There is a great deal of dishonest stupidity out there. When Trump announced the cease fire a host of voices rose up saying that Iran had won – they controlled the Straight, had Trump over a barrel and were now in a stronger position than ever. There was just one fly in the ointment here: it was nonsense.
The first requirement to control a waterway is to have a navy. Even shore positions aren’t enough. You have to be able to get out on the water and stop the traffic. Iran has no navy. They didn’t have much of one before the fight and after it they had nothing. We had spent weeks systematically destroying anything like a sea going ship. Meanwhile, we have the most powerful navy in the world and a significant portion of it is parked right off Iran. If anyone is going to control the straight, it is us. And easily.
But that didn’t stop the stupid liars – when the Mullah regime absurdly claimed it has ordered a US warship to depart and it had complied, the stupid liars were everywhere going, “see? We told you!”. Except they didn’t order anyone to do anything. They can’t. They lack the capability to seriously damage a US warship…and any attempt to do damage would mean instant death to anyone who tried. That is, opening fire on us just tells us where you are and so allows us to kill you. Fanaticism can get you a long ways but it takes fanaticism of a rare level to press a button which will result in your instant death without any real chance you’ll kill the enemy.
Aside from slick enemy propaganda, I think part of our problem here is that it has been so long since real American victory that nobody can recognize it. Take a look at this:
Thus the American people heard of Dewey’s victory in Manila Bay. If this happened in 2026, we’d have headlines saying Dewey was now doomed because the Spanish army in the Philippines was 30,000 strong and could mine the harbor yadda yadda yadda. But those who bought that paper knew we had won – we controlled the sea. Whatever the Spanish army wanted to do, it couldn’t stop us from coming ashore where and when we wanted. That was the reason Dewey was ordered to attack the Spanish fleet at Manila the instant war was declared…because that was game over for the Philippines. The only thing the Spanish could after their fleet was destroyed was kill people…but, being civilized, they didn’t do that. The Spanish authorities in the Philippines capitulated quickly. The Mullahs are barbarians and so are quite willing to keep killing even when its pointless…but that doesn’t mean we haven’t won.
The bottom line is that the Mullah regime lacks the military capacity to alter the course of events. Even if we decided to, say, take Bandar Abbas to seal our control of the Straight, there would be nothing the Mullahs can do. They can’t stop us from coming ashore and they could not eject us once we are ashore. The Iranian army is some 300,000 strong but it is already heavily degraded (lost in the shuffle was a lot of American and Israeli targeting of Iranian military vehicles and ammunition stores) and if it came out en masse and surged against American positions at Bandar Abbas it would simply be massacred. The amount of intensely coordinated firepower we’d be able to inflict on them would simply kill them all before they could even come to grips with us. The larger risk to Americans would be in the aftermath trying to clear away the bodies before they became a health hazard.
Now, it is clear that Trump prefers not to commit US ground forces in Iran. I don’t want us to, either. And I do want this thing wrapped up quickly. Trump wants a deal – but if the Mullah regime is really that stupidly insane they won’t take a deal, then they’ll be swiftly destroyed. This is not going to be winning the war – that is already won. This will just be getting rid of idiots who won’t admit they’re beaten. Had to do it with Japan and Germany in WWII. They were decisively defeated by late 1943. Any sane person would have called it quits by then and taken the best deal possible from the victors…but they kept at it until we were forced to reduce both nations to junk heaps. So be it. Their choice. What they wanted. If the Mullahs want that, they’ll be obliged.
Blogs For Victory 
There is a great deal of dishonest stupidity out there. When Trump announced the cease fire a host of voices rose up saying that Iran had won – they controlled the Straight, had Trump over a barrel and were now in a stronger position than ever. There was just one fly in the ointment here: it was nonsense.
That’s been the case with almost everything Trump, particularly in his second term. Lefties say something about (fill in the blank), and either it is already a lie, or is proved to by not true in short order. It’s actually kind of entertaining. Reminds me of old Roadrunner cartoons.
“We will not tolerate a king!” / “We hate Trump because he will not control gas and grocery prices and give us health care!”
And they don’t see the conflict.
And they don’t see the conflict.
To be fair, that vast majority of them are not very bright.
They are so totally controlled by random emotion that there is no linear connection between one “thought” and another.
I’d love to see real interviews, one on one, with some of these “protestors” where simple legitimate questions are asked, to see what kind of answers might surface—if any.
1.) “Do you think it is legitimate for the United States to have laws about who can come into the country?”
2.) “If there is a law you don’t agree with, what do you think should be done about it? (Just break the law, or get it changed—protecting democracy, blah blah blah)
3.) “Do you consider what you are doing here as rebelling against laws you don’t like?”
4.) “Do you know that there is a federal law against rebelling against the authority of the United States and its laws, and that people found guilty of violating this law are felons with possible prison time in addition to fines?”
I think we probably agree that any such interview, once it got to or past #3, would disintegrate into “Trump is Hitler…ICE is the Gestapo…We don’t want kings…The price of gas/food/health care…Fascist…34 felonies” and so on, but I think it is time to start informing these people that while they are howling about the interpretation of accounting entries as felonies they, themselves, are unindicted and often violent felons merely temporarily avoiding arrest and trial.
1.) “Do you think it is legitimate for the United States to have laws about who can come into the country?”
