While it seems like every major story on the planet involves the Trump administration, things have actually been rather interesting in the rest of the world. Under the leadership of former ski bum Justin Trudeau, our neighbor to the north seems to be embracing some of the values that have made Europe so inhospitable to its indigenous population.

As Barbara Kay has explained both in print and other media, the proposed law by a Muslim MP targeting Islamophobia is simply a pretext to police inconvenient thought which happens to offend the political class. Keep in mind, the country was no bastion of free speech before discussion of this non-binding resolution discussed in the House of Commons of Canada. The long prosecution of Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant for dissident speech, as well as the demise of Free Dominion at the hands of inquisitor Richard Warman, attest to that.

The idea that this is simply a noble effort to protect Canada’s ruthlessly persecuted Muslim minority is belied by the robust effort that community has made to make acceptance of Islam by Canadian natives mandatory. Contrary to popular belief among the ruling class and its eager supplicants, Islamophobia is not a real issue. The terms itself is an ad hominem meant to distract from the disturbing frequency with which the adherents to Islam murder/intimidate those who are not.

If you want to experience what real fear looks like, I suggest you take a trip to Europe, where the paragons of virtue that run that continent have turned a glorious civilization into what increasingly looks like a garrison state. From the bullet-proof glass wall built around the base of the Eiffel Tower, announced in the wake of a respectful Egyptian’s jihadist machete attack at the Louvre and several thwarted Islamic terror attacks, to the fence being constructed between Latvia and Russia, to the Catholic pensioners being murdered by Saudi migrants, there are signs everywhere that Europe is under siege.

The fact that European governments are persecuting those who speak the truth about the wave of migrant crime merely serves to illustrate how warped the values which animate Europe’s ruling class are. That they continue to entrust with power, however ceremonial it may be, the same people who brought their continent to the brink of the abyss demonstrates how disconnected they are from the anger and discontent animating Europeans in France, Denmark, the Netherlands and throughout a continent being ravaged by undiluted multiculturalism, moral relativism, and perpetual open borders.

The fact that the vast majority of Europeans vehemently oppose further Muslim immigration is deemed irrelevant by those who want to transform the continent of Europe. Those who rule have made the replacement of Western peoples with Islamic settlers a priority, despite the intense suffering of the Middle East’s persecuted Christian minority, and woe to anyone who opposes this grand project. 2016 was not the end of the fight against this mentality-which has governed the West for over half a century-it was just the beginning.

Update: The stories of those who were murdered. 

Alexandre Bissonnette has been charged with multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder. 

The names of the victims have been released. 

The sole suspect in the Quebec City mosque attack has been identified. 

In a correction of an earlier report, it now appears that only one of the detained individuals is a suspect. The other is being held as a witness, according to police. 

2 suspects have been identified, one of Moroccan origin and one who is evidently Quebecois.  

Another reminder of why no one trusts the drive-by media. 

The motives and identities of the assailants haven’t been revealed, but we do know that there are at least 5 fatalities, as well as many other victims. Breitbart has posted links to some firsthand accounts of the attack, which is the first major terrorist incident on Canadian soil since the failed 2016 plot by ISIS supporter Aaron Driver.

Rather than sit through the inevitable anticlimax which is Sir Hillary’s acceptance speech, why not watch the documentary which crystallizes just how nakedly corrupt the would-be First Family is? BTW, isn’t it funny how none of the critics of this ground-breaking documentary and book have taken up its author’s challenge to debate the merits of his well-documented dissection of Clinton family corruption? I wonder why that is.

So many have opined on Black Lives Matter over the past 3 years that it’s difficult to imagine anything novel being said or written about this organization. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to add my 2 cents, if for no other reason than the fact that I’ve never tackled this subject before on this website and my readers are entitled to know what I believe.

There are a number of characteristics that distinguish BLM and its supporters from previous civil rights movements and which identify it as part of the current wave of millennial, leftist political activism, the most prominent being its imperiousness. Like the strident social justice and feminist activism flourishing within this country’s most expensive hug boxes, Black Lives Matter refuses to countenance the idea that the opinions of its critics-or even those who disagree with some of its policy prescriptions-matter. They exist to dictate terms of submission, not debate.

