The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
No, Loretta Lynch, Love Is NOT the Answer to Muslim Massacres
The Answer: End Muslim Immigration. (Ask Trump)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Another day, another Muslim massacre. When Radio Derb went to tape, the week’s big story was the terrorist attack on Istanbul airport on Tuesday—three terrorists, Muslim of course, who all died in the attack, a further 45-odd innocents dead. But then on Friday there was the Dhaka, Bangladesh attack (28 dead). And on Saturday, another Baghdad bombing (125-odd dead).

So what do we do about Muslim massacres?

heylorettaOur lady Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, says actual quote: “Our most effective response to terror is compassion, it’s unity and it’s love.” [Loretta Lynch: ‘Most effective’ response to Islamic terrorism ‘is love’, By Douglas Ernst, Washington Times,June 21, 2016]

All you need is love!

That was in Orlando, Florida, whither this career Social Justice Warrior and Harvard Law School Affirmative Action Baby had gone to investigate the mass killing of homosexuals by yet another Muslim.

Ms. Lynch further opined that— I’m not making this up, truly I’m not —”The message of Orlando is a message of determination to remove hatred, to remove intolerance from our midst.”

Elaborating further, Ms. Lynn promised that just as soon as hatred and intolerance have been removed from our midst, the U.S. Justice Department will launch a program to eradicate pride, envy, wrath, sloth, lust, avarice, and gluttony. The Justice Department will henceforth be known as the Ministry of Love.

All right, enough of the sophomore humor. But one of my pet peeves is that to a Progressive airhead of Ms. Lynch’s stripe, there is hate, and there is love, and there is nothing in between. She lives in a world that does not contain mild disapproval, grudging acceptance, resigned acquiescence, cool indifference, an open willingness to be persuaded, nor any other intermediate shade of opinion. Opinionwise, hers is a binary world. There is love, and there is hate.

The answer to that hate, says the A-G, can only be love. What else is there?

Well, there are visa restrictions, secure borders, immigration moratoria etc. But those aren’t the Attorney General’s thing. Love and hate are her things.

These people have the brains of eight-year-olds.

Seeking further instruction, I read through the opinions offered after Istanbul by “a panel of terrorism experts” in the New York Post. What do these experts suggest?

  • Expert number one: Max Boot [Email him]senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Boot says we need to get more militarily involved—more air strikes, more infantry, and under looser rules of engagement. [Obama won’t stop ISIS—but here’s how his successor can, By Max Boot, June 29, 2016] Also we should “topple”—that’s Boot’s word—we should topple the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, who is a very, very bad person. No mention from Boot about how the Russians might feel about that.

oderintdummetuantHoo-kay.

  • Expert number two, Ralph Peters, a strategic analyst for Fox News.

Col. Peters advocates ruthlessness “equal to that of our enemies.” He thinks we should loosen up on worrying about collateral damage: “Civilization cannot be saved solely by civilized means.” [To defeat ISIS, we must be as ruthless as they are, By Ralph Peters, June 30, 2016 ]

So there are two voices for getting Roman with the jihadists. Who else we got?

  • Expert number three, Andy McCarthy, contributing editor at National Review, whatever that is.

McCarthy [Tweet him] wants us to be proactive against radical Muslim ideology: “Domestically, we must reject a counterterrorism strategy that focuses only on action to the exclusion of ideology. Radicalism must trigger investigative attention.” [ To defeat ISIS, America must target Sharia ideology, By Andrew C. McCarthy, June 29, 2016]

Well, at least someone’s talking about the domestic scene.

The important thing, says he, is to seal the border. Well, yay … Oh, wait a minute: he means Turkey’s border with Syria! “Our immediate task is to push the Turks to completely seal the southeastern border.”[Airport attack should have come as no surprise to Turkey, by Jonathan Schanzer, June 30, 2016]

66213925Yes, that’s our immediate task, according to Schanzer. We’ve got to push those Turks to seal their border! Or else! [Team America clip: Kim Jong Il—”Or else what?” Hans Blix—”Or else we will be very, very angry with you, and we will write you a letter telling you how angry we are.”]

His prescription:

[A]cknowledge the role that existing mainstream opposition groups will need to play in assuming at least a shared responsibility for protecting Sunni Arab-populated territory captured from ISIS.

So, a words guy, then. You can tell he writes terrific memoranda, lotsa bullet points.

“Mainstream opposition groups”? What, like that military training program we’ve been running, that was supposed to produce 5½ thousand warriors by the end of last year, but when they did the actual head count had trained only, quote from our own Defense Department, “four or five,” at a cost of $41 million?

No, no. Lister means some other opposition groups. [Bolstering opposition groups could be key to war on terror, by Charles Lister, June 30, 2016]

Uh-huh.

So those are prescriptions from our five experts. To boil them down:

  1. Get Roman over there.
  2. Get more Roman over there.
  3. Look out for jihadists over here.
  4. Make Turkey seal its border, or else.
  5. Train and equip another four or five anti-Assad fighters at a cost of ten million dollars per.

Is it disrespectful of me to not be impressed by these experts? All right, the New York Post is a neocon paper—Invade The World, Invite The World. I guess you have to expect their panel of experts will lean that way.

