VIDEO: Zelenskyy says "Ukraine is helping fight Iran. Now help us!"

The current unpleasantness in the Middle East has diverted the world's attention from Russia's invasion of Ukraine. And, particularly in the US of A, there is a growing chorus of complainers that America should reduce or even end support for those fighting for the freedom and independence of Ukraine.

What can these people say, now that Ukraine is doing what it can to support the American-Israeli efforts to overthrow the murderous regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran? In a speech given on Tuesday to a group of members of the British Parliament, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called for joint efforts in building up anti-drone defences against Iranian missile and dreone attacks.

Ukraine has become the world leader in drone technology for warfare. On a daily basis they can now manufacture not only enough drones for their own need, but also drones for the needs of other countries. Ukraine now has technicians on the ground in all of the Arab countries surrounding Iran that have been attacked by Iran. And they are training the armies of those countries in the techniques of drone warfare.

President Zelenskyy said that "right now, there are 201 Ukrainians in the Middle East and Gulf region, and another 34 are ready to deploy... If, together with partners in the Middle East, we build a system like Ukraine, they will be able to track attacks from Iran or from the Houthis in real time, analyze them, keep improving their defense, giving people critical infrastructure and trade routes."

Dear readers, Ukraine is on our side! Seems to us the least we can do is give them all the aid we can in their desperate fight for freedom!

Thanks and a tip of the ushanka to Agent 5 for sending us the URL for this one.

VIDEO: Michael Matt calls out Christian Zionists over Iran war

Call me a Mugwump if you want [OK, you're a mugwump! Ed.] but I'm not totally on board with the war against the Mad Mullahs of Iran. 

There can be no doubt that the Middle East and the world in general would be a better and safer place if the Islamic theocracy were overthrown. But, as I suggeested yesterday, I don't see any clear plan for replacing the arch-Muslim dictators with a more tractable regime. And I certainly don't want to see another debacle like Iran or Afghanistan. 

One thing's for sure. I reject the argument of the Christian Zionists that this war, fomented by the Israelis (read: Jews) is all part of God's plan to establish His kingdom on Earth. For those who haven't heard, Christian Zionism is a theological and political movement wherein Christians support the state of Israel and the return of the Jewish people to the Holy Land, believing this fulfills biblical prophecy regarding the End Times. 

Rooted in 17th-century Puritan thought, this ideology sees modern Israel as a divine miracle. No traditional Catholic can believe that, as Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant newspaper says in an e-mail received here today, as follows:

Re: War in Iran – regardless of the nonsense Senator Ted Cruzmissile learned in Sunday school, Bibi’s manmade messiah has no legitimate Biblical foundation. Not to make this all about Sen. Lindsey Graham, but the warmongering Zionists are trying to blasphemously show Jesus Christ how it’s done. 

What they’re essentially doing now is laying claim to the temporal power the Sanhedrin wanted the first time around. Charlie Kirk was right! Their kingdom is most definitely of this world! So, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran…and any other country that gets in the way of Israel’s nuclear-armed messianism.

Antisemitic? Not at all! Orthodox Jews reject Israel’s militarized messiah out of hand. They consider it heresy, which is why I heavily lean on their testimony in this week’s Underground [the video below. Ed.]. 

Traditional Jews and Traditional Roman Catholics know their scripture, whereas Zionists rewrite it to accommodate their political aspirations. From Iraq to Gaza and from Syria to Iran, this is about a human hack for a divine curse... They base their claims on a religious right to the land of Israel, as promised to Abraham, heretically insisting that once Jews repossess Israel, this will bring about the millennial rule of Christ on Earth for 1000 years. 

What are they missing? Almighty God keeps His promises! So, just as Adam forfeited Paradise on Earth by his sin – and we forfeit God’s promised heavenly Jerusalem through mortal sin – so too the Jews forfeited the Promised Land by breaking the covenant with God.

In Deuteronomy 28:63-64 (DRV), Moses warns them "the Lord shall rejoice destroying you and bringing you to nought, so that you shall be taken away from the land... The Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the farthest parts of the earth to the ends thereof." 

That is the judgment of God Himself, and it was reaffirmed in no uncertain terms by His only begotten Son. Any attempt to circumvent it on the part of Zionists – Christian or otherwise – is blasphemy. 

In this latest edition of The Remnant Underground, Mr Matt takes a deep dive into the biblical foundations of this fundamentally Christian reality: No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a Christian Zionist. Listen and learn.

BREAKING: Trump tells Iran "FAFO"

Not a great way to start the day. I was awakened at sparrow fart by the distant whine of the Fort Mudge air raid siren. Seems that Chief Wiggum, who's in charge of the device, had misinerpreted the news flash on the radio and was warning the populace that Iran was attacking the US of A. In fact it's the other way around.

It's actually the mad mullahs who rule the Islamic Republic of Iran who need to keep their eyes to the skies, as President Donald Trump told the Iranian armed forces to lay down their arms or face "certain death." FAFO!

POTUS also urged the Iranian people to rise up and "seize control of your destiny" as "major" joint American-Israeli strikes against Tehran commenced overnight. 

Why is this happening? Because, after months of palaver, the Islamists refuse to accept limits on their development of nuclear technology. They say it's for peaceful purposes, because, as is well known, Islam is the Religion of Peace(TM).  American security experts, however, think that the Iranians mean to bring peace to the Middle East by nuking Israel. Just a thought, of course.

 Announcing the strikes to eliminate "imminent threats from the Iranian regime" which "directly endangers the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world," President Trump said, "A short time ago, the United States Military began major combat operations in Iran."

The strikes are intended to destroy Iran's stockpiles of missiles and to "obliterate" Iran’s missile production industry, the President said. The intent, he explained,  is to prevent Iranian nuclear-tipped long-range missiles from ever threatening the American mainland or America’s allies in Europe.

This is also about bringing regime change to the Islamic Republic. President Trump called on the armed forces, paramilitary, and police of Iran to lay down their weapons. If they did so they would receive "complete immunity" and be treated fairly, he said, but else would face "certain death". 

 

POTUS also called on the Iranian people to take this opportunity to rise up against the government, stating "the hour of your freedom is at hand" and they would not likely get another second chance. "Stay sheltered," he said, "Don’t leave your home, it’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will, probably be your only chance for generations… now is the time to seize control of your destiny."

