Why The Stupid Always Precedes The Evil

Don’t be shocked if ISIS hits San Francisco next.

This may seem rather harsh and unforgiving in the immediate aftermath of Manchester’s still recovering state, and even more so while the death toll continues to climb. But as long as pockets of stupid progressives continue to set policies, people will keep getting blown up, shot, and slashed.

And no where in America are Americans in more danger than where liberal progressives are in total command.

In Manchester terrorists plotted a public event that was already designed to enrage the restrictive societal allowances of what Islamic radical extremists use in their narrative to justify their actions. The degree of skin that Ariana Grande shows in an average show verges on a lingerie showcase and would be one of the reasons why my daughter would not be allowed to attend.

But the desire by the extremists to attack the “infidels” while they are participating in “immoral” activity becomes their rationalization. But it is not their exclusive rationale.

The terrorists hit Manchester because the Brits have purposefully ignored recent trends and failed to take thoughtful “pre-“action to anticipate the issue properly.

How else do you explain the fact that levels of arrests, stop & frisks, questioning of suspects in ports and air hubs have all dropped since 2015?

How else do you explain that despite a 5-6 hour constant viral red-flag being raised on twitter #ManchesterArena, there was zero increased presence in the hall, at the venue, or even a security perimeter? You literally had the red light flashing WARNING, and no one paid attention.

We also learned today that the UK has 3900 radical Islamists, including some 400 former ISIS fighters living within a train ride of Manchester. No doubt many of these were some turning #ManchesterArena viral. Opportunity, motivation, access, and capacity all played a decision into blowing up the children at the show.

In San Francisco only a few weeks ago the city leaders (Mayor/Police Commissioner) made a large public fuss over their personal disgust with the “tone” of the administration has it had been expressed in two separate and highly constitutional executive orders that limited travel from Obama-determined “hot spots.”

In reaction they then proceeded to withdraw their city from participation in the Joint Terrorism Task Force. The JTTF was established to form cooperative efforts between federal anti-terror units and local police to help monitor active threats and keep them neutralized before materializing.

Considering that only weeks before they had taken the provocative step of reiterating their status as a “Sanctuary City” in direct defiance to the federal government’s warning that to do so could cost municipalities, the dual action of partisan stupidity uniquely has established San Francisco as not only a threat to their own citizens, but a national doorway to havoc.

They refuse to enforce common sense immigration guidelines, and now they have become non-cooperative on the national terror front. The loss of federal monies to their city aside (in the tens of millions,) they will also have fewer foot-soldiers to police their city with, while simultaneously inviting trouble on multiple fronts.

The terrorists in the U.K. didn’t hit London. They hit a smaller city, one that had much more open access, and a venue that had nearly no security presence. They knew how, they were watching for when, and the social media blinked DANGER for hours before they actually carried it out.

There are a number of lessons that free people should be taking away from the Manchester attack, but none of them matter, if first among them is not the lesson of thinking ahead, and overwhelming the presence with law enforcement for the public good.

The world is looking to President Trump to do as he promised in his campaign, to keep the fight hot and heavy against the terrorists. In America we must remove those obstacles that somehow keep him from accomplishing that primary task.

We must stop the nutty left, because they will not only get themselves killed, but they become an open doorway to kill many of us as well.

These aren’t the radicals you’re looking for…

Remember how like so long ago the Mayor of Philadelphia told us that the jihadi who tried to execute a police officer had nothing to do with Islam? Sadly he can’t be recalled–even though he’s a man who wouldn’t know the truth if it him in the face. And no he has that amount of trouble… times three.

Are Refugees & Security Equal?

“Nobody who sets foot in America goes through more screening than refugees… And …Our humanitarian duty to help desperate refugees and our duty to our security — those duties go hand in hand.”

Tuesday from the White House the President utter those two little rhetorical gems.

They were buried of course in a much longer narrative of rhetoric that dealt with many bloviated expressions of feigned support for France, the war against the Islamic State, and of course, efforts to curb global warming.

Most of the media universe picked up on what a “powerful rebuke” it will be “to the terrorists” for he–President Obama–to attend a global warming summit next week.

Exactly why he thinks radical Islamists who would like to severe his head from his shoulders care one ounce about the issue of global warming–especially since we’ve been in a cooling cycle for 18 years–is a bit hard to explain.

But in the President’s world, leading can be done from behind, ending a war is the same as winning one, and containing ISIS means they’ve now grown to 20 additional countries as opposed to the two they started in.

But that “powerful rebuke” aside, it was my feeling that the two assertions above were actually far bigger problems for the American people.

Arguing that refugees are screened so closely that we wouldn’t be able to miss catching bad guys coming under a false cover of being a faux refugee or asylee is on its face laughable.

Maxim Lott exposes the underbelly of that assumption and points out the uncomfortable truth that the Kentucky IED, Boston bombing, and Fort Dix Six, and others have included refugees and asylees (who are here under the same conditions.)

That claim however is still to me the less worrisome of Mr. Obama’s assertions.

From the quote above it is clear that the President draws a moral equivalence between admitting, settling, and resourcing refugees in America and protecting the citizenry of America from terrorism.

He even asserts as much in the claim. While knowing that in not screening refugees as thoroughly as possible to properly vet before admission he runs the risk of violating national security directly.

From the text of the Constitution, to the halls of Congress, to the men and women in uniform, to the man and woman on Main Street — it is my belief that most would be¬†shocked to learn that an American President could even think that admitting refugees (under any circumstances), in terms of priorities, could consider to even be close–much less be seen as EQUAL to–the sacred calling of protecting America from her enemies both foreign and domestic.

But then again this is the thinking of the guy who said this week the most powerful weapon that we can yield against the terrorists (wasn’t guns, missles, jets, or nukes) was to look them in the eye and tell them “we’re not afraid.”

Right before his State Department told Americans globally to be very, very afraid to travel (anywhere in the world) on the biggest travel week of the year.

Um… Okay, I guess?

#ObamaSpeakMakesNoSense

UPDATE: We discussed it on-air…