UPDATED: Don't celebrate too soon!

Assad is an evil bastard, to be sure, and richly deserves a fate worse than living in exile in Moscow... in the winter. Hey, it could be Ottawa! 

But what do we know about Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the leaders of the so-called revolution? Only that they are a jihadist group once linked to al-Qaeda, now rebranding themselves as "moderate Muslims" -- an oxymoron if ever there was one.

If you're a Christian or a Jew, or "the wrong kind of Muslim", anywhere in the Middle East, don't just stand by... brace yourself! Worse is yet to come.

UPDATE ADDED @ 1630: No sooner said than done! Breitbart News has a report, quoting the New York Times, that Syrian rebels who overthrew the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad on Sunday are executing their opponents, imposing Islamic sharia law, and threatening non-Muslim minorities, including the Kurdish population in the north. 

Videos are circulating on social media showing Syrian rebels killing people associated with the regime, some of whom may have been part of the state security services, and others who appear to have been ordinary employees.

Islamic State forces on Tuesday killed 54 people in the Homs region in central Syria who had been part of the Syrian government’s military and fled during the collapse of the Assad regime, according to the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights, a British-based monitoring group.

The killings highlight the chaos in Syria as various rebel factions operate in different regions. One video also shows thousands of smashed bottles of liquor at the duty free store of the Damascus airport, where Islamist rebels apparently enforced the Islamic ban on alcohol by force, as Islamists did in Lebanon in the 1980s.

Let's not hear "I didn't see that coming" from Western leaders like Senile Joe and the Governor of the Great State of Canada.

"But we won, in the end, right?"

"I mean, we ended the Muslim civil war, we brought peace and democracy to Iraq and all those other places, and we saved the world from Al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban. So we won... right?"

Errr... actually, NO! Ever since WWII, and particularly since the fall of the Twin Towers, the Paranoid States of America has considered itself the World's Policeman, on a mission to spread freedom, democracy, and the American way of life (ugghhh, brrrrr) throughout the rest of the world, whether ROTW wants it or not.

After 9/11, the words "al-Qaeda" became shorthand for Islamic terrorism anywhere in the world. The cry "Allahu akbar!" was  heard in London, Paris, Berlin [That's enough world cities. Ed.] and is still our best guess any time there's a suicide bombing or mass shooting or terror attack anywhere in the Middle East or the Western world.

With the US of A as the unwitting midwife, Al-Qaeda begat ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The Muslim civil war in Iraq begat the same in Syria. The American-led (but really America-only) missions in Iraq and Afghanistan ended in ignominious retreat. 

Saddam Hussein and Muammar Ghadafi were deposed and killed, but today the countries they ruled remain no-go zones for Westerners, as does the entire Muddled East from the Mediterranean all the way to Pakistan. (The possible exception is Israel, although it has its own wars with Palestinians and Hezbollah to worry about.) 

Instead of bringing the Islamic republics, sheikdoms, etc into the New World Order, American intervention (read: meddling) has turned the region into one huge shithole, stuck in the mentality of the Middle Ages and intent on bring the ROTW down to its level. I call our mission a failure, utter and complete.

Further reading: And Then All Hell Broke Loose: Two Decades in the Middle East, by Richard Engel, Chief Foreign Correspondent, NBC News. Simon & Schuster, 2016. Clear and concise, not overly biased, easy reading.

Footnote: Regular readings should know that Walt fully supports Ukraine and Ukrainians in their reistance to the illegal Russian invasion and occupation of their land. Слава Україні! Героям слава! 

I believe we should give the Ukrainians as much humanitarian and military assistance as we can, short of putting US or NATO boots on the ground. Why stop at that? Precisely because of the mess America has made of every foreign intervention since (and including) Korea. That kind of "help" is the last thing Ukraine needs!

Al-Baghdadi: no longer wanted, much longer dead

So, farewell then, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. You were killed this weekend in a US special forces operation in the Syrian province of Idlib. Of you, President Trump said, "He was a sick and depraved man, and now he is gone."