VIDEO: Taliban fighters being trained by British officers!

Further to our report on the outbreak of hostilities between Pakistan and Afghanistan, we pass along this shocking video, which reveals that British army officers -- the first one shown is a Scot, the second English -- are training the Afghan Taliban for combat!

 

We don't refer to this as "boot camp" becauase it appears that these soldiers of the Prophet have no boots. Perhaps, after the battle, they will be able to get some off the feet of the other soldiers of the Prophet. Good luck lads!

Muslim civil war flares up again

While we were preoccupied with ICE, Cuba, Epstein and other things closer to home, the followers of the Religion of Peace(TM), having tired (for the moment) of attacking Jews and Christians, have resumed attacking each other.

Pakistan's defence minister said yesterday the country is in "open war" with Afghanistan, after Islamabad launched airstrikes on Kabul as part of a wave of attacks across the country. "Our patience has now run out," said Khawaja Muhammad Asif following the attacks. 

The strikes came after the Afghan Taliban [You mean there's more than one Taliban? Ed.] announced a major offensive against Pakistani military posts near the border on Thursday night. Thanks to "Angry_Old_Man_2" at Blazing Cat Fur, we have a photo of Talibaners being trained for the assault.

The latest attacks follow months of clashes between the two neighbouring nations, despite agreeing last October to a ceasefire, which has proven to be more an idea than a reality.

Walt sez: Have at it boys. May the best Muslim win, and may Allah step lightly on your heads.

Book review: "The Jewish War" + BONUS VIDEO

Yesterday was the day fixed by President Trump by which Hamas had to accept his plan to bring an end to the unpleasantness in Gaza... or else! 

While we wait for all hell to break loose. let us consider the words of Jewish Roman historian Flavius Josephus ben Matthias, in The Jewish War. 

1950 years ago, Josephus wrote his contemporary account of the great Jewish rebellion against Rome. The insurrection began in 66 A.D. and lasted seven years.

The Middle East described by Josephus is perfectly familiar -- a politically fractionalized land populated with a humble of ethnic and religious groups, including Jews, Arabs, Egyptians, Syrians, Greeks, Italians and a tiny community of Christians.

Each detests the others. Extreme political and theological views prevail. Terrorism and assassination are commonplace. Alliances are momentary. Grudges, personal. And neither colonial subjugation nor local autonomy suffices to keep the peace.

The political events are familiar too. Rome first intervened in the region as a peace keeper, brokering a dispute between Seleucid Mesopotamia and Ptolemaic Egypt. Later the Middle East appeared vital to Rome because Roman trade routes passed through the region and because of the Parthian threat to the empire's eastern frontier. The Romans were lured into deeper military and political involvement, and this triggered continual insurrections.

The rebellion of 66 A.D., however, did not begin as a war of national liberation. It began as communal rioting in the seaport town of Caesarea -- Greeks verus Jews over an empty lot next to a synagogue. This inspired sympathetic rioting in Jerusalem, and a ham-handed Roman attempt to quell the disturbances worsened them instead. The result was one of those great wallows siege, massacre, treachery, persecution, revenge, plunder, and self-destruction to which the Middle East is so often host. 

The rising in Jerusalem set off a reaction among the non-Jewish inhabitants of the region, who indulged themselves in wild pogroms, with killings taking place as far away as Damascus and Alexandria. Roman forces were not sufficient to quash the rebellion. Jewish forces were not sufficient to defeat the Romans in open combat. Guerilla warfare ensured, with predictable consequences to the populace.

The Romans were noted for vigorous foreign policy responses. The Emperor Nero sent Vespasian and three legions to pacify Judea. Using a great deal of slaughter and some tactics, Vespasian drove the rebels back to the environs of Jerusalem. He was prevented from ending the war, however, by political confusion at home. Sound familiar? Nero was ousted and three worthless and short-lived emperors followed within the year.

The Jews made use of this breathing space by engaging in urban warfare with themselves and committing all conceivable and some inconceivable atrocities upon their co-religionists. Vespasian himself was finally proclaimed emperor by the Roman army, and the war was resumed under the direction of his son Titus.

After a prolonged and disgusting siege, Jerusalem was taken. And after another prolonged and even more disgusting siege, Masada, the last rebel stronghold fell. The Temple was destroyed, the Jewish upper classes were dispersed, and a Roman army was permanently stationed in Judea. Even then the peace did not hold, and rebellion would break out anew during the reign of Hadrian. 

Normally the patterns of history are reassuring. But in The Jewish War, the shock of recognition is just a shock. Here, sixty generations ago, is nearly the same cast of characters engaged in exactly the same obsessive, vicious, and fatal behaviour for the same terrifying reasons on the same cursed, reeking, ugly chunk of land.

Who fails to learn history is doomed to repeat it. But was seemed doomed to repeat this history anyway. 

This review is adapted from "The Two-Thousand-Year-Old U.S. Middle East Policy Expert", by the late, great P.J. O'Rourke, in a little-known libertarian magazine called Inquiry, c. 1979. While you're letting that sink it, here's a very à propos musical interlude.

A sensible view of demands to retaliate against Iran

Most of Walt's readers don't read (or haven't heard of!) the National Post. Founded by Conrad Black, sometime Canadian (when he wasn't busy being Lord Black of Cross Harbour) and arch-conservative, the Post (and its group of Sun newspapers) is the only media outlet in Canuckistan which takes a reasonably balanced view of the world. 

One of the Post group's premier columnists is Kelly McParland, who wrote an excellent piece today on the stupidity of the Excited States of America's entering yet another war in the Middle East. Mr McParland argues that the Republicans who are pressing Crooked Joe Biden to hit back at Iran for the drone strike that killed three US soldiers [How come all three were black? Ed.?] are all but insane to advocate such folly. 

Worse, they are urging a course of action which President Trump has rightly and repeated condemned. I've emphasized Mr Trump's words in Mr McParland's column, which I'm reposting, in a slightly shortened version. (To read the entire column, click on the headline link.) 

Biden pressed to start another 'stupid' war

If you disliked Donald Trump but were determined to say something positive about him, you could always cite his consistent criticism of “stupid” American wars. It’s a position that hits home with a lot of people — Democrats as much as Republicans — who have lost loved ones in distant countries over matters a lot of Americans don’t view as their responsibility to solve.