And I’m not actually opposed to getting Roman when it’s called for, if only we’d be serious about it. Hey, I’m the guy who coined the phrase “Rubble doesn’t make trouble.” [Breeding Terrorism, NRO’s Corner, August 10, 2006]

Sure, maybe a few Roman-style expeditions wouldn’t hurt—done properly, under Roman-style rules of engagement.

That is all secondary, though. It’s small stuff, and arguable. There are great big fat things we need to do, and they are not arguable:

  • We need to control our borders;
  • We need to have rational policies on settlement and visa management.

First, we don’t need any more people. A third of a billion is enough. Permanent settlement visas should be for spouses and dependent children of U.S. Citizens, certified geniuses, persons who’ve performed some meritorious service to U.S. policy goals, a few Solzhenitsyn-type high-profile dissidents, and nobody else at all.

Second, other visa categories—students, businessmen, tourists—need to be limited, and entry and exit properly tracked. With modern data management technology, this could easily be done.

Muslims, other than diplomats and heads of state, should not get visas. That includes Muslim refugees. There are 49 majority-Muslim countries, some of them very rich. Let them look after their own people.

ORDER IT NOW

Third, we need close supervision of mosques, as Andy McCarthy says. Radical Muslim preachers who are not citizens, need to be expelled. Those who are citizens should be bribed to renounce their citizenship, and their mosques should anyway be closed as a danger to the Republic.

Don’t tell me about the First Amendment. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Manage settlement; manage inflow and outflow; manage our borders; manage visa issuance and tracking; watch the mosques. Those are great big fat things we need to do.

If we don’t invite so much of the world, we won’t need to invade so much of the world.

It’s a shame that Muslims are hacking each other’s heads off five thousand miles away. But the impact of that on us could easily be reduced to zero, or way closer to zero than is currently the case.

The means are there, waiting to be used. We just need the will.

Right now, the amazing fact is that only Donald Trump seems to realize this—and have the will.



John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjectsfor all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He’s had two books published by VDARE.com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013. His writings are archived atJohnDerbyshire.com.

(Republished from VDare.com by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 44 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Dwright says:

    Wishing that love Lynch mentions would find it’s way to white America in flyover land.

    The spirit of General Curtis Lemay lives on in these insane Neocons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /jderbyshire/no-loretta-lynch-love-is-not-the-answer-to-muslim-massacres/#comment-1478201
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. “Our most effective response to terror is compassion, it’s unity and it’s love.”

    This is also the “most effective response” to black on black violence and crime in general. I live near Birmingham, Alabama and I hear this message on TV every time there is a rally to “end the violence”, but the violence does not end, it increases.

    “Love” has become some kind of primitive magic.

    …doing the same thing and expecting different results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    Aaaannd there it is in comment #1! (which was not visible when I posted #2)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Shortly after any ghetto murder there’s the scene of the victim’s mother and the local preacher talking about how “we got to have love and understanding and peace!” Hours later at the memorial for the dead someone else gets murdered because they butted in front of someone in the line up to get fried chicken.

    Nigs gonna nig. You can put expensive clothes on them, send them to Harvard and give them posh affirmative action jobs but at the end of the day there’s precious little that separates a Lynch or Obama from a Trayvon Martin.

    Same thing with Muslims. The only thing that really separates the Islamic expert at King’s College who’s dutifully called upon by CNN to explain why the latest Islamic atrocity isn’t about Islam and some donkey raping headchopper from Afghanistan is the Bulgari watch.

    Read More
    • Agree: MBlanc46, MBlanc46
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Hours later at the memorial for the dead someone else gets murdered because they butted in front of someone in the line up to get fried chicken."

    To add to Mr. Derbyshire's list, it's about time we did something about "fried chicken," since it seems to be the source of so much violence in this country. One possible path to peace was opened recently by one of the food sites which offered up a recipe for "fried chicken" that is cooked in the oven and thus avoids many of the pitfalls involved in frying chicken, such as spattering grease. http://food52.com/recipes/58557-judy-hesser-s-oven-fried-chicken Now, how you can call chicken cooked in the oven "fried chicken" is a mystery to which I have no answer, but it must undoubtedly be a by-product of the "age of love" proclaimed by Loretta Lynch. I don't know if they have come up yet with a solution to the "watermelon problem," but it's my understanding that watermelons also contribute to violence in our country because of their racially-tinged history. I don't have any answers, which is not too surprising since I used to laugh myself silly as a child at the very funny black actors on TV's "Amos and Andy" without realizing that those endearing characters were all racial stereotypes who had to be banned from TV.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @another fred

    “Our most effective response to terror is compassion, it’s unity and it’s love.”
     
    This is also the "most effective response" to black on black violence and crime in general. I live near Birmingham, Alabama and I hear this message on TV every time there is a rally to "end the violence", but the violence does not end, it increases.

    "Love" has become some kind of primitive magic.

    ...doing the same thing and expecting different results.

    Aaaannd there it is in comment #1! (which was not visible when I posted #2)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. These people have the brains of eight-year-olds.

