The first time I've ever disavowed myself

I tend to stand by what I have written as a matter of principle, and never delete things because that would be altering the record. As someone trained in history, that's unacceptable behavior. Yet today I find myself hovering over the "delete post" button when it comes to this September 2006 post, in which I praise Keith Olbermann's vitriolic rant about George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. 

I haven't changed a whole lot since then - I was a critic of Bush the Lesser and the Iraq War then, and I remain one now. As it turns out, neither has Olbermann: his rant did not come from principle, but from partisanship. He was a deranged Democrat then, and is one still. It just didn't become apparent until the Trump Derangement Syndrome hit and people like him openly lost their minds.

While I think I will keep that post, it will get a big fat asterisk from the future, as proof that even a hopelessly broken clock could be right twice a day. I hereby disavow any interpretation thereof that could be construed as an endorsement of Keith Olbermann, his positions or his character. I hope he gets the professional help he appears to need. 

A tale of two civilizations, or why there is hope

Last month, after the coronavirus-delayed Victory Parade in Moscow marking the 75th anniversary of the triumph over Nazi Germany, Russian President Vladimir Putin traveled to nearby Rzhev to unveil a new monument.

The 25-meter memorial pays homage to uncounted Soviet soldiers who perished in the Rzhev salient between 1941 and 1943, in bitter fighting described as a "meat grinder." The monument was reportedly entirely crowdfunded, designed by young architects, and depicts a soldier turning into a flock of cranes.

Cranes have a powerful symbolism in Soviet and Russian memory of WW2. A 1957 film about the suffering of civilians is named "The cranes are flying," and the flock of birds seen in the sky bookends the plot. A decade later, Dagestani poet Rasul Gamzatov will write "Cranes," a heart-rending poem about fallen soldiers turning into white cranes. It was set to music in 1969, and recorded by actor and singer Mark Bernes shortly before he died of cancer. Hence the cranes, you see.

Shortly before the Rzhev monument opened, Putin also unveiled the grand cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces, at the heart of a new WW2 museum outside Moscow.

It's interesting to observe the contrast between the West and Russia recently. As the West has been dismantling its monuments, Russia has been erecting massive Orthodox churches, like the new Armed Forces Cathedral, and WWII memorials, like the one of Rzhev, in this month alone. pic.twitter.com/jNyNqCIuBK

— Nina ☦️ Byzantina (@NinaByzantina) June 30, 2020

Meanwhile, the "greatest country in the world" that is fond of deriding Russia as a "gas station with missiles" is undergoing a Cultural Revolution-style purge of monuments, revision of history and destruction of memory. 

It may have started with century-dead Confederate generals, but quickly escalated to Union generals, Catholic saints, Christopher Columbus, and even the founding fathers of the American republic. Absolutely nothing is sacred, and everything must be torn down in the name of intersectional social justice or something. 

This is what a dying civilization looks like. https://t.co/HQeeixN68z

— John Daniel Davidson (@johnddavidson) July 1, 2020

The irony is that, insofar as the monument-toppling revolutionaries have an articulated agenda beyond destruction, it's race-based Communism. Russia went through that starting a century ago, and though it took a while, it has obviously recovered rather well, as physical evidence shows. So, there is hope. Nothing is inevitable. One just has to be willing to learn from the mistakes of others, lest they be repeated. 

Some thoughts on guns

(another collection of takes from Twitter, rearranged and slightly expanded for your convenience in this medium)

Before you endorse a ban on "assault weapons," take a deep breath. There is no such thing.

The term "assault rifle" is literally a translation of Sturmgewehr, a name bestowed by Adolf Hitler himself on a strange hybrid of a rifle and an automatic pistol that Nazi weaponmakers had developed behind his back.

The "AR" in AR-15 does not stand for "assault rifle" but for "ArmaLite Rifle," its maker.

Military - i.e. fully automatic - weapons in civilian hands have been illegal in the US since 1938. The so-called "assault weapons ban" of 1994 relied on arbitrary COSMETIC features of weapons. It was easily circumvented, and did nothing to prevent the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado.

A ban on "semi-automatic" weapons would leave only revolvers, bolt-action rifles and some shotguns legal. Good luck with that.

American founders understood that "certain inalienable rights" made the difference between a citizen and a subject: freedom of speech, due process, and the "right to keep and bear arms." That is why they are in the Constitution, via the Bill of Rights. If you can't understand that this is fundamental to America, and why, then this might not be the country for you - whether you were born here or not.

History made

I'm referring to this post, of course. What did you think I was referring to?