Yes
2.) “If there is a law you don’t agree with, what do you think should be done about it? (Just break the law, or get it changed—protecting democracy, blah blah blah)
Change the law. Part of the process for doing so is peaceful protest.
3.) “Do you consider what you are doing here as rebelling against laws you don’t like?”
No. Peaceful protest isn’t the same as rebelling. It is also protected by the 1st Amendment.
4.) “Do you know that there is a federal law against rebelling against the authority of the United States and its laws, and that people found guilty of violating this law are felons with possible prison time in addition to fines?
Yes.
“Part of the process for doing so is peaceful protest.”
Stomping around and emoting has nothing to do with changing laws. It is merely virtue signaling and posturing as commitment to an allegedly moral “cause”.
“Peaceful protest isn’t the same as rebelling. It is also protected by the 1st Amendment.”
But you and I both know, even as you coyly try to pretend I am talking about “peaceful protest”, I refer to the physical interference with law enforcement officers and the efforts to prevent enforcement of our laws. Don’t act stupid as if you truly believe I am talking about verbal expressions of disagreement.
I have even cited the relevant statute and quoted from it:
18 U.S. Code § 2383 – Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
So quit tucking your chins into a pretense of misunderstanding and trying to pretend you actually think I was talking about posturing and screeching and sign-waving. It’s this kind of smirky effort at gamesmanship that makes you so annoying and unwelcome here.
I have also cited this federal law:
18 USC 111: Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees
In general, “whoever forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties…shall, where the acts in violation of this section constitute only simple assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and where such acts involve physical contact with the victim of that assault or the intent to commit another felony, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.”
(b) Enhanced Penalty.-Whoever, in the commission of any acts described in subsection (a), uses a deadly or dangerous weapon (including a weapon intended to cause death or danger but that fails to do so by reason of a defective component) or inflicts bodily injury, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”
I even included a definition of simple assault: “…a person is guilty of assault if he:
(1) attempts to cause or intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to another;
(2) negligently causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon;
(3) attempts by physical menace to put another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury.”
…………..
“Simple assault is generally defined as either an attempt to commit battery or an intentional act that places another person in reasonable fear of immediate bodily harm. Physical contact is not required for the charge to be valid; the focus is on the defendant’s conduct creating apprehension of harm in the victim.
A person who raises a fist, makes a threatening gesture, or moves menacingly toward another can be charged with simple assault, even if they are stopped before making contact. “
I’ve gone through these definitions before, but that didn’t seem to impress you enough with facts to deter you from another simpering effort to appear relevant. Another failed effort, I note.
“Stomping around and emoting has nothing to do with changing laws. It is merely virtue signaling and posturing as commitment to an allegedly moral “cause”.”
The women’a suffrage movement and the Civll Rights movement, along with numerous other movements all begin with peaceful protests.
“But you and I both know, even as you coyly try to pretend I am talking about “peaceful protest”, I refer to the physical interference with law enforcement officers and the efforts to prevent enforcement of our laws. Don’t act stupid as if you truly believe I am talking about verbal expressions of disagreement”
Citizens have the right to observe and record LEOs in the performance of their duties. They also have the right to protest said officers as long as they are not directly interfering with the performance of their duties. None of that is considered “rebellion” under the law. That said, if the LEO thinks that a citizen is interfering with their duties he can have the person arrested, after which point the courts decide if the law has actually been broken. So far, the courts have sided with the protestors far more often than the LEOs. It should also be mentioned that ICE agents do not have jurisdiction over American Citizens, so any arrests made would have to be done by other LEOs.
“The women’s suffrage movement and the Civil Rights movement, along with numerous other movements all begin with peaceful protests.” And what is the biggest difference between these efforts and the mob violence we see today? These people were not just being oppositional. They had a coherent goal, a clear idea of what they wanted to see accomplished. It may have been women’s voting rights, it may have been equal rights for all races, but they had principled ideas and sought to bring them to the attention of the American public. And they were not violently attacking law enforcement officers trying to enforce laws.
And they were pointing out real, legitimate, problems, not just invented stories designed to inflame emotions: Rights of women, rights of minorities. These thugs and anarchists today are not doing this. They do not come to the public with ideas for improvement of a system they find unacceptable. They do not suggest laws they might find more tolerable. They do not appeal to legislators for changes. Some lapdog legislators try, every now and then, to come up with some legislation that denies the ability of the government to act in defense of a sovereign nation, but the mobs just act like savages.
No, they are merely violent thugs, engaging in violent street theater, emoting toxic and hate-driven sludge.
What ARE they “protesting”? If there is a properly legislated law, and a properly legislated mechanism for enforcing it, and a legally and properly appointed agency assigned the duty and responsibility to enforce it, what is the basis for objecting to this? For “protesting” the legal enforcement of laws? Well, there is the hysteria built up on lies, for the most part, just engaging in hysterical opposition to invented offenses. Every shrill claim of some offense by an ICE agent has quickly been proved to be a lie, but you and your fellow travelers just shrug this off and line up to be fed the next one. This is because none of you CARES that these are lies. None of you have the personal dignity to be offended by being manipulated by lies, getting too much pleasure from the taste of the lies to care about being treated like stupid little meat puppets, easily directed here and there and fed narratives trying to sanitize felonious activities. They are purely oppositional, acting solely to obstruct legitimate law enforcement in a way designed to incite the feeble-minded and hate-driven Identity Politics mobs slavering over invented offenses, with the clear agenda of undermining the authority of a legally elected president and his administration. (While squealing passion for “defending democracy” as they try to dismantle it.) It is totally, 100%, political, and often veers very close to actual insurrection—that is, the often violent overthrow of a government or its authority and assumption of its powers.
