separating children from their illegal immigrant parents (that is, those who violate settled and defined American law)—into a political issue. That, in sum, is the nub of the matter—not those children supposedly in “cages,” not those poor refugees who, if they could, by the millions would come streaming across our porous border into the “land of milk and honey.”

Of course, they do come for the chance to get those bountiful welfare checks, for “free” education, for a plethora of child support programs, to join vicious and violent street gangs now in every American city, and to learn how to pull the Democratic lever in the polling booths—all at YOUR expense in your increasing tax bill. Not to mention the destruction of what is left of traditional American culture. And, with millions more children coming, why, eventual population “replacement,” that is, the replacement of those here whose ancestors founded this nation by teeming masses from the “third world,” is quickly underway.

It is a long-range strategy of the Leftist Dems, as it would potentially insure their final and complete electoral dictatorship; and it doesn’t seem to bother a lot of Republicans, either (just again Lindsey Graham or John McCain, and the Koch Brothers or Chamber of Commerce types). Perhaps we should insist that all the uneducated, unskilled, MS-13 gang prone, potential welfare cases be resettled in those restricted communities where the GOP and Democrat elites live, often behind ornate gates and barb wire-studded walls, say in Dupont Circle in Washington DC, or Grosse Pointe, in Detroit, or maybe out at the Hamptons on Long Island ?

And then there is “Miss Laura” who jumped on that Leftist attack bandwagon faster than a young brain-infected Marxist millennial could get to the latest demonstration against a Confederate monument or symbol (recall her husband’s cowardly and contemptible position on them? [https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/06/13/texas-removes-confederate-symbols-from-court/03eba3a6-488d-4e59-a2e7-72f7153f3232/?utm_term=.784e8a54813a]).  Our policies (she meant Trump’s policies) she likened to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II by the Roosevelt administration. Oh, the horror! [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/18/laura-bush-compares-border-enforcement-to-japanese-american-internment-camps/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_content=links&utm_campaign=20180618]

Never Trumper “Little Jeb” went further, calling the policy, enshrined in law back in 1997, “heartless,” and directly attacked the Trump administration, adding: “Children should not be used as a negotiating tool.” [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/18/jeb-bush-demands-trump-end-heartless-child-border-policy/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_content=links&utm_campaign=20180618]

I will repeat what I wrote about the Bushes—about the Bush family—a few years ago: they are perhaps the worst disaster, after the Kennedys, to befall the American political system in the past 100 years. As I wrote and published via The Unz Review, March 3, 2015, “these Bushes are poisonous,” [http://www.unz.com/article/these-bushes-are-poisonous/]

I wrote these words then, and everything I said has been repeatedly confirmed since:

“But none of this should come as a surprise to anyone familiar with the history of the Bush family. Beginning with Yankee patriarch and Wall Street banker, Prescott Bush, that history is one of calculated pretense to sounding like whatever best advances the political and financial fortunes of the family. But down deep the Bushes, arguably, have never been conservatives. In recent years, the Bushes have sometimes sounded “conservative,” but in the darker recesses of their thinking, they reject basic principles that give essential life and form to conservatism…. Until the Bush/Establishment grip is fully exorcized (and the Karl Roves and John McCains finally interred for good), this nation will have no real opposition to the ongoing, steep decline into neo-Marxist multicultural totalitarianism.”


I stand by this assessment, even more so today.

But then there is the specter of such religious luminaries as the respected Reverend Franklin Graham also weighing in on the “inhumanity” of the process, and one (so-called!) Catholic bishop, Edward Weisenburger, of Tucson, Arizona, suggesting that any ICE agent collaborating in the separation of children from their illegal immigrant parents who attempt to cross the border illegally in direct contravention of our laws (and not at designated and legally set up entry points), might incur “canonical penalties,” including the Church’s wrath of excommunication. [https://tucson.com/news/local/tucson-bishop-should-catholics-face-canonical-penalties-for-role-in/article_1e06e268-7c4e-5817-88d0-136ad5a80171.html]

It’s getting to the point that I am almost ashamed to admit that I am a Catholic, much less a Christian, what with that ideologically and doctrinally disastrous personage seated in Rome!

No wonder Christianity, at least mainstream Christianity, is perishing and dying a well-deserved and miserable death—the only problem is that it is taking with it millions of ideologically na├»ve, well-intentioned communicants and much of historic Christian culture and the cultural inheritance that has taken two millennia to create. The former fearlessness and boldness, the unashamed defense of truth and the faith, the older crusading spirit, have virtually disappeared from Western Europe and from much of America. True, there are vigorous and traditionalist organizations such as the Society of St. Pius X (which I support) and the growth of such conservative Protestant confessions as the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). And, above all, there is the incredible efflorescence of the Russian Orthodox Church—by far the most steadfast traditional of Christian communions standing for traditional belief and orthodoxy. But, by and large, Western Europe and America now are spiritual wastelands, post-Christian deserts where what parades before us as “Christianity” is little more than faux-Christianity-in-drag, like the ladies of the night, plying their “trade” to ensnare the unwary. No, I did not write “Whore of Babylon,” for at least in that case you actually know what you are getting….

