My Photo
I am retired from government, law enforcement, politics and all other pointless endeavors. I eat when I am hungry and sleep when I am tired.

Monday, September 1, 2014


Dreher outdid himself this week with his deep feeling post on Rotherham. I write "feeling" rather than thinking for obvious reasons.  Perhaps I shouldn't be as disgusted as I am.  But nausea has reasons that the brain knoweth not.

Pakistani immigrants to the town of Rotherham were finally brought to book for "Grooming" and sexually exploiting White English girls.  The practice was well known, both within the populace and in the center right press.  That made the practice all the more off-limits to the authorities,  always anxious to appear politically correct in an anti-causasian sort of way.  

He writes, "My guess is that it is as unfair and as inaccurate to blame the rape by Pakistani Muslim men on Islam as it was (is) to blame the rape of children by priests on Catholicism." 
Dreher then goes on to blame both Paki' Muslim crime and Catholic clerical crime on the cultures of Islam and Catholicism.

You have to be very willing to avoid the obvious to write or think in this manner.  Or, you must be utterly terrified of the truth and where it might lead you.  

I have a friend who is quite brilliant and a holder of a PhD who maintains that the things that offend and frighten us about Islam are mostly artifacts of pre-Islamic culture.  Killing your womenfolk for disgracing your family and or beliefs can be found among pre-Islamic Arabs.  Killing them to just keep them out of the hands of other Arabs was also common before the Prophet came on the scene.  There are many other such examples.

So to the Dreher mind and the Dreher minded, we must not make judgements about the nature of Islam: not even when after more than a thousand years, the religion of peace can't make it's adherents change their tribal, bloody ways. 

He and his silly band of commenters go on to raise all the usual questions to which there must never be conclusions.  The idea that Pakistanis come from a very dysfunctional country  and therefore might not be good citizens of a post industrial society with vulnerabilities, must never be broached.  The Paki's are from a culture that is low trust, tribal and hostile to the culture of foreigners, even when those foreigners are supposedly their fellow countrymen. 

I can't see how Islam softened any of these traits.  I can easily see how Islam solidified these primitive features within a code sanctioned by Allah himself.  Pakistan only exists because Indian Muslims could not abide other Indians.  They had to separate and create a country that is both deeply Islamic and utterly failed.

What needs to be understood is that the concept of citizenship is a Western concept.  It has no place in Muslim thinking.  It's not the only such Western concept that doesn't fit in well with cultures of the desert and mountains.  There is no Agora in Mecca or any other Muslim city.  Islam is an inward looking civilization.  Life in Muslim society is family life.  Fellow citizens are just strangers who live under the same law as oneself.  If the strangers are not Muslims and the law is not Islamic, they don't owe much to wider society beyond paying taxes.  And this applies to vulnerable members of that society.  

By Sharia standards pretty much all Western women are whores.  Married ones are not to be touched but loose ones are fair game.  

The idea that everyone in society is in a kind of extended civic pact, based on adherence to certain binding ethical precepts, is profoundly alien to these people.  They prefer their way of life.  they prefer holding apart as little extended family enclaves where jobs go to sons and cousins, uncles marry nieces and outsiders are to be ignored or taken advantage of.  Such people cannot be expected to correct abuses committed by relatives.  That would  betray the all-important family to foreigners who live around them.  Islam does nothing to stop of soften any of this. 

The attempt to separate culture from religion is a worthwhile project for scholars.  But to behave as though the cultures of Muslims and the religion of Muslims can be teased apart in any useful way is a bootless distraction from what must be done.  Weak simpletons like Dreher cannot or will not discuss this honestly. 

Sunday, August 24, 2014


TAC is yet again holding up a comment of mine.  It is in response to the boringly reliable "Philadelphia Lawyer. "  He is one of the left-trolls haunting the site.  As a former peace officer I had to tick him off, perhaps too much for the timid souls at TAC.

