Unspeakable Abomination

            On Tuesday, July 26, two Islamic terrorists stormed into a church in the French town of Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray during the celebration of Mass. They made the 85-year-old priest kneel and, after making a speech in Arabic, cut his throat.

            I take this personally. And perhaps all Americans should.

            Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray is in Normandy, that part of France where thousands of Americans gave their lives to liberate France from Nazi occupation in 1944. Any American who has ever visited the Allied cemeteries in Normandy has felt the special bond between us and this land made sacred by the blood of our soldiers.

            The French of that region have not forgotten. In 1964, two decades after D-Day, I happened to be having a mid-afternoon beer with an American friend in Amiens, not far from Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray. The bar was empty, except for three old men sitting at the far end of the room. After eying us for a while, one of the men came over to our table and asked, “Are you American?” When I said yes, the Frenchman held out his hand and said, “I want to thank you for what you did for us.”  I was deeply moved by this unsolicited and heart-felt gratitude.

            Normandy also happens to be the land of my mother’s ancestors who emigrated to Canada in the 17^th century. I share my blood with the people of Normandy.

            Finally, I am a Catholic. The execution of a priest in his sanctuary during the most solemn of Catholic ceremonies is an unspeakable abomination. Worse, this atrocity was committed in the name of another religion, Islam.

            If this does not rouse the people of France--and those Muslims who abhor radical extremism—to excise this growing cancer in their midst, I don’t know what will.

            Whatever they do, I will take it personally.

           

Our Next Civil War

            “We are at war.” These words have been heard not only among Trump supporters like Newt Gingrich, but by Brits, Turks, Frenchmen, and many others who are finally realizing that Islamic terrorists are determined to conquer the Middle East and to wipe out non-believers wherever they are.

            Abroad, we have seen Muslim migrants terrorize the populations of Sweden, Denmark, and Germany, only to hear their governments preach against discrimination. But the people are finally starting to come around to the reality that their governments are not acting in their best interests.

            In Great Britain a majority voted to wrest control from a European Union’s global elite. Underlying the vote was a visceral protest against liberal immigration policies that were changing their society’s traditional values and customs.

            In the wake of the recent slaughter at the Istanbul airport, a failed coup in Turkey underscored a dissatisfaction among many with a leadership sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood and unsupportive of efforts against ISIS. 

            And now, in Nice, we have witnessed yet another horrific massacre on French soil by a Muslim fanatic. Incredibly, the response from the French government has been to reinforce military action abroad. In the face of their government’s fecklessness, it is no surprise that paramilitary groups are organizing to take action against Muslim enclaves.

            Why is it taking so long for us in this country to wake up to reality? We have had the first Twin Towers, 9/11, Boston, Ft. Hood, Chattanooga, San Bernadino, Orlando, and more, yet our president continues to deny or even speak the words “radical Islamic terrorism.” Rather, he will accelerate the import of 10,000 more unvetted migrants from Syria.

            What we are seeing in Europe is the beginning of civil war. If Islamophiles like President Obama and liberal slaves to political correctness continue denying the growing threat of Muslim fanatics in this country, we may very well be heading for another Civil War of our own.

It's All Politics

            My son Marc lives in Florida, but stays at our home when he has business in Norfolk. On the day FBI Director James Comey announced he wouldn’t recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton, Marc stormed in and said, “I have lost complete confidence in our government.” He went on to recall that during his long career as a naval officer he was subject to very strict regulations governing the handling of sensitive or confidential information, and that the punishment for violating those regulations was swift and severe. He was outraged by the pass Comey gave to Clinton after describing a long list of indictable offenses, not to mention proving that she is a serial and shameless liar.

            Marc wasn’t the only one to voice similar opinions. For myself, I find it terribly difficult not to be cynical about our leaders’ assertions of fairness and impartiality. Comey’s verbal acrobatics to preserve his reputation as a straight-shooter are a case in point. Placing politics above justice, he knew all along that he would not recommend that Hillary be prosecuted, in spite of having a solid case. So he found a way to justify his decision by basing it on a lack of intent on Hillary’s part, while dismissing her gross negligence. He failed badly to make his case, and the speciousness of his logic was laid bare repeatedly during his testimony before by the House Oversight Committee.

            Two points betrayed Comey’s impartiality. First, when asked if Hillary Clinton had lied to the FBI during her 3 ½ hour interview, Comey said no. That was a safe answer, considering he had not been present at the 3 ½ hour interview – how strange is that? -- and no transcript was available for anyone to examine. Second, Comey admitted that he had not factored into his decision Secretary Clinton’s perjured testimony before a Congressional Committee on Benghazi. That is really strange, as perjury is a felony and the FBI was conducting a criminal investigation.

            Is my son’s loss of confidence in the government justified? We might say that it’s just something in the air. I call it the stench of corruption.

Standards Don't Apply

            My son Marc lives in Florida, but stays at our home when he has business in Norfolk. On the day of James Comey’s announcement that he wouldn’t recommend prosecution of Hillary Clinton, Marc stormed into our house and said, “I have lost complete confidence in our government.” He went on to recall that during his long career as a naval officer he was subject to very strict regulations governing the handling of sensitive or confidential information, and that the punishment for violating those regulations was swift and severe. He was understandably outraged by the pass Comey had given to Clinton after describing a long list of indictable offenses, not to mention proving that she is a serial and shameless liar.

            Marc wasn’t the only one to voice similar opinions. As THE HILL contributor Chuck Hobbs said, “…it becomes more obvious than ever that the rich and powerful seem to know instinctively that when accused of wrongdoing, absolutely nothing will come of it, no matter how serious the allegations.”