Speaker Paul Ryan is now offering the House of Representatives two “immigration reform bills,” the Goodlatte Bill and what is curiously called “the leadership bill.” By far, the Goodlatte Bill is better, as I wrote on June 16  [http://boydcatheyreviewofbooks.blogspot.com/2018/06/june-16-2018-my-corner-by-boyd-cathey.html], but both confirm and solemnize the illegal DACA fix, enabling hundreds of thousands of illegals to stay in the US and probably gain citizenship—and the numbers could expand exponentially. The question of child separation is also addressed, certainly due to the extreme pressure from the Mainstream Media and the screeching screams of politicians, both Democrat and Republican.

My wish would be that we might do again exactly what that great moderate Republican president, Dwight David Eisenhower, oversaw back in 1954, “Operation Wetback,” when the US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) conducted mass sweeps and deported well over 1.1 million illegals. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback]

We have only our nation and our culture to save…and a future for our children.

Lastly, I attach Pat Buchanan’s take on this question; he has written books on the topic, but this column hits the high points:



Patrick J. Buchanan: Trump And The Third World Invasion Of The West




Patrick J. Buchanan      June 18, 2018, 05:41 PM

"It is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart," says former first lady Laura Bush of the Trump administration policy of "zero tolerance," under which the children of illegal migrants are being detained apart from their parents.    "Disgraceful," adds Dr. Franklin Graham.  "We need to be ... a country that governs with a heart," says first lady Melania Trump. "No one likes this policy," says White House aide Kellyanne Conway, even "the president wants this to end."

And so it shall—given the universal denunciations and photos of sobbing children being pulled from parents. Yet striking down the policy will leave America's immigration crisis still unresolved.

Consider. Since 2016, some 110,000 children have entered the U.S. illegally and been released, along with 200,000 Central American families caught sneaking across the border.

Reflecting its frustration, the White House press office declared:  "We can't deport them, we can't separate them, we can't detain them, we can't prosecute them. What (the Democrats) want is a radical open-border policy that lets everyone out into the interior of this country with virtually no documentation whatsoever."

Where many Americans see illegal intruders, Democrats see future voters.   And with 11,000 kids of illegal immigrants in custody and 250 more arriving every day, we could have 30,000 in custody by summer's end. [Question: what happens then, do they enter the DACA “road to citizenship”?]

The existential question, however, thus remains: How does the West, America included, stop the flood tide of migrants before it alters forever the political and demographic character of our nations and our civilization?

The U.S. Hispanic population, already estimated at nearly 60 million, is predicted to exceed 100 million by 2050, just 32 years away.

And Europe's southern border is more imperiled than ours.  A week ago, the new populist regime in Rome refused to allow a boat full of migrants from Libya to land in Sicily. Malta also turned them away. After a voyage of almost a week and 1,000 miles, 630 migrants were landed in Valencia, Spain. Why did Italy reject them? Under EU law, migrants apply for asylum in the country where they first enter Europe. This burdens Italy and Greece where the asylum-seekers have been arriving for years.

Of the landing in Spain, Italy's interior minister Matteo Salvini, a leader of the populist League party, chortled: "I thank the Spanish government. I hope they take in the other 66,629 refugees (inside Italy). We will not be offended if the French follow the Spanish, the Portuguese and Maltese, we will be the happiest people on earth."

If the migrants boats of the Med are redirected to Spanish ports, one suspects that the Spanish people will soon become as unwelcoming as many other peoples in Europe.

And Trump is not backing down. Monday he tweeted:  "The people of Germany are turning against their leadership as migration is rocking the already tenuous Berlin coalition. Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!"

Whatever European leaders may think of him, many Europeans are moving in Trump's direction, toward more restrictions on immigration.

In Germany, a political crisis is percolating. The Bavarian-based CSU [Christian Social Union], longtime coalition partner of Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU party, is now talking divorce if Merkel does not toughen German policy. Merkel has never fully recovered from the nationalist backlash against the million migrants she allowed in from Syria's civil war. A New Year's Eve rampage in Cologne, featuring wilding attacks on German girls by Arabs and Muslims, cost her dearly. Among the reasons Bavarians are pulling away from Berlin is that, being in the south of Germany, Bavaria is a primary point of entry.