An unlikely off-ramp

We have crossed the boundary that lies between Republic and Empire. If you ask when, the answer is that you cannot make a single stroke between day and night; the precise moment does not matter. There was no painted sign to say: “You are now entering Imperium.” Yet it was a very old road and the voice of history was saying: “Whether you know it or not, the act of crossing may be irreversible.” And now, not far ahead, is a sign that reads: “No U-turns.”
- Rise of Empire by Garet Garrett, 1952

Long-time readers of this blog know that I am a subject of the Atlantic Empire and therefore have the right to participate in the quadrennial ritual of electing the Emperor. While I will not disclose which one of the candidates will get my vote, between my background and what's been published here that ought to be intuitively obvious.

What I will say, however, is this. Once a republic turns into an empire, it is rare - unheard of, actually - for it to get an opportunity to turn away. That's what the quote above refers to. Yet through a combination of most unlikely circumstances, the USA has one such opportunity this year. Whether Americans will use it, or lose it (most likely forever) will shape their own destiny - and that of the world.

Let's see what happens.

The Emperor Doth Protest Too Much

His Most Elevated Majesty, Barack the Blessed, gave a speech in Talinn (Estonia) on Wednesday, filled with words such as "freedom" and "democracy" and "real progress" - whatever that means.

I'll deal with it in more detail in my Antiwar.com piece tomorrow (update: here's a link). For now, though, just some thoughts.

photo via RT

C-Span has the 30-minute video. The White House has a transcript.

Listen to it. Compare what he says to be the truth, with actual truth. Compare the actions of his own government, his own officials, his own troops - to his platitudes about "big bullying the small" and "dignity" and "independence". I dare you to listen with a straight face to his words about freedom of press and thought, what with Anglosphere media marching in absolute lockstep and every dissent dismissed as "propaganda."

Listen to his soothing platitudes about how NATO isn't aimed against anyone - the blood of Serbs, Iraqis, Afghans and Libyans begs to differ. Listen to his lies about how there were no Nazis in the Maidan, or how there was no coup in Kiev. "These are facts, provable, not subject to dispute" - except they are not.

And the "currents of history... flow towards freedom"? Who wrote this speech, Citizen Kang?

All this talk of the inevitable triumph of freedom, democracy, "real progress" (whatever that is) - methinks that's just His Imperial Majesty protesting too much. He is trying too hard to persuade his "allies" (i.e. clients) that he is still the most powerful, still the strongest, still the richest, that End of History is just around the corner.

Not everything in the speech was a lie. Moral strength is more powerful than tanks. People generally do wish to be free from bullying, and be independent. Might indeed does not make right.

So why is his country and his own government using tanks (or planes, or missiles)? Why does he bully other countries into making only the "choices" his government dictates, under threat of "kinetic military action" or "color revolution"? Why is it the core belief of the current government of the United States of America that might does make right?

He lies about motes in the eyes of others, while failing to see the beam in his own.

Fourth of July

On this day in 1776, representatives of 13 American colonies declared independence from Britain, citing a "train of abuses and usurpations" starting with unjust taxation and getting worse from there.

I urge you to read the actual text of the Declaration; it's very instructive.

Thing is... the taxes that caused the colonies to rebel were nothing in comparison with what Americans pay today. The government in Washington treats its citizens worse than George III treated his subjects. And America's foreign policy is that of the British Empire: invade, divide and rule, lie and deceive, betray and corrupt - all the while claiming to be a force for good (then it was "civilization," now it's "democracy," in both cases stripped of all meaning).

And the worst thing? Most Americans either don't realize this... or if they do, they don't care. Today is for grilling, beer and fireworks - all fine things, mind you, of which I myself intend to partake. But while I do so, a part of my mind will continue to wonder: is this really what the Founders had in mind when they invoked "the protection of divine Providence" and pledged to each other "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor"?

Seven Decades Hence

"The world is Hades for me now
and all men in it hellish spirits."
- The Mountain Wreath

Seventy years ago, on June 6 1944, the Western Allies launched the largest amphibious operation in history, landing hundreds of thousands of men and tanks onto the beaches of Normandy. Were they fighting and dying for an American Empire, or the world democratic revolution? The Emperor now says so.

Did those men fight so their country could pick up Hitler's torch 50 years later, back his allies, pursue his policies? With the Luftwaffe bombing Belgrade again, German boots on Serbian soil, SS marches in Latvia, and Banderist torchlight parades in Ukraine, Anglo-American boasting of how they won in 1945 are at best hypocritical and hollow. At worst, a cruel jest.

Bandera supporters march in Lwow, January 2013 (via "Kyiv Post")

The "Greatest Generation" is spinning in their graves. Hitler's ghost cackles with glee.

