• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

America Uniting Against Fascist Critical Race Theory!


Black Scholars Pen Open Letter To School Boards Slamming Critical Race Theory

By Chrissy Clark at   DailyWire.com•FacebookTwitterMail

NEW YORK, NY - SEPTEMBER 17: Author, columnist and professor at Columbia University, John McWhorter speaks onstage during the New York Times Schools for Tomorrow conference at New York Times Building on September 17, 2015 in New York City.
Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for New York Times

A group of black scholars penned an open letter to the National School Boards Association and local school boards nationwide urging them to drop curriculum that is inspired by Critical Race Theory. 

Posted on “1776 Unites,” an organization that crafted curriculum to counterbalance The New York Time’s “1619 Project,” 21 black scholars said that Critical Race Theory and the “narrative of racial grievances” are having a “damaging effect” on low income and minority children.

“The prevailing narrative of racial grievances has been corrupting the instruction of American history and the humanities for many decades, but has accelerated dangerously over the past year,” the letter reads. “The most damaging effects of such instruction fall on lower income minority children, who are implicitly told that they are helpless victims with no power or agency to shape their own futures.”

The signees say they represent a nonpartisan and “intellectually diverse” group of black-led writers, educators, activists, and thinkers who are “focused on solutions to our country’s greatest challenges in education, culture, race relations, and upward mobility.” Among the group are thought leaders such as Bob Woodson, who created “1776 Unites, John McWhorter, an associate professor of Columbia University, and Glenn Loury, a professor of economics at Brown University. 

According to the letter, the group finds it to be problematic that teachers allow the “racial grievance” narrative to dominate nearly every classroom, while data shows that only a tiny portion of America’s students are performing at or above proficiency standards in civics and history courses. 

For example, only 24 percent of eighth-graders in the U.S. performed at or above the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) proficiency standards on the civics assessment, and only 15 percent of students hit the NAEP’s proficiency standards for the history assessment. 

“These dismal achievements in gaining an understanding of democratic citizenship, government, historical facts and perspectives across time are low across all student backgrounds and virtually unchanged from the benchmarks established two decades ago,” the letter reads.

The group proposes that school boards opt to use curricula such as 1776 Unites and avoid using any lesson plan that is rooted in Critical Race Theory, an ideology that claims America is irredeemably racist. 

Signees “stands in unqualified opposition to any curricula that depict America as irredeemably racist; teach that the legacies of slavery, racial segregation, and other appalling crimes are insurmountable; or fail to provide examples from history of black achievement against the odds.”  

The group provides three tenets for its existing curricula.

The first is “continuity, not rupture,” which means asking teachers to teach about the harsh realities of slavery while reminding students that this is not an example of American ideals. The second is “Dignity not grievances,” which proclaims that black people can — and will — reclaim their own destiny despite hardships. https://8749c4a28d59cef88ac14116cbe77015.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

The final tenet is “resilience, not fragility,” which argues that knowing the achievements of historical black people can help current students better understand their responsibilities as American citizens. 

Related: CRT Experts Offer Advice On How Parents Can Fight Back Against Indoctrination In Their Child’s Classroom

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a memberRead more in:

Article from Mark Waldeland.

We Won Afghanistan, Then Lost It!?

After Afghanistan, No More Moral Blackmail From Failed Global Interventionists

The architects of the nation-building policies from Afghanistan to Iraq are failures and should be treated with the same disdain reserved for flat earthers or bloodletters.

By Sean Davis at the Federalist:

Days after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was initially sold as a necessary pre-emptive effort to secure deadly weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein planned to use against the American people, National Review ran an op-ed by former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum attacking everyone on the right who opposed the war as “unpatriotic conservatives.”

In the nearly two decades since it was published, the column has become something of a Rosetta Stone for deciphering the underlying motivations and mindset of the most ardent proponents of the idea that stable democracies can be imposed by military force from the top down. Like an insect captured in amber, Frum’s essay is a near-perfect specimen of the neoconservative id, equal parts delusion and sanctimony.

Frum attacked legendary conservative columnist Robert Novak for correctly predicting that America’s foray into Afghanistan would be a “futile slaughter”; he attacked Pat Buchanan for correctly predicting that America’s military might wouldn’t be enough to overcome its ignorance of Afghanistan’s culture and history; and he characterized the entire movement of conservatives who opposed the neoconservative plan to democratize the world through military conquest as Vichy apologists whose sole aim was to stand up for terrorist suicide bombers.

After tarring war opponents as Nazi collaborators, Frum transitioned to tarring anyone who opposed open borders and unchecked immigration as racist relics pining for the return of the KKK. “They began by hating neoconservatives,” Frum wrote. “They came to hate their party and this president. They have finished by hating their country.”

“War is a great clarifier,” Frum concluded. “The paleoconservatives have chosen—and the rest of us must choose too. In a time of danger, they have turned their backs on their country. Now we turn our backs on them.”

Frum, who was sent packing from his perch at the American Enterprise Institute for his refusal to do much of anything in exchange for his six-figure sinecure there, was right about one thing: war is a great clarifier.

We Won Afghanistan, Then Lost It

Take Afghanistan, for example. Although the post-9/11 invasion of the country was presented to the American public as necessary to take down al Qaeda and its then-leader Osama bin Laden for their roles in perpetrating the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, the mission quickly shifted to nation-building and democracy-exporting. By December of 2001, the Taliban–which had harbored al Qaeda in Afghanistan—had been routed, and bin Laden had escaped through the mountains into Pakistan.

In his State of the Union address in 2002, President George W. Bush all but claimed total military victory in Afghanistan.

“In four short months, our nation has comforted the victims, begun to rebuild New York and the Pentagon, rallied a great coalition, captured, arrested, and rid the world of thousands of terrorists, destroyed Afghanistan’s terrorist training camps, saved a people from starvation, and freed a country from brutal oppression,” Bush stated.

