Wilder: China's War On The U.S.

John Wilder's latest piece is "China’s Unrestricted Economic War on America." He notes that in 1999,  two PLA colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, wrote a treatise called Unrestricted Warfare describing how to take down the U.S. without open warfare. And they have been following it since. He explains:

    The idea was simple: use every possible tool to erode the enemy’s strength while pretending you’re just a friendly neighbor.

    How many of those boxes have they checked?

• Trade warfare? Done. They flooded our markets, stole our manufacturing base, and used the WTO like a Trojan horse.
• Financial warfare? They’ve been buying up U.S. debt, manipulating currency, and positioning themselves to pull the rug out when the time is right, which might be now.
• Ecological warfare? See the citrus groves and the poultry barns and the Michigan fungus folks.  Introduce a pathogen here, a pest there, and watch the food supply strain.
• Smuggling warfare?  Fentanyl, anyone?
• Cyber and network warfare?  Constant hacks, intellectual-property theft, missing hard drives from Los Alamos, and infrastructure probes that never quite rise to the level of “war.”
• Psychological and media warfare?  Want to bet that China was stoking the fires on both sides in Minnesota during George Floyd?   

And this doesn't even include China buying up U.S. farms and ranches, buying up land abutting U.S. military bases, and flying drones over sensitive locations.  

    I know that a lot of readers probably disagree with the war against Iran, but it is important to understand that Iran is just a pretext. If it were just about Iran and its nuclear arsenal, the Democrat leadership--at the least the ones that matter--would be all for it. But the real target of the war is China. 

    Zineb Riboua, in an article penned for The Free Press, explained at the beginning of March:

    Operation Epic Fury, this weekend’s joint U.S.-Israel attack on Iran, has been widely described as an extraordinary assault on the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. That is true, but it misses a critical dimension. For years, Beijing has spent billions of dollars building Iran into a structural asset. By striking Iran directly, the Trump administration is dismantling, whether by design or by consequence, a pillar of China’s regional architecture.

    In other words: This is all about China.

She continues:

    Iran’s value to China also extends to proxy warfare. When Iran’s Houthis began attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea in late 2023, the consequences rippled across the global economy. Container traffic through the Red Sea fell by 90 percent within three months. Goods worth roughly $1 trillion were disrupted in the first seven months. The rerouting of ships around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope added nearly two weeks and about $1 million in fuel costs to every voyage, driving freight rates between Asia and Europe.

    The U.S. bore the heaviest burden of response. Carrier strike groups were deployed, air campaigns were sustained for months, and precision munitions costing between $1 million and $4 million per interceptor were expended at a rate that, by mid-2025, had consumed roughly a quarter of America’s high-end missile interceptor inventory. Last week, it was reported that Tehran was close to finalizing a deal for Chinese-made supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, capable of threatening American carriers now massing in the Persian Gulf. Earlier, Chinese suppliers shipped over 1,000 tons of sodium perchlorate, a key missile propellant ingredient, to an Iranian port, enough to rebuild a substantial portion of the ballistic missile stockpile that Israel spent 12 days destroying. Why would Beijing do this? And what does that mean for the United States? Answering those questions requires looking beyond Iran and toward the broader global contest in which Iran plays a role.

    Start with oil, because oil is where the entire relationship begins. China buys more than 80 percent of Iran’s crude oil exports at steep discounts. The shipments travel on a ghost fleet of tankers that switch off their transponders and relabel their cargo as Malaysian or Indonesian to circumvent American sanctions. Since 2021, the cumulative value of these purchases has exceeded $140 billion. This makes China the main reason the Islamic Republic has not gone bankrupt.

    The arrangement works beautifully for Beijing. It gets cheap oil for its industrial base, saving billions annually compared to market-rate suppliers. And in exchange, China acquires influence over a nation of 90 million people sitting astride the world’s most consequential energy corridor.