But the East remembers.

Clearly an Outrage

This letter appeared today in The Boston Globe. Make sure you read it carefully, and all the way to the end:

IT’S TRULY an outrage that, in this day and age, a region within a sovereign country can be taken over and declared independent simply because they have a majority of residents with an ethnic identity different from the majority of citizens in their country. That this sort of thing can be successfully orchestrated militarily by a foreign power is alarming. This is a blatant violation of international law and should be strongly opposed by the citizens of every free and law-abiding country where respect for national borders is held high. After all, if it can be permitted to happen even once, there will be no end to it.
Therefore, we must stand firm and refuse to recognize Kosovo.

Theodore L. Bosen
Plymouth

Well done, sir.

Well done. 

RIP, David Yeagley

Dr. David Yeagley, a great scholar, American patriot and Comanche, passed away last week. Among the many issues he had addressed during his prolific writing career was the plight of the Serbs. To honor his memory, I am reposting his most recent article on the subject.

I can't help but think that his desperate plea from the last paragraph was finally answered this week.

- Gray Falcon

Serbia: A Lesson for the Modern World

By David Yeagley, November 7, 2013
BadEagle.com

To this day, because of liberal, biased media, most people in the world still do not know what has happened to Serbia. The fraud, the corruption, and the international robbery of a nation go unrecognized, unjustified, and unpunished. Is this to be the fate of every country facing the same issues?

Serbians of their northern Kosovo resisted Albanian Muslim government elections in the internationally usurped province.

BadEagle.com has written numerous articles on Serbia, pointing out the ironies and agonies, and the stark shame due the United States government under President Bill Clinton and his NATO commander, Gen. Wesley Clark, as well as President Bush following, and the Obama administration to date.

It was all about crime, heroin, and Albanian Muslims. That’s how Kosovo became an “independent” nation, a heroin haven forworld corruption, with such renowned leaders as former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari. The media never once pointed out these underlying evils. “Ethnic Albanians” who had migrated en mass into Serbia’s Kosovo province were presented as victims! Whoever helped them was heroic, just, and to be greatly honored, regardless of reality.

Serbia was branded barbarian, when the Serbians were simply white Christian nationalist patriots, trying to protect and preserve their own. The liberal West wouldn’t have it.

Yet, there are still Serbian patriots, even in the norther area of Kosovo, some 40 to 50 thousand of them. They refused to vote for the integration into Kosovo, and disrupted the recent mayoral voting process in Mitrovica, in northern Kosovo.

Of course, the new, liberal-leaning Serbian government in Belgrade is trying desperately to get Serbia integrated into the European Union, and wants all Serbians to acknowledge the independent Kosovo. Thus, the new Serbian government has betrayed Serbians, calling them ulta-nationalists, instead of patriots, non-cooperatives, hold-outs, hardliners,etc., condemning them as the problem for the rest of Serbia. Kosovo plans another election, in defiance of such patriotism.

Serbians of Kosovo are being presented as those needing to be integrated into the new “foreign country” of Kosovo, created by masses of migrated Albanian Muslims who moved in on Serbian territory. Imagine, being “integrated” into a new country on your own land–robbed from you by a liberal, Western world united against you.

The last of the Mohicans, I’ve called these Serbian patriots. They are Christian, Serbian orthodox. They are denied by Muslims, liberals, and Western drug machines. White Christian is out, Muslim tyranny is in. Western governments, including the United States, prefer it this way.

It is an international disgrace, this betrayal of Serbia. That the United States should have had such a profound role in it only shows just how corrupt the United States government has become. Bi-partisan betrayal, indeed. It is nearly unfathomable.

Mass migration of foreigners, enemies of the culture they invade; international government cooperation with the invaders, business cooperation, criminal pay-offs; and utter misrepresentation of liberal media; these things create cosmic crime. These are the lessons of Serbia to the world. Beware.

No nation is safe today. No, not one. International forces have gained the ascendancy. Whatever your nation has that is valuable to the internationals, it will be taken from you, by coercion, by government force, by arms if necessary. Whatever it takes.

We can only pray for divine intervention. When the patriots are outnumbered by the world, how can they defend what’s theirs? When the patriots are out-manned, out-monied, out-gunned, the most they can hope for is “reservations,” like the American Indians. Is that where all true honor ends, on reservations?

Decline

Daniel Greenfield writes, apropos yesterday's anniversary of the Moon landing:

"Forty-four years ago, a nation that we now know was racist, didn't care about the environment and drank too much soda, landed on the moon.
[...]
We were going to go the moon and then to the planets beyond. We could find new frontiers, plant our flags, build colonies, jump from world to world, star to star, and turn our civilization into something more than another archeological dig. Maybe it was all just a crazy dream, but looking at the eyes of the men who did it and who died and die seeing it undone, there is that sense that they believed that it could be done.