At that point, the military mission in Afghanistan should have concluded. But by 2004, the mission to destroy the terrorists responsible for 9/11 had morphed into a mission to export and establish Western-style liberal democracy not just in Afghanistan, but in Iraq, too.

“As long as the Middle East remains a place of tyranny, despair, and anger, it will continue to produce men and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends. So America is pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the greater Middle East,” Bush told Congress in 2004. “We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government.”

The subtext of Bush’s address was no different than the overt charge leveled by Frum: if you opposed the bait-and-switch from defeating terrorists to nation-building all over the Middle East, either because you believed it be contrary to the purpose of the military or you believed it was futile and doomed to failure, you were racist and xenophobic.

Let’s Just Try It and See What Happens

Bush’s sentiments were echoed more eloquently by the late Charles Krauthammer in a speech delivered to the American Enterprise Institute in February of 2004. Krauthammer’s remarks, entitled “Democratic Realism,” extolled the virtues of democracy promotion by force, and scoffed at the idea that a liberal Western democracy in a tribal nation like Afghanistan with no history whatsoever of secular, representative government would do anything but flourish.

“Realists have been warning against the hubris of thinking we can transform an alien culture because of some postulated natural and universal human will to freedom,” Krauthammer acknowledged. “And they may yet be right. But how do they know in advance?”https://a24efcb5d23c39a288205baee86ff4d4.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

When he then asked during his speech where it is written that tribal Islamic societies with no sense of national identity akin to the American esprit de corps that unites all people within its borders regardless of color or creed, let alone a tradition of Western rule of law and civic order, are incapable of peaceful, secular democracy, an attendee at the dinner yelled out “the Koran!” Unfazed and apparently oblivious to the possibility that the vacuum created by forcibly deposing Saddam Hussein and other Middle Eastern leaders would lead to Islamists throughout the Middle East deposing their own governments, slaughtering Christians and apostate Muslims, over-running American diplomatic outposts and murdering American ambassadors, and eventually re-establishing the Islamic caliphate, Krauthammer soldiered on.

Spreading democracy around the globe, Krauthammer argued, was the only way to stop terrorism, and to argue otherwise was idiotic. To oppose the grandiose plans of the neoconservatives and liberal internationalists was, in Krauthammer’s words, “intellectually obsolete” and “politically bankrupt.”

As we all now know, having witnessed the post-invasion debacle in Iraq, the disastrous Arab Spring, the pre-meditated murder of four Americans in Libya, the rise and spread of ISIS, and the ignominious fall of Kabul in Afghanistan, the utopian vision of Frum, Bush, and Krauthammer was a lie. It was a lie that cost two decades, trillions of dollars, and tens of thousands of American lives and limbs, and it was an incalculably destructive lie that was sold by smearing its realist opponents as condescending, racist know-nothings who lacked both the brain and the heart to understand how the new world truly worked.

Smears to Substitute for Having Any Arguments

The fall of Afghanistan should have shocked the architects of its failure back into reality. Instead, they’ve moved on as if nothing much happened at all and are now arguing that America should, nay must, allow tens or even hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees into America immediately.

Being wrong means never having to say you’re sorry and being wrong about every failed foreign policy endeavor of this century apparently means you get to blather your way past America’s worst defeat since Vietnam so you can instead talk about the need for open borders. The solution for failing to export American democracy to Afghanistan, you see, is to import Afghanistan into America.

Wouldn’t you know it, the same arguments and epithets deployed against opponents of America’s failed wars are now being deployed against opponents of unchecked immigration. Moral blackmail is the stock-in-trade of the failed internationalist.

Are you concerned that people posing as refugees might be terrorists intent on killing Americans on U.S. soil? You’re a racist. Are you worried that the same government and immigration system that allowed the 19 9/11 hijackers entry to the United States might not be competent to judge who is and who is not a security threat? You’re a xenophobe.

Do you think maybe it is time for the U.S. government to focus on what is best for American citizens rather than what is best for Afghans, or Syrians, or Libyans, or Iraqis? You’re probably a Jim Crow fanatic who wants segregated water fountains. Do you think the family of the current president, via their shady business deals with corrupt oligarchs beholden to America’s enemies across the globe, might be getting rich by manipulating the president’s foreign policy to enrich themselves? Well, you’re obviously a Russian stooge.

A Projection of Their Own Guilt

The same people who tried to morally blackmail you into supporting a failed Forever War in Afghanistan—the ones who declared that you were either on board with the new international interventionist imperative or you were with the terrorists—are now trying to morally blackmail you into supporting open borders with Afghanistan and every other country that America’s incompetent elites thought they could turn into Stepford if only they invaded it hard enough. In truth, the entire foundation of the Washington establishment’s failed foreign policy is its members’ own feelings of guilt.

They felt guilty that Afghanistan looked like an awful place to live, so they set about rebuilding the country in their own image, complete with gender equity courses and lectures on how the predominantly Muslim citizens of the country need to be more like their secular Western counterparts.

They felt guilty about what they spent 20 years doing in Afghanistan—falsely offering hope of an eternal American safety net, constructed and maintained not with their own blood, sweat, and tears, but with those of enlisted American military men and women scoffed at and mocked by the smart set—so you must accept the risk posed by a terrorist who pretended to be a refugee to get across the nation’s increasingly non-existent southern border.

They feel guilty about their wealth and privilege (not guilty enough to give that wealth or privilege to anyone else, of course), so you must accept the lower wages that are the obvious result of inflating the labor supply while depressing demand through job-crushing progressive economic policy.

Triumph of Denial Above Experience

These concerns about the runaway costs of interventionism, however, are based firmly in reality. Take the story of an Afghan interpreter told in “Outlaw Platoon,” the spectacular war memoir by Sean Parnell, who served as a combat platoon leader in one of the most violent parts of Afghanistan.

In his book, Parnell details how one of the Afghan interpreters in his platoon, a man who had been thoroughly “vetted” and given access to some of the Army’s closest held secrets, helped engineer an improvised explosive attack that killed one of Parnell’s troops, Cpl. Jeremiah S. Cole, and seriously injured four others. That interpreter, who went by the name Yusef, also arranged for the murder of his counterpart Abdul so Yusef would have total access to all sensitive information, such as troop movements and attack plans, which he then passed along to America’s enemies.