"Last night, the United States brought the world's number one terrorist leader to justice," said POTUS. "Al-Baghdadi is dead. He reached the end of the tunnel as our dogs chased him down." Mr Trump added. When he was cornered, al-Baghdadi detonated a suicide vest laden with explosives, killing himself and three of his children. These and other gruesome details of how the ISIS leader "died like a dog" were revealed by the President in a nearly 50-minute live press conference in which he described the operation and answered journalists' questions about the raid and his strategy in Syria.

US special forces raided the compound where al-Baghdadi was hiding (apparently being sheltered by al-Qaeda, sometime competitors of ISIS) under order to take the terrorist chief alive. To prevent being taken alive, al-Baghdadi blew himself into little terrorist bits. Some of the pieces were large enough to enable able identification by conducting an onsite DNA test. This was crucial given that al-Baghdadi had been declared dead several times in the past.

Although one of the dogs was hurt, there were no human American casualties during the operation. POTUS said US soldiers were able to capture critical material about Islamic State, including information about its origins and future plans. US intelligence knew about al-Baghdadi's whereabouts for a couple of weeks, he said. "He spent his last moments in utter fear, in panic and dread, terrified of American forces coming down on him."

The death of the ISIS "caliph" has been called a crippling blow to the once-influential Islamic terrorist group. And it is a clear and stunning victory for the American military and its Commander-in-Chief. And yet, predictably, the lefties and never-Trumpers are saying otherwise. The Dumbocrats are complaining that POTUS didn't notify them of the impending raid, and invite Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to join him in the White House to watch the event unfold.

The usual "experts" are being quoted by the lamestream media, predicting the death of the "austere religious scholar" (as WaPo called al-Baghdadi -- you couldn't make it up!) could unleash retaliatory attacks in both the Middle East and North America. Several Canadian "Middle East researchers" have said al-Baghdadi's death could prompt blowback from sleeper cell ISIS members hiding in other countries. "Every time that a terrorist group suffers an important defeat like this, whether it's the death of its leader or something else, you have to expect the possibility that this will motivate them for revenge," said Thomas Juneau, a Middle East "expert" at the University of Ottawa.

Personally, I'm not worried. The death of al-Baghdadi may not be the mortal blow that kills ISIS once and for all -- Islamic extremists will be amongst us and against us for a long time yet -- but it's a start. I'm happy to leave it to the Turks or the Kurds or the Russians or anyone else (even the Canucks) to carry on the fight against Islamic terrorism (a phrase strangely absent from most of the lamestream media reports) if they so choose. If they won't or can't contain and destroy ISIS, I'm confident America will do the job, when and if necessary.

Further reading: "Trump accused of 'war crimes' by liberal journos after his al-Baghdadi presser", Business & Politics, 27/10/19. I swear, if Trump walked on water, the lamestream media would say he couldn't swim!

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.

VIDEO: Ron Paul looks at the year that was and the year to come

It's been some time since we've reposted a video featuring Dr Ron Paul. Thanks to President Trump's surprise announcement of an imminent pull-out from the Middle East, there seems to be... at last... the prospect of disengagement from the Muslim civil war. See "Getting out of the Muslim civil wars - about time!", WWW 21/12/18.

In this review, Dr Paul and Daniel McAdams discuss what the Ron Paul Institute has accomplished in 2018 and what they have planned 2019. Spoiler alert! There's a new book coming out -- The Individual versus the Collective -- and they tell you how to get an advance copy, FREE! And you'll learn how you can help spread the message of peace and prosperity. Running time: 10:27.



Naysayers (including some Republicans!) are calling on the President to reverse his decision to remove all US troops from Syria and several thousand from Afghanistan. The neocons, lametream media, and even some progressives suddenly find themselves defending the endless and pointless Gulf wars. A strong voice for the principles of disengagement and non-intervention in foreign affairs is needed now more than ever. Ron Paul is that voice, and Walt urges you, dear reader, to give him your support.

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.