Going to the moon was a crazy idea of course. Going beyond it would have been even crazier. Instead we settled down to the important things, like race relations, the importance of listening to music, breaking up the family, importing huge numbers of people with little use for our way of life and all the other stupid suicidal things that dying civilizations do to pass the time.
[...]
We could have gone to the stars, but we took another road instead. Maybe we can still turn back to a time when we could do great things before it's too late."

But wouldn't that be "turning back the clock" on all the wonderful "progress" that's been made since, uh, erm...? Well, yes. Progress in deconstructing society, certainly. Can it be done? I don't know. Should it at least be attempted? Certainly.

Space colonization may be impractical, as Charles Stross has argued, but then again, it might not. But practicality is less of a concern than the loss of drive. After everything has been deconstructed, people are wondering if anything has a point - to the point where reality offends them. So instead of doing great things, they turn inward and embrace the ennui. Retreat from space is just a symptom. Every health chart of a dying civilization shows some form of this.  The story of Buzz Aldrin's secret Communion suggests that the rot was already setting in, even then.  Fred might be right.

Note, however, that this applies to one civilization in particular. And while influential and powerful, it forgets it alone is not humanity. There is a world elsewhere.

An Enduring Mystery

On Veterans' Day (originally Armistice Day, commemorating the end of the Great War), a local newspaper in Bellingham, Washington published a letter from one of the local soldiers, who took part in the IFOR peacekeeping mission in Bosnia.

Officially, everyone was enthusiastic about the mission, and its success in stopping the previously intractable Bosnian War was later taken for granted. But one of the things I learned in Bosnia, while having the honor to work with retired Army colonel David Hackworth, was that one should always trust the grunts, not the "perfumed princes" with fruit salads on their uniforms. And from what I've heard from the grunts - much, much later - it was a near run thing that Bosnia did not relapse into war by the end of 1996.

Here's something PFC Matthew Levi Aamot, wrote in that letter to his grandmother Charlotte, in March 1996:

"One thing that bothers me here is all the kids who stand out at the road and beg food. Thing is, most of these kids so far are well fed and clothed, and are just trying to get something for nothing. ... Suspect that the kids are being paid by the Bosnian army to get ahold of our MREs (meals) to use for themselves.

I also think that these people are just using this year to rearm and recruit more troops. After we leave they will fight again. Maybe we can help get peace established, but somehow, I don't think that us being here will make a lasting impact."

Yet somehow, the peace took. The war has been in remission ever since. And there have been few attempts to explain why. Maybe because the U.S. troops stayed on beyond the one-year deployment that was originally promised? Perhaps because Washington refused to green-light a new war in Bosnia, as it had Serbia to fry? Or was it that the armistice, once it actually took hold and became peace, proved too seductive to people who had to be lied into war to begin with?

It is hard to tell. But until it is figured out, I'm afraid that deciding whether PFC Aamot was right or wrong may hinge solely on the definition of "lasting."

Spoiled Wards of Nanny State

The past several days I've had to deal with power, phone and internet outages due to a freak storm that swept through the Imperial capital on Friday. Much as I'm tempted to rail against such poorly set-up infrastructure that tends to collapse under any sort of inclement weather, I'll save it for another time.

What I missed in the ensuing chaos was the storm of vitriol directed at my friend and colleague Ilana Mercer, over the column wherein she criticized the emotional response to the story of the bullied bus monitor. Being as I focus on Imperial shenanigans in my ancestral lands, I had not seen the video of Karen Klein being cruelly mocked by teenage boys. Once I watched it, I found Ilana's conclusion entirely reasonable. Why did Klein just sit there and take it? What has this society come to, when children can bully adults, and the adults are too craven to talk - let alone fight - back?

I hear the same thing is happening in the lands of my birth now. Elementary and high school students bringing weapons, abusing teachers, even threatening and physically assaulting them. But we had wars and societal collapse (a.k.a. "transition"); what's America's excuse?

Even worse than the outrageous behavior of boys on the bus - which would've been unthinkable even a generation ago, as their fathers would have seen to it they couldn't sit down for a while thereafter - was the vitriolic response to Ilana's article. I won't quote any of it, for it is far too foul; see for yourself. Nothing better than displaying one's "compassion" by being contemptuous of someone else, right? What the hell has happened to this country, when people react like this to a reasoned argument, just because their precious feelings are hurt?