“Knowing where Abdul had been going and the road he had used to get there, Yusef’s tip had allowed the insurgents to establish an ambush in time to catch Abdul on his way back to Bermel from his family’s house,” Parnell writes. “With Abdul dead, Yusef knew he would be promoted to head interpreter.”

“We’d gone through our year in country, judging these Afghans through the prism of our own value systems, never fully grasping what we were up against,” Parnell concluded.

Earlier this week, Parnell shared that story on Tucker Carlson’s primetime show on Fox News. Media Matters immediately responded by slicing and dicing the transcript of Parnell’s appearance to smear him as a racist for believing, based on his own personal experience with a vetted Afghan who murdered one of his brothers in arms, that America could not properly vet the thousands of Afghans wishing to immigrate to America.

The President Who Wouldn’t Be Morally Blackmailed

Like one of those old magic eye posters that contained images hidden among visual white noise, once you see the American ruling elite’s reflex to resort to moral blackmail to win an argument, you can never unsee it. Every policy, every argument, every talking point asserts that you are a racist and a bad person if you believe America’s government should first and foremost protect American citizens. This is a fun game for the failed foreign policy establishment, because they reap all the benefits of using Americans’ blood and money to pump up their self-esteem while bearing precisely none of the costs.

One of the primary reasons this cadre of credentialed incompetents loathed former president Donald Trump is because, as a secular, thrice-married New York billionaire, he was impervious to the moral blackmail that had worked like a charm on everyone else for over a decade. He didn’t much care if they called him racist for wanting to secure the border and put an end to open borders. He didn’t care if they called him heartless for wanting to shut down immigration from “sh-thole countries” to preserve the wages of American workers. And he didn’t care if they called him stupid for refusing to go along with their plans for forever wars all around the globe.

For a time, America had a president who wouldn’t be bullied into doing things that weren’t in America’s national security interests. They hated him for it, and it’s why they spent every waking moment for four years, including two impeachments, desperately trying to throw him out of office.

Moral blackmail only works when the target cares what the blackmailer thinks about him. America’s interventionist elites have publicly failed in the most spectacular way possible, with the evidence of their failures playing on repeat on television for all the world to see.

Breaking their hold on power from here on out is simple: stop caring what they think, and stop caring what they say about you. Their ideas are disastrous and their rhetoric—that anyone who disagrees with them is a racist traitor—is toxic in a society built on free expression. The architects of the nation-building policies from Afghanistan to Iraq are failures and should be treated with the same disdain reserved for flat earthers or bloodletters.

Do you want to prevent the next Iraq or Afghanistan or Libya or Syria from being foisted on the American public at the cost of who knows how many decades, lives, or trillions of dollars? Stop giving them an inch. Stop kowtowing to their moral blackmail. Start telling them no.Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.

Crooked, Slow-Joe Biden Passes The Buck, The Truth, The Presidency, But Enjoys His Dishonesty Where He Makes His Money!



Caroline Glick’s column about the Afghanistan debacle is worth reading in full. I want to focus this post on Glick’s discussion of Joe Biden’s attempt to place the blame for the fiasco on (1) Donald Trump and (2) the Afghans.

Of Trump, Glick writes:

Biden’s accusation that the Trump administration is responsible for the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan is wrong on several counts. As former president Donald Trump and his secretary of state Mike Pompeo explained on Sunday and Monday, the agreement Trump reached with the Taliban was conditions based. Since the Taliban breached the conditions, there is little reason to believe that Trump would have implemented the troop pullout.

Glick bolsters her view of what Trump would have done by pinpointing a major difference between the former president and the current one — a difference I flagged here. Biden doesn’t listen. He forms his views in knee-jerk fashion and, and with a self-confidence that is wholly unjustified, clings to them no matter what he’s told.

Trump may share the former trait, but he’s willing to listen and moderate:

In a conversation with Israel Hayom, a former senior Trump administration official noted. . .that unlike Biden, Trump was willing to listen to argument, and change his positions to align them with the situation on the ground when necessary.

“After Trump ordered the removal of all U.S. forces from Syria in 2018, several people from both inside and outside the administration warned him that a full withdrawal would be dangerous. So he changed his plans. He withdrew most of the U.S. forces but left a few hundred in key locations and gave them the wherewithal to secure U.S. goals in the country.”

By the same token, the official argued, Trump would likely have kept a residual force in Afghanistan.

Indeed, that was the only force that remained in Afghanistan. And just as a skeletal U.S. footprint in Syria suffices to secure U.S. interests in the country, so the 2,500 non-combatant U.S. forces Biden removed from the country were able to work with Afghan and NATO forces to keep Afghanistan stable and keep the Taliban at bay.

(Emphasis added)

The last point is key. Our mission in Afghanistan wasn’t “doomed from the start.” It wasn’t doomed in 2020. It was doomed only once Joe Biden became president.

(To be clear, I don’t contend that Afghanistan was stable in any strong sense. Had we remained, there would have been ups and downs, and certainly no guarantee that we could have kept the Taliban at bay indefinitely with only 2,500 troops and virtually no American deaths. But we kept it at bay for more than five years while sustaining only about 15 deaths per year on average. So we knew how to preserve the stalemate without much loss of American life.)

Glick goes on to demolish Biden’s lazy claim that the Afghans were unwilling to defend their country.

Over the past 20 years, 2,448 U.S. servicemen and women were killed in Afghanistan. Over the same period, 69,000 Afghan forces died defending their country from the Taliban. [Biden’s] statement amounted to malicious slander.

Unfortunately, malicious slander is right up there with blame shifting and plagiarism in the playbook of this dreadful man.

Glick continues:

One of the main functions of the U.S. forces and contractors Biden removed was to serve as military air traffic controllers for Afghan forces. Their departure meant the Afghan military lost its close air support. And since the U.S. built the Afghan military as its mini-me, like the U.S. forces, Afghan forces were dependent on close air support to conduct land operations.