Virtually every one of the populist parties of Europe, especially of the right, have arisen to contest or to seize power by riding the issue of mass migration from Africa and the Middle East.

Yet the progressives adamantly refuse to act, apparently paralyzed by a belief that restricting the free movement of peoples from foreign lands violates one of the great commandments of liberal democracy.

We are truly dealing here with an ideology of Western suicide. If Europe does not act, its future is predictable.

The population of Africa, right across the Med, is anticipated to climb to 2.5 billion by midcentury. And by 2100, Africa will be home half of all the people of the planet.

If but a tiny fraction of the African and Middle Eastern population decides to cross the Mediterranean to occupy the emptying towns and villages of an aging and dying continent, who and what will stop them?

Trump may be on the wrong side politically and emotionally of this issue of separating migrant kids from their parents. But on the mega-issue—the Third World invasion of the West—he is riding the great wave of the future, if the West is to have a future.

Sunday, June 17, 2018


June 17, 2018



MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey



Honoring—and Remembering—Our Fathers on Father’s Day



Friends,

Today we celebrate Father’s Day and even more, we celebrate fatherhood and the role of the father as head of the family. Indeed, it is a bit surprising, given all the current radical feminization of our culture and the denigration of masculinity, that we are even permitted to celebrate this day traditionally, that we are allowed to call it “Father’s Day.” No doubt, we shall see in the future efforts by the dominant politically-correct culture to make this day more “inclusive” and less “oppressive to women and minorities.”

In all the commercial hoopla now associated with this day, we sometimes forget a deeper meaning that is attached to and undergirds it. Still, we are yet able to observe it, and to recall, to remember days long past, family events and meals, holidays and trips, wisdom imparted and passed on lore, and at the center of it all there are—and were—our fathers.

My father passed away back in 1999, a few days shy of his 91st birthday in June. He had been with our entire family the day before—we had all dined together and given thanks for the many blessings we had received. That night my dad crawled into bed, and early in the morning the aneurism near his heart distended, and he died a peaceful, tranquil death.

He remains with me—his memory, his words, his good counsel, they are with me every day. I can close my eyes and see his face; I can hear his voice. And if I am about to make a bad choice, I can faintly hear him asking me if I really wish to make that choice, if I really want to turn my back on the fifty years of good counsel and example that he gave me.

At my father’s funeral, I had the opportunity to speak, but I could not, emotionally. Instead, my sister made some remarks—a kind of eulogy. And in memory of my father, and in honor of all fathers, I transcribe her remarks here:

“Dear Pop,

“Several weeks ago as you, mom, and I sat chatting at lunch our conversation turned to what you and mom wanted to be done at your funeral. I look back on that time ironically today, because I never thought that I would need to put into practice what we talked about so soon.

“At that time you told me two things that stuck in my mind. One was that ‘How Great Thou Art’ was your favorite hymn, and the other was that you wanted someone who knew you well to talk about you as a real person. I promised you that I would. And, so, Daddy, I will give this my best shot.

“I never knew you as a young man, but judging by the photographs I will bet you were the heart throb of many a young lady. You were the epitome of tall, dark, and handsome—that is what I would call you. I know also that in high school you excelled in both basketball and baseball, even were scouted by the majors, but your life didn’t turn in that direction. You had more important things to do.

“What I remember most is your many stories. You were a master story-teller. The whole family could sit and listen for hours about your experiences, and they were indeed extraordinary and memorable.

“I do not believe anything defined your life more than your experiences in World War II. I believe it was a terrifying and transforming event for you that shaped the way you lived the rest of your life. It was a clear cut case of good against evil, and you fought a powerful enemy for what you believed in and won. And we all won, because of men like you.

“You were a man of the earth. You knew all the trees and their names, and you taught me how to identify poison ivy and poison oak. You taught me the difference between a good snake and bad snake. You taught me how to whittle a bamboo stick and make a whistle of it. You had the wisdom to turn me loose in the woods and let me find my way back home on my own—only years later did you admit you were following close behind to keep me from any harm.

“I cannot remember any summer that you did not have at least two, if not three gardens to tend: the ‘upper,’ ‘middle,’ and ‘lower’ gardens! I remember so clearly following you down the rows of tomatoes, picking a ripe one, wiping the dirt off on the seat of your pants, and eating it like an apple. There was hardly a day that went by in the summer when you were not outside until dark, tending to your land.

“You were the original ‘man of steel’! At the age of seventy you took my husband, a city boy, out in the woods and taught him how to split wood.

“You were a man of deep religious conviction who served the church we are in now for many, many years.

“You were a man with a great sense of humor! You loved a good joke, Disney’s Pluto the Dog, and sharing a good laugh.