    Meanwhile, Tehran, increasingly cut off from every other major economy, has nowhere else to turn. When Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei received Chinese president Xi Jinping in Iran in 2016, he praised the 25-year strategic partnership as “totally correct and endowed with wisdom,” adding pointedly that “Western governments have never been able to win the Iranian nation’s trust.” Khamenei was not merely flattering a guest. He was describing a structural reality: Iran’s economy now runs on Chinese money, and both capitals know it.

    In 2021, the 25-Year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership committed China to invest an estimated $400 billion across Iran’s energy, banking, telecommunications, and infrastructure sectors, formalizing a relationship that was already underway. The deeper this integration runs, the less leverage anyone else has over Tehran, and the more leverage Beijing accumulates.

    Meanwhile, Chinese-flagged ships sailed through with less interference. Beijing contributed no vessels to the multinational protection force and issued no condemnation of the attacks. In fact, Chinese satellite companies were providing the Houthis with intelligence to enable their targeting of commercial vessels.

    The logic here is simple. Every dollar the United States spends defending Red Sea shipping lanes is a dollar unavailable for submarine production, Pacific bases, or Taiwan contingency planning. Every carrier group stationed in the Gulf of Aden is a carrier group absent from the Western Pacific. Iran’s proxies, armed with Iranian weapons and supported by Iranian intelligence, function as a mechanism of American strategic attrition, and the costs fall entirely on Washington while Beijing accumulates strategic gains. 

Real Clear Defense similarly noted in mid-March that the war is really about China, explaining:

    Iran is a theater, but it does not hold the final stage. The real battlefield lies within the larger contest between the United States and China over the architecture of the international order.

    Seen through that lens, American military pressure on Iran—and earlier actions against Venezuela—assume wider significance. These moves do not merely punish hostile regimes. They strike at elements of the geopolitical framework Beijing has spent decades constructing.

    China’s rise has depended not only on domestic economic growth but also on the steady expansion of influence abroad. Beijing has cultivated relationships with states willing to trade with China, align diplomatically with China, or simply welcome a world less dominated by Washington.

    Iran occupies a crucial place in that system.

    The oil that sustains Tehran’s economy has long flowed eastward to China, often at discounted prices. Countries now under American pressure have supplied nearly 17 percent of China’s imported oil, providing Beijing with a quiet but significant buffer against Western leverage.

    To remove Iran from that equation—or even threaten doing so—is to reach directly into China’s long-term energy planning and development strategy.  

    Iran's importance to China is reflected in the assistance China has given Iran. The Strategist reports:

    Several reports in recent weeks have revealed the extent of China’s active support for Iran. The Financial Times reported on 15 April that China had given Iran a commercial reconnaissance satellite, providing Tehran with precise targeting information to hit US military facilities in the Middle East. A Chinese company, Earth Eye Co, reportedly built and launched the TEE-01B satellite and provided in-orbit delivery to Iran. Another Chinese company, Emposat, also supplied Iran with satellite data and control services. These must have helped Iran target US bases in the war.

    Other reports point to a Chinese geospatial AI and software company, MizarVision, which published satellite imagery with tagging data on several US military facilities prior to and even during the war.

    On 12 April, CNN reported that China was providing Iran with new air-defence systems in the coming weeks. These were shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, CNN said. These are relatively short-range systems, but they still represent a serious danger to both helicopters and low-flying combat aircraft. The US-built Stinger is a good example, and its earlier version was credited with playing a major role in defeating Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the late 1980s. CNN’s sources said that China was shipping the weapons through third countries to hide their origin. China has denied the report.

    A 3 April Telegraph report revealed that China was providing Iran with chemicals for fuel for ballistic missiles. The report added that four sanctioned vessels were at Iranian ports, with one more ship waiting offshore. They’d come from China’s Zhuhai Gaolan port and were transporting sodium perchlorate, a precursor material for solid-fuel rocket propellant. The quantity is reported to be enough for hundreds of ballistic missiles. The five ships reportedly belong to the Iran Shipping Line Group, which is under sanctions by the US, Britain and the European Union.  