In other words, Biden is more responsible than anyone else for the Afghans’ post-American collapse. If he expected them to fight, he shouldn’t have left them dependent on U.S. traffic controllers which he withdrew without coordination or warning of any kind.

But Biden refuses to accept that responsibility. Worse, he keeps saying “the buck stops here,” even as he tries to pass it off — to Trump, to the Afghans, to the intelligence community.

Disgusting, but entirely in character.

Our Fascist Biden Dems Prefer Buying Fuel From Taliban Than From Our Own North Dakota! WHY? Too Many Fascist Dems?

Pentagon Does Not Deny that U.S. Military Is Buying Fuel From the Taliban to Evacuate People From Afghanistan

By Debra Heine at American Greatness:

August 19, 2021

Army Maj. Gen. Hank Taylor and Pentagon Spokesman John Kirby dodged a reporter’s question about whether the US military is buying aviation fuel from the Taliban as evacuation efforts continue at Hamid Karzai International Airport (HKIA) in Kabul.

During a briefing at the Pentagon Thursday, Kirby also revealed that of the 2,000 people evacuated over the last 24 hours, only 300 of them were Americans.

“How are you fueling your planes… are you now in a position that you have to buy fuel from the Taliban?” asked Fox News national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin during a briefing at the Pentagon.

“The assets on HKIA … on the airfield are what we need to maintain the operations,” Taylor responded hesitantly. “There’s plenty of fuel sustainment capability at HKIA airport.”

“So that’s a no, you’re not buying fuel from the Taliban?” Griffin pressed.

Taylor moved aside to let Kirby field that question.

“There’s plenty of fuel, sustainment capability,” Kirby said, not answering the question. “And as you know Jen, we have the ability on our own—logistics ability—to fuel our aircraft.”about:blankabout:blankhttps://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1428372667191734274&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Famgreatness.com%2F2021%2F08%2F19%2Fpentagon-does-not-deny-that-u-s-military-is-buying-fuel-from-the-taliban-to-evacuate-people-from-afghanistan%2F&sessionId=167075e565d0aa12db27cfb70eac38f76d204038&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=500px

Around 4,500 US soldiers are providing security at the airport, but the Taliban has reportedly been making it difficult for anyone trying to make it to the terminals.

Approximately 7,000 people have been evacuated since August 14,  Taylor announced at the briefing. But neither he, nor Kirby could say how many of them were Americans – or how many Americans remain in Taliban-controlled country.

“I don’t know,” Kirby said when asked. “The State Department would be a better place to go for an estimate of how many Americans are in Afghanistan or in and around Kabul. That is not a figure that the US military would know.”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1428381767522668546&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Famgreatness.com%2F2021%2F08%2F19%2Fpentagon-does-not-deny-that-u-s-military-is-buying-fuel-from-the-taliban-to-evacuate-people-from-afghanistan%2F&sessionId=167075e565d0aa12db27cfb70eac38f76d204038&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=500px

Kirby said that 0f the 2,000 people evacuated over the last 24 hours, “nearly 300 of them were Americans.”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1428383208748593155&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Famgreatness.com%2F2021%2F08%2F19%2Fpentagon-does-not-deny-that-u-s-military-is-buying-fuel-from-the-taliban-to-evacuate-people-from-afghanistan%2F&sessionId=167075e565d0aa12db27cfb70eac38f76d204038&theme=light&widgetsVersion=1890d59c%3A1627936082797&width=500px

U.S. officials meanwhile, speaking on the condition of anonymity, are saying that the Taliban is flying high with a “new U.S.-Made War chest.”about:blank

According to Reuters, “the current intelligence assessment was that the Taliban are believed to control more than 2,000 armored vehicles, including U.S. Humvees, and up to 40 aircraft potentially including UH-60 Black Hawks, scout attack helicopters, and ScanEagle military drones.”

Current and former U.S. officials say there is concern those weapons could be used to kill civilians, be seized by other militant groups such as Islamic State to attack U.S.-interests in the region, or even potentially be handed over to adversaries including China and Russia.

Only a month ago, according to Reuters, “Afghanistan’s ministry of defense posted on social media photographs of seven brand new helicopters arriving in Kabul delivered by the United States.”

“They’ll continue to see a steady drumbeat of that kind of support, going forward,” Austin told reporters a few days later at the Pentagon.

“We — we have provided — begun the provision of the aircraft that we mentioned to you earlier, that we’re going to provide on Friday three newly-refurbished UH-60s that landed in — in Kabul, and they’ll continue to see a steady drumbeat of that kind of support, going forward. We’ve talked about, you know, setting up a — a — a node to be able to conduct over-the-horizon strikes. That node is in place,” Austin said on July 21.

Now, “everything that hasn’t been destroyed is the Taliban’s now,” according one U.S. official.

Representative Michael McCaul, the top Republican on the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, told Reuters in an email, “We have already seen Taliban fighters armed with U.S.-made weapons they seized from the Afghan forces. This poses a significant threat to the United States and our allies.”

Former President Trump fired off a statement Thursday, reiterating what he said on Fox News about what the Biden Regime should have done in the Afghanistan drawdown.about:blankabout:blank

“First you bring out all of the American citizens. Then you bring out ALL equipment. Then you bomb the bases into smithereens—AND THEN YOU BRING OUT THE MILITARY. You don’t do it in reverse order like Biden and our woke Generals did.

No chaos, no death—they wouldn’t even know we left!” Trump said.


Americans are being told they will have to pay up to $2,000 to be flown out of Afghanistan, Politico reports.

Even though U.S. officials tell NatSec Daily and others that evacuation flights from Kabul will be free, people trying to catch a plane in the Afghan capital say differently. One person said State Department staff were seeking large payments — up to $2,000 — from American passengers and even more from non-U.S. citizens.

When we relayed what this person told us to the State Department, a spokesperson didn’t deny that this is happening.