VIDEOS: UPDATED! Non-gangsta gunman shoots 14 in Toronto

Here's something you don't see every day... and thank God for that! Copied from Canada's Global News, this is a video taken in Toronto's Greektown last night.



The gunman unloaded his firearm into a crowded restaurant, killing two and injuring 12. (This is a developing story. Numbers may change.) The murderer is also dead, whether by his own hand or shot by police is unclear.

Also unclear -- because Toronto's finest won't say -- is the identity of the killer, described as being 29 years old and, errr, that's it. Walt notes that the shooter is not wearing the hoodie which is standard issue for Toronto's legion of gangstas. You can see his face pretty clearly. He is (a) bearded and (b) not black. Is it too soon to jump to a conclusion? Certainly this is not the typical black-on-black shooting which occurs in certain Toronto `hoods (Gooood mornin', Jane-Finch!) with astonishing regularity.

Which brings us to motive. The copz aren't saying anything about that either and the gunman himself isn't talking, by reason of being deceased. Let's be brave -- to hell with M-103 -- and follow my first conclusion to another one. A bearded whitish guy opening fire into a crowd. What was going on there? Could it be what the politically correct politicians call a "terrorist incident"? (It is customary in Canada and western Europe not to preface that phrase with adjectives like "Muslim" or "Islamic".)

So far there are no reports of shouts of "Allahu akbar!" being heard, and in the video you can't hear the murderer yelling anything. An eyewitness told Global News that the gunman shot a woman multiple times as she was trying to run away, killing her. "It was horrible," said the witness. "You don't expect this on Danforth of all places. But the guy...had this look on his face, while I saw his profile, like he was screaming at something and shooting."

"Screaming at something", eh. If I were a betting man, I know which way I'd play this. But here's a clip of the Mayor of Toronto -- Tory by name but liberal by nature -- warning us not to jump to conclusions! LOL



Meanwhile, in other news, the government of Canuckistan announced yesterday that it would welcome another 200 Syrian "refugees" -- Muslims, of course -- who are fleeing the civil war in that shithole, now that Assad has pretty much won. But these are not your average "refugees". These are "White Helmets", who have been "giving humanitarian support" to the anti-Assad rebels. Is there any possibility that they will continue the fight from their sanctuary in Canada? Don't be silly!

"Allahu akbar!" - another Muslim family, another terrorist attack

"All in the Islamic Family" is the title of a new Muslim TV drama being shot right now in Surabaya, Indonesia. Really. The very next day after a family of Indonesian Islamic terrorists succeeded in attacking three churches in Surabaya, killing 12 and injuring many more, another family attacked the city's police headquarters.

National police Chief Tito Karnavian said four of the perps were killed, or, should we say, killed themselves. A girl aged about 8 who was riding on a motorbike with two of the attackers was thrown clear by the blast and survived. Four cops and six civilians were wounded.

Chief Karnavian said the family who attacked the police HQ were friends of the family that went to Paradise attacking the churches. As I reported in yesterday's post, the latter family had gone to ISIS to help the soldiers of the prophet wage war on the infidels (Shia Muslims and non-believers in the Religion of Peace), but returned when ISIS lost its grip on Syria and Iraq. Both families were friends of yet another family whose homemade bombs exploded in their apartment Sunday night.

The flurry of attacks have raised concerns that militant networks in the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation have been reinvigorated by the return of some of the estimated 1100 Indonesians who went to fight with ISIS. Experts have warned for several years that when those fighters return, they could pose a significant threat. However, such warnings have largely been ignored because, as the Pope keeps telling us, Islam is the religion of peace, and has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. Yeah, right!

Innocent questions for our dear readers: How many returned jihadis are living in your neighbourhood? Do you know who they are and where they are? Does your local constabulary (police department/FBI agent/DHS agent/Officer Barbrady) know? Are they doing anything? If you're not sure, Walt advises you to watch your infidel ass! And if you see something, say something! [To whom? Ed.]

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.