A perfect illustration of this is the spectacle which unfolded at Toronto’s annual gay pride parade, an event effectively shut down while its organizers acquiesced to the incoherent demands of virulent racists. Leaving aside the tactical problem of a culture that comprises less than 3 percent of a country demanding recognition from a governing majority which it insists is systemically bigoted against black Canadians, there’s the question of why they believe this approach will be strategically successful. Based upon an interview with one of BLM’s co-founders north of the border, they seem to believe that if their movement can successfully manipulate language, effectively shaping how we speak, then they will be able to implement their goals-however nebulous they may be-without opposition.

This is not a completely baseless assumption, as the hijacking-to use a triggering word-of language has been essential to the left’s subversion of most cultural and political institutions in the West. In fact, manipulating language, distorting the way we communicate, is at the heart of critical theory, arguably the most destructive intellectual development of the past half-century. Just as past totalitarian ideologies sought to control and wield words in their quest to crush human autonomy-exemplified by the Communist corruption of language-contemporary cultural Marxists recognize how essential this tool is to achieve their political objectives.

It’s not simply a matter of language though. BLM and its advocates seem to inhabit an alternate reality where their perceived enemies don’t have any independent beliefs or philosophies of their own. These activists are not interested in any dialogue, much less debate, but instead want the uniform enforcement of a list of racial diktats they have devised. My only engagement with a white supporter of this movement is emblematic of the problems one encounters whenever he attempts to broach thoughtful critiques of Black Lives Matters.

Even when I explained that black people are not the victims of disproportionate violence at the hand of law enforcement-as Kevin Jackson has pointed out, Native Americans are much more likely to be killed during encounters with the police, to say nothing of whites-he refused to acknowledge this enormous hole in the BLM narrative, after which he chose to block me from his Twitter account. This is a typical response to anyone who tries to challenge blanket statements and irrelevant anecdotal evidence with statistical evidence and concrete, verifiable data.

The idea that rogue police officers might be acting out of a sense of impunity rather than a systemic hatred of black people, or that white people have also been victimized by cops is not even entertained by BLM demagogues. While you can probably recount the names of most black civilians killed by police officers, whether unarmed or armed, peaceful bystanders or aggressive criminals, how many of you remember the names  Zachary Hammond or Jeremy Mardis, an autistic 6 year-old white boy killed by a black police officer in Georgia?

The question answers itself, the reason being that academe, the media, and our cultural gatekeepers are intent upon perpetuating the concept of black Americans being the apex victim within our society. While there are occasionally thoughtful, nuanced national discussions of this subject, they are dwarfed by the institutionalized propaganda portraying minorities, but particularly black men, as eternal victims who are perpetually denied justice. Keep in mind, the previous and current Attorney General, as well as the man ostensibly charged with upholding the Constitution, are African-Americans. Correspondingly, white men are seen as super-predators in this country, continually oppressing their non-white prey through their ubiquitous racism. This meme suffuses American society and popular culture and has been a feature of daily life for at least the past 2 decades. Like the  doctrine of total hereditary depravity, white people are inculcated with the belief that their very existence is contaminated from birth. Their original sin is being born to race which is currently disfavored by our political and social elites.

The idea that there are no practical consequences to this institutionalized bigotry is absurd. When one race is persistently demonized by academe, the news media and within popular culture, and another is imbued with the sense that it is being exploited at the hands of that racial group, you are creating a toxic society. Beyond the mentally deranged who will exact violent, lethal revenge upon the people who they believe are responsible for their oppression, there are scores of people who aren’t sociopaths that will use the racial narrative they’ve absorbed to inform their daily lives. You need look no further than public opinion polls to discover the depth of this country’s racial divide and ask yourself, who or what is contributing to this philosophical chasm?