    So how long should we expect the war to continue? That's hard to say, but one data point has to do with China's strategic oil reserve.  Prior to the war breaking out, "China surged oil imports in January and February alone by 16 percent, with Russia exporting around 300,000 additional barrels per day to China," and "China’s combined strategic and commercial reserves now stand at 1.3 billion to 1.4 billion barrels, covering roughly four months of imports." That means that the U.S. blockade may need to go on for more than four months to be effective. But even that may be in doubt, as China expects to benefit from the UAE leaving OPEC. 

     I fully expect things to get spicy this summer as China begins to feel the bite of sanctions. First, China's Leftist tools will be working overtime to protest and disrupt life in the U.S. and prepare for cheating in the fall elections. Second, we should see China step up its modes of attack outline in Unrestricted Warfare. In that regard, it is notable that a synthetic opioid, cyclorphine, has started showing up on American streets. 

VIDEO: Comparison Between 9mm and .40 S&W Federal HST

This is a good test as the author uses the same pistols (other than caliber) and the same brand and type of ammo (Federal HST in this case) to compare the .40 S&W and 9mm +P. Obviously, these results are only for the Federal HST and might be different for other ammo. Notably, the Federal HST was picked for the test because it is what the host would recommend for carry.

The results were interesting. Both the 9mm and .40 S&W had excellent expansion with the longer barreled pistols, giving the win to the .40 S&W: it started larger than the 9mm and so, fully expanded, it was still larger than the 9mm, and the penetration was basically the same. But the lower velocity out of the shorter barrel weighed against the .40 S&W such that the 9mm performed better both as to expansion and penetration when using the compact pistols. 

The takeaway, then, was that with this ammunition, the 9mm was a better choice out of a compact pistol while the .40 S&W would be the better option for a full sized pistol. Selecting a round is about more than just how well it works in a ballistic test, though. One of the reasons 9mm has been so successful is that it hits a sweet spot balancing size, recoil, and effectiveness.  

 VIDEO: "As a Ballistic Tester - The 9mm and .40 S&W Ammo I Would Recommend - Worth Going up to .40 S&W?" -- Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (18 min.)

Is The SPLC Handing Out More Money?

The New York Post reports: "Sicko walks through quiet Rhode Island town in KKK robes: ‘That’s a whole different level of racism’."

Reports of Christianity's Death May Be Premature

Rod Martin reports that "Christianity’s Decline in America Has Halted, and May Now Have Reversed." Martin offers two explanations:

    First, he believes that the decline was being led by people who didn't truly believe or were shaky in their faith who were leaving. But now that those types are mostly gone, the decline halted. He explains (bold in original):

    But why? Why would it stop? If the problem is that Christianity is outdated or offensive to our culture, why wouldn’t we continue to collapse?

    The answer is simple, as I’ve been telling you for decades. The people who were leaving Christianity were not leaving because conservatives were “mean,” or because Christians “lacked winsomeness,” or because the church failed to wrap historic orthodoxy in the therapeutic language of NPR. 

    They left because they were leftists. The belief system of the modern Democrat Party is anathema to the Christian faith.

    Or let me put that another way: the fakers have left.

    There’s no longer any benefit to your business, or to your personal prestige, that derives from pretending to be a Christian. There is no financial gain that comes from sitting on the second pew. To be a Christian today means you have to really mean it, or you just wouldn’t bother.

    And they don’t.

    So the half-believers left. The brunch Christians left. The “Jesus was a socialist community organizer” crowd left. The people who wanted the church to baptize abortion, transgenderism, Critical Race Theory, and every other fashionable madness of the age left.

