Tilting

 

Insurrections

The definition, from the American Heritage dictionary:

“1.The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

2. A rising against civil or political authority, or the established government; open and active opposition to the execution of law in a city or state.

3. A rising in mass to oppose an enemy.”

The Democrats have been calling January 6th an insurrection every day for years and using it as a cudgel with which to beat all conservatives. They held sham congressional hearings over it – with no GOP members chosen by the GOP, which has been the accepted practice in such hearings, for obvious reasons – and repeated it endlessly, everywhere.

During a four-year period in which they had zero accomplishments and plenty of disasters – the Cadaver and the Cackler at the top of government, the humiliating and incompetent withdrawal from Afghanistan, 9% inflation and trillions of extra debt, a wide-open border, mentally disordered males in every women’s room, etc. – the Dems have turned the “worse-than-9/11 insurrection of January 6th” into the sole reason to vote for them.

Of course, all conservatives have acknowledged that to the extent a minority of those involved in January 6th were destructive and got violent with the police, they should be condemned, charged, and punished according to the law. And we don’t condone the bad actions that day. At the same time, the left’s wild exaggerations and lies about January 6th required rebuttal, which we’ve done, if for no other reason than to shoot down the ridiculously exaggerated comparisons to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor.

To wit: the whole thing only lasted a few hours; of the roughly 1500-2000 people who were there, only around 10-15% did anything violent at all; the majority of the protestors were middle-aged or senior citizens with clean records, who walked around inside the Capitol taking selfies for a half hour or less and then departed peacefully. Even the ones who fought with cops brought no weapons, and they killed or seriously injured zero people.

Considering that the MSM wildly exaggerated every single aspect of that day – including breathlessly reporting that the MAGA-nauts brutally murdered five cops, when the actual number, again, was zero – I’d bet my house that no cops were seriously injured that day. Because if they had been, they’d be the most famous cops in history, and we’d all know their names the way we know George Floyd or Trayvon Martin. I don’t think you can call a very short-lived, unarmed struggle with a small number of cops “an open revolt against civil authority” to be taken deadly seriously. I suppose you could call it “a rising…[in] active opposition to the execution of the law,” in the sense that the ostensible goal was to prevent Biden from taking office, as far-fetched and delusional as that aim was.

But as to the third part of the definition, I don’t see how you can call a few hundred unarmed people – out of a nation of 330 million – brawling like drunken, idiotic frat boys for several hours a “rising in mass to oppose an enemy.”

Compare that to the gigantic, repeated, months-long, nationwide orgy of violence and destruction of property committed during the BLM and Antifa protests/riots/vandalizing loot-fests of 2020, and the sustained and violent anti-ICE protests and attacks this year. Not one nationally prominent Democrat (with the possible exception of Fetterman?) or MSM talking-head propagandist that I’m aware of has called ANY of those mob attacks acts of “insurrection.” But let’s go back to our tripartite definition. Could these events be reasonably called “acts of open revolt against civil authority or constituted government?”

The insurrectionists are openly defying our immigration laws and multiple federal agencies (ICE, Border Patrol, DHS), and opposing the well-established legal use of the National Guard to protect and safeguard federal property and agents. Could they also be called “open and active opposition to the execution of law in a city or state?” Same answer. And it’s not just happening in “A” city or state, it’s happening in MANY cities and states all across the country. And it’s happening with the open support of governmental officials on the local, state, and national levels.

It’s hard to know precisely how many different people have participated in this years-long insurrection, because many of them are serial offenders, participating in dozens or even hundreds of separate riots in separate cities and states. But the number of perpetrators is obviously well into the hundreds of thousands, and likely into the low millions. (Put your shoes back on and take my word for it, AOC: that’s a lot more than the several hundred bad actors on January 6th.)