You say “They also have the right to protest said officers”. What the hell does that mean? They are protesting PEOPLE. That makes no sense. “as long as they are not directly interfering with the performance of their duties” although we see them actively, violently, repeatedly directly interfering with that ability to “perform their duties”. You claim “None of that is considered “rebellion” under the law” as if you have the slightest credibility in determining what is and what is not legally considered rebellion against the authority of the government, or its laws thereof. Only the fuzziest of thought processes could see screaming threatening mobs blocking the enforcement of laws and claim this does not show rebellion against those laws or the authority of the government that properly legislated them.
Please do not insult us by coyly pretending you are not aware of this—-the blocking of access to buildings, the hiding of criminals, the disabling of vehicles, the swarming by dozens of people screaming insults and threats and blowing whistles into officers’ ears and using lasers to try to blind them. Don’t try to play that silly game. You have repeatedly been removed from this blog when your inane mindless silliness gets too tiresome, and ceaseless parroting of stupidity is a shortcut to that happening again.
June 15, 2025
“Four police officers were injured Saturday night during a violent riot at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland, Oregon. A mob threw fireworks, rocks, and smoke grenades at law enforcement, smashed windows and forced their way into the building, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed.
Authorities were able to regain control, but the incident marks a new escalation of violence against officers. Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin denounced that aggressions against officers have increased by 413% and warned that “we won’t sit idly by and watch these cowards.”
……………….
Peaceful? A “protest”?
……………….
August 23, 2025
“A mob of up to 20 anti-ICE protesters swarmed and attacked immigration agents outside a San Francisco courthouse on Wednesday, with one keffiyeh-clad agitator allegedly armed with a knife threatening to stab an officer and go after his family, officials said.
Adrian Guerrero, a U.S. citizen, slashed the tire of a government vehicle during the clash at the immigration courthouse at 100 Montgomery Street, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The incident unfolded as ICE agents carried out a removal operation, when protesters surrounded them and physically assaulted four officers, throwing punches and deploying pepper spray.” (What a sane person would call “interfering” with law enforcement officers in the course of their execution of their duties.)
……………
And so on. While the fatuous silly-boy parrots Leftist narratives about women’s suffrage and pathetically tries gaslighting us—“no, you’re not seeing violence, you’re not seeing physical intimidation, there is no interference, it’s all peaceful and a joyful celebration of constitutional rights…”
It took one Google search to come up with these examples of violent attacks and assorted felonies, with whole lists of examples left unexamined. And the fact remains, casper and his fellow travelers support and enable violent felons committing violent felonies and rebelling against the authority of our government and its laws thereof, while clutching pearls about “felonies” based on misstating of accounting records and bleating about “defending democracy”. These people are incapable of shame. Stupidity accounts for a lot of it, but underneath the stupid is a deep vein of character rot.
“It took one Google search to come up with these examples of violent attacks and assorted felonies, with whole lists of examples left unexamined.”
Found this and dozens of articles doing the search “ice attacks on citizens”.
In early 2026, reports indicate an escalation in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, resulting in the detention of U.S. citizens and fatal encounters, particularly in Minnesota. Incidents include fatal shootings of citizens, the use of physical force, and accusations of aggressive tactics against protesters and bystanders.
American Immigration Council +4
Key 2026 Incidents and Accusations:
Surveillance: Reports indicate expanded surveillance of U.S. citizens and activists.
Fatal Shootings: In January 2026, ICE agents in Minneapolis shot and killed two U.S. citizens, Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, in separate incidents.
Detention of Citizens: Reports show that over 170 U.S. citizens have been wrongly held by immigration agents.
Escalated Tactics: Agents have been accused of using excessive force, including banned chokeholds, and conducting raids that involve surrounding citizens and searching vehicles.
Here is the thing. If you don’t want ICE protests, then perhaps you should ask ICE to behave as a proper law Enforcement agency. Require more and better training, body cams, search warrants when entering a vehicle or building, stop attacking unarmed citizens, etc. Until the happens you are defending a group of armed, poorly trained thugs who are going into American neighborhoods and attacking American citizens.
You Googled and got lies – which is what Google provides.
Casper is the living, breathing, waddling poster boy of GIGO and an eager partaker of manufactured outrage
Aww, looky here—casper is once again obediently parroting the narratives fed to him by his masters, in hopes he can continue using this blog as a platform for regurgitating their lies and distortions.
I see that he has depended on AI to put together a boilerplate summary. But look at what it says:
” In early 2026, reports indicate an escalation in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, resulting in the detention of U.S. citizens and fatal encounters, particularly in Minnesota. Incidents include fatal shootings of citizens, the use of physical force, and accusations of aggressive tactics against protesters and bystanders.” OK, passive voice of “reports indicate” followed by a fact (escalation of of ICE operations), a purposeful deception (“detention of U.S. citizens”, which when they have occurred have been accidental and immediately corrected, occurring when citizens were among illegal aliens being detained); “fatal encounters” (initiated by mob participants in their violent attacks on ICE officials). Then there is the deception, the comment that “citizens” (plural) have been fatally shot (that passive voice again) when the citizens who were fatally shot were only shot after threatening the lives of law enforcement officers, one after producing a gun in a struggle with officers (a proven way to get shot, BTW) after arming himself before attending a “peaceful protest” and one after purposely aligning her vehicle with the body of a law enforcement officer and then accelerating, striking him with the car. The salient points of the two shootings somehow managed to be eliminated in the narrative.