Climate Barbie apologizes for tweet praising Syria

Following Walt's posting of "Canuck Minister tells The Rebel to stop calling her names" (WWW 4/11/17 - includes video), Ezra Levant, whose The Rebel website coined the name by which Catherine McKenna would prefer not to be known tweeted: "Appointed to fill a gender quota; unable to control her emotions when criticized; spends taxes on vanity photo shoots. #ClimateBarbie fits."

His point is not that Ms McKenna, like Chrystia Freeland, is one of the terminally entitled limousine liberals who gets her hair colour out of a bottle and any ideas which may temporarily reside in her head from the Toronto Red Star. The problem is that Climate Barbie is a classic example of the Peter Principle. The Peter Principle (by Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, 1969), for those who haven't read it, states that people rise in an organization until they reach the level of their incompetence. Ms McKenna, now nominally in charge of one of the more sensitive portfolios in the Canadian cabinet, has actually risen above that level.

Yesterday, taking a break from defending herself for defending herself, the Climate Barbie was forced to admit that "clearly a mistake was made" after a tweet from her official departmental account praised Syria for joining the Paris climate agreement. The tweet has since been deleted, but we have a screen shot. Here 'tis.

Nicaragua and Syria were the final two countries to sign on to the climate accord, leaving the United States as the only UN member state not supporting the agreement. The tweet attracted dozens of complaints from other Twitter users, many of them pointing to the widely suspected use of chemical weapons by the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The celebratory Nicaragua and Syria tweet was sent from @ec_minister. Its description says it is run by Environment and Climate Change Canada, Parks Canada and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Ms McKenna tweeted her response to the controversy from her personal account, @cathmckenna. "Clearly a mistake was made from my Dept twitter. We've been clear that the murderous Assad regime must end attacks against its people."

Well, maybe we're being a bit hard on Climate Barbie. Surely it's a bit unfair to ask the Minister of Stopping the Sky from Falling to take responsibility for communications sent out by the minions under her... errr... control. Walt suggests that in future she delegate adverse comments (along with whines about being called names) upwards to her boss, the self-proclaimed feminist Junior Trudeau. He's good at apologies, and totally undeserving of his rep for being a bit of an airhead himself.

Manchester bomber: "lone wolf" or "known wolf"?

"We really don't know what his motive was."
"Just a deranged individual who acted alone."
"A lone wolf..."
That's what the authorities told us about Lee Harvey Oswald. Remember? That's what they try to tell us every time a murderer -- terrorist, assassin or otherwise -- does something horrendous, like killing a VIP or maybe just a couple of dozen innocent kids. The reason for downplaying any possible links to a criminal gang or terrorist network is to excuse the "authorities" from their failure to prevent atrocity or take any effective action to obliterate (President Trump's excellent word) the group of malefactors responsible.

No sooner had the dust settled into the pools of blood from the victims of the Manchester massacre than police -- forced by pressure from blogs like WWW to name the attacker -- started saying Salman Abedi, pictured at left, was born in Britain (omitting his Arab ethnicity) and ISIS' claim that he was a jihadi "cannot be verified" (therefore isn't true). What a load.

That whitewash (pun intended) didn't last long. In my third update to yesterday's post, I told you that Inspector Knacker had felt the collar [= "arrested" in Americanese. Ed.] of a 23-year-old -- unidentified, of course -- who is "helping with the investigation", which means being beaten with rubber hoses until he talks.

Catching up with the latest developments this morning, the mojo wire tells us Manchester police have arrested three more men, including Mr Abedi's brother, in connection with the suicide bombing. The arrests had been made in the south of the city, in the same neighbourhood where the 23-year-old was arrested and a number of homes were searched. Why have they arrested these four people? Because... wait for it... "Police are trying to establish if bomber Salman Abedi acted alone or whether there could be a risk of further attacks."

The AP report goes on to say that "British police and intelligence agencies are working to piece together Abedi's allegiances, as the country's law-and-order chief said it's 'likely' he did not act alone." No shit, Sherlock! Then British Home Secretary (responsible for police and security) Amber Rudd dropped the other shoe, admitting that Mr Abedi had been known to security forces "up to a point." For instance, they knew he had made a number of trips to Libya and Syria. Did they have him under observation? Errr, no. Did they investigate his associations and connections? Errr, no. Not until now. Did they do anything to prevent him from exterminating dozens of "infidels"? Supply your own answer.