    They couldn’t hold their positions if that were the case.
    These people’s job is, in today’s recitative democracy, and like all marketers, to address and drive target audience whose — depending on various factors — average mental age is 8, or 12.

    She lives in a world that does not contain mild disapproval, grudging acceptance, resigned acquiescence, cool indifference, an open willingness to be persuaded, nor any other intermediate shade of opinion.

    Have you checked out Facebook’s six emotional responses? One is “love.” You aren’t finding “resigned acquiescence” nor “mild disapproval” there.
    I once worked for a social media platform based on staff-edited content for a brief time: after my first 2 posts I was told by my seniors (more than one, since I complained to the first one’s remark) to avoid semicolons, semicommas, gerunds: “They confuse people. Not all people are writers.”

    If you want to do something good for someone, you may ask some effort on their part. If you are using someone, your best move is to please them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pink_point

    Muslims, other than diplomats and heads of state, should not get visas. That includes Muslim refugees. There are 49 majority-Muslim countries, some of them very rich. Let them look after their own people.
     
    So you didn't want Muslims to live here permanently, and permanently remind everybody on social media, media, campuses, etc. how bad Western countries are because, as one from Angola claimed, "They treat Muslims like shit" (the Angolan girl had no specific thoughts on how atheists, Christians, Jews, and other confessions are treated in "Muslim countries")?

    That's racist of you, Derbyshire. There's nothing as racist as reciprocity, and indeed, even hinting at it is very racist; xenophobic, too.


    We need to have rational policies on settlement and visa management.
     
    Are we sure?

    “If we broke up the big banks tomorrow,” Mrs. Clinton asked the audience of black, white and Hispanic union members, “would that end racism? Would that end sexism? Would that end discrimination against the L.G.B.T. community?,” she said, using an abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. “Would that make people feel more welcoming to immigrants overnight?”

    At each question, the crowd called back with a resounding no.
     

    , @ZZMike
    “They confuse people. Not all people are writers.”

    What he obviously meant was, not all people are readers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “Manage settlement; manage inflow and outflow; manage our borders; manage visa issuance and tracking; watch the mosques. Those are great big fat things we need to do.

    If we don’t invite so much of the world, we won’t need to invade so much of the world.”

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded “so much” of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?

    Flag wavers may want to believe that, especially on yet another holiday distorted into a celebration of militarism, but it isn’t so. Just look at the map of American military bases around the world, or take ten minutes to review the history of US support of despots and other meddling in the Middle East, etc.

    Mr. Derbyshire usually falls well below the standards set by the other columnists here. Every American problem is diagnosed as the fault of someone than people like him. He convinces no one who isn’t already in his camp. Sadly, some of the UR readership can’t get enough of that patronizing “patriotism.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded “so much” of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?
     
    Derb has been on the record for many years in opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases and forces in countries that should be defending themselves. You are reading something into his article that is not there.
    , @anonymous
    Edit: "...of someone other than people like him."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. @pink_point

    These people have the brains of eight-year-olds.
     
    They couldn't hold their positions if that were the case.
    These people's job is, in today's recitative democracy, and like all marketers, to address and drive target audience whose — depending on various factors — average mental age is 8, or 12.

    She lives in a world that does not contain mild disapproval, grudging acceptance, resigned acquiescence, cool indifference, an open willingness to be persuaded, nor any other intermediate shade of opinion.
     
    Have you checked out Facebook's six emotional responses? One is "love." You aren't finding "resigned acquiescence" nor "mild disapproval" there.
    I once worked for a social media platform based on staff-edited content for a brief time: after my first 2 posts I was told by my seniors (more than one, since I complained to the first one's remark) to avoid semicolons, semicommas, gerunds: "They confuse people. Not all people are writers."

    If you want to do something good for someone, you may ask some effort on their part. If you are using someone, your best move is to please them.

    Muslims, other than diplomats and heads of state, should not get visas. That includes Muslim refugees. There are 49 majority-Muslim countries, some of them very rich. Let them look after their own people.

    So you didn’t want Muslims to live here permanently, and permanently remind everybody on social media, media, campuses, etc. how bad Western countries are because, as one from Angola claimed, “They treat Muslims like shit” (the Angolan girl had no specific thoughts on how atheists, Christians, Jews, and other confessions are treated in “Muslim countries”)?

    That’s racist of you, Derbyshire. There’s nothing as racist as reciprocity, and indeed, even hinting at it is very racist; xenophobic, too.

    We need to have rational policies on settlement and visa management.

    Are we sure?

    “If we broke up the big banks tomorrow,” Mrs. Clinton asked the audience of black, white and Hispanic union members, “would that end racism? Would that end sexism? Would that end discrimination against the L.G.B.T. community?,” she said, using an abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. “Would that make people feel more welcoming to immigrants overnight?”

    At each question, the crowd called back with a resounding no.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. It’s is little outposts of sanity like this that keep my going. Well, Loretta, when you don’t have reason on your side you can always go evangelical. Love is the answer to imported terrorism.

    But love is not the answer to understanding the upset in flyover country. Them Trump supporters are haters, haters, I tell you. And it is even okie-dokie for mobs to attack them for peaceful speech.