But let’s get beyond the letter of the law in the definition above. Everybody can easily tell the difference between seriously threatening insurrections and momentary tantrums by tiny groups of marginalized people with no chance of overthrowing the government. Consequential insurrections with even a slight chance of success always involve armed perpetrators, recognized leaders among the rebels, serious organization, a plan for an end game, and strategic, coordinated actions to get there (ex, taking control of armories, communication facilities, or other significant government facilities; arresting or taking hostage key government figures, etc.). Does any of that sound like what happened on January 6th? None of those boneheads were armed. The closest thing they had to a leader was a bipolar weirdo in a horn hat whom nobody knew. (The logical leader for a real insurrection would have been the president who stood to retain power… but Trump never coordinated or communicated with the J6ers, and in fact explicitly told them only to protest, and to do that peacefully!) (Which would make him the Worst. Insurrection leader. Ever!) They had no organization, no plans for an endgame, and no strategic plans to gain control over any location or assets more consequential than Imhotep Pelosi’s ceremonial gavel.

The leftist insurrectionists pass all of the tests required to be considered a serious threat. They are obviously armed with everything from slingshots, clubs, and various deadly throwable objects (cans of soup, pavement, frozen water bottles) to cars (used to ram agents and their vehicles) to fireworks, handguns, and long guns. They’ve murdered at least 27 people and have badly injured literally thousands of others. They have recognized leaders and an organizational structure composed of associated national networks and coordinated local cells, like the 10-member team who lured ICE agents out of a facility in TX with fireworks and then ambushed and shot at law enforcement, striking one in the neck.

They obviously coordinate, with some supporters providing housing near ICE facilities, some providing political cover, some gathering and disseminating intelligence (including doxxing individual ICE agents and broadcasting the locations and movements of law enforcement who are carrying out their legal and constitutional roles). Others provide them with funding and also with legal support. (One such idiot was the Vice President, who used the power of her office to solicit funds to bail out violent insurrectionists who had been arrested!)

They were also determined enough to cause literally billions of dollars of damage in just the second half of 2020: $2 billion in insured damage, and likely that much more in uninsured. And that’s not counting the costs of paying for what is expected to be millions of man-hours of LEO time and overtime, not to mention the costs of trying, convicting, and housing those who end up in jail. Or the clean-up costs of public buildings, highways, courthouses, or other government facilities, and private businesses.

And they have won victories. They forced kangaroo trials that failed in many places (against Kyle Rittenhouse in WI, for example) but succeeded in others (against Derek Chauvin in MN). They established temporary lawless zones, such as CHOP, which ultimately ended in disaster. (UNEXPECTEDLY!) More importantly, they have cowed state and local officials in many insurrectionist cities and states. What is a “sanctuary city” if not a place where insurrectionists defeated law-abiding citizens and seized control over their public infrastructure and government, in open rebellion against our democratically established democratic republic?

I always like to apply the double-standards test to all political issues, and something tells me that the lefties who love designating “sanctuary cities” when it comes to our immigration laws would not be so happy with conservatives declaring their cities and states as sanctuary areas.

I hope the violent left has enjoyed their victories, because now we’re turning the tables on them, and helping them to reap that which they so eagerly sowed. They lectured us about how “no one is above the law,” and now we’re proving them right. (Ask Letitia, Fani, Comey, and Pencil-Neck, etc., how they feel about that.) And since they screamed that insurrectionists deserve the harshest of punishments?

 

The War on Drugs

“The Trump administration quietly authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in Venezuela, granting the agency lethal authority as part of an escalating campaign to oust President Nicolás Maduro, The New York Times reported, citing multiple United States officials familiar with the classified directive.” (The “directive” is a “lethal finding” if you’re looking for the precise term of art) It seems that this Administration is taking the war on drugs seriously.

 

Bullet Points:

** Jules has money to burn. She does, and she explains her spendthrift ways. “I whipped around to see a man holding out a cocktail stick with multi coloured things on it. In front of him was an array of different olives bobbing in more oil than this particular snake could muster.” That’s how it always starts.