FOOTNOTE AND WOW!!! Near the beginning of yesterday's post, Ed. queried how the Americans got into this. Turns out the name of the attacker and other "sensitive details" of the investigation into the Manchester massacre were made public not by the UK authorities, but by "American officials". British officials had said that making all their findings public could compromise the ongoing investigation, but they were undermined by their counterparts in the US, who promptly handed over many of the police's findings to American media outlets. See "British officials warn American government to stop leaking details of Manchester terror probe", in The Sun (UK), from which the picture of the Islamic terrorist was scraped.

Majority of Eastern Europeans oppose admitting Syrian "refugees"

Georgia is quite far away from Walt's cabin in the pines, almost on the other side of the world. But we still get news from the homeland of Josef Stalin occasionally. In yesterday's online edition of The Financial, we read: "Syrian Refugees Not Welcome in Eastern Europe".

The Financial is reporting the results of a Gallup survey of the citizens of 15 nations of Eastern Europe, which found that almost no-one -- repeat, NO-ONE -- wants their countries to be further polluted by the admission of more "refugees" from Syria. It wasn't just Christians who were opposed to taking more Muslim migrants. Significant numbers of atheists and even Muslims had the same feeling. Here are the findings in tabular form.

54% of Christians -- mainly Catholic and Orthodox -- surveyed oppose admitting any Syrian refugees, while only 2% (two percent) were in favour of taking all comers. Atheists proved even more unlikely than Christians to welcome Syrian refugees, with 63% opposed to taking any. And 36% of Muslims in the countries surveyed were likewise opposed.

My question... Suppose, if you will, that a competent and legitimate polling organization -- Pew Research, for instance -- took a similar poll in the USA, Canada, Britain or France. (Thanks to Bill M-103 it would probably be illegal to ask that question in Canada. Mustn't promote Islamophobia, you know!) And suppose the results were similar, or even worse (from the point of view of all the SJWs and one-worlders who believe in open borders).

My question [at last! Ed.] is: Would the self-censoring lamestream media publish such results, with headlines as frank as "Syrian Refugees Not Welcome in USA/Canada/UK/France"? Not bloody likely!

Note from Ed.: Just to clear up any confusion in the minds of our American readers, the Georgia where Josef Stalin (né Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili) was born is not the one Sherman marched through, but a small country in the south-eastern corner of Europe, at the east end of the Black Sea. You're welcome.

VIDEO: Was President Trump right to attack Syria?

Let me answer the headline question for you. NO! What President Trump should have done was stick with his position, enunciated long before the election, that the US should stay out of foreign entanglements, of which the Muslim civil war is the chief example. Yet the President Trump sent 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles into Syria in retaliation for what he claimed was a chemical attack on civilians by Syrian President Assad. He sought no Congressional authorization and presented no evidence to either Congress or the American people to justify his actions.

Some of President Trump's most dedicated admirers, including Yours Very Truly, were stunned by the news. The missile strike was pretty much what his defeated rival, Hellery Clinton, would have done, had she had her trembling finger on the button. On Thursday she told a women's forum she would "take out" Assad's airfields, and that's what the missile strike launched that same day was supposed to do.

Kevin MacDonald, the editor of The Occidental Observer, called the US attack on Syria "a betrayal". In a phone interview the morning after the missiles were launched, he told the CBC, "I'm concerned now this whole administration is going the way of the neocons. The whole nine yards." Mr MacDonald thought President Trump was supposed to be an "America First" leader focused on a non-interventionist foreign policy. Now, he said, "I'm very disappointed; very agitated."

Richard Spencer, who coined the term "alt-right", expressed his displeasure in a video titled "The Trump Betrayal". Alex Jones, host of InfoWars, said on his show Mr Trump was "disintegrating in my eyes." And former Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos wrote on Facebook, "There comes a day in every child's life when his Daddy bitterly disappoints him."