Here is the link.  Check out Philadelphia Lawyer's call to action.  Can any Lawyer actually be so misinformed?
  1. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “The police formulate policy that, quite naturally, gives the police the “right” to kill when the threat to them is only a little bit above ridiculously low. And they exercise that “right,” over and over again.” This is really laughable. Who do you think formulates police policy, lawyers! Every move to turn cops into robots over the last 40 years began with legal jerks seeking to “professionalize,” police.
    Almost all police in the USA answer to prosecutors, all of whom are lawyers. And it is these prosecuting lawyers who keep restricting police judgement and autonomy.
    Tasers, nets, clubs? Nightsticks were taken away from the police in my day as a means to limit liability driven by ambulance chancing lawyers representing criminals.
    Nets? You must be joking. This isn’t the Circus Maximus and the cops aren’t Spartacus.
    Tasers can be very unreliable. Mace is good but it won’t stop an attacker with a knife fast enough to save your life.

    Sunday and still waiting.  


Wednesday, August 20, 2014


A promenent member of Ferguson's Black community seeking justice at a local venue.

Aren’t we all tired of the endless Ferguson coverage?  I am.  What precisely, is newsworthy there?  Is a common police blotter shooting of a street thug by a police officer worthy of such national obsession?  I think not.

Why is our peace of mind hostage night after night to images of ignorant rioters?  Why is the President involving himself and his Attorney General once again in municipal affairs, even going so far as to interrupt his vacation on Martha’s Vineyard to express his solidarity with the down trodden?  Why is Anderson Cooper risking his precious good looks under possible assault by water bottle?  Why have purportedly mature public officials contorted themselves into impossible shapes catering to an incoherent mob?

Before expressing a general opinion, I’ll pass along some general observations.

Today, the ever gamine Ronan Farrow of MSNBC took the Lieutenant Governor of Missouri to task for daring to use the expression, “Anglo-American legal system.”  Shamefully, The Lt. Governor apologized for any misunderstanding he may have caused. It was painful to watch, as the Lt. Gov. had acquitted himself well up to that point.  Even more bizarre was that he apologized even after reminding Farrow, that as Farrow is a lawyer, he knew quite well that the term is both a historical and legal term.  So I suppose it’s now official.  Our common Anglo-Saxon legal history is now a shameful excrescence, not to be mentioned. It upsets both the mob class and the New York media volunteer auxiliary thought police.  

Then last night Governor Nixon of Missouri all but called for the prosecution of the Officer involved.  He actually said this before a grand jury was empaneled. Nixon used to be the State Attorney General. 

While it has been alluded to, it’s curious that the racial element hasn’t been but into sharper focus.  I’m not talking about the Blacks, but the Indians and others who seem to dominate all the commercial establishments in this sorry business. 

The owners of the convenience store where that “Gentle Giant” Brown strong-armed the staff are named Patel.  The little Fellow he pushed about is named Patel.  Mr. Jacoub from Lebanon owns Sam’s Meat Market, which was enthusiastically looted by his own customers a few nights ago.  Among others looted was one Mumtaz Lalani, another storeowner just goes by the name of Ibrahim.  The list goes on.

Nothing excuses looting, but you might think that the mainstream media, so engrossed in race talk, might at least notice this disconnect between the face of the community and the face of everyday commerce.  The politically correct media see untrammeled Indian and Pakistani immigration as part of our wonderful diversity. 

There is that other minority in Ferguson, Whites, who get out and vote, and pass civil service tests, and show up to work on time.  Their success is apparently, an affront to Black America.  Importing people to gyp blacks from the other side of the world is just fine however.

There is the media’s abandoning of even the pose of objectivity.  They, and the administration, and the liberal over-culture and the rioters are acting to re-affirm their high-low coalition.  That is, the multi-cultic elite of the new class, and the underclass whose votes help keep them in power must be  reset from time to time with a Trayvon Martin, or a Duke Lacrosse case. It doesn’t matter how bogus these distractions are.  It’s enough to get underclass voters riled and ready for Election Day.  How else to explain both CNN and MSNBC’s depiction of rioters as “Protesters seeking justice?”  How else to see Erick Holder’s meeting today with “Community leaders”? Having de-legitimized the real community leaders, other wise know as elected representatives, Holder all but promises the prosecution of a White cop for doing his job.