And then it struck me: the bus monitor, her tormentors, and those trolls - they were all children. Children of the Nanny State, who's always coddled them from any criticism and taught them they were entitled to everything they could beg, borrow and steal, without any responsibility, ever.

Worse, I know children who have actually exhibited a grasp of logic and the ability to use it. These spoiled brats, real and metaphorical, don't bother. They operate purely on emotion, getting offended, "feeling" this and that (never "thinking" - that'd be presumptuous and might offend Nanny), and ever crying at the top of their lungs when something isn't to their liking. So calling them children is an insult to honest children everywhere - but I'm at a loss for metaphors here.

A semi-literate farmer in the era of Jefferson, Washington and Franklin possessed more reason than most "educated" Americans today (and I daresay many in other countries, also afflicted with nanny-statism). People back then took up arms against what they saw as excessive taxation and meddling - what their descendants today would deride as "not enough government", sadly - and even accepted the challenge to explain why, using the philosophical language of Locke and Hume, talking about liberty, equality before the law and natural rights. Most of their descendants today wouldn't recognize a natural right if it socked them on the jaw. Or identify tyranny, even if it's been systematically pilfering their pockets and their minds for years.

It's a sad state of affairs - pun very much intended. And while I'm sorry Ilana had to deal with the tantrums of spoiled brats, at least her experience offers a lesson to us all about the stunted minds of postmodern "citizens" and their complete disrespect for actual adults.

Iowa

The furor over the Iowa caucuses tonight is an illustration of the sad state of democracy in America. The mainstream media have done their best to create an atmosphere in which the whole process will be dismissed as a fluke if a particular candidate wins. Especially since that candidate is a man they have first ignored, then laughed at, then demonized... And yes, the quote attributed to Gandhi does come to mind here.

Much as it was decided in 2008 that the best heir to Bush the Lesser would be Barack the Blessed of Hopechange, the establishment has decided that the Republican candidate in November shall be Mitt Romney. Just look at the pattern in the GOP race so far: Romney gets treated as the front-runner, while every other candidate is built up and then torn down - a phenomenon Vox Day dubbed the "Romney-alternative-who-is-not-Ron-Paul wheel."

Trouble is, Paul isn't going away. He's a clear alternative to the establishment (as Vox puts it, to "Newt Romney O'Bama"), or to borrow what Phyllis Schlafly said about Barry Goldwater, "a choice, not an echo."

Predictably, the "smearbund" (Murray Rothbard's expression) tried hard to paint Paul as a racist. Unfortunately for them, that accusation has been the first resort of political scoundrels for so long, people have grown tired of it. It doesn't quite work anymore. It also happens to be a lie. So they accused Paul of being an anti-Semite instead. That, too, is untrue.

Today, Richard Cohen of the Washington Post almost called Paul a Nazi, while praising all the Imperial interventions that Paul has opposed. Cohen, by the way, argued passionately back in 2003 that "bagging Karadzic" would show the Muslim world all the white-knighting virtue and love of the United States, and win its never-ending gratitude. Well, Karadzic was "bagged" in 2008, Ratko Mladic last year, the US has created not one but two Islamic states in the Balkans (per Tom Lantos)... where's all the gratitude? Oh wait.

Daniel Greenfield really dislikes Ron Paul. He's convinced Paul's policy of dismantling the Empire is bad for the Jews and bad for Israel, suspects him of Islamophilia, even argues that Paul is working with George Soros. But it is Greenfield that wrote the best rebuttal of Cohen's idiotic rant, by pointing out that the U.S. never actually intervened to stop genocide. Not today, not in WW2, not ever.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I like Ron Paul. Back in 2004, I interviewed him for NIN - then a premier Serbian news magazine, later sold to a German consortium and thoroughly ruined - mostly about his principled opposition to America's illegal foreign wars. To prep for the interview, I did a fair bit of research on his voting record and where he stood on issues. And I have to say, even when I disagree with him (on immigration, for example), I respect him and his integrity. Assuming there is a way to save the United States of America from the consequences of imperialism - and forgive me if I'm not entirely convinced at this point that there is - Paul is the man who might be able to pull it off.

But even if I thought otherwise, even if I disliked the man and his ideas entirely, I'd still be objecting to the obvious problem of his treatment at the hands of the mainstream media and the political establishment. As should we all. Because what we're seeing here is what Philip Cunliffe noted about the 2008 Serbian elections: that democracy means whatever the Empire says it means.