    Second, Martin links the reversal to a growing number of young conservative men turning to Christianity. He notes: "Young conservative men helped drive the stabilization, and they may now be helping drive the reversal. They are embracing Christianity as part of a broader rejection of leftist ideology, secular despair, and the cultural war against masculinity itself." And it seems the numbers support this:

    Gallup’s newest data show a remarkable shift among young men ages 18–29. In 2024–25, 42 percent of young men said religion is “very important” in their lives, up from 28 percent just two years earlier. Young women, by contrast, remained roughly flat at about 30 percent. Gallup says young men now surpass young women on this measure by a statistically significant margin, a stunning reversal of the long-standing pattern in which young women were more religious than young men.

    Let’s put that in perspective. For the first time in 300 years, among young adults aged 18-24, the gender gap in religiosity has flipped. Historically, women have long been 15-20 percentage points more religious than men (which accounts for much of the church and the clergy’s feminization). But among Generation Z, those days are over.

    This is a very, very big deal.

    My LDS readers may be wondering about all this as it seems the LDS Church is still drifting left and embracing "social justice," DEI, and illegal immigration. For instance, the recent pronouncement allowing women to serve in Sunday School presidencies notwithstanding Paul's admonition in 1 Timothy 2:12. But looking at the statistics, you will see that the Church seems to be following the same trend lines as Christianity in general, albeit lagging by several years. This is illustrated by this article from April 21, 2026: "Why Latter-day Saints appear to be politically shifting to the left." The article explains that contrary to the general trend among Christian denominations, "[o]ver the last 18 years, [LDS] members moved 19 points to the left, according to a new report from the global analytics firm YouGov based on data from the Cooperative Election Survey." However, those members moving to the Left are less devout:

    ... When [Alex Bass, a data scientist] plotted the share of devout Latter-day Saints — those with the highest levels of religious practice, such as praying and attending church — and the share of Latter-day Saints who identify as Republican, they seem to be declining in tandem.

    Of course, correlation isn’t always causation. Bass said, however, the political beliefs of the different devoutness groups haven’t changed — devout members are firmly Republican, and cultural members are near the political center. Now, there are just more Latter-day Saints who are less devout and less Republican.
    
    The share of devout Latter-day Saints dropped from 52% in 2008-2012 to 39% in 2021-2025. Cultural members, those who attend church less than once a month, grew from 21% to 31%. 

And in going to Bass's blog, he reports that there is some data showing a resurgence in Church activity, but warns that "the limited data we have more likely suggests a retrenchment where those who remain are more likely to participate in all religious measures, but people are lost at the fringes." And in line with what Martin was saying, Bass notes: "Looking at party affiliation, in-line with the practice metrics and increasing 'devout' status, we see a rise in Republican Party affiliation. This again shows how strongly correlated these two things are!" 

    The correlation shouldn't be all that surprising. Church members were, prior to the 1970s, roughly split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, but as the Democrats moved ever leftward, the membership shifted to voting Republican. Given the current state of the Democratic party and its embrace of communist theories if not outright communism, it is notable that on July 3, 1936, the First Presidency of the Church issued a statement concerning communism that warned members that communism was anathema to both the teachings of the Church and to our Constitutional form of government, stating in part:

    Since Communism, established, would destroy our American Constitutional government, to support Communism is treasonable to our free institutions, and no patriotic American citizen may become either a Communist or supporter of Communism.

[snip]

    Furthermore, it is charged by universal report, which is not successfully contradicted or disproved, that Communism undertakes to control, if not indeed to proscribe the religious life of the people living within its jurisdiction, and that it even reaches its hand into the sanctity of the family circle itself, disrupting the normal relationship of parent and child, all in a manner unknown and unsanctioned under the Constitutional guarantees under which we in America live. Such interference would be contrary to the fundamental precepts of the Gospel and to the teachings and order of the Church. Communism being thus hostile to loyal American citizenship and incompatible with true Church membership, of necessity no loyal American citizen and no faithful Church member can be a Communist.    

Leftists cannot abide Christianity and Christianity cannot abide Leftism. So eventually the Leftists, where they are unsuccessful in destroying a religious institution, will eventually leave. 