It’s ironic the same sort of people who acknowledge the damage false racial narratives inflicted upon black Americans and American society in the past, and even warn us about the danger they pose in the future, gleefully demonize the race they believe threatens their hold on power. The dysfunction that decades of cultural conditioning has created can be seen not only in the supremely narcissistic, myopic BLM but at virtually every liberal arts university in the country, as Jonathan Haidt and Sam Harris have explored far more eloquently than I could ever hope to. Black Lives Matter and its peers in similar affinity groups simply demonstrate the triumph of untethered emotion over reason.  The question is how do you reason with people who don’t recognize the value of reason? We must find an answer before the entire country finds itself living out the screenplays to The Wire.

Although there have been numerous global jihadist assaults since my last post-including an unsuccessful attack carried out by a Somali Muslim immigrant in a Texas town forced to accept the resettlement of refugees and the beheading of a Canadian hostage taken by Abu Sayyaf-it’s worth reflecting upon the atrocity which took place at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. Not simply because of the staggering toll-you can read the stories of those who were killed here-but because the post-Orlando political climate is a reflection of our bizarre national discourse at the moment.

While a courageous few are willing to speak truth to power-in the face of censorship by those who feel that the violence of Islam will evaporate once its critics are erased-our esteemed leaders continue to value their narrative of vibrant diversity over real human lives. The only way to combat this disease-which not only threatens our lives but our hard-won freedoms-is to confront it head-on. Share this video-as well that of Milo’s press conference, which begins 12 minutes in-and begin to challenge the insidious lies which ignore a mountain of corpses.

With the world aflame, it’s only appropriate that our periodical digest of immigration and cultural news returns. Starting off in the States, we find that Michelle Root, after a heartfelt meeting with Donald Trump, has decided to throw her support behind his candidacy. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the case, Michelle is the mother of Sarah Root, who was murdered by a criminal alien that is now at large because of our government’s brilliant oversight of this national disaster. For a good exposition of why Donald Trump is worth supporting, I recommend David Horowitz’s fantastic piece in Breitbart, which echoes many of my thoughts regarding the Dump Trump phenomenon. In my mind, it’s the best encapsulation of the pro-Trump argument published thus far. Jack Cashill also has a worthwhile column on this subject in WorldNetDaily. However, for those of you of a more intellectual bent, I recommend reading acclaimed historian Paul Johnson’s coruscating attack on the paragons of PC culture, and explanation of how Trump’s candidacy is a breath of fresh air in this stagnant ideological environment.

Moving north, we’re pleased to note that justice triumphs over sharia, at least in this instance. Accepting this idiotic leftist neologism into our lexicon is bad enough, but allowing the congenital neuroses of social justice warriors to determine the fate of jihadists is a bridge too far. Let’s hope that a certain judge in Minnesota is paying attention to these proceedings.

Rounding out our tour of North America, we land upon Mexico, where El Chapo, formerly the world’s most-wanted fugitive, is one step closer to extradition. Sean Penn could not be reached for comment. Someone who never declines to speak his mind is former Mexican president Vincente Fox, whose torpid retirement has been enlivened by the unexpected success of Donald Trump. What’s notable about his most recent outburst is its stunning lack of self-reflection. A man whose tenure witnessed continued mass emigration-both illegal and legal-virtually no progress by any significant cultural or economic metric, and who was widely considered a more doltish version of President Bush, somehow believes that Trump supporters are the ones operating from a place of ignorance. Go figure.

In Latin America, we find that Panama has closed its border with Colombia in order to prevent Cuban emigres from using their country as a transit point to the United States. However, not before agreeing to the transfer of 3,000 Cubans to American territory. For those of you who haven’t been paying attention, scores of Cubans are now flocking to American shores in order to take advantage of our wet foot, dry foot policy-implemented under President Clinton-which they fear will be coming to an end now that Barack Obama and the Castro regime have reached an uneasy detente.