Then we get to “the use of physical force, and accusations of aggressive tactics against protesters and bystanders”. Hmmm. Well, when mobs physically attack officers as they attempt to detain criminals, it is beyond hypocrisy to then whine about the occurrence of “physical force”. OK, not beyond the hypocrisy of the Left, but sane people understand that when people initiate physical force they really do lose an argument based on whining about it. “aggressive tactics against protesters” needs to be edited to read “aggressive tactics against violent rioters who have initiated physical contact and violence against law enforcement officers” and as for the claim that some “bystanders” have been on the receiving end of “aggressive tactics” that is just tossed in for emphasis of the trope.
What else was in your script? Well, let’s take a look.
“Reports indicate expanded surveillance of U.S. citizens and activists.” Passive voice of “reports indicate”—a reliable indicator of propaganda. “expanded surveillance”-–expanded from what, to what, according to which real, documented, reports. “surveillance of U.S. citizens and activists” This bothers you? Keeping an eye on violent conspirators and instigators of riots and efforts to undermine the laws of the land? People who actually DO incite violence, engage in violence, plot violence, post messages about killing law enforcement officers, post messages about seeking out and killing the families of law enforcement officers, people who by their words and deeds pose a threat to the safety of the public, should not be under surveillance? (Not like parents who object to schools grooming their children, or Catholics, for example. Or Trump supporters.)
Detention of Citizens: Reports show that over 170 U.S. citizens have been wrongly held by immigration agents. For how long, and under what circumstances? Getting past that passive voice again (“reports show”) this is purposely vague, as well as editorial (“wrongly” held).
Escalated Tactics: Agents have been accused (passive voice again—“have been accused”. By whom? When? Where?) of using excessive force, including banned chokeholds, and conducting raids that involve surrounding citizens and searching vehicles. Surely even you understand the insanity of this complaint. It’s like whining on steroids, amplified. A “raid” to pick up a criminal already under a legal, judicial, warrant for detainment and deportation, might involve people in the building or nearby vehicles. And maybe, possibly, one or more of those nearby people could be a citizen. Oh, the horror!
I often refer to you as silly, and this litany that you seem to find so compelling is a study in silliness. It is shallow, uninformative, vague, cluttered with passive-voiced implications but lacking in detail or depth. But you don’t settle for just parroting meaningless jibber-jabber–you try to fill it out with your “ideas”.
“If you don’t want ICE protests, then perhaps you should ask ICE to behave as a proper law Enforcement agency.” So now you are an expert on what constitutes a ‘proper law Enforcement agency”? You whine: “Require more and better training”—as opposed to what? What is the level of training these officers receive? What is the nature of that training? You don’t know, and neither do your fellow screechers and howlers. You just make shit up.
“search warrants when entering a vehicle or building”-—a judicial warrant for the arrest, detainment and deportation of a criminal is already in place. What would be the justification for demanding that if a warrant is in place for John Doe at a certain address that warrant has to include the physical description of every nearby apartment, building or vehicle? And for what purpose? And since when does the mob get to rewrite the law and impose its own rules?
And why? John Doe has entered the country illegally, been deported, and reentered, several times. He has been convicted of crimes, with due process. He is evading enforcement of properly executed judicial warrants for his arrest, detainment and deportation. What is the reasoning behind interfering with the process of enforcing those laws and those warrants? When “citizens” physically attack the officers trying to enforce those warrants, what is the argument against their efforts to defend themselves? Why are they supposed to be denied the same basic right to self defense that those “citizens” have?
We all know this is all BS. Your efforts to justify the rebellion against the authority of the United States and its laws thereof, your defense of criminal actions by trying to reframe them as mere peaceable protest (though not of actual laws, just against false claims of actions attributed to the Target Of The Day) your highly edited versions of events that fall under the definition of “lies” all lead us to the inevitable outburst of your real position: That is, the excretion of a foul and odorous deposit of hate, dishonesty, slander and libel, all based on your blind tribal allegiance and identity “Politics”. This disgusting conclusion of yours, attacking the integrity and courage and dedication of real Americans who care about law and justice, is exactly what we have always known lies just under the pudgy surface of your pretense of decency.
Every word of your screeds is dishonest to some extent, on some level, but this is the worst: when you describe law enforcement officers as “a group of armed, poorly trained thugs who are going into American neighborhoods and attacking American citizens” you hit a new low, even for you.
And you smugly try to assume the Higher Moral Ground by claiming I am defending the indefensible, while you come here and defend violators of several federal laws, including 18 U.S. Code § 2383 – Rebellion or insurrection, 8 U.S. Code § 1324 – Bringing in and harboring certain aliens, 18 U.S.C. § 2101 – U.S. Code – Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 2101. Riots and § 423.22 Interference with agency functions and disorderly conduct among others. Worse, you do this in the pretense of “defending democracy”, posturing as someone who respects the law. Someone not familiar with your slimy history might give you the benefit of the doubt and think you are just gullible and lacking in the mental ability to properly analyze information, but we know better. This is not just an intelligence defect, it goes to the core of your character.