What happens next, as the President opens wider the US military involvement in the Middle East? Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY) joins Ron Paul's Liberty Report to discuss "US Bombs Syria - National Security Or Aggression?"



Further reading: "Let’s Allow The Syrian People To Decide For Themselves", by Ron Paul, posted 3/4/17, before the missile strike.

More reading, even better (added 11/4/17): Click here to read "Shocked But Not Awed: An Open Letter to President Trump", by Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrara, in Fetzen Fliegen (a Remant newspaper blog), 10/4/17.

"We love our Muslim neighbours"... don't we? Maybe not in Québec?

Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of All Canuckistan, never tires of saying how much Canadians love all the Muslims who are flooding into their country -- especially the 1000s of refugees from Syria on whom millions of beaverbucks are being spent -- and what a great contribution "Muslim Canadians" are making to the diversity which is Canada's strength, yada yada yada.

Walt suspects that Junior actually believes this liberal claptrap, tone-deaf as he is to the views of ordinary Canadians, as read (when the censors allow) in the comments section so the Groan and Wail and the CBC News website. Just this weekend, when President Trump announced that the Paranoid States of America would not be taking any more Syrian refugees, and would not be issuing visas to citizens of Syria and six other Middle Eastern sandpits, M Trudeau took to the airwaves and the Twitterverse to say that all "refugees" are welcome in Canada, and anyone inconvenienced by the American "Muslim ban" can get temporary resident status in Canada, just for the asking. Yada yada yada.

The usual suspects are demonstrating in the streets of Toronto (of course) and Mississauga (ditto), holding up signs saying "We love our Muslim neighbours!" However, no such demonstrations or signs were to be seen in Québec City, the heart of francophone [= French-speaking. Ed.] Canada. It was there, a couple of years ago, that the previous provincial government, proposed a Charter of Québec values which would have banned the wearing of Islamic headgear. And it was there, during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, that a pig's head was left on the doorstep of the Islamic Cultural Centre [= mosque. Ed.] in suburban Sainte-Foy.

Now comes news that shots were fired tonight inside the same mosque, leaving several people dead and more wounded. Québec City police say that a few dozen people, mostly men, were gathered at the mosque for evening prayers when shooting broke out. The director of the centre said at least five people were killed, but that information has not been confirmed by police. Two suspects have been arrested. We have not been told whether they are "Muslim Canadians" or "old stock Canadians", but it couldn't be the latter, eh, because M Trudeau keeps saying "We love our Muslims!"

À lire: "Tuerie dans une mosquée à Québec: plusieurs morts", La Presse, 29/1/17.

Walt's plan for the war in the Middle East

During the US election campaign, Hellery Clinton responded to challenges on what she was going to do to win the war against the Islamic terrorists -- the ones she wouldn't call by name -- by saying that she had a plan, which included the capture of Mosul, which would fall in a matter of days. Donald Trump said that even if the anti-ISIS "coalition" succeeded in liberating Mosul, they'd find the IS leaders long gone, precisely because La Clinton had given them plenty of notice, plus details of President 0's plans to "degrade" the soldiers of the Prophet.

As I pointed out a few days ago, in "Meanwhile, in the Middle East...", predictions of the capture of Mosul turned out to be premature. Latest reports are that the Kurds, advancing from the area they control in northern Iraq, are stalled at the gates of the city. The alleged Iraqi National Army, coming up from the south, has been unable to prevent ISIS fighters from breaking out to the west and south, heading for Syria. Enough of the terrorists remain in Mosul to make its fall uncertain at best.

Meanwhile, the eyes and ears of the world have turned toward Syria, where ISIS has retaken the ancient city of Palmyra, which it lost some nine months ago. Turns out this great victory for the "coalition" was, errr, of a temporary nature. As in Afghanistan and Iraq, "we" learned that occupying and securing a given area is rather more difficult than taking it in the first place. I can almost hear the cries of "They're baaaack!"