Trump has been nothing if not consistent on the point.While campaigning for re-election in 2020 he boasted of his efforts to reduce U.S. military deployments overseas and pledged to "keep America out of these endless, ridiculous, stupid, foreign wars in countries that you’ve never even heard of."

He regularly assails the Biden administration over its defence performance — particularly the bungled withdrawal from Afghanistan, insists he could end the Ukraine war in 24 hours as president, and says the White House "has brought us to the brink of World War III."

His admirers like to cite his record of having "no wars" during his four years in office — a claim with some merit compared to recent predecessors. One 2017 study concluded that crucial Trump victories in three key states in the 2016 election may have been helped by concern over high casualty rates under previous administrations. All of which makes it a bit odd that top Republicans are loudly demanding the sort of retaliatory action against Iran that history suggests would be an excellent way to start yet another ill-fated U.S. military entanglement....

"The only answer to these attacks must be devastating military retaliation against Iran’s terrorist forces, both in Iran and across the Middle East. Anything less will confirm Joe Biden as a coward unworthy of being commander-in-chief," said Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who is backing Trump’s renewed bid for the presidency. 

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell charged in a statement that "the entire world now watches for signs that the President is finally prepared to exercise American strength to compel Iran to change its behaviour."

He said U.S. enemies would continue to be emboldened "until the United States imposes serious, crippling costs — not only on front-line terrorist proxies, but on their Iranian sponsors who wear American blood as a badge of honour." Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and John Cornyn both fired off tweets insisting the White House aim hits directly at Iran, while Trump himself used the attack to criticize Biden for his "weakness." 

Given the Middle East’s status as one of the world’s most relentlessly volatile regions, Iran’s success in spreading its tentacles throughout the region, the tensions already centred on the bitter confrontation in Israel and Gaza and the growing boldness of Iran’s determination to taunt western powers, it’s difficult to see how yet another one-off U.S. retaliatory effort could accomplish anything other than increasing the danger the region’s many festering hot spots erupt into one giant conflagration.

In other words, just the sort of "endless", "stupid" foreign war that Trump has so often derided, and just the sort of quagmire the mullahs in Tehran would love to see sweep over the region. Chaos and conflict work to the benefit of regimes like Syria’s and Iran’s, helping focus hatred on foreign powers rather than the brutality and repression they inflict on their own people. 

A few quick missile strikes on known Iranian dependents in Syria or Iraq, or even Iran itself, might raise cheers for a day or two in Washington but would be yet another opportunity for Tehran to recruit the sort of fanatics who think spilling more blood is a good reaction to all the blood that’s already been spilled. Jumping impulsively into doomed conflicts is indeed a trait that has brought the U.S. tragedy and humiliation time and again. 

Vietnam was a quagmire. It was far harder for the Obama and Trump administrations to get US troops out of Iraq than it was for the Bush White House to get them in. The US disaster in Benghazi may not have killed Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign all on its own but was certainly a nail Republicans hammered at enthusiastically. And Joe Biden’s rush to flee Afghanistan was a fiasco from which he’s never managed to recover.

It’s easy to understand the temptation to use Washington’s immense military might to strike back at a country that works so hard to bring despair to so many people. But in pressing Biden to risk lives for the sake of a quick headline or two, Republican leaders are demanding a response that’s diametrically opposed to what their favoured candidate has been preaching since the day he entered politics. 

Would they be making the same demand if it was a Republican sitting in the White House, forced to confront the prospects of setting off a regional explosion, complete with body bags being shipped back home? If so it would be evidence they’d learned no more about the dangers of stumbling into foreign wars than the presidents who sent U.S. sons and daughters into Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and came to regret it.

2022 Wally Awards: Best pictorial explanation of "our" foreign aid policy

Sometimes it's hard to understand government policies, particularly foreign policy and the trillions spent on foreign. For a clearer understanding of how your tax dollars are spent to help the development of third world shitholes, check out this photo, taken somewhere in the Middle East.

One picture may be worth 1000 words, but is it worth $1000? You be the judge. And be sure to let the rulers of your country know how proud you are of their wokeness.

Footnote and protest alert! Organizers of the original Freedom Convoy protest that paralyzed the capital of Canuckistan (Prime Minister McBlackface's residence is pictured above) for three weeks in early 2022 say they're planning on bringing a new convoy to Winnipeg MB next month. 

In a Facebook post reported by CTV, Canada Unity shared a live video in which they proclaimed that a "world unity convoy” would be held in Winterpeg, so named because of its insalubrious climate, from the 17th to 20th of February, to coincide with the Whitewash Rouleau Commission report into last year's protest.

Mr Socks is said to be making reservations for a skiing holiday at "an undiscosed location" (read: NOT Winnipeg) for the 16th through 21st.

Dr. Ron Paul: Twenty years on, we’ve learned nothing from 9/11

Ed. here. What follows is Dr Ron Paul's column from the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prospertity, reposted with permission. Thank you, Dr Paul, for your clear and constant warning abouot the dangers of big government and the folly of meddling in foreign affairs which are none of our business.

Nothing upset the Washington Beltway elites more than when in a 2007 presidential debate I pointed out the truth about the 9/11 attacks: they attacked us because we’ve been in the Middle East, sanctioning and bombing the civilian population, for decades. The 9/11 attackers were not motivated to commit suicide terrorism on the Twin Towers and Pentagon because they dislike our freedoms, as then-President Bush claimed. That was a self-serving lie.

They hated – and hate – us because we kill them for no reason. Day after day. Year after year. Right up until just a few days ago, when President Biden slaughtered Zemari Ahmadi and nine members of his family - including seven children - in Afghanistan. The Administration bragged about taking out a top ISIS target. But they lied. Ahmadi was just an aid worker, working for a California-based organization, bringing water to suffering Afghan village residents.

This horror has been repeated thousands of times, over and over, for decades. Does Washington believe these people are subhuman? That they somehow don’t care about their relatives being killed? That they don’t react as we would react if a foreign power slaughtered our families?

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright famously suggested in an interview that killing half a million Iraqi children with sanctions designed to remove Saddam Hussein from power was “worth it.” It was an admission that the lives of innocents mean nothing to the Washington elite, even as they paint their murderous interventions as some kind of “humanitarian liberation.” The slogan of the US foreign policy establishment really should be, “No Lives Matter.”