Thank you for acting so swiftly to illustrate why you have been removed from this blog so many times
Accused liar claimed she was detained by ICE for two days — but was actually at hotel getting spa treatments:
An investigation is underway into who is funding anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) riots disrupting Los Angeles and other major U.S. cities after a major company revealed it had received requests for help.
Crowds on Demand, a California-based company that specializes in providing on-demand crowds for protests, told Fox News Digital it received “numerous high budget requests” to get involved with the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles and other cities but declined to participate.
………………..
One of the organizations called into questioning by Hawley and Republican California Rep. Kevin Kiley is the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, an advocacy group believed to be at the center of the anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles.
“Who is funding the LA riots? This violence isn’t spontaneous. As chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime & Terrorism, I’m launching an investigation to find out,” Hawley posted in a statement on X.
FBI WILL INVESTIGATE ‘ANY EVIDENCE OF A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY’ IN LA RIOTS
Hawley’s letter noted that “credible reporting” has indicated the organization has provided “logistical support and financial resources to individuals engaged in these disruptive actions,” referring to the Los Angeles riots.
“Let me be clear: bankrolling civil unrest is not protected speech. It is aiding and abetting criminal conduct. Accordingly, you must immediately cease and desist any further involvement in the organization, funding or promotion of these unlawful activities,” Hawley wrote.
Kiley also questioned who was behind the funding for the rioters and suggested that California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s motive may be a conflict of interest.
“The ‘nonprofit’ behind the LA riots donated almost $500,000 to support Newsom’s campaign. It then received $34 million in state funding. I’m sure this is all a coincidence,” Kiley wrote in a post on X.
re: the whine about ““Reports indicate expanded surveillance of U.S. citizens and activists.”
Evidently SOME surveillance by the feds is OK, at least to the radical Left. Never heard casper bleating about this:
“The Biden DOJ closely collaborated with pro-abortion groups to track pro-life activists’ First Amendment activity. Pro-abortion groups—especially the National Abortion Federation, Planned Parenthood, and Feminist Majority Foundation—capitalized on their relationship with the Biden DOJ to gain internal information and push targets for enforcement. These groups compiled evidence and dossiers that ultimately gave rise to search warrants and charges.
The Biden DOJ affirmatively asked pro-abortion groups about pro-life individuals’ travel and constitutionally protected advocacy. The Biden DOJ and career attorneys monitored pro-life activists for years before charging them.
Prosecutors knowingly withheld evidence that defense counsel requested to prepare an affirmative defense, tried to screen out jurors based on religion, and authorized aggressive arrest tactics instead of allowing pro-life defendants to self-surrender.
This in spite of the fact that “If you’ve ever seen a pro-life protest, one thing that will stand out for you is the contrast between pro-life demonstrators and nearly every other protest group in America in terms of the level of peacefulness they exhibit. They are the poster children of the “peaceful protest.”
And they are hardly children. Just based on my own observations, nothing scientific, it would seem that at least half are well into their retirement years and are about as harmless as protestors can be.”
“They do not come to the public with ideas for improvement of a system they find unacceptable. They do not suggest laws they might find more tolerable. They do not appeal to legislators for changes.”
There are a number of ideas that have been put forth. Require ICE agents to follow Due Process when arresting and detaining suspects as required by the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments. Require agents to unmask, carry body cams, and show show visible ID like every other major police force in this country to start.
“If there is a properly legislated law, and a properly legislated mechanism for enforcing it, and a legally and properly appointed agency assigned the duty and responsibility to enforce it, what is the basis for objecting to this?”
Slavery, Jim Crow laws, and not allowing women to vote also were properly legislated law.
“You say “They also have the right to protest said officers”. What the hell does that mean? They are protesting PEOPLE.”
They are protesting the actions of the LEOs as they continue to detain and arrest people without proper cause or warrants.
“You claim “None of that is considered “rebellion” under the law” as if you have the slightest credibility in determining what is and what is not legally considered rebellion against the authority of the government, or its laws thereof.”
I would guess that more Americans would consider me more credible in this case than you.
“No, they are merely violent thugs, engaging in violent street theater, emoting toxic and hate-driven sludge.”
And yet, no ICE agents have identified during these protests while at least 8 people have died while dealing with ICE in2026.
“Please do not insult us by coyly pretending you are not aware of this—-the blocking of access to buildings, the hiding of criminals, the disabling of vehicles, the swarming by dozens of people screaming insults and threats and blowing whistles into officers’ ears and using lasers to try to blind them.”
I am quite aware that citizens when defending their neighbors and neighborhoods have used some questionable tactics. I’m not so sure I wouldn’t respond the same way if my neighborhood was invaded by masked and armed thugs.
Remember when I said casper was playing the same silly game he always plays, posturing as being serious about discourse but just trying to get his weaselly nose under the blog tent so he could then flood it with spurious Leftist propaganda? He is so predictable, and of course, here he is, right on schedule. So let’s go to the tape…
I point out that “They do not appeal to legislators for changes.” The response does not disagree with this, just veers off into “ideas that have been put forth” by radicals and the mob: (Note the passive voice—“have been put forth”. Always signals of propaganda.)
“Require ICE agents to follow Due Process when arresting and detaining suspects as required by the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments.” Yet the penalties for illegal entry and residence are statutory. The physical presence here is de facto proof of guilt and the hysteria is about detaining people who already have legal detainment orders from courts. You are doing what your kind always does, just spouting slogans with no understanding of what they mean.