“U.S. law requires that evacuation assistance to private U.S. citizens or third country nationals be provided ‘on a reimbursable basis to the maximum extent practicable.’ The situation is extremely fluid, and we are working to overcome obstacles as they arise,” the spokesperson said.

In other words, the Biden administration may request payments for evacuation flights.

Also, via the Wall Street Journal, yet another story about the Biden Regime being warned that Afghanistan would collapse if the U.S. military completely withdrew.about:blank

About two dozen State Department officials serving at the embassy in Kabul sent an internal memo to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and another top State Department official last month warning of the potential collapse of Kabul soon after the Aug. 31 troop withdrawal deadline, according to a U.S. official and a person familiar with the cable.

The cable, sent via the State Department’s confidential dissent channel, warned of rapid territorial gains by the Taliban and the subsequent collapse of Afghan security forces, and offered recommendations on ways to mitigate the crisis and speed up an evacuation, the two people said.

The cable, dated July 13, also called for the State Department to use tougher language in describing the atrocities being committed by the Taliban, one of the people said.

TwitterFacebookParlerShare onTwitterFacebookParler

About Debra Heine

Debra Heine is a conservative Catholic mom of six and longtime political pundit. She has written for several conservative news websites over the years, including Breitbart and PJ Media.


Reuters: FBI finding “scant evidence” of any coordination behind January 6 riot


“Scant” in this case means almost none, especially for any particular point other than just to riot. More than seven months after a mob stormed the US capitol, injured dozens of police officers, and sent members of Congress to flight, the FBI has found no particular conspiracy to overthrow the government or reverse the election. While a few groups organized to assault the Capitol, the FBI has concluded that they didn’t have any other coherent goal in mind:

The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”

And perhaps more to the point for many, there’s no evidence that Donald Trump plotted the riot either:

In public comments last month to the Democratic-led congressional committee formed to investigate the violence, police officers injured in the mayhem urged lawmakers to determine whether Trump helped instigate it. Some Democrats have said they want him to testify.

But the FBI has so far found no evidence that he or people directly around him were involved in organizing the violence, according to the four current and former law enforcement officials.

This explains why no one has been charged with insurrection. That charge would be difficult to sustain anyway, and it’s easier for prosecutors to stick to charges objectively supported by the evidence of their physical presence or activity.
This report from Reuters makes a stronger case for the lower-level charges. An insurrection would require a conspiracy; you can’t have an insurrection of one, after all. Not only can’t the FBI prove a conspiracy to insurrection, they’re sounding more convinced that the only conspiracy on tap that day was a conspiracy of a**holery:
Prosecutors have also not brought any charges alleging that any individual or group played a central role in organizing or leading the riot. Law-enforcement sources told Reuters no such charges appeared to be pending.
Conspiracy charges that have been filed allege that defendants discussed their plans in the weeks before the attack and worked together on the day itself. But prosecutors have not alleged that this activity was part of a broader plot.
That doesn’t let the rioters or those few conspirators off the hook for that a**holery, of course, and the FBI continues to identify them, thanks to their use of social media and post-riot bragging. And the guilty pleas keep coming, along with the regrets:
Jenna Ryan, a Texas real estate agent who boasted about storming the Capitol on January 6 before coming to regret her decision, on Thursday pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge in connection with the riots.
Ryan pleaded guilty to a single federal misdemeanor charge of parading in the Capitol building, and is set to be sentenced on November 4 with a maximum penalty of six months in prison.
She will also pay $500 in restitution for the damage caused to the Capitol as part of the terms of her plea agreement. The government is seeking $2,000 in restitution from Capitol riot defendants who plead guilty to felonies and $500 from misdemeanor defendants. …
But Ryan eventually turned on Trump when he did not pardon her or any accused rioters before he left office as she publicly pleaded with him to do so. She told The Washington Post in February that she felt hoodwinked by Trump’s impassioned pleas to “stop the steal” and abandoned by her fellow “patriots.”
“I bought into a lie, and the lie is the lie, and it’s embarrassing,” she said. “I regret everything.”
“Not one patriot is standing up for me,” Ryan told The Post. “I’m a complete villain. I was down there based on what my president said: ‘Stop the steal.’ Now I see that it was all over nothing. He was just having us down there for an ego boost. I was there for him.”

The riot was an embarrassing blot on American politics. Thankfully, an investigation has shown no evidence that it was anything more than that, except perhaps an object lesson in the perils of cults of personality and a reminder that representative government still beats mob rule.

Exit question, of sorts: What impact would this finding have on Nancy Pelosi’s partisan commission on the riot? Presumably Pelosi will want to push forward, but if House Democrats try pushing findings unsupported by evidence from the FBI, that’ll make it look like a kangaroo court. Normally Pelosi might not care, but Biden’s utter incompetence in the Afghanistan crisis isn’t going to give them much room to use this as a distraction. Will people see the Pelosi panel as the House Select Committee on the Beating of Dead Horses?

America’s Newspapers, Television News, Universities Are And Will Sell Idiot Biden As A Star On HIS Afghan Disaster!



With the exception of the New York Post, American newspapers are generally trying to downplay the ongoing fiasco in Afghanistan. For example, my home town newspaper, the Star Tribune, does not have a single word about Afghanistan on today’s front page.

To get more candid coverage, it helps to go overseas, as to the Telegraph: “Joe Biden’s asinine handling of Afghanistan could gift Donald Trump the White House.” The article is by the Telegraph’s U.S. editor:

It’s a bit early in his tenure for a political obituary. But for Joe Biden the Afghanistan debacle may be presidency-shattering. HMS Biden is now holed below the water line and slowly sinking.

Donald Trump scents blood in the water and is popping up on the airwaves to put the boot in to his hapless successor.

That’s not to say that, if Mr Trump were still president, the US departure from Afghanistan would have been any less chaotic.

It’s just that American voters – and the Taliban – know the US reaction to the crisis would have been very different under a President Trump.