The Washington foreign policy elites – Republicans and Democrats – are deeply corrupt and act contrary to US national interests. They pretend that decades of indiscriminate bombing overseas are beneficial to the victims and keep us safer as well. That is how they are able, year after year, to convince Congress to hand over a trillion dollars – money taken directly and indirectly from average Americans. They use fear and lies for their own profit. And they call themselves patriots.

The Washington establishment lied to us because they did not want us to stop for a second and try to understand the motive for the 9/11 attacks. Police detectives are not apologists for killers when they try to look for a motive for the crime. But the Washington elite did not want us to think about why people might be motivated to suicide attack. That might endanger their 100-year gravy train.

What was the real message of 9/11 to Americans? Give up your freedoms for the false promise of security. It’s OK for the government to spy on all of us. It’s OK for the TSA to abuse us for the “privilege” of traveling in our own country. We must continue to bomb people overseas. Don’t worry it’s only temporary.

So, twenty years on what have we learned from 9/11? Absolutely nothing. And we all know what the philosopher George Santayana said about those incapable of learning from history. I desperately hope that somehow the United States will adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy, which would actually protect us from another attack. I truly wish Americans would demand that their leaders learn from history. The only way to make us safe is to end the reign of the Washington killing machine.

Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Iraqi parliament wants US troops out of their country

Regular readers will know that, along with such right-thinking patriots as Dr Ron Paul, I am absolutely opposed to American involvement the Muslim civil wars in the Middle East.

It's not that I'm a pacifist or peacenik. I do believe in the doctrine of the "just war". It's just that I think it's foolish to waste 1000s of lives and billions of dollars on a war we can't win, in an affair which is none of our business.

So I was heartened to hear yesterday that the Iraqi parliament voted in favour of a resolution asking the government to expel US troops from their shithole country. Mostly Shiite factions voted in favour, while Kurdish and most Sunni members of parliament did not attend the session, presumably because they want the American presence in Iraq to continue.

The resolution says, "The government commits to revoke its request for assistance from the international coalition fighting 'Islamic State' due to the end of military operations in Iraq and the achievement of victory. The Iraqi government must work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason."

Like so many resolutions passed by so many politicians in so many talking shops around the world, this resolution is likely to come to nothing. It still needs to be approved by the Iraqi cabinet, which, under their system, is not responsible to parliament. However, interim Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi voiced support as he railed against US "violations of Iraqi sovereignty."

He was referring to the US air strike on Friday which killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps' elite Quds Force, near Baghdad's airport. The force has been declared an Islamic terrorist organization, and the killing of its commander -- a man with the blood of 1000s on his hands -- was intended to prevent the execution of a major terrorist attack against Americans in the Middle East, while at the same time dealing a blow to the heart of Iran's Middle East policy.

About 5,200 US troops are deployed at Iraqi military bases -- built at considerable expense to American taxpayers -- to train and support local security forces, in hopes -- faint hopes -- of preventing a resurgence of ISIS. The troops are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government as part of an US-led international coalition against the Islamic extremist group.

The usual suspects (read: Democrats) filled the airwaves yesterday with complaints about the air strike, and dire warnings about immanentizing the eschaton. (You can look it up.) At the very least, they say, Still-President Trump's action has facilitated conditions for Iran to achieve one of its main regional objectives: removing the US military from its neighbour.

And I say: GREAT! What I see here is a brilliant plan to, at long last, get America out of Iraq and perhaps the entire sandpit, without spending at little cost in lives or money, and without losing face!
Previous administrations, both Republican and Democrat, got the USA into the Middle East quagmire (giggity!), without any realistic chance of victory, or any exit plan. The Prez promised to clean up the mess left by Bush, but just spread it further, into Libya.

President Trump said he'd find a way, and was attacked for preparing to bail out, abandoning the "good" Muslims, yada yada yada. What better way to end this colossal exercise in futility than to have the people that invited America to go in to "help" them, order the US to leave. Walt says, DO IT! NOW! Leave the Sunnis and the Shiites and ISIS and Al-Qaeda and the Taliban to fight it out. And may all the jihadis get what they so richly deserve. Selah!

Christians, Christian culture attacked across Europe, world

On Christmas Day in the Year of Our Lord 1000 (or New Year's Day of 1001 AD, depending on which calendar you use) Stephen I (aka King Saint Stephen) established Hungary as a Christian Kingdom. On that day he was crowned king with a crown sent by Pope Sylvester II.

Over 1000 years later, the government of Hungary, unafraid to call the country "Christian", has warned that Christians are increasingly being persecuted around the world, and driven out of public life in Europe, more viciously than any people of any other faith.

So concerned are the Hungarians about the persecution -- even to the point of death -- of Christian minorities that they have created Hungary Helps, an assistance programme for persecuted Christians and other victims of humanitarian crises, particularly in the Middle East and Africa.

The aim of the programme is not to help Christian minorities migrate to the West -- a process which has seen the Christian populations of countries like Syria and Iraq collapse at an alarming rate -- but to help them where they are, in order to preserve their ancient communities and way of life for posterity. According to Hungary's ambassador to the Disunited Nations, Hungary Helps has so far spent $35 million supporting Christian communities, and helped 70,000 refugees to return to their ancestral homes.

According to a report on Breitbart News, Tristan Azbej, the Hungarian state secretary with particular responsibility for Hungary Helps, recently tweeted some examples of the ongoing attacks on Christians and Christianity. "There are places where it's illegal to display a Nativity scene and you can get fired for wishing 'Merry Christmas'", he wrote, "and this happens in the name of  'liberalism, inclusivity and freedom.'

"Some years ago, at the Brussels City Hall, it was decided not to set a Christmas tree, and in Santa Monica, California, a ban on nativity screening was made on the grounds of world neutrality," he wrote. "Meanwhile, in Germany, Christian songbooks have been burned, and in France, churches have been attacked every year, and Christian symbols and religious objects, such as crucifixes, have been damaged."

"Christianity is the most persecuted religion, with about a quarter of a billion Christians worldwide being persecuted or discriminated against, and thousands of people killed last year because of their Christian beliefs," the minister continued. But, he added, "The Hungarian Government stands with Christian values and communities. [We are] committed to the protection of Christian culture and strengthens it in the world by, inter alia, combating migration. [We] hope that over time, Europe will realize the importance of this."