If you believe the propaganda dished out every day by the lamestream media, the retaking of Palmyra by ISIS isn't that big a deal. What is a big deal is the fall of Aleppo -- once Syria's biggest city -- not to ISIS but to [SHOCK! HORROR!] the forces of the evil, devilish, inhuman Bashir al-Assad! With more than a little help in the form of airstrikes by the Russians, Syrian government forces have entered and taken control of 99% of the eastern part of Aleppo, which had been held by rebel militias for years. MORE SHOCK! MORE HORROR!

The chattering classes and spokesthingies for liberal democracy are engaging in an orgy of handwringing, pissing and moaning that almost defies description. Here's a sample, written by someone called Terry Glavin [Who he? Ed.] in today's Emotional Post. "J’accuse! May Allah look down in his mercy upon Aleppo — no help is coming from us. This is what we have become. This is the depravity to which we have all sunk. Aleppo has fallen and so has humanity. We are disgraced."

Walt doesn't see it quite that way. There have been some civilian casualties in the battle for Aleppo, to be sure, including women and children. Hundreds, not thousands, have been killed, but those numbers pale in comparison to the numbers executed -- not killed in fighting, but executed -- by ISIS. So why is it the "end of civilization" when Syrian government forces do the killing, but not when atrocities are committed by the Sunni Muslim rebels and the Islamic extremists of ISIS? Answers on the back of a postage stamp, please, to the usual address.

As of this morning, the Assad government controls most of western Syria, which is the only part of the country worth having. The Kurds have most of their homeland in northern Iraq. ISIS holds their capital, Raqqa, as well as Mosul (still) and Palmyra (again). The alleged Iraqi government has a tenuous hold on Baghdad, but not much else. Their ill-trained and timorous army is (sometimes) fighting it out with ISIS for eastern Syria and south-central Iraq. I'll go out on a limb here and predict that there will be no significant change of any kind in the year to come. Lifetime pct .985.

What, then, should the USA, soon to be under new management, do about the Middle East? I've given it a lot of thought [All this week? Ed.] and can come up with no better plan than to bug out and let the Muslims duke it out amongst themselves. That, in essence, is what Ron Paul has been saying for years. The Syrian armed forces, with the help of the Russians, will keep pushing eastward, while the Kurds, helped by the Iranians, will keep pushing down from the north. Let them destroy the Sunnis (ISIS plus assorted rebel militias) if they can, and good luck to them. We’ve got no skin in that game.

Further reading: "Some Perspectives on the War on Terror: Anyway you look at it, it's a failure", by Philip Giraldi, in The Unz Review, 20/12/16.

Meanwhile, in the Middle East...

A random selection of headlines from this weekend's news...

- 25 dead after bomb explodes during Mass at Coptic Orthodox cathedral in Cairo

- Turkey stadium bombing death toll rises to 38, including 30 police officers

- 9 months after being driven out, IS militants recapture Palmyra

- Iraqi offensive against ISIS stronghold in Mosul stalls; Defense Secretary Carter arrives to assess situation

- Syrian army, Russian warplanes pound rebel-held Aleppo but advances halt

- Death toll hits 45 in Yemen suicide bombing

- Kerry calls for "grace" as Syrians set to take Aleppo

- US Sends 200 More Troops To Syria Days After Obama Lifts Ban On Arms Supplies To Rebels

Meanwhile, the Prez (soon to be ex-Prez) thinks the most important thing he should do before leaving office (at last!) is to prove that the Russians are responsible for the election of Donald Trump. You couldn't make this stuff up.

Further reading: "Trump’s Promised 'New Foreign Policy' Must Abandon Regime Change for Iran", by Ron Paul, 4/12/16.

Islamic "hyper-extremists" greatest threat to freedom and peace

Here's the non-news story of the month, if not the year. The Religious Freedom in the World 2016 report, a worldwide survery of religious freedom, has found that Islamic "hyper-extremism" is wreaking havoc, especially in the Middle East, prompting brutal violence and creating an unprecedented surge of refugees.