Mr Biden, shamefully, sought to blame Afghans themselves. His officials meekly pleaded with the Taliban to allow American citizens safe passage to the airport.

And, in Washington, not a single head rolled in response to what one Pentagon official called a “s—show”.

What would Mr Trump have done if confronted with this monumental insult to American pride? Well, for starters he would have fired the head of every US intelligence service that touched any piece of information out of Afghanistan in recent months.

Then, he would probably have called for Ashraf Ghani, the former president of Afghanistan who fled Kabul on Sunday, to be detained for cowardice, and delivered a tirade down the phone to the leader of any country harbouring him.

And then, he would have publicly threatened to rain down “fire and fury” on the Taliban unless it helped US citizens, their allies and translators get to Kabul airport.

After his press conference Zabihullah Mujahid, the Taliban spokesman, would have faced the very real possibility of his house being flattened by a MOAB if he didn’t comply.

The Taliban know a bully when they see one. Americans, and Britons, would have found themselves swept to the airport with an armed Taliban escort and an apology.

It is a thought experiment, reminiscent of the time when Iran’s mullahs released their American hostages on Ronald Reagan’s inauguration day.

More at the link, e.g.:

Mr Biden’s attempt to retrieve the situation in a TV interview on Thursday was an unmitigated car crash – despite the interview being conducted by Bill Clinton’s former White House press chief.

Viewers heard Mr Biden saying he “can’t recall” – never a good phrase for a president to use – being advised by his generals that he should leave 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. There is evidence to suggest that he was advised of that.

Nor did he remember any of his intelligence officials suggesting the Afghan government and military might possibly collapse like a house of cards the moment the US left. Again, there are suggestions they did tell him this.

Bizarrely, Mr Biden said he always expected the withdrawal to be chaotic. And, strangest of all, for a politician famed for empathy, he showed not a jot of it for those who fell to their deaths clinging to the wheels of a fleeing US aircraft.

As happens so often, newspaper readers in other countries are getting a more clear-eyed view of events in the U.S., and events in which we are critically involved, than newspaper readers here at home.

“Obama is too arrogant for his own good”

The Afghanistan Debacle is Exactly What the Left Wanted

By Christopher Skeet at American Thinker:

There’s not much to say that hasn’t already been said regarding Biden’s unconditional surrender to the Taliban, and it’s only the first week.  Bookshelves will be filled with analyses of these events, and we won’t understand their full ramifications for decades.  My two cents, for what they’re worth, are that the left doesn’t consider the fall of Kabul and the betrayal of our allies to be a tragedy.  Rather, this is deliberate foreign policy strategy, and it’s right on track.

The pattern is clear for those who wish to see.  Simply put, the left thinks America is not only evil but irredeemably so.  Hence, any policy, be it foreign or domestic, that weakens our nation-state should be pursued, the goal being that the nation-state will eventually corrode to the point of collapse.  They don’t care that the hollowed-out dystopia will be long past its desirability for subjugation, so long as they get to be in charge.  As Lord Varys said of Littlefinger, “He would see this country burn if he could be king of the ashes”.

What started with Woodrow Wilson finally came into full force and in open view under Obama.  Every time he could, Obama favored strict Islamist regimes over Western-friendly governments.  Whenever overseas pro-democracy demonstrators flew American flags, Obama reflexively sided with their oppressors.  He removed sanctions from Cuba and Iran and asked for nothing in return.  The JCPOA, the Paris Accords, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership were specifically designed to weaken American power behind the flimsy guise of noble causes.

What would strike the neutral observer as unabashed idiocy comes across as cold, deliberate Machiavellianism to anyone reading between the lines of Obama’s head swivel speeches.  Obama is a mechanical Leftist, harboring the paint-by-number faculty lounge dictums of America as a negative historical force.  Hence, almost every action he took was to weaken that force.  Through this lens, one can see the pattern clearly, and his actions make perfect sense. 

Obama is too arrogant for his own good, and his governance was rooted in yard sign aphorisms rather than any real understanding of how the world works.  But one can’t deny his strategy was both coherent and effective.

One can’t say the same of Joe Biden, that moth-eaten sock puppet who, to paraphrase Billy Bob Thornton from Bad Santa, doesn’t know his ass from last Tuesday.  The man is an unparalleled moron, used lackadaisically as a mouthpiece by the ventriloquists behind the throne when they need to convey the message, “We know this clown wasn’t our first or tenth choice for mascot, but he’s a company man through and through, and he’ll do exactly what we tell him to do so long as the ice cream keeps coming”.  Biden can’t be pro-American or anti-American or anything in between because he lacks the capacity to formulate a value system necessary to organize and prioritize such concepts. 

Not so for every bureaucrat underneath him who was at best complicit, at worst a willing executioner, of his disastrous Afghanistan pullout.  The same fool-me-once suspicion that Americans apply to the supposed 99.99998% of FBI field agents who, we are assured, are disgusted at their “few bad apples” who tried to overthrow a presidential election…yet from whose noble ranks emerged not a single whistleblower…should now be applied with equal force to the Pentagon.

The Pentagon employs 26,000 people, and from September 12, 2001, to August 15, 2021, not one of them alerted the American public… theoretically, the people they claim to serve… that our beribboned parade generals were doing little more than throwing darts at a flowchart to decide what our Afghan strategy should be.  Indeed, the only “whistleblower” during that time was ol’ Porkchop Vindman, who “came forward” not with evidence of any actual wrongdoing, but with the opinion that, as an unelected mid-level drone whose foremost duty was to carry out the orders of the commander-in-chief, he himself should dictate Ukraine policy.

Of course, now that the cat is out of the bag (and the Afghan girl back in it), the Pentagon is tripping over the “intelligence community,” who is tripping over the State Department, who is tripping over the Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity Office for Non-Binary Pashtun Child Brides to be first to raise its rifle in the circular firing squad of the pathetic blame game they’re now playing.  Sorry boys, but after the fact, after your crime has been laid bare for the world to see, is not the time you get a cookie for claiming that you were misled by the other guy for two decades straight, or that you were the sole voice of sanity in the closed-door CSI meetings.  The fact that, as of this writing, none of you have resigned is a testament to your complete lack of any sense of honor.