The North Hollywood Shootout And Its Impact On Law Enforcement

Occasionally an incident will happen that sends ripples through the law enforcement community. One that has received a lot of attention was the April 11, 1986, Miami Shootout between a couple bank robbers and the FBI that fundamentally changed our perceptions of what was acceptable performance from handgun ammo. It was from that shootout that the FBI studied handgun bullet effectiveness and developed the famous FBI standards on penetration and performance that still drive bullet design. 

    But another incident that was probably just as significant was the North Hollywood Shootout of February 28, 1997.  On that day, two bank robbers--Larry Phillips Jr. and Emil Mătăsăreanu--walked out of a bank and immediately began a 44 minute shootout with police outside the bank which moved into an adjoining neighborhood. At the end of the shootout, over 1,600 rounds had been fired by the robbers and police; Phillips and Mătăsăreanu were mortally wounded; and 12 officers, 8 civilians had been wounded.

    The reason the shootout lasted 44 minutes was because of the equipment used by the robbers and the police. As a Guns America article on the shootout relates:

    [The robbers] each wore body armor bodged together from commercial Aramid components covering their chests, groins, shins, thighs, and forearms. Matasareanu included a steel strike plate in his ensemble to protect his vital organs. They had each sewed watches into the backs of their gloves and took phenobarbital to calm their nerves. ...

[snip]

    They had one Norinco Type 56 S-1 underfolder that had been illegally converted to full auto along with several Chinese-made 75 and 100-round drums. It is impossible to deploy an underfolding AK stock with a drum in place, but Larry Phillips still ran this weapon efficiently on full auto even with the stock folded.

[snip]

    The loadout included a Bushmaster XM15 Dissipator. The Dissipator featured standard M16A1 triangular handguards, a stubby16-inch barrel, and a collapsible stock along with a 100-round Beta C-mag. The Dissipator looks a little weird but illegally converted to full auto it was a formidable close combat tool. They also wielded a German HK91A3 with extended 30-round mags. These magazines were formed by welding two 20-round magazine bodies together.

Conversely, the responding officers were armed only with their issued 9mm pistols or .38 Special revolvers, with some having shotguns. The body armor used by the robbers made them nearly impervious to the officer's weapons. (Although some officers were authorized to obtain rifles from a nearby gun store, the sources I've read indicted that none of those weapons were put to use). Ultimately, though, the robbers were wounded. Phillips put a pistol below his chin but was shot in the neck. He died of his wounds. Mătăsăreanu bled to death from his wounds while police secured the area before allowing EMTs in to care for him. He had been shot 20 times below the waist. 

    As a Mag-Life article relates:

After reviewing the incident, the LAPD took a hard look at its response and how it could do better in the future. The Department took on the suspects with department-issued 9mm pistols, shotguns, and a few officers had rifles chambered in .223. It was decided that in addition to ongoing training for department-wide preparedness for any future incidents of this magnitude, officers would have the option to use .45 ACP pistols, AR-15s chambered in .223, and 12-gauge shotguns in addition to upgraded pistol ammunition options. Police vehicles were reportedly upgraded with Kevlar panels in the side to help protect officers from rounds. 

But it didn't just stop with the LAPD. This incident is generally credited with boosting the then-growing impetus across the nation to arm police officers with patrol rifles. For instance, a Police Magazine article on the shootout relates:

A month later, the chief of the Omaha (Neb.) Police Department asked its SWAT commander to write a position paper outlining the need and justification of arming our patrol personnel with intermediate (5.56x45mm) rifles. With the backing of the chief and a strong-willed deputy chief who always remembered the streets from where he came, the department graduated its first patrol rifle class in November of 1997.     