Anyone with any law enforcement training or knowledge knows that a cop who has been assaulted, had to fight to keep his sidearm, and is being approached by an assailant with criminal intent can shoot.  This is particularly true if the officer has had the bones in his face crumpled and is in danger of losing consciousness.  Yet the legal analysts employed by the networks mouth gibberish when they know that this is a routine matter, save for the tribal passions of Brown’s benighted neighbors.       

My final conclusion is this. The over class and the underclass need to stick together in order to deconstruct our culture, our legacy population and our economic system.  It takes a village to lift our wallets, as it were. When a minority President sympathizes with his own race when they riot, he is sending a message.  And the message is this; the mechanisms of justice, and our political process are no longer free from his usurpation.  That Anglo-Saxon tradition that Ronan Farrow found so unacceptable is being replaced by a racial and ideological spoils system. 

What is happening in Ferguson has absolutely nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the manipulation of racial resentments and the will to power by parasitic elites.

Friday, August 8, 2014


I just saw the noxious plagiarist and dupe, Chris Hedges, say that he "Had been to war" just now. The context was a CSPAN coverage of the 2014 Left Forum Panel on Thomas Paine.  in it, the usual collection of socialist malcontents held forth from a dais about injustice. I gather they are against it.  

The clown prince of affirmative action Afro-jibberish, Cornel West was there, along with some smarmy little guy I've never seen before, and Hedges.  The event should not be confused with an exposition of ideas.  It  was just  a chance for a small crowd of angry left nerds to see their heroes perform their acts.  

The sole reason I bother to post this is that Hedges made that statement, he had "Been to war."  Due diligence forces me to report that there is no record of military service in any Hedges bio I can find.  I don't mean to split hairs here.  My understanding of the term is that when one "Goes to war", you are going to war with some purpose greater than writing about it.  Hedges did covered plenty of wars, but only in the capacity of an onlooker.  The distinction here is that those who have "Been to war" have to stick around when the shooting starts.  Journalists like Hedges can stay as long as they want, then go back to their air-conditioned hotel for a shower, a Mojito and nice clean bed.  

Hedges is a throughly unpleasant character, spouting radical revolutionary from his sinecure at the Nation Institute.  Like West, he gets to wage the revolution from a cosy distance.  Come to think of it, that anonymous little clown with them was a professor as well.  

Hedges left a strong impression of having served, while only serving his career.  

Wednesday, August 6, 2014


The founders of our republic looked to the Roman Republic for examples of how a republic could survive and prosper in what was then the modern world. Unlike we post moderns, they knew that human nature does not change. They made a keen study of how the Roman Republic eventually slid into anarchy and tyranny.  Therefore, it is profoundly gratifying to see how long those Roman inspired lessons held out against the impulse to mere democracy and institutional decay. As our republic declines,  let's examine those Roman institutions our founders chose not to incorporate into our political framework.  Doubtless they had their reasons.  

This is just a thought experiment, as such stern measures are too sensible to gain acceptance in our present state of decadence.  Looking at how a sister republic confronted the challenge of governance is a useful exercise, if only to see how far from perfection we have fallen.  To understand the Roman model is to know their mind and at one remove, the minds of our founders.   The Romans were far from perfect, but the republic they instituted and the empire that followed, lasted a thousand years.  Our republic will not see it's three hundredth birthday.  

The examples I give below are unique Roman public offices and their functions.  I bring them forward as exhibits of Roman practical wisdom.  The reader can judge for himself how useful they would be in our time.  Obviously, I think they make sense, although as stated above, we are too far-gone to adopt them.