We just let the pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong, Cuba, and Iran know that they don’t have our support, other than the occasional week-too-late hashtag.  We just let our allies in Taiwan, Ukraine, South Korea, and Israel know that we folded like wet paper to illiterate pedophiles in pickup trucks, so good luck against the million-man professional armies who are busy reassessing the futility of your current ceasefires.  We just showed that, contra the dictum of “leave no man behind”, we will leave every man, woman, and child behind who, be they American or Afghan, civilian or military, ever lifted a finger to help us.  We will literally let them fall off our planes.

We just gave up a position strategically located smack dab in the middle of our three most formidable enemies: China, Russia, and Iran.  Not to worry though.  Surely our vaunted “intelligence community”… the same community that filed to predict the Berlin Wall coming down, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the 9/11 attacks, the WMDs, and the 90-day-oops-we-meant-90-hour fall of Kabul… surely they’ve had two decades to ensure we have well-trained intelligence assets firmly in place in Afghanistan for the day we inevitably left, right?  Right?

We abandoned Bagram Air Base on July 42021.  Biden originally planned to complete the withdraw on September 11th.  These aren’t flukes, nor the clockwork stupidity of our government’s well-credentialed experts.  These were specifically designed as symbolic humiliations of America, by people who hate America, who are being paid six-figure salaries to do so by America.

This was all deliberate.

Soviet Pravda writers, in the interest of maintaining their dignity, would have refused upon pain of death to fabricate a story like this on the grounds that it was simply too unbelievable.  But truth is stranger than fiction, and 44% of Americans polled after Kabul fell think Biden did a “good job” in Afghanistan.  With enemies like us, who needs a nuclear arsenal?

Another telltale sign that this was deliberate is this:  who has been uncharacteristically silent this entire week?  We’ve heard nary a peep from the biggest loudmouths of all, the activist left.  They haven’t lashed out in anger because they aren’t angry.  Indeed, the campus elitists, Black Lives Matter, the Antifa incels, and the Squad knaves couldn’t be happier.  They think America deserved this.  They can’t yet openly celebrate but give our schools another decade of critical race theory and our students will be celebrating August 15th not as the fall of Kabul, but as its liberation.

The left, including its swamp bureaucrats who administer our wars, has no qualms with what happened in Kabul.  They support Biden’s grotesque withdraw not in spite of its consequences for America, but because of them.  They want to see America humbled and weakened on the world stage.  They want our enemies to outmaneuver us.  They want us to lose our global leverage.

They want to do to our military what they did to our police, by demoralizing and demonizing the institution to the point that they simply can’t get qualified recruits.  What young, idealistic American would enlist to defend a country that doesn’t let them win wars, forces them to retreat from 7th-century quadrupeds, all the while having one’s own patriotism questioned and slandered by woke Pentagon careerists who blather about “white rage” and who remove Mahan and Clausewitz from the reading lists in favor of Ibram X. Kendi?

And what does the Left make of the tens of thousands of Afghans, assumedly members of the BIPOC oppressed class, who helped us?  What do the legions of #MeToo “feminists,” who show up in Handmaid’s Tale gear whenever Nebraska tries to criminalize partial-birth abortions for pre-teens without parental notification, make of the millions of their Afghan sisters who woke up Sunday morning free and went to bed that night as slaves?  Merely pawns on a chessboard to be sacrificed.

The left wants our betrayal of these Afghans to be seen by our allies, and for them to infer from this (and rightly so) that they can’t count on us to honor our commitments.  It’s a perverse twist of our domestic politics.  In America, the message of the Left is: If we can impeach Donald Trump and silence Rand Paul and spy on Tucker Carlson with impunity, how well do you think you’re gonna fare?  You’re on your own, pal. 

Amplified across the world, the message of the left is:  If America will sell you out to the Taliban, they won’t even think about lifting a finger to the Iranians and North Koreans, much less the Chinese and Russians.  You’re on your own, pal.

What happened in Kabul was deliberate. In fact, I would argue it went far better than most leftists dreamed it would.  Even they underestimated Joe’s uncanny ability to make the absolute worst decision in practically every situation.  Our kids’ grandkids will be fighting the wars that result from this and will likely do it alone.  Far from being a tragedy, our abandonment of Afghanistan was one of the left’s biggest foreign policy successes. 

Truth Has NO Meaning In Obama’s Marxist Minnesota!

Marxist Minnesota Principals ‘Making Good Trouble in Education’

By Chris Talgo at American Thinker:

There was once a time when school principals’ principal concern was the academic achievement of their students.

Sadly, in many places, that is no longer the case.

Take Minnesota for example, where 162 principals have signed onto the Marxist-minded “Making Good Trouble in Education” anti-education, social justice movement.

According to its website, “We are a loose collection of local principals bound together by a commitment to changing our nation’s future by engaging in better, more equitable educational practices. We have constructed this site as a gathering place for Good (Trouble) Principals. It is a safe place to rest among like-minded leaders. It is a place where your convictions about educational justice in our country can be fortified and your view of education as a transformative social force can be reinforced.”

At this point, you may have a few questions, such as:

What are more equitable educational training practices?

What is educational justice?

And, since when has public education become a social force?

Lucky for you, the principals at Good Trouble have answers to these pressing questions.

In terms of equitable training practices, the misguided Minnesota principals plan to enact this by, “De-centering Whiteness. Understanding that traditional organized whiteness ensures domination through forms like PTAs and Unions. We purposefully call out and lift up historically non-represented voices of color in our spaces to hold weight and power.”

Sorry, but implementing discrimination to allegedly address past discrimination is flat-out wrong.

To achieve what they deem “educational justice,” the Minnesota principals support, “Dismantling practices that reinforce White academic superiority like bias in testing and the labeling, tracking and clustering that reflect an Americanized version of a caste system in our schools.”