Sources:

• "North Hollywood shootout"--Wikipedia. 
• "Historical Shootouts: Lessons Learned and Their Impact on Training" by Jason Mosher, Safariland.
• "Guns of the North Hollywood Shootout: Life Imitates Art" by Will Dabbs, Guns America.
• "North Hollywood Shootout: 44 Minutes That Changed Law Enforcement" by Patti Miller, The Mag Life. 
• "How the North Hollywood Shootout Changed Patrol Arsenals" by Bob Parker, Police Magazine. 
• "20 years ago, a dramatic North Hollywood shootout changed the course of the LAPD and policing at large"--Los Angeles Times.  
• "Report to police commission on North Hollywood shootout"--LA Times.  
• "How the North Hollywood shootout changed policing" by Dana Bartholomew, Police 1. 
• "When Bank Robbery Went Wild: Remembering the North Hollywood Shootout"--The History Of Everything Blog. 

It's A Start...

• Update: "Justice Department indicts former FBI Director James Comey again"--New York Post. The NY Post article doesn't have any details about the charges, but another source indicates it may relate to Comey's 2025 social media post showing sea shells arranged to form "86 47" which was interpreted as a threat against Pres. Trump. 
• "Anthony Fauci adviser indicted by Department of Justice"--New York Post. Per the article, David Morens, who served as a senior advisor to Fauci, "has been charged with conspiracy against the United States; destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations; concealment, removal, or mutilation of records; and aiding and abetting." 

Morens, who served as a senior advisor to Fauci from 2006 to 2022, conducted official government business from a private email account and asked the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) FOIA liaison for tips on how to evade records requests, according to communications first exposed by The Post in May 2024.

The article also notes that Morens "oversaw a now-infamous grant from NIH to the Manhattan-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance beginning in 2014 that ended up funneling US taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research."

    “These allegations represent a profound abuse of trust at a time when the American people needed it most — during the height of a global pandemic,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement.

    “As alleged in the indictment, Dr. Morens and his co-conspirators deliberately concealed information and falsified records in an effort to suppress alternative theories regarding the origins of COVID-19. Government officials have a solemn duty to provide honest, well-grounded facts and advice in service of the public interest — not to advance their own personal or ideological agendas.”

 Not the "crimes against humanity" charges I'd been hoping for, but at least it is something.

• "FBI raids nearly two dozen Minnesota child care centers in fraud probe, including ‘Quality Learing Center’"--New York Post. The article relates: "The Trump administration estimates fraud in Minnesota alone at $19 billion, with dozens charged criminally."
• Update:  Minn. Gov. Tim Walz (D), who previously had called the fraud investigations "white supremacy" is now using the raids to tout that it shows he is tough on fraud. So even when he claims to be tough on fraud, he is a fraud. 
• "‘Multiple young men’ were allegedly drugged, raped at Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, where ‘super predators’ roamed: report"--New York Post.  The article begins:

    “Multiple young men” were allegedly drugged and raped at Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, according to an explosive new report that detailed harrowing accusations from murder to babies snatched from mothers at the pedophile’s New Mexico house of horrors.

    “A man actually claims that he met Jeffrey Epstein [and] was brought to the ranch, he was drugged,” US Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) told “60 Minutes Australia” in a Sunday segment, the Sun reported.

    “He describes in detail a scene in which multiple young men were raped at the ranch in front of him after he was drugged,” said Stansbury, a leading advocate for Epstein victims. 

• "Migrant caravan leaves southern Mexican city but many are no longer aiming for the US border"--AP. From the article:

    Hundreds of migrants, most of them from Haiti, left the southern Mexican city of Tapachula on foot Tuesday seeking better living conditions elsewhere in Mexico.

    Migrant caravans like the one that left Tapachula used to aim for the U.S. border. But many of the migrants leaving Tapachula on Tuesday said they had lost hope of making it to the U.S. due to the restrictions that the Trump administration has placed on asylum seekers.

    Instead, the migrants said they wanted to settle down in large Mexican cities, where they may be able to find work and file asylum claims. Some of the migrants said that they had been unable to get responses for asylum claims in Tapachula, despite spending months in the small city near Mexico’s border with Guatemala.

    “The United States is no longer an option for us” said Jerry Gabriel, a 29-year-old Haitian migrant. “We only want to make it to Mexico City, Monterrey, Tijuana or another place where we might be able to live.” 