“You believed in family. You were always there to help us out. But you also had the wisdom to let us make our own mistakes and learn from them.

“You were a wonderful husband. Your constant concern and love for mom is a testament to sixty-two years of happy marriage and the love you shared.

“You were a hero. I watched you save the lives of three people: one little girl who was drowning and two ladies from an overturned and burning car. I will never forget that accident scene. Everyone just stood there and watched, while you pulled those women out from underneath that smoking car. I was terrified, but you were amazing. Then, you just got back in your car and went to work. I’ll bet you never even spoke to anyone about what you had done.

“You were a good father. All the good that there is in me I received from you and mother. You taught me that it is wrong to lie. You taught me how to treat people with dignity and grace. You taught me that a fair weather friend is no friend at all. Sometimes I fall short of your lessons, but I try.

“I am confident that mother, Boyd, and I—all of us—will see you again one day. In the meantime your spirit, your memory, your love, and your goodness will abide with us and will continue to comfort us.

“Anyway, Pop, I promised I would not make this long, so I will stop. I hope everyone has a good idea now of who you were.

“Hope you earn your wings soon!”

“Love, Kay”

My sister summed up my sentiments and my love so very well. I can add little to what she said.

Our memories—those memories of who we are and of family and of events in our lives—always remain with us, even as they become more distant. That love, that affection, never dies, it never goes away.
So, today I honor my father, his memory, his love and his presence. And I hope you will do the same for your father.

Saturday, June 16, 2018


June 16, 2018



MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey



Immigration Debate Front and Center—Is Hillary’s Dream Coming to Pass?



Friends,

I’ve been going back and reviewing items I wrote before I began MY CORNER in April 2017. And I found a short piece—a kind of parody—which I’ve dusted off and edited just a bit, and I share it with you today. Back when I authored it (January 7, 2016), Hillary Clinton was the prohibitive favorite to win the November 2016 presidential election, and the Mainstream Media was doing everything it could to besmirch and sink the campaign of candidate Donald Trump. (It is still at it, even more unhinged and foaming-at-the-mouth than ever.)

What is a bit stunning when I re-read this parody—which I hope will amuse you some—is the irony it conveys.  Millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump because they opposed (and continue to oppose) the “open borders”/amnesty mentality and narrative of the Democrats AND the Republican Party establishment (which seems to be controlled in large part by elites dominated by fat cat financial backers, Wall Street, the Chamber of Commerce and the Koch Brothers’ Americans for Prosperity). The grass roots, including millions of hardworking, law-abiding, God-believing, beset-upon Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, voted for Donald Trump with the hope that he could somehow stop the hemorrhaging of American jobs, that he could secure a strong border wall, that he could end chain migration and the visa lottery system, and that even millions of illegals might be returned to their own homelands (and if they wanted to come to the US that at the very least they would have to stand in line like everyone else!).

And Donald Trump was elected. Hillary and the “open borders” crowd were defeated in what was undoubtedly the most stunning election in recent American history.

Success for “America First,” right?  Secure our borders, right?

NO….All those “deplorables”—those regular and beleaguered American citizens—had to now contend with what is arguably an even greater challenge: the establishment in the GOP and its current efforts, being pushed by Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, to indeed achieve by legislation what Hillary and her crew actually desired!

And thus the Speaker has allowed to come forward two “immigration reform” bills, both of which are presented as satisfying the president’s demands for border and immigration security, one of which, in actuality, could have been—and probably was—drafted by minions of the Business Roundtable and those in the GOP favoring some sort of amnesty.

One of the bills that will be considered is the Goodlatte Bill, so called after Congressman Robert Goodlatte (Republican of Virginia).  [https://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=1081] Formerly labeled the “Securing America’s Future Act,” it is the better of the two pieces of proposed legislation, yet still falls short of the promises that Donald Trump made during the 2016 campaign.

Here is how Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies characterizes it (June 14, 2018):

“It would codify Obama's lawless DACA amnesty, protecting the 700,000 illegal aliens who signed up for it from the likely Supreme Court ruling permitting the termination of the program. To limit the magnetic effect of such an amnesty to attract new illegal immigration, the bill includes enforcement measures, most notably full funding for a wall and mandatory E-Verify. And to limit the downstream legal immigration consequences, the Goodlatte bill would discontinue the visa lottery and the chain-migration categories and allow parents of adult U.S. citizens to move here only on non-immigrant visas (i.e., those that do not lead to citizenship) and require proof of paid-up health insurance.