Require agents to unmask. This is rich. The only reason agents sometimes wear masks is because if they are identified by the mobs their families are threatened with death. The blatant hypocrisy of squealing about masks just illustrates the core depravity of those attacking ICE. If the “protesters” were decent human beings focused merely on peacefully presenting their belief that it is wrong to enforce the law, masks would not be necessary to protect innocent families, including children, from retribution.
carry body cams Some do. Yet the video records of reasonable actions and legal detainment are still distorted and do nothing to slow the lies and slanders.
show visible ID See the comment on the vicious depravity of people who threaten the lives of families, including children, in efforts to intimidate law enforcement officers.
“Slavery, Jim Crow laws, and not allowing women to vote also were properly legislated law.” Well, here you go again, just as you used to claim that anyone supporting the Constitution as it was written wanted to reinstate slavery and deny women the vote. People get to be stupid, but flaunting stupidity is just annoying. Yes, in the past there were social constructs that were either enshrined in laws or simply accepted. So–what does this have to do with the current efforts to mount a coup on this administration by using mobs to flout laws and attack law enforcement officials? Objections to slavery were objections to the legal ownership of human beings and forcing them into servitude—a clear-cut issue with a specific solution. Objections to Jim Crow laws were objections to limiting access to voting to people with certain levels of education—a clear-cut issue with a specific solution. Objections to the inability of women to vote were based on a simple fact, an issue with a clear-cut specific solution. This pious list of former problems is presented in an effort to sanctify mob rule and violence and anarchy, by pretending that the attacks on our rule of law and those defending and enforcing it are somehow similar and therefore moral and reasonable.
What is the objection to enforcing federal laws, and what is the suggested solution? We can say yeah, people shouldn’t own people and people should be able to vote (including women) so what is the message of the rioters? That we shouldn’t enforce laws because we are all big mad at the current administration? Because if you ever allow even the tiniest hint of honesty into your fever swamp of regurgitated Leftist cant you have to admit that this is all just an effort to generate chaos, fury, hate and social instability as part of anti-Trump efforts by the rabid radical Left.**
“I am quite aware that citizens when defending their neighbors and neighborhoods have used some questionable tactics.” I’m sure you used this same defense of Trump supporters when they “used some questionable tactics” in defense of the integrity of our electoral process. You just defined the violent and vicious attacks on human beings (ICE officers) and federal buildings as mere “questionable tactics”. Thank you for a little transparency here, finally, as once the pious platitudes and simpering efforts to conflate serious and principled rejection of actual wrongs with simple mob violence and anarchy.
And thanks for proving my point, which is that all you want to do is pretend to be serious long enough to use this blog as a platform for your Leftist anti-American narratives.
** It is obvious that the true underlying agenda of the riots and attacks on ICE are really just efforts to create the image of a divided, dystopian nation in crisis and chaos due to the election of Donald Trump and his administration as president.
The goal is to convince people who have abandoned actual thought and who are controlled by their attraction to negativity and hate and by blind emotion and profoundly subject to emotional manipulation that the United States, under President Trump, is an ugly, dangerous, violent nation in which “armed, poorly trained thugs … are going into American neighborhoods and attacking American citizens”. It is fear-mongering on a national level, designed to create the illusion of a chaotic and terrifying nation run by a maniacal despot and his armed storm troopers–setting up the eventual claim that electing Democrats will return the country to sweetness and light, a place where kindness and love and tolerance rule and big mean baddies are only a bad memory, never to be resurrected by voting for another Republican.
The riots have nothing to do with immigration, or even of defense of criminals and protecting them from the legal consequences of their crimes. These are the veneers applied to a massive psy-ops operation designed to scare an entire nation into a state of panic. And the recruits into this malignant movement are, surprisingly, not the “lower classes” of uncredentialed economically suffering demographics, the support system of the nation: The house cleaners, truck drivers, electricians, farmers and ranchers, house painters, etc. who are not so susceptible to the wooing of the Left with its lies. No, these classes for the most part see through the BS and manipulation and lies, because they live in the real world. It is the credentialed class, the people smug in the conviction that pieces of paper naming them as “educated” mean they are smarter and therefore more qualified to make decisions for the nation, who are contributing with such eagerness to its downfall.
The Left always depended on stirring up conflicts based on class warfare, generating support from the working class against the wealthy. Now it looks like that class warfare thing is being turned on its head, as Democrats control well over half of the wealth of the nation, and the proletariat are rebelling against the self-defined aristocrats and their smug arrogance and hypocrisy as they impose their will on the nation while bleating about “democracy”.
I have read that the mullahs had a plan in place where if the top command structure were ever lost, there’s a contingency plan where who’s ever left would separate into 31 different sub-structures, acting independently. The Iranian government has no real power to do anything even though they try to act like they’re negotiating for all of Iran. They can claim a cease fire but the remaining mullahs and IRGC do not submit to that government and it appears, have no intention of submitting to the terms Trump put forth. The current sporadic & haphazard missile and drone strikes are a clear sign that the contingency plan is in effect and a strong indication of their lack of ability to do anything on a scale that will make any major difference. Their ability to do anything except create localized problems is largely diminished, but still with the ability to cause some damage.