 If Mexico lets them in, Mexico should keep them. 

Survival Lilly: Game Over For Germany

Survival Lilly has posted a follow up video to her one from last week describing how bleak things had become in Germany. In many ways, this video is even worse than the one from last week. She begins by sharing an article entitled "Germany's Economy At Point Of No Return". The basic thrust of the article is that German businesses are taking more in depreciation than they are spending on new equipment. In plain terms, it means that, overall, German businesses have stopped investing in new plants and equipment ... at least in Germany. The article goes on to note that NGOs (i.e., the freeloaders that live off government subsidies) are crowding out the real economy; and those businesses that can do so are moving out of Germany.  She also notes that since 2018, Germany's industrial sector has lost about1/5 (20%) of its production volume; and the government is reporting a 79% reduction in corporate tax revenue compared to last year, along with a 14% decline in income tax revenue. In short, as Lilly explains:

Once the continent's industrial engine, Germany has spent the last decade dismantling the foundations of its prosperity through energy and immigration policies driven more by ideology than evidence or good sense. The results have been rising costs, falling competitiveness, social disorder, and political backlash. 

In other words, Germany is undergoing "decolonization". 

    You might think that term simply means countries dispossessing themselves of colonies. But just as the term "anti-racism" actually means reverse racism, decolonization means a reverse colonization and destruction of the European peoples. That is, as Jean-Paul Sartre put it, "Our soil must be occupied by a formerly colonized people and we must starve of hunger." And to accomplish this, quoting from the introduction to The Camp Of The Saints, "[t]he First World must be taught to be ashamed of itself, to believe that its death will be its greatest gift to humanity." 

VIDEO: "Game over for Germany - Part 2"
Survival Lilly (14 min.)

VIDEO + Article: "What Effective Training Can Look Like With 100 Rounds"

The article is entitled "What Effective Training Can Look Like With 100 Rounds" from Achilles Heel Tactical. The article begins:

    I just got back from San Mateo County, California, where I was training some law enforcement, and one of the sergeants pulled me aside and pointed out a guy walking onto the range. He said, "Watch this, he's just going to mag dump." Sure enough, the guy ran three mags straight through the gun, back to back to back. The sergeant's question was fair: what training value is that guy actually getting?

    That's the conversation that led to the following video. If you've got 45 rounds on your belt and you're rotating ammo from duty to training, or you've got 100 rounds and a range day ahead of you, you might as well get something out of it. So I wanted to put together a session of 100 round pistol drills and show what you can actually accomplish with a restricted round count if you train with intent instead of just mag dumping. 

The video is embedded in the article, but I've also embedded and linked to it before. The article is the transcript of the video, so it allows you to better review some of the points raised in the video. But here is the gist:

    We ended up at 107 rounds across the whole session. Trigger control at speed, 50/50s and doubles, graduation drill at 7, progressive return at 25, two static and two moving in four directions, a movement drill with hit factor scoring, and the DOPE drill to close it out.

    These 100 round pistol drills deliver more training value than most cops know what to do with, more than most civilians know where to start, and more than the military is doing on any given range day. It doesn't cost a lot of time or money. If you're willing to be honest about what you're seeing and feeling behind the gun, and do something about it, 100 rounds goes a long way. 

 VIDEO: "What Effective Training Can Look Like With 100 Rounds Or Less"
Achilles Heel Tactical (35 min.)

CT Dem Wants To Ban "Automated" Guns

From Breitbart: "Connecticut Democrat: Ban Guns That Can Be Converted ‘Into Semi or Fully Automated Weapons’." The article notes that "Connecticut state Rep. Bob Godfrey (D) spoke in favor of banning firearms that are 'too easily converted into semi or even fully automated weapons.'" You might think the law was to protect us from rogue AIs and their terminator drones and robots, but you would be wrong. It was just another ignorant politician demonstrating that he knows nothing about what he intends to ban.