    Loretta’s job isn’t to decide who to love and who to hate. Her job is to enforce the rule of law. She wasn’t hired to be an occasional minister. And there is no rule of law once it appears to be selectively, racially and politically enforced.

    It’s easy enough though if she takes her cue from the Bamboozler, who loves to wag his finger at the hateables.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. @anonymous
    "Manage settlement; manage inflow and outflow; manage our borders; manage visa issuance and tracking; watch the mosques. Those are great big fat things we need to do.

    If we don’t invite so much of the world, we won’t need to invade so much of the world."

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded "so much" of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?

    Flag wavers may want to believe that, especially on yet another holiday distorted into a celebration of militarism, but it isn't so. Just look at the map of American military bases around the world, or take ten minutes to review the history of US support of despots and other meddling in the Middle East, etc.

    Mr. Derbyshire usually falls well below the standards set by the other columnists here. Every American problem is diagnosed as the fault of someone than people like him. He convinces no one who isn't already in his camp. Sadly, some of the UR readership can't get enough of that patronizing "patriotism."

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded “so much” of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?

    Derb has been on the record for many years in opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases and forces in countries that should be defending themselves. You are reading something into his article that is not there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    To the contrary:

    "And I’m not actually opposed to getting Roman when it’s called for, if only we’d be serious about it. Hey, I’m the guy who coined the phrase “Rubble doesn’t make trouble.” [Breeding Terrorism, NRO’s Corner, August 10, 2006]

    Sure, maybe a few Roman-style expeditions wouldn’t hurt—done properly, under Roman-style rules of engagement."

    Nor is there a hint of any "opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases" that he may have published elsewhere. And if he does, in fact, know better, then shame on him for this patronizing, deluded jingoism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @anonymous
    "Manage settlement; manage inflow and outflow; manage our borders; manage visa issuance and tracking; watch the mosques. Those are great big fat things we need to do.

    If we don’t invite so much of the world, we won’t need to invade so much of the world."

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded "so much" of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?

    Flag wavers may want to believe that, especially on yet another holiday distorted into a celebration of militarism, but it isn't so. Just look at the map of American military bases around the world, or take ten minutes to review the history of US support of despots and other meddling in the Middle East, etc.

    Mr. Derbyshire usually falls well below the standards set by the other columnists here. Every American problem is diagnosed as the fault of someone than people like him. He convinces no one who isn't already in his camp. Sadly, some of the UR readership can't get enough of that patronizing "patriotism."

    Edit: “…of someone other than people like him.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @another fred

    So, the author truly believes that Uncle Sam has only invaded “so much” of the world as has been warranted by Islamic terrorism conducted in this country?
     
    Derb has been on the record for many years in opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases and forces in countries that should be defending themselves. You are reading something into his article that is not there.

    To the contrary:

    “And I’m not actually opposed to getting Roman when it’s called for, if only we’d be serious about it. Hey, I’m the guy who coined the phrase “Rubble doesn’t make trouble.” [Breeding Terrorism, NRO’s Corner, August 10, 2006]

    Sure, maybe a few Roman-style expeditions wouldn’t hurt—done properly, under Roman-style rules of engagement.”

    Nor is there a hint of any “opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases” that he may have published elsewhere. And if he does, in fact, know better, then shame on him for this patronizing, deluded jingoism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @random observer
    "Jingoism" would be all the "rah, rah, AMERICA! FREEEEEDOOOOMM!!" crap. Or its earlier British equivalent, for which the term was coined.

    "These people are a pain in our ass and we are going to kill them all to eliminate that pain", which would be the Roman, and rational, approach, is not jingoism. It is also not available to America, whose people have to feel good all the time and think they are on the side of angels instead of just on the side of themselves. The Romans believed themselves superior, but they didn't feel it necessary to think of themselves as 'nice'.

    Besides, the original al-Qaida declaration of war on the US claimed to be justified by the presence of US soldiers in Saudi Arabia, even though they had been invited by the Saudi king, who was considered legitimate by the Wahhabi branch of Salafism at least, were in SA peacefully for its protection against the Iraqi Baathists and Iranian Shia, and were nowhere near the holy lands of Mecca or Medina [the idea that all of KSA, a state assembled in the 1920s, is holy in its entirety is a neologism at best]. AQ was not claiming to be justified by any "invasions" by the US other than this bogus claim.

    The invasion of Afghanistan by the US, at least, was wholly justified by 9/11. The Taliban may or may not have been willing to surrender AQ, and I realize they had host obligations, but by hosting them while they planned 9/11 the Taliban had given the US a valid casus belli against them by any standard. The only mistake the US made was by staying and trying to nation build. The Romans would have adopted Derb's strategy. And it would have been justified.

    Iraq was different. That was just stupid. But the jihad against America was old news by 2003.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Loretta Lynch, says actual quote: “Our most effective response to terror is compassion, it’s unity and it’s love.”