[But] it reallocates some of the family visas to the employment-based immigration categories, which are already too big, without the needed streamlining of that system that the Raise Act calls for. What's more, it establishes a huge new agricultural guest worker program, expanding it to cover workers in meatpacking and dairy (a bribe to farm interests to buy their silence on E-Verify). [https://cis.org/Oped/Compromise-Immigration-Bill-and-Compromise-Compromise]

But, as Krikorian states, the Goodlatte bill is unlikely to pass, “as since every Democrat will vote against it, joined by the immigration-expansionist Republicans.”  

The second bill that is being offered by Speaker Ryan is labeled “the leadership bill,” and it has his support and the support of establishment Republicans. And it is a direct undercutting of the candidate Trump’s promises to the American electorate:

“The leadership bill cuts out whole portions of the Goodlatte compromise: It doesn't mandate E-Verify, it leaves more of the chain-migration categories in place, and does nothing to change the rules for immigration of parents. What's more, it would expand the amnesty beyond those who currently have DACA, and could be even larger than the 1.8 million cited by the White House earlier this year.

“Not only does the leadership bill cut out important parts of the Goodlatte bill, it includes new provisions inserted at the behest of tech lobbyists: It reallocates more of the family green cards to the already bloated employment categories, it ends the per-country cap (meaning Indian tech workers and their relatives will come to dominate the legal immigration flow, with people from other countries effectively crowded out), and most alarmingly, it expands the amnesty to include children of long-term foreign tech workers here on temporary visas, a number I've heard quoted as 75,000, though there's no way to know.”

This is not why millions of American citizens voted for Donald Trump; yet, in an embarrassing contrempts on Friday, June 14, after the president apparently said in the morning that he only would sign the Goodlatte bill, later that evening his spokesman, Raj Shah, said that the president would support either bill! [https://www.conservativereview.com/news/why-is-the-white-house-betraying-conservatives-on-immigration/]

What is going on in the White House? Are those Neoconservative sycophants who are desperately trying to shape the president’s foreign policy, now working hand-in-glove with the “Profits First” (as opposed to the “America First”) segment of the GOP?

So, in the end…does Hillary actually win? Does her agenda and the agenda of the open door Leftists and the pro-amnesty establishment GOP and the Neocons (who never wanted Trump in the first place) succeed after all? How ironic can you get?

It is time to contact your congressman and tell him that NEITHER BILL is a great one, and a vote against both is appropriate. BUT, if we must have one or the other, then reluctantly support Goodlatte. Call, write, email, and let your representative know.

Now, on to the parody—with these Republicans in power I still may need to buy that extra pork (see below)!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



HILLARY AND HER VERY, VERY SECRET DEAL FOR AN ISLAMIST PROMO:

Finally, the Real Behind-the-Scenes of that Story?

By Boyd D. Cathey



It’s been two and a half years, and now I think it is safe to tell the whole story. You might remember what happened. It was the lead news item on ABC’s Saturday morning, January 2, 2016, news program. The announcer reported, breathlessly, “Donald Trump is being used in a terrorist ad---Hillary confirmed!” The last two words were actually not spoken by the ABC reporters, but the implication was just that.  Instead, Hillary Clinton was shown in the previous Democratic debate when she announced with fanfare that Donald Trump’s demand for a ban on Muslims coming to the US “was being used [in ISIS] recruitment videos.”

Back after Hillary made that claim, she was called on her false assertion, and even the mainstream media reluctantly stated that she had lied.  But I recall Rush Limbaugh on his radio program predicting that, indeed, there would be a video to eventually surface that in some measure would confirm what Hillary lied about, even if the Democratic National Committee and Hillary’s campaign team had to do it, surreptitiously of course.

Well, I have some highly informed and highly-placed clandestine sources in the Middle East. So, shortly after this incident I decided to contact my highly informed and highly-placed sources.    If I identified who they were, they'd sever my head from my aging body! For security reasons, I only use short-wave, two-way radio, you understand, and I use a frequency that was only used by the Bulgarian secret service during World War II---my friends in the Middle East know that when that frequency beeps, it’s me calling.

So, I beeped them: “Allahu Akhbar!” I blurted out (that means, “God is great!”). “This is Boyd Pasha calling.” My secret source---let’s call him Gunga Din, to protect his identity---responded, “What do you want, Boyd Pasha?”  And I stated that ABC and other news sources were reporting that the Islamic terrorist group al-Shabab, the al-Qaida affiliate in Somalia, had produced a promo using a clip of Donald Trump proposing a ban on Muslims coming to the USA until we can get a secure program up to ferret out potential terrorists, and that the American media was showing it. Apparently, the al-Shabab clip also included footage of its deceased spokesman Anwar al-Awlaki, who back in 2011 was sent by American air strikes on to meet up with those promised seventy-two virgins in Heaven.