    Godfrey was defending the convertible pistol ban, aka, the Glock ban, which the Connecticut House passed on Wednesday.

    CT Mirror reported that the ban “passed by a vote of 86-64, with all the House Republicans and 15 Democrats voting in opposition.”

    The Mirror noted that Godfrey defended the bill as it moved through the House. He admitted that Connecticut citizens have a right to own firearms for self-defense but hedged that admission by saying the state’s legislature has the ability to define which firearms constitute “defensive weapons.”

Reminds me of this meme:

 

Source: WRSA

Democrats Are Sick

It is being reported that, last Thursday on his late night show on ABC, Jimmy Kimmel gave his own speech mocking the White House Correspondence dinner in which he said: “Our first lady, Melania, is here. Look at Melania, so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.” Two days later an assassin tried to rush into the dinner, shooting a Secret Service Agent in the process. 

I'm not saying that Kimmel was involved in planning or carrying out the assassination attempt--although I think the possibility should be investigated--but he clearly hoped that someone would do something. In essence, he sent out a request to all the Democrat wind-up toys.  

Meanwhile, although the would-be assassin penned a manifesto (or diatribe, if you prefer) on why he hates Trump that echoes mainstream Democrat talking points, prominent Democrats--including Barack Obama--claim we don't know the motive for the attack. Other Democrats are incensed that people have noticed that the gunman was a Democrat. But as Stephen Green writes:

    Dems, you have a problem.

    "The same week the New York Times published a cozy interview justifying the murder of people whose politics you don’t like, the same week we learned that the Unite the Right Charlottesville rally was funded by the Left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center, President Trump survived his third assassination attempt," Batya Ungar-Sargon wrote on Sunday.

    "A recent YouGov poll says it all: 25% of very liberal Americans consider political violence justified—compared to 3% of very conservative Americans. Another 17% of liberal Americans say it’s justified, compared to just 6% of conservatives."

    The left has worked hard at normalizing political violence — and Allen's murderous intent is the left's new mainstream.     

Daniel Greenfield, writing at Frontpage Magazine, points out that the Democrats have become a party of assassins:

    But even while people are talking about Cole Tomas Allen becoming ‘radicalized’, there’s no evidence that he was ideologically radicalized. And it’s important for us to understand this.

    Unlike Thomas Crooks, the Butler assassin, Allen wasn’t quoting Mao about power coming from the barrel of a gun. Unlike Austin Tucker Martin, who was shot and killed while breaking into Mar-a-Lago while armed with a shotgun back in March (notably there are so many attempts to kill Trump that they quickly vanish from the media coverage) he didn’t go down a social media conspiracy rabbit hole (Martin was obsessed with conspiracies tying Trump to Epstein.)

    Allen and Routh’s views were generally those of mainstream liberal Democrats. They were no more extreme than your average MSNBC viewer. Probably even a smidgen more moderate.

    And they were probably no more radical than the average committed Democrat.

    The only difference between the two assassins and the rest of their political movement was that they didn’t just buy t-shirts calling for Trump’s murder (Amazon has a Google search result ‘Trump Dead Shirt’ to cash in on this trend) or put up ‘Is He Dead Yet’ signs on their lawns or confine themselves to fulminating on social media… they did something about it.

    That doesn’t make them more radical than the average Democrat. Just more serious.

[snip]

    This is not some grassroots phenomenon but the messaging from the top down of the party and its media apparatus. That’s why Allen’s views are entirely reflective of their rhetoric. He wasn’t a Marxist, a Communist or a Socialist… his views were those of the mainstream of his party. (The amount of distance between the Democrats and the Marxists of course is rapidly shrinking.)

    But Allen didn’t try to kill Trump and members of his administration officials in the name of socialized medicine, a command economy, the working class or any affirmative leftist cause.

    He did it because he had been brainwashed into believing he was stopping Hitler 2.0.

 And thus we come full circle back to Kimmel and others like him urging someone, anyone, to rid him of this turbulent president.