So the Iowa caucuses will be declared legitimate, meaningful and proper only if the establishment's preferred candidate (i.e. Romney) wins. If Paul carries Iowa, it will be dismissed as a fluke, the whole caucus system will be derided as stupid and obsolete, and a host of other excuses will be enlisted to tell the general populace why what just happened didn't matter at all. Nothing to see here, move along, vote Romney O'Bama and the Bank Party in November, thankyouverymuch.

That sounds very much like a diabetic being forced to make a "choice" between Coca-Cola and Pepsi. It's not just that he doesn't get to choose water, it's that either of those will kill him.

Is it Jihad Yet?

photo: Beta

This is Mevlid Jasarevic, age 23, follower of the Salafi sect of Islam, who this afternoon opened fire on the U.S. Embassy in Sarajevo, Bosnia. Jasarevic was subsequently shot and reportedly killed. [Clarification: Jasarevic was wounded and detained by the police.]

Because Jasarevic is from Novi Pazar, a town in Serbia, odds are the mainstream Western media will describe this as a "Serbian attack", or at least identify him as "Serbian citizen." This would be horribly misleading, of course, but that hasn't stopped them before.

Here are some things to keep in mind here, before the spin distorts them:

• Salafi missionaries came to Bosnia during the war, with tacit approval and even assistance of the U.S., to get the "wayward" Bosnian Muslims in line and wage jihad against the Serb and Croat "infidels."
• There are 150,000 or so Muslims in the Raska region of southwestern Serbia (which they call "Sanjak", a term going back to Ottoman days). Their religious leader, mufti Muamer Zukorlic, was appointed by the top Islamic cleric of Bosnia and has been stirring up trouble and preaching violence and hate for several years. In this, he enjoys the support of many foreign governments ("Friends of Sanjak"), including the U.S.
• Jasarevic may technically be a citizen of Serbia, but he is wanted there on charges of terrorism. He left Serbia last year, and settled in the Salafi commune of Gornja Maoca in northern Bosnia. Until it was ethnically cleansed during the Bosnian War, it used to be a Serb village called Karavlasi.

In addition to terrorizing any Christians (Serbs or Croats) they may come across, the Salafi frequently harass ordinary Bosnian Muslims, who by and large follow the Hanafi school of Islam. The Hanafi approach accepts local customs and is what made coexistence with Christians in the past possible in the first place. Salafists dismiss this as heresy and preach absolute intolerance of any who do not follow their ways.

Anyway, just watch: Jasarevic will be described as a lone lunatic, his motives will be "unknown", and there will be no mention of jihad or Islamic terrorism. The notion that the Salafists in Bosnia may be nurturing terrorists who threaten American lives runs counter to the mainstream narrative of innocent Muslims being victims of evil Serbs, and is therefore thoughtcrime.

Update (10/31/2011): Julia Gorin has a post up about this and other jihadist attacks, with links. Lots of links.

9/11

I remember that Tuesday morning the way I remember much of the Bosnian War: in vivid detail. The confusion, the shock, the horror of the burning and crumbling towers, the pillar of black smoke coming from the Pentagon. But the world didn't stop turning. And nothing actually changed that day.

Within weeks, the man who got into the Oval Office on a promise of a "more humble foreign policy" had launched a war without end. Except that the "War on terror(ism)" was lost before it began. U.S. policymakers have persisted in believing their own myth about the "good" terrorists (i.e. ones they could control) versus the "bad" ones (the ones that would attack America), no matter how much the terrorists themselves blurred that line, repeatedly. They even begged jihadists to like them (again)!

Eventually, the "War on Terror" became a "Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism", a term signifying precisely nothing. Instead of fighting fear and terror, the Empire unleashed them upon the world. The discrepancies between reality and fantasy were discounted through perception management. The 2006 mockumentary "Borat" was supposed to have been a comedy. But when the title character enthuses about the "war of terror", it wasn't funny. It rang true.

Seven years after that fateful Tuesday, the American public knew it wasn't really involved in a war on terrorism any more, only in the protracted and pointless occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq (a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, but was nonetheless invaded). The man who promised Hope and Change promised to end those wars. He hasn't delivered.

In May this year, the alleged mastermind behind 9/11, Osama bin Laden, was killed in Pakistan. If the official version of events is to be believed (so many lies have been told about the wars, it's hard to believe anything any more), he was taken out by Seal Team Six, a special forces unit. The question that begs to be asked is, couldn't something like that have been done in the first place, without two full-scale invasions and a bunch of proxy wars? Instead, bin Laden's alleged purpose - to bleed America dry in the sands of the Muslim world - seems to have been achieved, all right.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist (I'm more interested in conspiracy facts). Nor do I believe for a second that everything would have been just fine had America not "provoked" the jihadists, as some well-meaning folks think. Jihad isn't some benevolent ideology of spiritual self-fulfillment, but a religious commandment to perpetrate violence upon the infidel. Many people who call themselves Christians may not take the commandments of their faith very seriously. Rest assured, many Muslims do. The real error was believing that jihad could be harnessed, controlled and directed to achieve a strategic purpose. That belief was wrong in 1978, it was wrong in 2001, it is wrong now, and it will be wrong tomorrow.