Hopping across the pond, we find Britain under siege from the usual assortment of anti-fascist fascists, primarily The Religion of Peace and its prog thought enablers. While expressing public discontent with your government’s decision to repopulate your town with Islamic colonists is now grounds for being thrown into a dungeon, it appears that you can still safely threaten to behead political candidates who are not so keen on being invaded by scores of unassimilable aliens. This practice seems to have become a habit among well-integrated British Muslims, BTW. But aren’t these folks just the modern-day Jews fleeing the equivalent of Nazi Europe? No, they’re not, as even the perennially obnoxious Jamie Kirchick readily concedes, although we understand why someone conditioned by decades of open borders propaganda by the likes of NPR would think that’s an apt analogy. The same way it’s understandable that some have convinced themselves that Brexit represents an existential threat to the United Kingdom, although not as great as that posed by Donald Trump, evidently. The truth is much less flattering to the ruling class, alas.

However, truth is worth embracing for its own sake, in addition to its subsidiary benefits. Islamic refugees do pose a threat to European identity-and to the national sovereignty of the countries they’re invading-regardless of how politically incorrect this thought might seem to the gatekeepers of acceptable opinion. Even as the flood of colonizers from the Islamic world seek new paths of ingress, the results of Europe’s dangerous experiment in openness continue to pour in, most recently with a mysterious outbreak of mental illness in Munich, where the Palestinian knife jihad seems to be one more glorious import Mama Merkel has blessed her countrymen with. Is it any wonder that “far-right” thought criminals are catapulting to power in Central Europe?

Speaking of electoral politics, it looks like The Philippines has a new President-elect. Although that country has had its fair share of colorful leaders, Rodrigo Duterte seems to be in a class by himself. In addition to promising cabinet positions to the New People’s Army-a Maoist terrorist group which has waged a nearly half-century battle against the Filipino state-he has also pledged to negotiate with Islamic insurgents in the south of the country. Whether or not this promise includes the creatures who ritualistically sacrificed Canadian citizen John Ridsdel remains to be seen.

Over on the dark continent, we learn that Kenya has finally decided to shut down the world’s largest refugee camp. Followers of this site, or world events in general, can probably recite the litany of atrocities committed by Muslims living in Kenya-particularly those who are Somali refugees-so the decision to potentially repatriate some of these foreign nationals will come as little surprise. Neither will the howls of outrage from human rights groups, which lodged similar protests-equally spurious, as Philip Gourevitch has pointed out-against Rwanda’s effective campaign to close down terrorist havens in the Congo many years ago. 

A small victory for freedom of thought in a nation which has gradually descended into the muck of fascism, aided in no small part by the wholesale importation of Islamic radicals. Paul Weston, himself a victim of political persecution for expressing wrong think, explains why Tommy Robinson is the #1 target of the British government in a disturbing essay for Gates of Vienna, which you can read here.

As frightening as what’s transpiring in the UK is to most rational human beings, the sad truth is that these anti-Western witch hunts could very well make there way to the United States, especially if a certain Democratic presidential candidate is elected. The stenographers for hate groups and jihad enablers like the SPLC and CAIR are already hard at work erecting a foundation to punish those who dare to voice reasoned criticism of the left’s favorite religion. Darkness has descended upon the West, and not simply in Europe; it’s time we woke up to that ineluctable truth. The time for dithering has ended; we need to stand up for our freedoms before they’re lost irrevocably.

The facile nature of the immigration debate within this country can be infuriating to those of us who’ve invested time and effort into gaining a fuller understanding of this complex, interconnected series of issues. It often seems like we’ve living in the dystopian future outlined in the Neil Postman classic, Amusing Ourselves to Death. A world where linear thinking and the gathering of empirical evidence in order to buttress your argument are considered inconsequential, if not a hindrance, while the refraction of charged images and exploitation of emotional triggers are paramount. In that sense, the photo of Aylan Kurdi’s corpse being carried from the Mediterranean shore is emblematic of the type of discussion this subject engenders. Rife with emotionalism and moral preening, devoid of introspection, and remarkably fact and logic-free.

That’s why the chat between Professor Glenn Loury and economist George Borjas featured on Bloggingheads TV is such a breath of fresh air. They not only engage in a substantive examination of this topic-along with its profound implications for American society-but discuss why the rational, cost-benefit analysis that usually factors into any domestic policy debate is completely discarded when the subject turns to immigration. They honestly explore why the elites who have benefited from unfettered immigration from the developing world have stigmatized criticism of their agenda to the point where it is almost never broached in national conversation, and is taboo among Democratic Party incumbents and aspiring political leaders.