Now there's a declaration we haven't heard lately -- if ever -- from any Western government. Sadly, we don't even hear it loud and clear from Pope Francis. Today, December 26th, if the feast day of the first Saint Stephen, the protomartyr or first martyr of Christianity. Saint Stephen was a deacon in the early church at Jerusalem who aroused the enmity of members of various synagogues by his teachings.

Accused of blasphemy at his trial, he made a long speech denouncing the Jewish authorities who were sitting in judgment on him, and was then stoned to death. Let us ask him to help all those who today are being discriminated against, persecuted and even martyred for their Christian Faith.

Turks invade "Kurdistan" -- What next?!

And so it begins. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced on Twitter Wednesday that the Turkish offensive into northeast Syria has started. He calls it "#OperationPeaceSpring". The aim of the operation, he tweeted, is to "eradicate the threat of terror against Turkey." And the invasion will be good for Syria too, of course. "We will preserve Syria's territorial integrity," he wrote, "and liberate local communities from terrorists."

What kind of terrorists? Well, "PKK/YPG and Daesh terrorists", of course! You can't tell the players in the Muslim civil war without a programme, Walt will elucidate. "Daesh" is the name the PC media use for ISIS/ISIL, to avoid have to use the word "Islamic" (as in "Islamic terrorists"). "PKK" stands for "Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê" (= Kurdistan Workers' Party‎), a Kurdish far-left militant and political organization based in Turkey and Iraq. The Turkish government has been trying for years to suppress them, often by making them dead. "YPG" is the armed wing of the leftist Kurdish Democratic Union Party, closely allied to the Syriac Military Council, a militia of Assyrians.

The Kurds are an Iranian ethnic group native to Western Asia. Their mountainous "native land", known as Kurdistan, includes southeastern Turkey, northwestern Iran, northern Iraq, and northern Syria. The most widely practiced religion in the region is Islam. According to a 2011 study conducted by the Pew Research Center, nearly all Kurds (98%) in Iraq identified as Sunni Muslim, while the other 2% identified as Shiite Muslims.

The predominant branch of the Religion of Peace in Iran is Shia Islam. In Turkey, Sunni Muslims are in the majority, with about 80% of the populartion. 19% of Turks are Shiites.

So you might think that there should be no friction, in Turkey, between the Sunni Turks and Sunni Kurds. You would be wrong. The problem is that the Kurds of Turkey would prefer to be united with the Kurds of Iran, Iraq and, yes, Syria in an independent Kurdistan. That is what they have been fighting for, allying themselves with whatever other groups or powers may be useful. See "How goes the war against IS/ISIL/ISIS? It's a fiasco!", WWW 27/5/19 (includes video).

The problem for the Kurds is that they just lost their biggest ally, the Excited States of America. Still-President Trump's decision to withdraw American forces from Syria, opens the desert of northeast Syria for Mr Erdogan's "Operation Peace Spring". (Dontcha love how all these invasions -- no matter who leads them -- have names that include "Peace", "Freedom", "Liberation", etc?) A UK-based Syrian war monitoring group, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, reported today that people were fleeing the border town of Tal Abyad, which Turkey is expected to attack first. And Turkish television reports said Turkish jets had bombed Syrian Kurdish positions across the border from Turkey.

And so it begins. What happens next? Will Shia Iran seize the opportunity to move against the Sunni Kurds in its westerly regions? Will the Arab Iraqis try to oust the ethnically different Kurds from the oil-rich northern party of their alleged country? Where will it all end? God (or maybe Allah?) only knows. But don't forget that south of Syria lies Israel, and within Israel lies... wait for it... Armageddon.

Further reading (and viewing):
"Meanwhile, in the Middle East, something big is on the horizon", WWW 10/11/17 (includes video from Ron Paul Liberty Report)
"Scrapping the Iran deal: another milepost on the road to Armageddon", WWW 10/5/18.

VIDEO: Ron Paul comments on long-overdue US withdrawal from Syria

In case no-one noticed, our blog quietly passed its 10th anniversary back in July. [If I'd remembered I'd have baked a cake. Ed.] How time flies when you're having fun! One of the themes that I write about again and again [and again and again. Ed.] is the folly of America being entangled in foreign wars that it can't win, especially the oil wars in the Gulf and Middle East. See, for example, "Will America never learn? The persistence of bad foreign policy" (WWW 2/5/13).

It's not that I'm a pacifist, or anti-Israel, or an apologist for the Islamists. I'm just a realist, like Ron Paul, and think it's stupid to waste tens of thousands of American lives and billions of American dollars meddling in and tens of thousands trying to act as referees in Muslim civil wars. Here's what Dr Paul has to say about Still-President Trump's announcement that US forces will be withdrawn from Syria, starting yesterday!



IMHO the withdrawal is long overdue! We have (dare I say it?) no dog in those fights. The USA will be no better off no matter who wins, and no worse off no matter who loses. The usual suspects say the Bushes, Slick Willy, and the Prez sent American forces to the Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan, and kept them there, not just to convert the feudal Arab states to modern Western democracy, but to keep the Saudis and multinational companies in control of the oil that lies beneat the blood-stained desert sands.

I call BS on that. With the development of fracking and shale oil, and the slowly lessening use of plastics and other oil-based products, America is virtually self-sufficient in oil. And if the liberals on both sides of the Canada-US border would smarten up and support the development of Canada's oil sands and the import of Canadian oil through pipelines which the leftists don't want to be built or expanded, oil self-sufficiency would be guaranteed. Who needs Arab oil?!

Mr Trump's announcement late Sunday has set the lefties' hair on fire. Expressions of shock and horror are being heard from all liberal quarters, notably Brussels, the capital of the European Union, and (of course) the commentariat of America, Britain and Canada.
* America is leaving its Kurdish allies in the lurch!
* America is surrendering! Another failure for Trump!
* America is caving to Assad!
* The Turkish invasion of Syria will be disastrous!
* More millions of refugees will be washing up on our shores!
and, inevitably
* We're inviting a resurgence of Al-Qaeda and ISIS!

Walt says, who cares?! Let the Islamists duke it out. And if a humanitarian disaster ensures, let the Europeans and Canucks take care of it, if they're so minded... and can afford it. Getting out of the Middle East is absolutely the right thing to do. As Dr Paul and Dan McAdams say near the end of the video, it's not going to happen overnight, but this week's decision by Still-President Trump is a step in the right direction.