Secondly, it seems Japan has recently come out with new, highly effective anti-drone technology that they are supplying to Ukraine in a joint deal to counter Russia’s current drones. I heard there are talks of the US using that technology against Iran, further reducing their ability to strike. The US navy is currently inside the Hormuz straight clearing mines. At the same time Trump is talking about a blockade of the straight, further hampering China and India’s desperate need of crude oil. This tactic would place additional burden on Iran both financially through the loss of oil sales and through whatever diplomatic stress China might place on Iran.
I suspect any boots on the ground would be highly specific, perhaps in part to help with the revolution and / or installing a new power.
Jeff Childers covers a lot ground here, from (properly) chastising Trump for a poorly thought-out effort at satire or humor (or something) to an observation of Pope Leo being equally (though quite differently) off-base.
I haven’t looked up the post in question, nor do I intend to. I have always admitted that Trump can do some very stupid things, though I have also been glad they seem to be related to his personality and not extending to statecraft or the execution of his duties as President and Commander In Chief. If it were not for his well-known refusal to drink alcohol, this blunder might be an example of drunk-posting but no, it was just dumb.
I cite this Childers post because of its reference to Leo doing his own version of stupid public commentary, and suggest that bad taste from a president about something unrelated to his job is far less significant than the Pope’s veering out of his proper lane as spiritual leader into an effort to be relevant in world politics.
At this point, there is virtually nothing that Trump could do to the “elites” that would upset me, including this. Global leftists and elites have attacked and disparaged Trump in every possible way and continue to do so. American leftists and elites have tried to kill him, impoverish him, and imprison him. I think Trump is remarkably restrained. I wouldn’t be as nice as Trump, if I were in his shoes.
It was in pretty poor taste and checking his Truth Social feed, the offending picture does appear to have been deleted. I suspect Melania woke up this morning and said some version of “Donald, are you f-ing nuts?” and so got him to retract. Trump is, of course, always over the top and never lets an attack go unanswered so nobody should be acting all “get me the smelling salts” on this.
That said, we do note the timing – right after Axelrod’s audience with the Pope – Obama’s hatchet man meets the Pope and then we’re getting the Pope criticizing in very unfair terms our efforts against the Mullah regime along with a glowing interview on 60 Minutes of American prelates who condemn deportations. I mean, I get that the Pope wants peace and the Church has been rigorously against war for quite a long time now – you can even go back to 1917 and see the Pope’s appeal for peace on this. But, then again, you should go back to that statement which, in a lot of was, really started the ball rolling on making the Church explicitly anti-war or any sort. What did the Pope say then? Boiled down: “the warring parties should sit down and talk it out”. Which seems reasonable…but France was supposed to just sit down and ask the Germans nicely to leave? The Germans had invaded France out of the blue with no cause whatsoever…already France had lost nearly a million men trying to eject them…on the Central Powers side, Austria was supposed to just let pass the fact that their treaty ally, Italy, had attacked them out of the blue in 1915?
Sure, talking it out is great…but there must also be repentance and reparation. Those who have done wrong must admit it and pay for it. This is basic Catholicism…if a murderer confesses his murder to a priest, that priest is supposed to tell the man – after providing absolution – to go to the police and confess the crime to them…to make reparation for the sin. Not just “hey, no problem – too bad that person is dead, you’re forgiven and now go have a great life”.
What the Church has lost sight of is the fact it does take two to tango – both to make war and to make peace. To place all the blame on Trump for the recent events is downright asinine…and to say that dialogue is the only way to go when the other side is shouting “death to America” is entirely unrealistic. There were 47 years of events which lead up to Trump giving the order to go…and until “death to America” is abandoned, no real peace is possible no matter how much we talk and sign papers.
I don’t know why the Church is anti war.
God is not anti war.
I am anti war, but pro annihilation, and that’s the only way a war should be fought. Rapidly and decisively.
Aside from a general brief to not have war, the Church understands that in any war, it is those who have the least (money, power, etc) who suffer the most. But in my view the Church has gotten pretty far away from understanding what, exactly, constitutes a Just War. To be sure, the Catechism is very clear on it. Anyone can read it – from Pope to random guy commenting on X. To me, the crucial aspect is this:
Essentially, the people in charge of the government – instructed by Church teaching – are ultimately the ones who have to decide if going to war is just. And then, of course, conduct that war in line with Church teaching (no crimes that are crimes no matter the conditions, care for POWs and wounded, etc). The big stands the Church takes on it are that war must be the last resort, and the conduct must be proportional to the needs of the effort. That is, you can only go to war when you have no other real choice and what you do to win the war must be just enough to win…no gratuitous violence thrown in for spite. To this, all sane people can only respond, “of course”.
The argument is over what constitutes “last resort” and “proportional response”. In practice, the Church has gone to the position of, essentially, “the bomb is about to hit” before you can respond and the only proportional response is to stop that particular bomb from hitting you. This, I think, is a mistake – a misapplication of correct morality.
Last resort isn’t an in extremis thing – it can’t be. It would be suicidal to take that view and apply it. It would mean the only time I can try to stop a madman from launching a nuclear missile at me is after he’s launched it. This could mean millions of deaths. No; last resort is the point where I’ve exhausted all reasonable means of getting my adversary to cease threatening me. We can talk, talk, talk all we want and offer up all manner of formulas for peace…but if the man threatening to kill me (“death to America!”) won’t give up his nuclear program (which can kill me) then my point of action is any time after it becomes clear my adversary will not give up “death to America” and building a nuke. I am then ok with striking – and not just narrowly at the nuclear facilities, but at any facet of enemy power which assists in building that nuke to carry out “death to America”. As long as my goal is to end the threat, I’m on firm moral ground – if my goal ever switches to things like conquest and mere death, then I get into the wrong.