    Translation: In the war on whitey, the war to ensure that no white person will exist anywhere in the world in the twenty-second century, any ally will do, even Muslim terrorists.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. tbraton says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    Shortly after any ghetto murder there's the scene of the victim's mother and the local preacher talking about how "we got to have love and understanding and peace!" Hours later at the memorial for the dead someone else gets murdered because they butted in front of someone in the line up to get fried chicken.

    Nigs gonna nig. You can put expensive clothes on them, send them to Harvard and give them posh affirmative action jobs but at the end of the day there's precious little that separates a Lynch or Obama from a Trayvon Martin.

    Same thing with Muslims. The only thing that really separates the Islamic expert at King's College who's dutifully called upon by CNN to explain why the latest Islamic atrocity isn't about Islam and some donkey raping headchopper from Afghanistan is the Bulgari watch.

    “Hours later at the memorial for the dead someone else gets murdered because they butted in front of someone in the line up to get fried chicken.”

    To add to Mr. Derbyshire’s list, it’s about time we did something about “fried chicken,” since it seems to be the source of so much violence in this country. One possible path to peace was opened recently by one of the food sites which offered up a recipe for “fried chicken” that is cooked in the oven and thus avoids many of the pitfalls involved in frying chicken, such as spattering grease. http://food52.com/recipes/58557-judy-hesser-s-oven-fried-chicken Now, how you can call chicken cooked in the oven “fried chicken” is a mystery to which I have no answer, but it must undoubtedly be a by-product of the “age of love” proclaimed by Loretta Lynch. I don’t know if they have come up yet with a solution to the “watermelon problem,” but it’s my understanding that watermelons also contribute to violence in our country because of their racially-tinged history. I don’t have any answers, which is not too surprising since I used to laugh myself silly as a child at the very funny black actors on TV’s “Amos and Andy” without realizing that those endearing characters were all racial stereotypes who had to be banned from TV.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.728619

    This is hilarious for 2 reasons.

    1. What right do the authorities in UK have to investigate the ‘crimes’ of other nations?

    2. If UK believes it has such a right(and moral duty), why is it so selectively employed?

    If UK wants to try war criminals, how about starting with Obama and Hillary?

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    RE; Item 1, the US federal mafia has the same attitude you know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Rehmat says:

    “John Derbyshire – you’re a f***ing Zionist lair,” professor Jim Fetzer.

    http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.ca/2016/06/istanbul-airport-opens-4-12-hours-after.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Don’t invite the world, of course, but don’t invade the world either.
    Absent a declaration of war, we shouldn’t:
    1. Have troops in the Middle East.
    2. Do any bombings or drone attacks in the Middle East
    3. Have alliances with any Middle Eastern military group or country (including you-know-who)
    4. Sanction any Middle Eastern country (including big, bad Iran)
    5. Give foreign aid of any kind to any Middle Eastern country
    6. Sell advanced weapons to any Middle Eastern country (including you know who)

    If we ever do declare war on anyone (the Saudi royal family is my favorite candidate) unleash ALL HELL.

    Read More
    • Agree: jtgw, Priss Factor
    • Replies: @random observer
    Avoiding those are good policy prescriptions, but only # 2 would have traditionally required a declaration of war. Any country has always been able to do all those other things in peacetime.
    , @RadicalCenter
    How about bombing BOTH Israel and Saudi Arabia into oblivion? The USA and Russia could do it together.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Dave B says:

    This can be done very simply, if we have the will.

    One, no more Muslims accepted into the USA for any reason. Not just because of terrorism but because multi-culti does not work and we have enough problems with certain ethnic groups already.

    Two, get rid of the Muslims we have living in this country by outlawing Islam. We have made murder and theft illegal, why not a primitive ideology of violence and general overall craziness that hasn’t changed in 1300 years? What do they add to our society already overburdened with the joys of multiculturalism? Take over all their mosques and reading rooms by eminent domain, plow the buildings under, and sell the land to Americans who can do something more productive with the land.

    Third, stop supporting Islamic extremist like Saudi Arabia, and stop trying to overthrow secular dictators like Assad. In general, no more military misadventures overseas.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "This can be done very simply, if we have the will."

    Even if one has the will, your proposals are NOT simple to put into practice.

    "Two, get rid of the Muslims we have living in this country by outlawing Islam... Take over all their mosques and reading rooms by eminent domain, plow the buildings under, and sell the land to Americans who can do something more productive with the land."

    Except you are torching the Constitution in the process for those Muslims who are American citizens. You cannot be THAT ignorant, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. jtgw says: • Website

    I hate it when people say “the Constitution is not a suicide pact.” They always seem to think they came up with the idea themselves. People should know that Lincoln came up with it in order to justify all his violations of the Constitution when he invaded those states that had lawfully seceded.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer

    You wrote, “These people have the brains of eight-year-olds.”

    “These people have the brains of RETARDED eight-year-olds.” There, I fixed it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. foo124 says:

    Great article ! Just one question Derbyshire, you Great White Hope…does protecting ones borders include marrying an alien insect like oriental “woman”, sneaking her across in through the border and then potentially having yellow insect like kids with her within the USA ?

    Just curious…

    Read More
    • Replies: @random observer
    Insect-like?

    What people on earth are more conformist and hive-minded slaves than Americans?