            A Wall Street Journal editorial said, “…the most revealing words in FBI Director James Comey’s statement explaining his decision not to recommend prosecuting Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information were these: ‘This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.’”

            Comey’s statement sounds very much as an admission that he applied a different standard to Hillary Clinton than he would to anyone else. Is the system rigged, as Donald Trump claims? No. I think it’s just something in the air. I call it the stench of corruption.

Benghazi Matters

            “Nothing New.” This was the instant reaction of the liberal media to the long-awaited congressional report on Benghazi. Not that the media was looking for damning evidence of their darling’s culpability. No, the report does not find Secretary Clinton guilty of wrongdoing. But is the media itself guilty of whitewashing this scandal? Further, are the supporters of Hillary Clinton guilty of anything? I submit that they are indeed guilty of willful ignorance if not of moral vacuity.

            How, I ask, can anyone dismiss this scandal, the greatest example in our time of pervasive moral turpitude in our leaders, none more culpable than Hillary Clinton. We can blame the failure to provide the necessary security requested repeatedly by our Americans at risk in Benghazi on the incompetence of the state Department under the Secretary’s leadership. We can deplore the failure of the military to act when there was still time to rescue Americans under attack, and blame it on Hillary and Defense Department officials paralyzed by indecisiveness. But we cannot forgive the brazen and despicable lies spread by the Administration in the aftermath of the massacre, all for crass political purposes.

            Benghazi happened just 56 days before the presidential elections, and nothing could be allowed to suggest that the President was wrong in his assurance that al Qaeda was on the run and terrorism on the wane. So Susan Rice went on the Sunday talk shows to blame the attack on a video; the President repeated the lie in front of a United Nations General Assembly; and Hillary Clinton went on the air to perpetuate the lie, even as she had been telling the real truth to family, staffers, and the Egyptian Prime Minister. Worse still, she lied to the families of the deceased as the coffins of their loved ones were passing before their eyes. 

            Hillary Clinton’s epic history of lies and scandals is unmatched in American politics. But to my mind there is no greater example of her soulless depravity than her lies after Benghazi. Do her fawning fans not know how thoroughly corrupt she is? Do they care?

The Brits Get It

            The Brits who voted to get out of the European Union wanted out.  They did not agonize over the economic consequences of the split, they just wanted to regain control over their country. They were fed up with a government that had ceded its policy-making authority to unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels. Most specifically, they were angry with a government that had opened its doors to a Muslim invasion that had altered their society, their traditions, and their values.

            The majority of the world’s Muslims are peaceful. But Islam, as interpreted by fundamentalists, is not a religion of peace. Fundamentalists read in the Quran a clear injunction to rid the world of infidels. Followers of Mohammed conquered the Middle East and North Africa, and their armies would have conquered Europe had they not been stopped in Tours, Lepanto, and Vienna.  Realizing that armed invasion cannot achieve their goals, they developed a new dual strategy: infiltration and terror. Anyone can see that this strategy is working: send millions of faithful to populate the enemy’s cities; include radicals among them to recruit and train jihadist killers to terrorize the population; and rely on politically-correct cretins to welcome them.  

            We see what is happening in Germany, Sweden, and France, three countries with open-door policies. Only Britain has finally awakened to the mortal danger of the Islamic radicals in their midst.

            How is America facing this threat? In spite of 9/11, Fort Hood, Chattanooga, Boston, San Bernadino, and Orlando, we have a government that brands as Islamophobic all those who fear the immigration of unvetted Muslim migrants and the likely jihadists in their ranks. And we have a President with avowed Muslim sympathies who appeases Iran, the biggest supporter of terrorist groups, and who refuses to even utter the words “radical Islamic terrorism.”

            Is it any wonder that millions of Americans support Donald Trump’s call for a ban on Muslim immigrants? Is it any wonder that Americans are fed up with political correctness? Is it any wonder that favorability ratings of politicians in Congress are in the single digits? As unqualified as Trump is for the presidency, will American voters in November see him as the only way to follow the example of the Brits? Would that stop radical Islam’s strategy of infiltration and terror?

Our Government Is Armed Against Us

            Hypocrisy is an ugly word. Unfortunately, it has become characteristic of so many national leaders, it probably should be listed in the dictionary as a synonym for “politician.” Examples abound, but one in particular caught my attention this week.

            Thanks to a report released by OpenTheBooks.com, we now know that 67 federal agencies unaffiliated with the Defense Department spent $1.48 billion arming themselves between 2006 and 2014. Some of the details are stunning.

            For 2,316 of its agents, the IRS spent a yearly average of $5,000 each on guns, ammo, and military-style equipment. The IRS is scary enough. Why does it need an army?

            The VA spent $11.66 million on things like night vision goggles and body armor for 3,700 law-enforcement officers guarding VA medical centers. The VA not only is lousy at helping our vets, it is now treating them as potential criminals as well.

            The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service spent $4.77 million and the EPA $3.1 million on military-style equipment such as remote-control helicopters and waterproof thermal infrared scopes;  the Food and Drug Administration employs 183 heavily armed special agents; other agencies with armed agents include the Small Business Administration, the Social Security Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Energy Department, the Education Department, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Why?

            If I’m not mistaken, the 67 non-military federal agencies all fall under the purview of the Obama Administration, yes, the same Obama who blames all the ills of the world on insufficient gun control. I have one suggestion for President Obama, our Hypocrite-in-Chief: Remove the guns from your own house before trying to remove them from ours.