It isn't quite right to say that nothing has changed since that Tuesday, ten years ago. While the government, and the thinking behind it, has remained much the same (though a different faction is in power; that ought to suggest a few things, by itself), the United States of America isn't the same country any more. I have trouble recognizing it, and I've witnessed the transformation, gradual as it was.

Whether things keep getting worse, or some day take a turn for the better, there is no going back. Panta rei.

Be Very Afraid...

A lot is being said and written today about the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing. Professional panic-mongers and witch-hunters are once again screaming about "right-wing extremists" and warning that OKC could happen again. Yet the impression I get is that this noise has less (if anything) to do with the 168 dead and 600 injured in Oklahoma City 15 years ago, and more with the efforts of the government to deflect criticism by painting those who disagree with it as lunatics and potential terrorists.

Anthony Gregory of LRC puts it into perspective:

Seventeen years ago in 1993, the federal government did in fact murder dozens of Americans who were no threat to anyone. The same government has in fact violated the rights of American citizens, rounded people into concentration camps, silenced and infiltrated politically peaceful groups, conspired against the people in numerous ways, drugged, poisoned and withheld medicine from Americans without their knowing, lied repeatedly about war and serious law enforcement matters, jailed people without due process, imposed martial law on segments of the domestic population, seized guns from law-abiding gunowners, broken down American doors and held scared children at gunpoint, planned the creation of extralegal judicial institutions to process American citizens, targeted political enemies with the IRS and other police agencies, forced Americans to labor and even kill and die under threat of imprisonment, overseen the largest prison system in the world, shoveled trillions of borrowed dollars to corrupt financial institutions and killed millions of civilians abroad – all in the lifetime of many who are still alive. The U.S. police state has in fact been growing since 9/11 and even before – and Obama has done nothing to stem its growth. On the contrary, he has continued the mix of economic fascism, imperialism, surveillance and lawless detention policy that characterized the Bush years.

Indeed, the most dangerous rightwing extremist in my lifetime was George W. Bush. Obama is following in his footsteps. That so many Americans are more frightened of rightwingers out of power than in power – more bothered by conservatives who hate Washington than those who control or want to control it – and more offended by anti-government rhetoric than the Democratic president continuing the policies they claimed to hate under Republican rule – shows how little they have learned from Waco and all that has happened since.

Read the rest of the essay at LewRockwell.com.

War and Remembrance

Arthur "Jibby" Jibilian, the last surviving member of the Halyard Mission, passed away on March 23. To his dying day, he fought for recognition of the people who helped him and his OSS colleagues rescue hundreds of Allied airmen shot down by the Nazis over what is today Serbia. They were given aid and shelter, in spite of both brutal German reprisals and Allied bombings of Serbian civilians in 1944. But this amazing escape remained secret and forgotten, because of the identity of their Serbian rescuers.

It was the royalists of Gen. Draža Mihailović who took part in the Halyard rescue. Meanwhile, however, the Western Allies switched their support to Tito and the Communists. Assisted by Soviet troops, they took power in Yugoslavia as the Nazis retreated. Mihailović was captured in 1946 and executed by the Communists for "treason." His grave is yet to be found.

In 1948, Mihailović was posthumously decorated by President Truman, for "organising and leading important resistance forces against the enemy which occupied Yugoslavia from December 1941 to December 1944". The citation stated that the royalists, "fighting under extreme hardships, contributed materially to the Allied cause and were materially instrumental in obtaining a final Allied Victory." It was never made public, though, for fears of alienating the Tito government. Meanwhile, Communist history books nurtured a narrative of Mihailović and his troops as Nazi collaborators, equating them with actual Nazi sympathizers, the Croatian Ustaša, and the Bosnian Muslim and Albanian Waffen-SS.

As Tito's Yugoslavia was torn apart in the 1990s, this rape of history went a step further: the pro-Nazi forces in 1940s Yugoslavia and their modern heirs were re-cast as "freedom fighters", while the modern-day Serbs as well as Mihailović were smeared as the actual "Nazis"! The ignorant Western public swallowed the story hook, line and sinker. One can only imagine how the few Americans that knew the truth, like Jibilian, must have felt.