Cursus Honorum These were a graduated series of offices men in public life were expected to fill before advancing to the next step up the ladder of power.  Some steps were not strictly necessary but were customary.   This system of insisting that people demonstrate competence in lesser roles before running for higher office is itself a massive improvement over our own system.  The idea that one could be intrusted power without a record of accomplishment filled the Romans with dread. A jumped up law professor could never have achieved power in Rome.  Even the great Cicero, who was a lawyer, had to fill other offices to advance.  And when he went too far, he was banished for a time.  

Aedile These were elected officials who were charged with the upkeep of the city, the grain dole, the regulation of public morals, management of the public games and the regulation of the markets.  If your sewer backed up or foreign tricksters cheated you at the market, you went to the Aedile.  He had the power to render justice and the responsibility to keep what we call infrastructure in good working order.  He could not plead ignorance and if he did not act, his career died at the end of his one-year term of office.  He also had to put on public games for the entertainment of all the citizens.  So the Aedile was no piker and unlike our bureaucracy, could not slip the harness of accountability.  The next time my readers approach their town council over potholes and such, remember the Aedile. 

Military Tribune These were elected from the youth of Senatorial class who wished to advance in the service of the Republic.  They served with the legions under senior officers and if talented, were given actual combat responsibilities. 

Rome was a martial society and the thought of permitting cowards or incompetents to attain high office, in which they would be expected to lead men in war, was an completely unacceptable. 

Successful completion of service as a Military Tribune proved the individual had nerve and could take as well as give orders under pressure.  Contrast this with all the poltroons and fussbudgets inhabiting our Congress.  

CENSOR The office of Censor was the pinnacle of the Roman honors system and was usually occupied by elder statesmen who had already attained the office of Consul.  Censors were men who had satisfied the highest tests of judgment and rectitude.   As with Consuls, there were two Censors at a time.  They served for five years.  They oversaw the important work of conducting the census.  They also had the responsibility of purging the Senate of unworthy members.  They could banish certain religious practices and take action to defend public morals.

The genius of the Censorship rested on Romans of the leadership class knowing that their private vices would be known if they were not curbed or carefully hidden.  Someone of distinction that knew you or your family might eventually become a Censor.  This meant that at least a show of decency was necessary to survive in the Senate. It also behooved people in that class to be on civil terms with others, as what one Censor did, could be undone in five years by his successor.  

It’s tempting to wish we had censors.  They would be ex-presidents.  It takes only a moment’s reflection to see that this would not do.  Bill Clinton passing on other’s morals would be a scandal in itself.  If we produced men of stature we could call on them as Censors, but we don’t, so that’s that.  If we had such men today as Censors we would be rid of all the legal and illegal interlopers in our midst.  Our celebrity smut culture would be driven  underground.  No Ted Kennedy or a Barney Frank would pollute our halls of power for long.

The Founders attempted to install the spirit if not the structure of the Roman system.  They insisting on three equal branches of government.  They never dreamt of a Senate chosen by the people at large.  They never foresaw a ruling elite of test takers and hipsters without practical merit or character.  We cannot have a republic without republican virtue.  Re-instituting ancient systems cannot work where the public lacks the character to man them.  This is a pity. 

Thursday, July 31, 2014


CNN just announced the release of a substantial number of mortar rounds to Israeli forces now pounding Gaza.  That's not surprising.  What is, is that the delivery will take place from a massive depot of American weaponry and ammunition already placed in Israel.  How many people knew that the US pre-positions huge munitions stockpiles within Israel for the convenience of Israel?  My guess is that this is a reaction to the events of 1972, where Nixon had to emergency airlift munitions to Israel during that war.  There is the fiction that the Israeli's pay for this, except that they do so under a regime of loan guarantees in which they never really have to pay.  Now apparently we just skip the fictive transaction altogether and just let them take what they want.  

We conveniently positioned masses of mortar bombs in country so that our gallant allies in Jerusalem don't run out while they kill the children of Gaza.  

Of course this fact must never be allowed to interfere with our bogus assurance to the surrounding states that we are even handed.