    Unless you meant that literally. I haven't found any Chinese girls with antennae yet.
    , @Marcus
    He does have two kids, fortunately the son doesn't appear to be a budding Supreme Gentleman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @anonymous
    To the contrary:

    "And I’m not actually opposed to getting Roman when it’s called for, if only we’d be serious about it. Hey, I’m the guy who coined the phrase “Rubble doesn’t make trouble.” [Breeding Terrorism, NRO’s Corner, August 10, 2006]

    Sure, maybe a few Roman-style expeditions wouldn’t hurt—done properly, under Roman-style rules of engagement."

    Nor is there a hint of any "opposition to the adventures abroad and maintaining so many bases" that he may have published elsewhere. And if he does, in fact, know better, then shame on him for this patronizing, deluded jingoism.

    “Jingoism” would be all the “rah, rah, AMERICA! FREEEEEDOOOOMM!!” crap. Or its earlier British equivalent, for which the term was coined.

    “These people are a pain in our ass and we are going to kill them all to eliminate that pain”, which would be the Roman, and rational, approach, is not jingoism. It is also not available to America, whose people have to feel good all the time and think they are on the side of angels instead of just on the side of themselves. The Romans believed themselves superior, but they didn’t feel it necessary to think of themselves as ‘nice’.

    Besides, the original al-Qaida declaration of war on the US claimed to be justified by the presence of US soldiers in Saudi Arabia, even though they had been invited by the Saudi king, who was considered legitimate by the Wahhabi branch of Salafism at least, were in SA peacefully for its protection against the Iraqi Baathists and Iranian Shia, and were nowhere near the holy lands of Mecca or Medina [the idea that all of KSA, a state assembled in the 1920s, is holy in its entirety is a neologism at best]. AQ was not claiming to be justified by any “invasions” by the US other than this bogus claim.

    The invasion of Afghanistan by the US, at least, was wholly justified by 9/11. The Taliban may or may not have been willing to surrender AQ, and I realize they had host obligations, but by hosting them while they planned 9/11 the Taliban had given the US a valid casus belli against them by any standard. The only mistake the US made was by staying and trying to nation build. The Romans would have adopted Derb’s strategy. And it would have been justified.

    Iraq was different. That was just stupid. But the jihad against America was old news by 2003.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Thanks for taking the time to engage about this.

    However, that the Romans also had an empire is no mere coincidence. I expect that, in his own time and way, the typical Roman citizen jingoed about civilizing others, too.

    I also disagree about the justification for "invading" Afghanistan instead of attempting through traditional means to apprehend the alleged criminals of 9/11. Those whose actions you defend were the bunch who also had a "Patriot Act" rolled out for us within days.

    Again, thanks for civil, enlightening discussion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @Fidelios Automata
    Don't invite the world, of course, but don't invade the world either.
    Absent a declaration of war, we shouldn't:
    1. Have troops in the Middle East.
    2. Do any bombings or drone attacks in the Middle East
    3. Have alliances with any Middle Eastern military group or country (including you-know-who)
    4. Sanction any Middle Eastern country (including big, bad Iran)
    5. Give foreign aid of any kind to any Middle Eastern country
    6. Sell advanced weapons to any Middle Eastern country (including you know who)

    If we ever do declare war on anyone (the Saudi royal family is my favorite candidate) unleash ALL HELL.

    Avoiding those are good policy prescriptions, but only # 2 would have traditionally required a declaration of war. Any country has always been able to do all those other things in peacetime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @foo124
    Great article ! Just one question Derbyshire, you Great White Hope...does protecting ones borders include marrying an alien insect like oriental "woman", sneaking her across in through the border and then potentially having yellow insect like kids with her within the USA ?

    Just curious...

    Insect-like?

    What people on earth are more conformist and hive-minded slaves than Americans?

    Unless you meant that literally. I haven’t found any Chinese girls with antennae yet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Yes, my wife is mostly-Asian, and no antennae there, either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. mtn cur says:

    I am considering giving up on the UNZ review because much of it requires too much research on the side to verify facts. However, an accurate map of American military bases around the world takes only the few seconds to dip a ball in paint which gives a globe with all the bases covered, except for areas not held by Russian or Chinese troops, which tend to discourage further expansion of NATO’s borders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. woodNfish says:

    It’s a shame that Muslims are hacking each other’s heads off five thousand miles away.

    No Mr. Derbyshire, it is not a shame.I have no problem with the camel-humpers killing each other. The world is a better place without them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. woodNfish says:
    @Priss Factor
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.728619

    This is hilarious for 2 reasons.

    1. What right do the authorities in UK have to investigate the 'crimes' of other nations?

    2. If UK believes it has such a right(and moral duty), why is it so selectively employed?

    If UK wants to try war criminals, how about starting with Obama and Hillary?

    RE; Item 1, the US federal mafia has the same attitude you know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Don’t tell me about the First Amendment. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

    I wouldn’t waste my breath by trying to tell Darba-shur about anything. Whomever can write those words in any context other than extreme sarcasm is not worth even the minimal effort of speaking-to.