Further reading: "Worried for Kurds in Syria, abandoned by US? Here’s an obvious solution but it will make Washington hawks MAD", by Nebojsa Malic, on the Ron Paul Institute website, 8/10/19.

Getting out of the Muslim civil wars - about time!

I don't understand the reaction of American civilians, Republican and Democrat alike, to Still-President Trump's announcement this week that he intends to bring US troops home from Syria and Afghanistan. Daniel McAdams, writing on Ron Paul's website, says that "Washington heads are exploding", and so it would seem, but why? Is the Paranoid States of America a nation of warmongers? Do Americans really believe that the best defence against Islamic terrorism is to hammer the jihadis in their own sandpit? Does no-one see any merit in getting out of the Muslim civil war that is really none of our business? As Mr Trump says, "Are we going to stay there forever?"

Mr McAdams writes: The warmongering Left has joined forces with the neocons to demand that President Trump reverse course in his recent decision to pull US troops from Syria. Neocons claim that ISIS will increase with the US absence, but it was the very US intervention in the region - that they supported - that led to the rise of extremist and terrorist groups.

Indeed. It was interventionism -- the insane desire to be the world's policeman and bring the so-called "pax Americana" to a war-weary world -- that got the USA into the Gulf Wars. Shortly after 9/11, US troops stormed into Afghanistan, which had littlel if anything to do with the attack. Since then, America has lost more than 2400 soldiers and spent nearly a trillion dollars in its longest war ever. And with what result? The Islamists control about half of that shithole, the rest being controlled (in theory) by a feckless government that can't keep its notional army from killing the Westerners who are there to "help" them. Does that make any sense?

I can understand the displeasure of the American military with the President's decision. Secretary of Defense James Mattis departed in a huff [a minute-and-a-huff? Ed.]. He is emblematic of the super-macho militaristic types that have held the highest ranks in the American armed forces ever since World War II. They are the philosophical heirs of Douglas MacArthur, George Patton, William Westmoreland, and [That's enough generals. Ed.] who delight in sending American kids overseas to kill... and be killed... because there's no fighting to be done at home, but if there's no fighting, there won't be any need for the billions in defence spending, and many brass hats will be out of their jobs.

And what is the result? "Pax Americana" is a myth! Ever since its troops landed in Korea as part of the Disunited Nations' "police action", America has been at war -- declared or otherwise -- with someone, somewhere, every single hour of every single day. What has that cost the nation, in treasure, in lives, and the foregone benefits of peace? With President Trump, I ask: Is this going to continue forever?

In the summer of 2017, the President announced that he was adding about 1000 more troops to those already in Afghanistan to bolster the "training and advising" mission, which we are supposed to believe doesn't involve any fighting, just teaching the Islamists how to fight. But, Mr Trump said, doing so went against his instinct. Since then, security conditions in Afghanistan have not improved, according to the latest government watchdog report.

And then there's Syria. US forces were sent to that shithole to Syria to work with local Syrian and Kurdish "partners" on the ground to help defeat ISIS. Now, the President says, that mission has been largely accomplished, and in terms of the amount of territory controlled, that would appear to be the case.

Of course the jihadis haven't been exterminated. They've simply gone to ground, or gone elsewhere. 1000s of them have migrated to Europe and, yes, America, disguised as "refugees" and asylum-seekers. So the fight against them should continue, wherever they may be found... but not in the sandpit. Leave the mopping up to the Turks, the Kurds and other Muslims. "Keep at it, Mohammeds, and lots of luck to you. We're done with you!" That's what I would like to hear all of the lawmakers in Washington say. I can't understand why anyone would think otherwise.

VIDEO: 1000+ Europeans killed/maimed by asylum-seekers since 2014

An Eritrean asylum seeker and his British Muslim partner have been found guilty of plotting an ISIS-inspired terror attack over the 2017 Christmas holiday period.

According to the Derby Telegraph, Munir Mohammed, 37, a resident of Derby, met Rowaida El-Hassan, 33, from London, on a Muslim dating website. Mr Mohammed is a devout follower of the Prophet after whom he was named. So firm in his beliefs was he that he once chastised a neighbour for wearing shorts. When arrested by Inspector Knacker in December, he was days away from launching a "Mother of Satan" a bomb or poison attack. Click on the video to get the details.



That was six months ago. My point here is that, although Mr Mohammed and Ms El-Hassan were foiled, other "radicalised" Islamic asylum-seekers have murdered or injured more than 1000 people in terror attacks in Europe between January 2014 and December 2017. In that period, 32 Islamist plots involved those who had sought sanctuary. 44 "refugees" had either carried out atrocities or been thwarted before they could bring bloodshed to the streets.

The findings echo warnings by law enforcement chiefs that some ISIS fanatics bent on killing "infidels" -- not just non-Muslims but Muslims of the wrong sort! -- posed as "refugees" fleeing war and persecution in the shithole countries of the Middle East. They exploited the "migrant crisis" by pretending to be asylum seekers, in order to sneak into Europe and cause carnage.

In an article published by the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, terrorism expert Robin Simcox says it was "disturbingly simple" for jihadists to hide among genuine refugees because Europe's borders were under huge strain. European leaders, he explains, "inadvertently increased the terrorist threat" as a direct result of their catastrophic handling of controversial immigration and open-border policies. He singles out German Chancellor [for the time being! Walt] Angela Merkel, who sparked fury by throwing open the doors to Syrian refugees, leading to an influx of more than one million people in 2015.

Mr Simcox makes clear that the fault for 11 successful attacks involving asylum-seekers, which killed 182 people and injured 814, lay with the terrorists, but "Ill-conceived immigration policies have made it easier for them to strike. European leaders were either naïve about the risks or failed to communicate honestly with the public the impact that accepting such large amounts of people would have on security.... The fall-out from the decision to take in such a large amount of unvetted people in such a short time will continue for decades to come."

Here are the key takeaways from Mr Simcox's article:

1. Islamism poses a clear and present national security threat to Europe. This threat has mainly converged on France, Germany, and the U.K.
2. Over time, the plots have increased in frequency. Defeating ISIS militarily is clearly vital. Yet such a defeat alone would not mean the danger has passed.
3. The US can and should help its friends in Europe [assuming it has any left] face these challenges. Nonetheless, a robust response to Islamism in Europe must be led from within Europe.