** Kamala: “Some people have said I was the most qualified candidate ever to run for president.”

** Is she here for the fashion show?

** Billions and billions – Put a nickel on the drum, save another drunken bum.

** Boating with EdB – just when we thought that the long arm of the law caught up with him. Should EdB go to the Midwest Boating School?

** Been there, done that. It happens fast. Watching a video differs from being there in how your mind processes it at the time. I can relive minute details even 4o years later.

** The most PAULM guy in the world.

** Good vibrations? No, not the Beach Boys rendition.

** What happens if you pack a ham sandwich in your kid’s lunch box?  Ok, a bacon sandwich – would that be OK?

** In the end, no one cheats us more deeply than our own desire.

 

Poor Relatives

(link) Europe is losing. Just look at the numbers. Economic activity on the continent of Europe has been mostly flat for the last decade, all while America continues its ascent. Measured per person, European GDP is about half of what it is in the U.S., and household wealth has grown three times faster in the U.S. than in Europe since 2009.

Instead of competing, European politicians are erecting barriers to American business. The most egregious might be the recently enacted Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. Don’t let the wonky name fool you. “CS3D,” as it’s been dubbed, seeks to impose European regulatory restrictions on American businesses just because they operate there.

The law holds any large company operating in Europe liable for environmental or human rights violations that occur anywhere in their global supply chain – anywhere in the world. Companies of a specific size will run afoul of the law if a contractor in Mongolia fails to file the proper paperwork or a supplier in Uzbekistan overlooks a European compliance code.

The Europeans are disregarding other countries’ sovereignty to impose their regulatory burdens on the rest of the world. European governments have choked off their own economies over the last two decades by adopting a thicket of rules, levies, price caps, and red tape that make it increasingly difficult for businesses to operate.

This regulatory overreach has bled the continent of its economic vitality. But it’s not our fault the Europeans decided to tie both hands behind their back.”

 

Zulu

Sir Michael Caine has hit back at claims that his 1964 classic Zulu promotes far-right extremism — calling the accusation “the biggest load of bullsh-t I’ve ever heard.”

The film, which made Caine a star, tells the story of British soldiers defending Rorke’s Drift during the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879. Released nearly 60 years ago, it’s long been regarded as one of British cinema’s great historical epics, showcasing courage and conflict from both sides.

But a recent review of the UK’s counter-terrorism programme Prevent listed Zulu as a “key text” for “white nationalists/supremacists,” sparking debate about whether certain historical films could inspire extremism. Caine, now 90, dismissed the idea altogether in an interview with The Spectator, saying it was absurd to link a war film from the 1960s to modern extremist views.

Caine reflected that Zulu was the role that launched his career — “the one that made me a star” — and said he has no regrets about any of the films he’s made.

Throughout his career, the double Oscar winner has occasionally spoken out about politics, describing himself as independent-minded. As he once put it, “I’d rather be a poor master than a rich servant.”

 

Identify the Ship

1

There are no hull numbers visible, so you get a hint. She’s the lead ship of a class of frigates.

Displacement: 6,670 tons

 

Identify the Armor

2

 

Parting Shot

In an exciting revelation, excavations in Germany’s Tollense Valley have uncovered what is now recognized as Europe’s oldest known battlefield, stretching back an astonishing 3,250 years. This remarkable journey began in 1996 when the discovery of a bone protruding from the riverbank sparked a series of archaeological digs that would unearth a staggering 12,500 bones alongside 300 metal artifacts. These finds include flint and bronze arrowheads, swords, and clubs—all remnants of a fierce battle that unfolded around 1250 BC. What’s even more intriguing is that many of these weapons were found still lodged in the skeletons of the courageous warriors who fought bravely on this ancient battlefield. Each discovery paints a vivid picture of the scale and savagery that characterized warfare in northern Europe long ago.

 

So much for the peaceful, pastoral, bucolic life of yesteryear…

 

End