    Really, the constitution is not only not a suicide pact, it isn’t really anything at all. It’s a government “guarantee” of some “rights” (privileges, really) as long as those rights aren’t too inconvenient for the government. As soon as the government decides they are too inconvenient, we get shown the bad end of the gun, reminding us of just how little that constitution is really worth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Marcus says:

    Did she want to respond to Dylann Roof with love?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    The original BLM vs Homos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. @Fidelios Automata
    Don't invite the world, of course, but don't invade the world either.
    Absent a declaration of war, we shouldn't:
    1. Have troops in the Middle East.
    2. Do any bombings or drone attacks in the Middle East
    3. Have alliances with any Middle Eastern military group or country (including you-know-who)
    4. Sanction any Middle Eastern country (including big, bad Iran)
    5. Give foreign aid of any kind to any Middle Eastern country
    6. Sell advanced weapons to any Middle Eastern country (including you know who)

    If we ever do declare war on anyone (the Saudi royal family is my favorite candidate) unleash ALL HELL.

    How about bombing BOTH Israel and Saudi Arabia into oblivion? The USA and Russia could do it together.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @random observer
    Insect-like?

    What people on earth are more conformist and hive-minded slaves than Americans?

    Unless you meant that literally. I haven't found any Chinese girls with antennae yet.

    Yes, my wife is mostly-Asian, and no antennae there, either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Marcus says:
    @foo124
    Great article ! Just one question Derbyshire, you Great White Hope...does protecting ones borders include marrying an alien insect like oriental "woman", sneaking her across in through the border and then potentially having yellow insect like kids with her within the USA ?

    Just curious...

    He does have two kids, fortunately the son doesn’t appear to be a budding Supreme Gentleman.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @random observer
    "Jingoism" would be all the "rah, rah, AMERICA! FREEEEEDOOOOMM!!" crap. Or its earlier British equivalent, for which the term was coined.

    "These people are a pain in our ass and we are going to kill them all to eliminate that pain", which would be the Roman, and rational, approach, is not jingoism. It is also not available to America, whose people have to feel good all the time and think they are on the side of angels instead of just on the side of themselves. The Romans believed themselves superior, but they didn't feel it necessary to think of themselves as 'nice'.

    Besides, the original al-Qaida declaration of war on the US claimed to be justified by the presence of US soldiers in Saudi Arabia, even though they had been invited by the Saudi king, who was considered legitimate by the Wahhabi branch of Salafism at least, were in SA peacefully for its protection against the Iraqi Baathists and Iranian Shia, and were nowhere near the holy lands of Mecca or Medina [the idea that all of KSA, a state assembled in the 1920s, is holy in its entirety is a neologism at best]. AQ was not claiming to be justified by any "invasions" by the US other than this bogus claim.

    The invasion of Afghanistan by the US, at least, was wholly justified by 9/11. The Taliban may or may not have been willing to surrender AQ, and I realize they had host obligations, but by hosting them while they planned 9/11 the Taliban had given the US a valid casus belli against them by any standard. The only mistake the US made was by staying and trying to nation build. The Romans would have adopted Derb's strategy. And it would have been justified.

    Iraq was different. That was just stupid. But the jihad against America was old news by 2003.

    Thanks for taking the time to engage about this.

    However, that the Romans also had an empire is no mere coincidence. I expect that, in his own time and way, the typical Roman citizen jingoed about civilizing others, too.

    I also disagree about the justification for “invading” Afghanistan instead of attempting through traditional means to apprehend the alleged criminals of 9/11. Those whose actions you defend were the bunch who also had a “Patriot Act” rolled out for us within days.

    Again, thanks for civil, enlightening discussion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. I honestly don’t recall. Did the US have a Muslim Massacre problem before the false flag attack of 9/11? Are Muslim Massacre’s in any way related the the much larger Anglo/Zio massacre’s of Muslims? As an American, I would like to see our foreign legions repatriated and our mercenary forces disbanded. According to opinion polls mine is a popular idea. Perhaps government by the consent of the governed would be a good thing for the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    the the is not a typo. I stutter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @WorkingClass
    I honestly don't recall. Did the US have a Muslim Massacre problem before the false flag attack of 9/11? Are Muslim Massacre's in any way related the the much larger Anglo/Zio massacre's of Muslims? As an American, I would like to see our foreign legions repatriated and our mercenary forces disbanded. According to opinion polls mine is a popular idea. Perhaps government by the consent of the governed would be a good thing for the US.

    the the is not a typo. I stutter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Kamran says:

    Hey Derbyshire, you wanky kaffir bastard.

    I’m going to come to the US whether you like or not. I’m going to convert to judaism and learn the torah and wear a kippah, and the US immigration services and consulate personal will love me.

    I am a master of taqiya and forging documents.

    Try and stop me, cunt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Corvinus says:
    @Dave B
    This can be done very simply, if we have the will.

    One, no more Muslims accepted into the USA for any reason. Not just because of terrorism but because multi-culti does not work and we have enough problems with certain ethnic groups already.