The report, produced by the international Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need, sees the Islamic State as the primary example of Islamic hyper-extremism". In an introduction to the report, Father Jacques Mourad, who was kidnapped by the Islamic State and held for several months before being released, warns that "our world teeters on the brink of a complete catastrophe as extremism threatens to wipe out all trace of diversity in society."

The report says that Islamic extremism -- the phenomenon that Barack Obama and Hellery Clinton refused to name -- is most powerful in Iraq and Syria. No surprise there. It accuses the jihadis of displaying barbarous cruelty and complete intolerance of other views, in a religious war aimed at "eliminating all forms of religious diversity". The authors add that not only the Middle East is threatened, but also parts of Africa and the Asian subcontinent.

No matter how loudly and how often the lamestream media tells us that most Muslims are not extremists, and Islam is "the religion of peace", the fact is that the world has seen a flood of refugees, reaching an all-time high of 65.3 million. The report points to Islamic extremism as the key driver in the displacement of peoples, with millions fleeing from Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Iraq.

The Islamists are not the only offenders. Religious Freedom in the World 2016 also draws attention to setbacks for religious freedom outside the Islamic world, particularly in China and Turkmenistan. Case in point: An Islamist militant, wearing a shirt with the word "jihad" on it, threw a gasoline bomb at a church in Samarinda, on the Indonesian island of Borneo, on November 13th. A two-year-old child was killed and three other children injured. See "Four children injured in suspected militant attack on Indonesia church", Reuters, 13/11/16.

Further reading: Click here to download the executive summary of Religious Freedom in the World 2016. (Don't be surprised if you find yourself on the ACN e-mail list. That's OK. You can always unsubscribe if religious freedom ceases to be of interest to you.)

All those Ay-rabs look the same!

American pilots have earned a reputation -- in Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Syria -- for being quick on the draw but sloppy on the aim. On 17 April 2002, "friendly fire" from the USAF killed four Canadian soldiers near Kandahar, Afghanistan. US Air National Guard Major Harry Schmidt dropped a laser-guided 500-lb bomb from his F-16 on the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry regiment which was conducting a night firing exercise. Major Schmidt was charged with negligent manslaughter, aggravated assault, and dereliction of duty.

He blamed the "incident" on his use of "go pills" (authorized stimulant drugs), combined with the "fog of war". He was found guilty of the third charge (only) and a negative comment was entered on his permanent record. The Canucks stayed in Afghanistan for another ten years or so, but were noted for for their propensity to duck and cover at the sound of approaching jets.

Fast forward a dozen years or so to the fight against The Enemy Which Cannot Be Named -- its initials are IS or ISIS or ISIL -- in, errr, Iraq and Syria. The Canadians sent a half dozen of their aging but still airworthy CF-18s, but no ground troops, on the theory (Walt supposes) that if there were going to be any similar "incidents", it would be better to be on the bombing end than the incoming end. The RCAF flyboys flew missions for about a year without killing any allies... or any Islamic terrorists... or anybody. They did succeed in hitting a couple of dump trucks and what might have been an oil tank. Or not. Then, this past March, they went home, leaving the air war against the jihadis to the Americans... and the Russians... and, errr, the Syrian Air Force.

A ceasefire in the civil war between the Syrian government and assorted rebels went into effect (more or less) on Monday. It was clearly understood, though, that air attacks on the jihadis would continue. So it was that the USAF (or Air National Guard -- who knows... planes with a white star) dove down on a collection of hovels called Deir al-Zour, where the bad guys -- Syrian troops -- were said to be battling the even worse guys (ISIS).

But you know how it is. The damned Ay-rabs all look the same. They wear those same shit-brindle clothes and have rags on their heads. And then there's the "fog of war". Turns out the American pilots couldn't tell them apart and... ooops!... damn!.... did it again!!! According to the Russian army, the Yankees killed 62 Syrian government soldiers before calling a halt to the attack. An emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, convened by Russia, is discussing the crisis. Meanwhile, a spokesthingy for the Obama administration expressed "regret" for the "unintentional loss of life".