My source, always on target, then revealed some startling news. In fact, my source played for me a recording of a conversation, and I think I’m the only person in the US to have heard it, and I quickly copied the text down in English. And, here, for the first time ever—two and a half years later—I release it to you:

FIRST VOICE (Hillary Clinton): “Hel-loo…this is Hillary Clinton. With whom am I speaking, please?”

SECOND VOICE: “Allahu Akhbar! Who are you? What do you want?”

FIRST VOICE: “I said this is Hillary Clinton, and I’m the smartest woman in the world. I am going to be Empress of America, well, at least the president, and I am calling you…is this ISIS? May I speak with the big boss, please?”

SECOND VOICE: “Clinton? Well, you are American? Do you wear a burqa and follow shar’ia law?”

FIRST VOICE: “You mean a veil? Well, if it would help, I can put one on, if I can find one at Saks 5th Avenue in New York City. Hmm…I believe my husband Bill may practice shar’ia law, I know he’s still looking for those seventy-two virgins.”

FIRST VOICE: “Anyway, is this ISIS?”

SECOND VOICE: “No, this is al-Shabab of Somalia. I am the Grand Vizier, Doofi al-Shazam, representative of Allah on earth, may his name be praised.”

FIRST VOICE: “Well, are you engaged in terrorist acts? That’s what I care about, you see. I don’t care which group you’re a member of, just as long as you qualify as a Muslim terrorist.”

SECOND VOICE: “No; we are engaged in a holy jihad against the infidel running dogs of the West, and we intend to impose Islam on all the peoples of what was once Christendom. We shall water our camels in the Potomac River and proclaim international shar’ia law from the US capitol! We are the holy army of the Prophet.”

FIRST VOICE: “Okay, okay; that’s good. I get it. But I need to ask you a question: do you know about Donald Trump and his proposal to ban Muslims coming to America? Well, I stated back in a national debate that ISIS was using that in its recruitment ads. I knew it was totally false, but, hey, falsehood has never stopped me. But, you see, I was wondering, could you, perhaps, use Trump in one of your promo ads? I would really be beholden to you. And I could then tell my followers that I was right.”

SECOND VOICE: “We know of this Trump man…he threatens to kill us and send us all to Jannah [Heaven]. We don’t like him, because he would probably really do that. He’s not like your other infidel politicians….”

FIRST VOICE: “Look, I know, but that’s not my question. Could you make a video using Trump pushing his Muslim ban? Hey, I would do almost anything if you could do that…please!”

SECOND VOICE: “I will consult with the Grand Islamic Council, but I think I can say that we could produce such a video. But, I must ask you, what will you do for us in return? We do not do favors for infidel American running dogs for nothing.”

FIRST VOICE: “Ah! Mr. Shazam, I will do almost anything, just name it, if you can produce such a video and make sure that the American news media get it really soon.”

SECOND VOICE: “Allah be praised! Yes, we can deal. Here is what we request in return: first, if you become president of the infidel American running dogs, you must open the doors to millions of Muslims---like what is happening in Europe, especially those Warriors of Allah---to come to your nation. Also, you must allow the imposition of shar’ia law in your infidel nation.”

FIRST VOICE: “Okay, I think I can take care of that. Yeah, I can think of some states---like Alabama, Mississippi, maybe the Carolinas---where we could settle millions of Muslims. After all, those areas would never vote for me anyway. And millions of Muslim jihadist immigrants would fix their little red wagons!”

SECOND VOICE: “Our Muslim immigrants would also demand all the benefits of the American welfare and educational systems, which must be shaped and molded to our values.”

FIRST VOICE: “Certainly, in fact, that’s happening right now! So, don’t worry, between the millions of undocumented Mexicans here and coming in, and your people coming, why, I can remake America! That sounds like a great arrangement. And I can get many Republicans on board, too—they are owned by the Chamber of Commerce and the Koch Brothers' Americans for Prosperity.”

SECOND VOICE: “Clinton woman, you have a deal. We shall produce such an ad.”

FIRST VOICE: “Great! Oh, and I’m sure that Bill will be delighted about that shar’ia law thing and those seventy-two virgins….man, he may even start his own harem! It’s been great talking with you, Mr. Shazam. Happy New Year!”

SECOND VOICE: “Thank you, Clinton woman. It shall be done as you say. Allahu Akhbar! Very soon the Prophet will reign in America and the lowly infidel running dogs will either worship Allah or die a miserable death!”

And then the conversation stopped. I have to say that it was, without doubt, a revelation for me. Of course, the Clinton machine has been known to take no prisoners in previous campaigns, and, certainly, the prospect of having a take-no-prisoners candidate—Donald Trump--come up against the Lady Macbeth of American politics was sobering. But I never dreamed they would go this far. And now I have to wonder if the jihadists will come after me, too; in fact, I’m putting out pork and bacon strips in my yard. I figure that that might keep the jihadists away, at least for a while.