    Two, get rid of the Muslims we have living in this country by outlawing Islam. We have made murder and theft illegal, why not a primitive ideology of violence and general overall craziness that hasn't changed in 1300 years? What do they add to our society already overburdened with the joys of multiculturalism? Take over all their mosques and reading rooms by eminent domain, plow the buildings under, and sell the land to Americans who can do something more productive with the land.

    Third, stop supporting Islamic extremist like Saudi Arabia, and stop trying to overthrow secular dictators like Assad. In general, no more military misadventures overseas.

    “This can be done very simply, if we have the will.”

    Even if one has the will, your proposals are NOT simple to put into practice.

    “Two, get rid of the Muslims we have living in this country by outlawing Islam… Take over all their mosques and reading rooms by eminent domain, plow the buildings under, and sell the land to Americans who can do something more productive with the land.”

    Except you are torching the Constitution in the process for those Muslims who are American citizens. You cannot be THAT ignorant, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Lorettta Lynch proposes a puerile solution of love, love, love. This author plagiarizes her comment with his own much more retro solution, that being hate, hate, and more hate. Nowhere is there anything like reasoned responses, thoughtful consideration, or interactions leading to understanding. But of course, Islam is still a 13th century misapplication of a severe local tribal code, now claiming to fame as the be-all and end-all of religion, and anyone not on board with the codas of that ancient century deserves to die die die, the sooner the better, so it really is difficult to find middle ground with the likes of Shia and Sunni who, forced together in a pit, forced to choose between one or the other of the two religious versions, would likely kill each other to the last man, woman and child rather than compromise in the least.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred

    ... that being hate, hate, and more hate.
     
    I can't tell, is this sarcasm or accidental self-parody.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Johnny Alamo
    Lorettta Lynch proposes a puerile solution of love, love, love. This author plagiarizes her comment with his own much more retro solution, that being hate, hate, and more hate. Nowhere is there anything like reasoned responses, thoughtful consideration, or interactions leading to understanding. But of course, Islam is still a 13th century misapplication of a severe local tribal code, now claiming to fame as the be-all and end-all of religion, and anyone not on board with the codas of that ancient century deserves to die die die, the sooner the better, so it really is difficult to find middle ground with the likes of Shia and Sunni who, forced together in a pit, forced to choose between one or the other of the two religious versions, would likely kill each other to the last man, woman and child rather than compromise in the least.

    … that being hate, hate, and more hate.

    I can’t tell, is this sarcasm or accidental self-parody.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Love. That’s just Lynch parroting the ruling elite’s propaganda cover for the ruling elite’s grip on Anarcho-Tyranny.

    “Eventually everyone in the world would become expert at the modest words, kind smiles and bland assurance that gloved the iron hand of ambition.” – Len Deighton, Bomber (1970)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. ZZMike says:
    @pink_point

    These people have the brains of eight-year-olds.
     
    They couldn't hold their positions if that were the case.
    These people's job is, in today's recitative democracy, and like all marketers, to address and drive target audience whose — depending on various factors — average mental age is 8, or 12.

    She lives in a world that does not contain mild disapproval, grudging acceptance, resigned acquiescence, cool indifference, an open willingness to be persuaded, nor any other intermediate shade of opinion.
     
    Have you checked out Facebook's six emotional responses? One is "love." You aren't finding "resigned acquiescence" nor "mild disapproval" there.
    I once worked for a social media platform based on staff-edited content for a brief time: after my first 2 posts I was told by my seniors (more than one, since I complained to the first one's remark) to avoid semicolons, semicommas, gerunds: "They confuse people. Not all people are writers."

    If you want to do something good for someone, you may ask some effort on their part. If you are using someone, your best move is to please them.

    “They confuse people. Not all people are writers.”

    What he obviously meant was, not all people are readers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. ZZMike says:

    ”The message of Orlando is a message of determination to remove hatred, to remove intolerance from our midst.”

    I agree completely. Remove the hatred of the West and all its infidel values, remove intolerance of any idea contrary (or even sorta contrary) to Islam.

    Ms Lynch seems to derive her philosophy from old Beatle songs. But we didn’t beat the bad ideas of Naziism and Imperial Japan with better ideas, we beat them with better bombs. And the lives of lots and lots of soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, …….

    “Get Roman over there.” I must have been a bit slow today – I tried to figure out how Roman Polanski could possibly help. Then I got it: Centurions and legions.

    “we don’t need any more people.” Well, that much is obvious. What is obvious – to our Great and Wonderful Leader and his minions – is that by diluting the voter pool with ready-made Democrat voters, and friendly folks from countries for whom the idea of democracy is utter nonsense, the country will soon fall off the cliff. Our country will be run by fundamentalist liberals, and after a few years or more, they’ll tell us that this old-fashioned two-party system is way too complicated, and wouldn’t it just be so much easier if we just had one big party, which we’ll just call the American Party, so let’s all just get along and sign up. Or Else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. […] versus culture. Clades. Shove the dove. Communist violence. Third worldism. Obama failure. Nigel. Ask Martha. “Liberal […]

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Limbaugh and company certainly entertain. But a steady diet of ideological comfort food is no substitute for hearty intellectual fare.
Once as a colonial project, now as a moral playground, the ancient continent remains the object of Great Power maneuvering