It’s worth watching in its entirety. I’m looking forward to your feedback.

Update: Cathy’s NRO archive. 

Some more memories, and photographs, of Cathy from her friends.

This month is bookended by two tragic anniversaries, which should serve as reflection points for not only the conservative movement but also the torpid, insular world of contemporary political journalism. While the untimely death of Andrew Breitbart has been discussed at length by numerous online news outlets-most of which would not exist but for his pioneering work in this field-yesterday marked the ninth year we’ve been without an equally brilliant American-by way of Winnipeg-iconoclast.

If Breitbart was a blowtorch to doctrinaire leftist, media-regurgitated nostrums, engulfing them in his incandescent fury,  then Cathy Seipp was a scalpel, skillfully and wittily excising blatant half-truths, misrepresentations and lies from the dominant, but usually misleading, media narrative. Both managed to thrive despite being embedded within what was essentially an alien culture, and led lives-horribly curtailed though they were-which illustrated the folly of suppressing your identity in order to be popular.

Last night I had the opportunity to reminisce about what made Cathy such a special person with her colleagues, friends, and family members. What I took away from the evening, beyond a keen appreciation for her generosity of spirit, was the realization that her defiance wasn’t simply a political philosophy. It was a defining feature of her character and something that exemplified who she was as a human being, which is why it had the ring of authenticity…it was true. Nowhere was this trait perceived more keenly than the manner in which she faced her own mortality, which allowed her to puncture an entirely different set of hobbling myths.

Cathy, through her wonderful, irreplaceable blog-whose name graces the post you’re reading-intellectually obliterated the concept that there is some rationale, cosmic or otherwise, for who does or does not get cancer. Even though this stupidity persists in some benighted quarters, no one could read one of Cathy’s posts and come to the conclusion that this was anything other than a horrible mistake, one which couldn’t have been avoided by finding a programmatic solution, e.g. don’t smoke, switch to a vegan diet, stop eating red meat. Cancer is so inexplicable that there is a 600 page-long book describing how the most well-trained oncologists and scientists on the planet can’t properly identify its causes. So the puritanical idea that there’s an inherent morality to this disease is absurd, and we can thank her for puncturing that baseless canard as well.

It’s sad to think that we have an Internet populated with inane listicles, turgid prose and simply godawful writing, but are missing some of the most wry, trenchant insights into human nature ever to grace the World Wide Web. Hopefully, the world will able to read these penetrating observations in some form in the future, and understand what it lost with Cathy Seipp’s passing. Her other great, and most lasting, legacy is her daughter. The store she put on family can’t be underestimated-as anyone who has read her work knows-and beyond her skill as a writer-which was peerless-this was her life’s signature achievement. Speaking with Maia last night gave me a deeper appreciation for how Cathy’s values, as well as her best personal qualities-particularly her wit and intellect-informed those she loved.

It’s something she undoubtedly would have taken great pride and satisfaction in, and which we should acknowledge in any remembrance of this great mother, friend and writer.

It’s funny how the most vociferous supporters of importing Syrian and Middle Eastern refugees to the West don’t seem to care that much about the official indifference of the extraordinarily wealthy Gulf Arab states. Which, to be blunt, have been less than helpful in alleviating the suffering of those streaming into Europe. Even the much-reviled Israelis-to say nothing of those despised Jews who are giving food and shelter to these outcasts-have discussed offering sanctuary to exiled Syrians.

Yet there didn’t seem to be any signs of outrage directed at their Sunni Muslim brethren at the no borders rally in Union Square this weekend. Then again, judging by the press release and assorted pictures our good friends at The Silent Majority No More compiled, there doesn’t seem to be much rational thought, let alone, philosophical consistency, put forward in defense of the current invasion of Europe from the Levant and Northern Africa. After all, why construct an argument on behalf of an indefensible position when you can rely upon carefully crafted fictions?