According to Mr Simcox, "Europe has faced a severe threat from Islamist terrorism for years. Yet Chancellor Merkel's decision to open Germany's borders in 2015 unfortunately increased that threat.... While only a minority of asylum seekers pose a security risk, the plots carried out by those exploiting migrant routes – in Paris, London, Berlin, Stockholm and elsewhere across Europe – demonstrate that even a low number of extremists can still cause huge amounts of damage."

Walt would like to be a little more specific. Let's make that "low number of extremists" one percent (1%) -- one crazy Muslim fanatic out of 100. Angela Merkel permitted the entry of a million "refugees" and asylum-seekers into Germany in just one year. 1% of 1,000,000 is... wait for it... 10,000.

10,000 potential Islamic terrorists on the loose right now. If 44 "radicalized" Muslims were responsible for murdering or injuring 1000 innocents, 10,000 jihadis could potentially kill or maim... let's see... 230,000. Does it make sense to keep letting these people into our countries? Please direct your answer to Angela Merkel, Theresa May, Justin Trudeau and all the other Islamophile "leaders" we foolishly expect to protect us.

Further reading: "European Islamist Plots and Attacks Since 2014 — and How the U.S. Can Help Prevent Them", by Robin Simcox, The Heritage Foundation.

Scrapping the Iran deal: another milepost on the road to Armageddon

Yep. Saw the "Mr President, you are right about Iran" ad, and would have signed it if anyone had asked me. [Guess you don't have a very big presence on the world stage. Ed.] In case you missed it, the main message of the full-page ad, featured prominently in the lamestream media today, is: "Iran is a danger to us, to our allies, to freedom. We stand alongside you in ending the dangerous appeasement of Iran and making all and any action required to stop Iran going nuclear, help its people, halt its spreading of terror and achieve peace and stability in the Middle East and among all peoples and nations."

There are those who disagree -- the usual gang of liberals, one-worlders (including the wimpy leaders of Britain, Germany and France), "progressive thinkers" and (((leaders of world opinion))). And the Prez. Remember him? Barack Hussein Obama thinks POTUS was misguided to renege on the Iran deal (read: capitulation to the Muslims) which was negotiated on his watch and for which he took credit, as befits the winner of a Nobel Peace Prize -- aawarded in advance by the aforesaid gang.

What the doves never explained was why, if the Iran deal was such a great game-changer, peace didn't break out in the Middle East the minute it was signed. The object was to prevent Iran from developing a nuculer (giving it the American pronunciation) weapon, and stop them from mucking around in Syria and other Muslim civil wars -- Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, etc etc -- by bringing them (Iran) back into the world economic community. So how did that work out?

The Prez and all the other one-world, appease-the-Muslim wienies have responded to POTUS' decision to scrap the Iran nuke deal by saying that his decision has moved us closer than ever to a full-scale war, yea a veritable nuclear holocaust! So if the Middle East explodes, it's all Trump's fault. Right?

Errr, no. In "Meanwhile, in the Middle East, something big is on the horizon" (WWW 10/11/17) I wrote that "recent events [in the Middle East] suggest that an escalation of that conflict is imminent." My point was that we were on the road to Armageddon well before the Iran deal! See "3 portents of the coming Armageddon", WWW 26/8/14. Scrapping the deal makes no difference other than to immanentize (slightly) the eschaton.

VIDEO: Meanwhile, in the Middle East, something big is on the horizon

Are we witnessing the beginning of a bigger Middle East war? ISIS seems to be just about finished, at least in the sense of occupying a defined territory. The Syrian government of Basher Assad has overrun the last ISIS stronghold and seems likely to turn its attention to putting the Kurds back in their place. The Kurds are also being attacked by the so-called Iraqi National Army. Those conflicts will continue, while the western powers dither about whose side they should be on. See "Gulf Wars drag on: Walt's guide to who's fighting who", WWW 16/10/17 and "Why the Canadian Army is 'suspending' ops in Iraq", WWW 2810/17.

Here's the scary part. The fighting in Syria and Iraq is just a proxy war, a smaller part of the larger Muslim civil war between the Shi'ites (read: Iran) and the Sunnis (read: Saudi Arabia). Recent events suggest that an escalation of that conflict is imminent. This month has seen a huge purge among Saudi royals, accusations of Lebanese aggression, and threats by Hezbollah. Recent semi-secret trips by (((Jared Kushner))), President Trump's son-in-law and advisor to visit with the Saudi crown prince raise questions about the position of the USA. Israeli policy seems to be lining up with Saudi regional policy against Iran and Hezbollah. The Yemen war is at a standstill. Tensions are rising throughout the sandpit.

Is this the start of something big? In the November 7th edition of the Ron Paul Liberty Report (running time 16:50) Dr. Paul and co-host Daniel McAdams analyze the signs and portents, and conclude that we are getting ever closer to a major conflict. Notice that I didn't use the word "Armageddon", but only because they didn't use it!



Walt suggests that you bookmark the Ron Paul Liberty Report. There's a new broadcast every day at noon, Eastern Time.

The irreversible browning of Canada

Assiduous readers of WWW will know that I habitually refer to the huge landmass north of the world's longest undefended border as the Great Not-so-white North or the Great No-longer-white North. I have been accused of exaggerating the degree to which Canada has been changed by the mass immigration encouraged by its governments (both Conservative and Liberal) over the last half-century. Data from the 2016 Census released by Statistics Canada this week show that I was right. Lifetime pct .991.

The decennial head count found that 21.9% of the Canadian residents counted are immigrants, the highest percentage in 85 years. And, I venture to say, the actual percentage is higher still, since the hundreds of thousands of migrants living in Canada illegally are unlikely to have filled in the census forms. StatsCan itself, if it were honest, would concede that the lowest rates of completion of the questionnaires were in the ethnic enclaves (read: ghettos) of Toronto, Vancouver and Montréal.

The naïve Canucks -- correction: the Canuck government -- accepted 1.2 million new immigrants between 2011 and 2016, with another 300,000 expected to have arrived by the end of this year. 60% of them were "economic migrants" -- the desirable (?) kind -- with the remaining 40% being allowed in under the "family reunification" programme -- less desirable -- or as "refugees" or asylum-seekers or "irregularly admitted", the kind of people the majority of Canadians have said they don't want to "welcome" to their country. See "Majority of Canucks think government 'too generous' to asylum-seekers", WWW 15/9/17.