In a March 30 letter to Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Mim Bizic explains the tragedy of it all:

Bill David, an Ohio pilot, was in the Boston airport when he learned of "Jibby's" passing. He wrote this in an e-mail to me: "Art and his fellow soldiers were honest-to-God real live American heroes, the kind that you would read about in comic books. Over 500 lives were saved during WWII and nobody knows about it. The guys they rescued went on to live their lives, father families, build careers, help make America great. Nobody knows of all of this.

"This is not the news of the day. We as a nation are worse off because of it. It disconnects us from our gallant values and what made us great as a country in the first place.

"Tiger Woods will take center stage for his indiscretions. That is the kind of stuff that is important to us now. Everybody knows who Tiger and Paris are, but nobody knows who Draza Mihailovich was and what he and the Serbian people did for our country, the sacrifices they made so that our boys could live."

Perhaps if Americans did know, this wouldn't have been written on the 11th anniversary of the illegal bombing of Serbia by NATO forces.

Rest in peace, "Jibby". And thank you.

KLA chic

Having more pressing and important business, I have paid little attention to the scandal over golfer celebrity Tiger Woods' adventures in blondeland. Suffice to say I was feeling somewhat sorry for the people involved, as their behavior would have hardly occasioned a reaction had it not involved a celebrity.

Until I saw a photo of alleged Tiger squeeze, Rachel Uchitel, in a National Enquirer article (spotted by one of Julia Gorin's readers), sporting atrocity headwear:



For the uninitiated, the emblem on the hat is the patch of the "Kosovo Liberation Army," the ethnic Albanian terrorist outfit that fought for "human rights and American values" by massacring Serb and Albanian civilians. Due to their usefulness to Washington's Balkans plans, they morphed from terrorists to "freedom fighters" within mere weeks, courtesy of PR agencies and a pliant press corps. In March 1999, NATO launched its first war of aggression on their behalf. When Serbia allowed NATO to occupy the Kosovo province, in June 1999, the KLA was allowed to run rampant - murdering and expelling people, pillaging and burning their possessions. Over the next eight years, it has "governed" the province, orchestrating a campaign of murder, destruction and intimidation aimed not only at the surviving non-Albanians, but at any Albanians who refused to submit. These paragons of tolerance, humanitarianism and democracy have also laid waste to some 150 Serbian Orthodox churches, chapels and monasteries, with nary a peep from Christians in the West.

But wait, there's more! Going by the same acronym was the "National Liberation Army" of Albanians in the country known by some as Macedonia. In the summer of 2001, this other KLA terrorized the Macedonian countryside until its Western sponsors could put enough pressure on the government in Skopje to surrender. Now they are guaranteed government jobs and subsidies.

Previously one could only find KLA "gear" among the ethnic Albanians in the U.S. (one of their strongest supporters - money, guns, volunteers and all). But Rachel Uchitel isn't Albanian, leastways not that I know of. I'm of the same mind here as Julia Gorin: if KLAwear has become the new street chick, joining other totalitarian brands like Che T-shirts, there ought be no more doubt whether their values are American; they clearly aren't the values of the America that exists on paper, that people still swear allegiance to, and fight for.

About the Imperial America, the one that goes forth to kill and conquer on behalf of terrorists, liars and philanderers... I'm not so sure.

Jihad at Fort Hood

The story of the murders at Fort Hood is still developing.

Base commander, Lt. Gen Bob Cone, told CBS (video) that there are "unconfirmed reports" that Major Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter, was saying "Allah Akbar" during his methodical killing spree yesterday.

Fox News spoke to Hasan's cousin, who said that Hasan wanted to get out of the Army before being deployed (whether to Iraq or Afghanistan remains unclear).

Now, mind you, this is the mainstream media. After years and years of seeing them lie about the Balkans, if they said the sky was blue I'd have to verify it myself . So far, the spin is directed at talking up the soldiers' courage under fire. The fact that Major Hasan was a disgruntled Muslim is grudgingly noted, but not really dwelt upon. Watch the CBS reporter sigh when Gen. Cone mentions "Allah Akbar," then change the subject.

Another segment of the Fox News story was intriguing to me. Here's a quote from Hasan's former colleague, retired Colonel Terry Lee:

"He said maybe Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor... At first we thought he meant help the armed forces, but apparently that wasn't the case. Other times he would make comments we shouldn't be in the war in the first place."

The very fact that Col. Lee thought that "standing up and fighting against the aggressor" could even possibly translate into "help[ing] the armed forces" reveals a disconnect from reality within the U.S. military. Was everyone in Ft. Hood oblivious to the fact that some Muslims view them as aggressors?

It boggles the mind.