Wednesday, June 13, 2018





June 13, 2018



MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey



Russia, the Neoconservatives, and the Real Issues Involved





Friends,

Almost one year ago the United States Congress (with only a handful of “nay” votes) adopted new and severe sanctions against Russia   for its supposed attempt to influence and interfere in the 2016 national elections [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/02/donald-trump-sanctions-russia-signs-bill]. Included in that legislation was a provision—specifically placed there by Russophobe Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC)—that President Trump cannot alter or lift any of the sanctions without future Congressional approbation.

 The government of Vladimir Putin, in response to this provocation, announced that the American diplomatic presence in Russia would be reduced by 755 persons, a drastic move by any standards. But we should not and cannot say it was unexpected—or undeserved.

 That sanctions vote was fascinating as it illustrated during the first year of the contentious Trump presidency a rare point of political unity between the socialist Left, the Democrats and the mainstream media—formerly noted for their “soft” and favorable attitude to the old and unloved Soviet Communist Russian regime—and the conservative/GOP mainstream, dominated by the Neoconservatives. Of course, perspectives and approaches to the question differ, whether it was the Trump campaign that was colluding with Moscow, or if it was Hillary and the Clinton Foundation that had collaborated in some way, but their target remained the same: that man in the Kremlin and the country he governs.

 One thing was clear: the result of the 2016 presidential election had that most unheard of and remarkable result in recent American political history: a de facto alliance of these supposedly antipodal political forces.  And what we have witnessed is a phalanx of the pseudo-Right Neocons and the formerly pro-Soviet Left linked together, competing to see who could be more “anti” and who could come up with the more far-fetched Russia conspiracy theories, and—as with the 2017 sanctions—the latest unwarranted, over the top legislation.

 Consider the recent—but largely unreported—formation of an umbrella group, the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), with the goal of “uni[ting] the center-left and the center-right.” Its leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post’s Anne Appelbaum, Never Trumper Bill Kristol, former chess wizard Gary Kasparov, and Richard Hurwitz of Council on Foreign Relations. [See “Neocons & Russiagaters Unite!," April 27, 2018: https://www.rt.com/usa/425303-renew-democracy-initiative-neocons-rdi/] RDI’s manifesto calls for "fresh thinking” and urges “the best minds from different countries to come together for both broad and discrete projects in the service of liberty and democracy in the West and beyond…. Liberal democracy is in crisis around the world, besieged by authoritarianism, nationalism, and other illiberal forces. Far-right parties are gaining traction in Europe, Vladimir Putin tightens his grip on Russia and undermines democracy abroad, and America struggles with poisonous threats from the right and left.” [bolding mine]

Or, recall those on-camera Fox News Russia experts—think here of General Jack Keane or the unhinged Colonel Ralph Peters who literally foamed at the mouth when talking about Putin, calling him “the new Hitler,” and who asserted that Putin had committed “worse crimes” than the German dictator.  (Peters is so anti-Russian that he finally left the Fox News network stable in March 2018; see http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-peters-fox-20180320-story.html)

When Tucker Carlson on his prime time program last July 11, 2017, demanded that Peters provide facts and figures for his accusations, Peters immediately exploded and implied that program host Carlson was a “Hitler apologist.” [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/07/11/tucker_carlson_vs_ralph_peters_russia_putin_syria_assad_status_of_middle_east_iraq_war.htm] It was a classic argument and instance of reductio ad Hitlerum.

 Of course, such examples aren’t rare in the establishment “conservative movement” media. Pick up any issue of National Review or The Weekly Standard or listen to the Glenn Beck radio program and you can find the same hysteria, largely laced with faked quotes or disinformation (e.g., “Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet Union” or “Putin was head of the KGB” or “Putin has had his enemies assassinated,” and so on, ad nauseum).

 Indeed, another ploy by Neocon pundits (and Congress) has been to parade Bill Browder, the grandson of American Communist Party boss Earl Browder, as a star witness to President Putin’s nefarious dealings. Of course, it should be noted that Browder fils lost big time financially in his manipulations in Russia, as investigative journalists Philip Giraldi [http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-new-know-nothings-in-congress/  and   https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/01/meet-corrupt-billionaire-who-has-brought-about-new-cold-war.html] and Robert Parry  [https://consortiumnews.com/2017/08/02/a-blacklisted-film-and-the-new-cold-war/] have documented, and he is engaged in a vicious personal vendetta against Vladimir Putin.

 For the Neoconservative leaders of what passes for “conservatism” these days, it is as if nothing has changed since 1991, since the ignominious fall of Communism. It’s even arguable that their hostility to Moscow has increased since then.