By far the largest source of new immigrants (over 60%) come from Asia, including the Muslim Middle East. Africa has now surpassed Europe as the second-most important source, with folks from the Dark Continent (including Muslim North Africa) increasing to 13.4%. Here's how the numbers look in graph form.

Syria now ranks as the seventh biggest source of immigrants, thanks to the tens of thousands of refugees -- almost all Muslim -- welcomed by Junior after his election in the fall of 2015. In 2011 it was ranked 50th. Africans have to be counted among the immigrants from "other countries", since they hail from a number of different countries. The majority of them are not from sub-Saharan Africa, but from the Arab countries of north Africa, who are accepted by the Québec government because they are French-speaking. From Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya and Egypt, Canada gets such upstanding citizens as Omar Khadr and Muayyed Nureddin, Abdullah Almalki, and Ahmad Elmaati (see footnote).

Although it asks about religion and ethnic origin elsewhere in the Census, StatsCan (and the Ministry of Immigration and Refugees) doesn't record these details for new immigrants, so it's just possible that some of the 41,480 who came from Pakistan might be Christian and white, although I wouldn't bet on it. (Lifetime pct .991.) But from the country of origin data, it's easy enough to extrapolate a "colour profile", so that the vizmins (= "visible minorities") can be identified and celebrated.

If you're a white Canadian, you might feel relieved (if you're the credulous type) when your government tells you that only 22.3% are "visible minorities" (read: non-white), even though that proportion is set to rise to over a third within one generation. You're still in the majority, right? Errr, no. It depends where you live. Another datum from the 2016 Census confirms that Canada's largest city, Toronto, is now a "minority majority" city, meaning that whiteys like you are now outnumbered by the dark-complected types who inhabit neighbourhoods like Dixon. See "Why no-one wants to take in Somali 'refugees'", WWW 16/10/17.

What I find most striking about the census data released yesterday is the comparison between the Canada of 2016 and the Great White North described in the Census of 1971. Here's the last (and most depressing) of the three graphs which Ed. has copied from CP, which got them from the StatsCan documents.

In 1971, fully 89% of the immigrants counted in the census came from Europe and the USA. Most of those would have been white. By last year, the percentage coming from Europe and the USA had shrunk to 31%, and more of those are non-white, having spent some time in the USA or Europe before moving to Canada. "Refugees" who apply to come to Canada from Germany (for instance) are counted as coming from Europe, not Syria or Afghanistan (for instance).

If you're a white Canadian -- perhaps one of the "white flees" who have escaped the ghettos of the GTA for the greener (whiter?) pastures of Grey County -- you will find the numbers from the 2016 Census depressing. It's not hard to see the trend. What's depressing is that it's too late now for the browning of Canada to be stopped. A half-century of liberal rule and white liberal guilt have done irreversible damage.

Even if the Canuck welcome mat were pulled back under the door tomorrow, the fecund third-world immigrants -- especially those who don't believe in birth control and abortion -- will pop out about 2.5 brown babies for every white baby. If you're a young, white Canadian, and want to keep living in a white community, you'd better start thinking about emigrating to... well... errr... eastern Europe perhaps -- someplace whose people still believe that European Christian civilization is the acme of human development. And good luck to you!

Recommended reading: The Strange Death of Europe, by Douglas Murray (Bloomsbury Continuum 2017).

Footnote: Turns out Omar Khadr wasn't the only soldier of the Prophet to become instant multimillionaires, courtesy of Canuck taxpayers. CBC News reports that Junior Trudeau's Liberal government has paid a total of C$31.25 million in settlements to three Muslim Canadian men "wrongfully accused of links to terrorism and tortured in Syria and Egypt" after being fingered by the Mounties and Canada's alleged spy agency." Muayyed Nureddin, Abdullah Almalki, and Ahmad Elmaati [What? No "Mohammed"? Ed.] will split the windfall, nearly $25 million in real money. That makes a total of over C$40 million paid out so far this year to four Islamists who were lucky to get the benefit of the doubt.

COMMENTS WELCOME! Click on the headline to open the comments window.

Muslim civil war continues: great editorial cartoon

A few minutes after we posted "Muslim civil war continues as ISIS strikes Iran", Agent 3 sent along this fine editorial cartoon by Brian Gable, in the Globe and Mail.

Mr Gable was referring to the decision of several Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, to sever ties with the tiny (but rich) emirate of Qatar, which they say sponsors terrorism -- Islamic terrorism -- in the form of organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah etc. But the cartoon applies pari passu (as Agent 3 puts it) to today's ISIS terrorist attacks in Iran.

Canada to fund killing of 1000s of Third World babies

In the sort of humanitarian gesture for which its elitist liberals are famous, Canada's International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau will announce this week that her alleged country will support a global "safe-abortion fund" set up in response to... wait for it... President Donald Trump's order banning American financing for any organizations that promote killing of unborn children.

Speaking to the Globe and Mail while on a junket to Amman, Jordan, Ms Bibeau said Canada will join an international campaign to fill a US$600 million gap left by President Trump's reinstatement of the so-called "global gag rule" prohibiting funding to international organizations that fail to disavow abortion. This is part of an initiative called "She Decides", sponsored by the Netherlands. The idea, you see, is to promote human development and help the world's poor by killing them before they are born, thus keeping population under control. Got it?

Ms Bibeau is touring the Armpit of the World (the Middle East) this week to announce that Canada will provide C$240 million (about $182 million in real money) over three years to address humanitarian needs in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. The latter two countries are already benefiting from Canadian assistance in reducing filthy cities like Raqqa, Palmyra and Mosul to rubble. The additional funding will be used to rebuild the shattered cities and support the basic needs of those hit hardest by the Muslim civil war, including food, shelter, health care, water, sanitation, hygiene, and... of course... abortion.

On a totally unrelated note... a new report from the Toronto Dominion Bank (TSX symbol "TD" -- worth a look!) predicts that Canada's budget deficit for this year could be as high as C$34 billion (roughly $26 billion US) -- $5 billion higher than the Liberal government planned for last March, thanks to weak economic growth and, errr, pouring beaverbucks down Third World ratholes. Good thing for the Gliberals that Canucks aren't allowed to vote until 2019!