In practice, the Church has gone to the position of, essentially, “the bomb is about to hit” before you can respond and the only proportional response is to stop that particular bomb from hitting you. This, I think, is a mistake – a misapplication of correct morality.
It’s political. It’s bending to popular opinion rather than standing firm in Faith and protection. We must protect Western civilization and Christian principles with every fiber of our being, or we are abdicating our roles as Christians. Back in 1987, Trump said that Iran should be taken out and he was right.
Honestly? It is because too many Church leaders watched videos of the aftermath of Dresden and Hiroshima. To be fair, they were horrific events which nobody wants repeated…but as per usual, when you take things out of context, you usually run into error.
If you want to start a fight on X, just say this: “the Axis killed 75% of all people who died in WWII and the overwhelming majority of the dead were unarmed people. They kept on killing them right up to the end and they kept fighting us long after it was clear they had lost. The only way to curtail the killing of innocents was to destroy the Axis as fast as possible. If we hadn’t used Strategic Bombing – including Dresden and Hiroshima – then the war would have gone on years longer than it did, costing far more totally innocent lives than the bombings killed, like by a factor of ten. Strategic Bombing was, then, not just a valid choice, it was the morally correct choice.”
It is because too many Church leaders watched videos of the aftermath of Dresden and Hiroshima
I disagree. If they were so horrified by the aftermath of WWII battles, did they hope the evilness of Hitler succeeded? And if the Church lost sight of the fact it takes two to tango, then what else have they lost sight of?
Jesus is not a pacifist, and when He came here, He didn’t come here to unite us. He came to divide us. Too divide us from sin. The Old Testament is all about confrontation, and attacking righteousness or appeasing evil to accommodate peace … is not what the Church should be doing.
I also just read that in October of 2025, the Vatican has dedicated a space for Muslim scholars. So the Vatican has now opened their doors to evil.
The manner in which Trump deployed our military, and the manner in which our military fought, makes me question every previous Presidents intention and commitment to this country. “Rules of engagement” are simply recipes to lose, and are only the rules of weak men. Our military exists to kill things and break things and as quickly as possible … and in that, they succeeded.
Sen. Blumenthal (a seriously weak man) was crying over the weekend that Congress must be involved in the decisions, to which I was hoping some reporter would ask “Why”? Congress and career politicians are the very reason why we are in this mess. Remember when they decided giving Iran billions of dollars would help?? I do … and that is the reason why they are not involved now.
I think is far past time to start publicly, and mercilessly, pointing out the Constitutional illiteracy of the Dem members of Congress.
Blumenthal claimed, on several occasions, that he served in the Vietnam War when he was a Marine reservist who never left U.S. soil. He has just skimmed over this with a couple of generic “apologies” so it’s time to bring it up again, and link it to his evident ignorance of the Constitution, particularly the duties and authority of the Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces.
I would not only go after his ignorance, but his qualifications to serve even a Democrat constituency given his history of both dishonesty and lack of knowledge of the Constitution he has sworn to defend.
And every single time any Democrat starts in with the howling and screeching about alleged violations of laws I think he or she should immediately be held up as an illustration of a toxic combination of ignorance, stupidity and dishonesty. And in so doing, indict every person who has voted for this person in the past or might vote for him or her in the future.
We need a loud and coherent and consistent message; VOTING IS SERIOUS! It is not, or at least should not be, just a frivolous personality contest, just a way to express emotion-based dislike of a party or person. It is the civic duty of every voter to make a serious, thoughtful decision about who to send to Congress, because these people have the reins of government in their hands. It is a duty of every citizen to do as much as possible to place serious, competent, knowledgeable people in these positions of authority and power, not just rubber-stamp people with political connections or the right tribal membership. (And yes, this is true of Republicans as well, though I think the purposeful lies about the Constitution and the law are concentrated mostly on the Left, with Republicans just tending to support the status quo.)
How can you, if you are a serious voter and concerned citizen, vote for a man who has lied about his military service, who consistently illustrates his ignorance of our own Constitution and rule of law, and whose pattern of lying extends into his dishonest portrayal of people just to gain personal and political power?
We need to ask these questions, and back them up with examples of the lies and distortions and ignorance.
When I ran across this quotation from a Theodore Roosevelt speech it made me think he could have been talking about Trump:
“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”
That’s a great Roosevelt quote that speaks directly to the perseverance of man to find purpose and dignity in struggle. Something of which the last two or so generations of Americans have completely lost sight of. Weakness and entitlement are now their only qualities.
I think what drives me crazy the most with our woke political adversaries is their pollyanish world view, where all POC’s are pure and loving Individuals just trying to survive an oppressive world; where illegal immigrants are family oriented people who were forced to flee oppression; where trans people are just born in the wrong body; etc, etc. The only danger they see of course is found in the white heterosexual American male. In other words, they simply place people in categories, and then label those categories … it’s much easier than actually thinking.
The resignations of Swalwell and Gonzalez from Congress proves once again to me why we are in such chaos and $36 trillion in debt, and why we need a fundamental transformation of our politics. 90% of them are in it for themselves and have no core principles or beliefs. They will say and do anything.