Let me suggest several reasons for this: First, many of the more prominent Neoconservatives descend from Russian Jews from the Pale of Settlement, whose memories go back to the pre-Communist days of pogroms under the Tsars. They originally welcomed Lenin and the Communist regime  as liberators and formed some of its staunchest supporters and apparatchiks in the regime of terror that followed (especially in the Cheka and the NKVD) until Josef Stalin unleashed a wave of anti-semitism after World War II. [See the partially translated excerpts from Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together at:  https://200yearstogether.wordpress.com, and the commentary:  https://russia-insider.com/en/solzhenitsyns-damning-history-jews-russia-review/ri22354 ]

 Putin, despite his strong support from native Russian Jews and from the Moscow Rabbinate, is a Russian nationalist and fervent supporter of the traditionalist Russian Orthodox Church, and those two factors bring up painful memories of the “bad old days” of discrimination and Jewish persecution for the Neocons.

 A prime example of this comes in a recent volume authored by prominent Neocon journalist and homosexual activist (yes, the two traits often seem to go together), James Kirchick: The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, 2017). In this jumble of Neocon ideology and prejudice, Kirchick evaluates what for him seems to be happening ominously in Europe. He is deeply fearful of the efforts to “close borders” against Muslim immigrants from the Middle East. He blasts Marine Le Pen as a racist—and most likely a subtle “holocaust denier!”—and attacks the attempts in places like Hungary and Poland to reassert national traditions and Christian identity; for  him these are nothing less than attempts to bring back “fascism.” [http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2017/04/the_end_of_europe_by_james_kirchick_reviewed.html]

 Russia comes in for perhaps his harshest criticism, and the reason is unmistakable: Russia seems to be returning to its older national and pre-Communist heritage, to its age-old Orthodox Christian faith. Russians are returning by the millions to the church and the “old-time” religion. For Kirchick this can only mean one thing: the triumph of bigotry, anti-semitism, and “extreme right wing” ideology, and the failure of what he terms “liberal democracy and equality” (including, he would no doubt include, feminism, same sex marriage, across-the-board equality, and all those other “conservative values”!).

 Kirchick’s critique, shared by many of the leaders of the national Republican Party and dominating the pages of most establishment “conservative” publications and talk radio these days, joins him arm-in-arm with globalist George Soros in efforts to undermine the Russian state and its president…all in the name of “democracy” and “equality.” [See, “George Soros Aghast as Collapsing EU, while Russia Resurgent,” January 19, 2018http://russiafeed.com/george-soros-aghast-collapsing-eu-russia-resurgent/]

 But, just what kind of “democracy” and what kind of “equality” do Kirchick and Soros defend?

 Beyond the ideological foundations for their hatred of nationalist Russia are economic considerations and the issue of who controls and manages the Russian economy: Wall Street and Bruxelles, or Russia, itself. Unlike the weak and pliant Boris Yeltsin, Putin the nationalist ended the strangle-hold of Russian industry, in particular control of Russia’s important energy sector, by those few international businessmen, the oligarchs (many of them Jewish), most of whom fled the country. That could not stand! How dare Russia—and its president—oppose the economic diktats of Bruxelles and Wall Street!

 Lastly, we should add one more reason for hostility, and that is Russia’s remaining international presence, in particular, in Syria. It is very simple: you don’t go from being one of the world’s two “superpowers” to all of a sudden a second-rate, economically-handicapped “has been” without some remorse. As a patriot and nationalist President Putin has, understandably, attempted to reassert Russian power—certainly, not as much or in the same manner as the old Communist leaders. But, from his reasonable point of view, the largest country in the world does have interests, and not just in what goes on in neighboring nations where millions of Russians (formerly within Russia) reside, but also with long-time allies such as Syria.

 Is not this same criterion true for the United States and its dealings with its neighbors and allies?

 More, for the past twenty-five years Russia has experienced the poisoned tip of Islamic terrorism, domestically, including the brutal war in Tchechnya in the Caucasus region and the horrid bombings in the heart of the country, Moscow.  From the beginning of his tenure Putin has offered to cooperate with the  United States in the fight against international Islamic terror, but each time it was the United States—us—who refused, including famously Paul Wolfowitz during the George W. Bush administration who replied to one such offer: “We don’t  need your assistance or intel.” And thus, the revealing files on the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston bombing) were not received.  But, as Neocon Charles Krauthammer once declared: “We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States.” That attitude was not received with equanimity by post-Communist Russia, a Russia that has discovered its heritage and its traditions and has asked for partnership with the United States, and not the hysteria we have witnessed in the United States sweeping aside all rationality.

June 19, 2018 MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey Illegal Immigration, those Border Children, and the Treason of Mainline Christianity...