As a former high school teacher, I can personally attest that there absolutely is no caste system in America’s public schools. To declare that a modern-day caste system exists in today’s public schools is literally ludicrous.

Regarding their quest that public schools become a social force, instead of an academic institution, the Minnesota principals plan on, “Reconstructing ‘school’ upon our full in-person returns where business-as-usual, like schedules and staffing, are open to drastic changes.”

To meet this nonacademic goal, the principals also propose, “Speaking truth to power. Where our commitment to holding ourselves and those who serve under us accountable to this work is just as importantly extended to those who serve over us.”

Yet, that is only the half of it.

Consider. “We declare that we are not leaving white children behind by lifting Black, Brown and Indigenous children up. But that we, not only have the collective capacity to hold all of our children up and into the light, but our White children have been done a great disservice by sustaining white-centered schools in America over all these years. And it is to their equal benefit to thrive in schools where they are not spoon-fed the poison that they are better because of their skin color, where they have principals and teachers who boldly lead them to both humility and pride, and where they have the beautiful privilege of thriving while their classmates of color thrive as well.”

So, according to the Minnesota Good Trouble principals, America’s public schools are havens for white supremacy propaganda. Of course, that is a total farce.

Moreover, the notion that America’s public schools cater almost exclusively to white children, and thereby do not allow minority students to thrive, is demonstrably false. How would these people explain that Asian-Americans, for example, outperform their white peers across the board in education metrics?

It is rather obvious that the Minnesota Good Trouble principals, all 162 of them, have an agenda.

Unfortunately, that agenda does not include ensuring that every student is held to the same standard, and that every student, regardless of race, is treated as an individual.

Instead, the Minnesota principals who signed onto this Marxist indoctrination program are most concerned with pitting students against one another based on nothing but their racial attributes.

Sadly, this is becoming the new normal in America’s public schools.

On the other hand, we are witnessing quite a backlash against many of these absurd programs. Throughout the country, parents and students are rising up against the critical race theory craziness and Marxist-oriented curricula that are seeping into far too many public schools.

Still, the question remains: Will the education-industrial complex, with their Marxist leanings, triumph, or will parents pushing commonsense education policies, including school choice, win the battle in the end? The future of America is at stake.

Chris Talgo (ctalgo@heartland.orgis a former public school teacher and senior editor at The Heartland Institute.

Image: rosaluxemborg

The Epoch Times:

Cvilians prepare to board a plane during an evacuation at Hamid Karzai International Airport, in Kabul, Afghanistan on Aug. 18, 2021. (Staff Sgt. Victor Mancilla/U.S. Marine Corps via AP)

More than 18,000 Evacuated From Kabul Airport: NATO

By Lorenz Duchamps August 20, 2021 

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) announced that more than 18,000 people have been evacuated from Kabul since the Taliban terrorist group took over Afghanistan’s capital five days ago.

NATO’s latest development comes as the White House updated its evacuation tally on Aug. 19, saying the United States has evacuated about 3,000 more people from Kabul’s airport in the last 24 hours, bringing the total tally of Americans evacuated from the war-torn nation to about 9,000.

“The U.S. evacuated approximately 3,000 people from Hamid Karzai International Airport on 16 C-17 flights,” the U.S. official said late on Thursday.

“Nearly 350 U.S. citizens were evacuated. Additional evacuees include family members of U.S. citizens, SIV applicants and their families, and vulnerable Afghans,” the official added, referring to special immigrant visa applicants. “We have evacuated approximately 9,000 people since Aug. 14. Since the end of July, we have evacuated approximately 14,000 people.”

President Joe Biden, who has come under fire over the turbulent U.S. withdrawal, is expected to speak on Aug. 20 about the evacuation effort.

Biden’s team has defended his leadership throughout the disaster in Afghanistan, including White House press secretary Jen Psaki, who cut her vacation short after the Taliban takeover.

A NATO official, who declined to be identified, told Reuters that thousands of people desperate to flee the country are still thronging the airport, despite the Taliban urging people without legal travel documents to go home.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson confirmed that over the past few days, the United Kingdom has evacuated more than 300 Britons and over 2,000 Afghans as part of its resettlement program—with a further 2,000 Afghan applications completed and more being processed.

Epoch Times Photo
Prime Minister Boris Johnson speaking during the debate on the situation in Afghanistan in the House of Commons, London, as MPs returned to Parliament from their summer break for an emergency sitting on Wednesday, three days after the country’s capital Kabul fell to the militants on Sunday. Picture date: Aug. 18, 2021. (PA/Parliament TV)

“We have so far secured the safe return of 306 UK nationals and 2,052 Afghan nationals as part of our resettlement program,” Johnson said on Wednesday.

Germany announced they have been flying military aircraft from Kabul to Tashkent to evacuate more individuals. In its latest update, the country has evacuated around 1600 people on Aug. 20, according to a statement by the German Foreign Ministry. They include an unspecified number of Germans, Afghans, and nationals of international partners.

In other parts of Europe; France, Spain, Denmark, the Netherlands, among other nations, confirmed they have began an evacuation operation with flights to the Afghan capital underway. Some of the countries already confirmed safe return of hundreds of people.

Criticism of NATO and other Western powers has risen as images of the chaos and desperate fear of the Taliban were shared around the world.

Several protesters were killed in the eastern city of Asadabad on Aug. 19 when Taliban terrorists fired on a crowd of people demonstrating their allegiance to the vanquished Afghan republic, as the Taliban set about establishing an emirate, governed by a strict form of Islamic rule.

Anti-Taliban protest in Jalalabad
People carry Afghan flags as they take part in an anti-Taliban protest in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, on Aug. 18, 2021. (Pajhwok Afghan News/Handout via Reuters)

There were similar shows of defiance in two other cities in the east—Jalalabad and Khost—with Afghans using celebrations of the nation’s 1919 independence from British control to vent their anger with the Taliban takeover.

“Our flag, our identity,” a crowd of protesting men and women chanted as they waved the Afghan national flag.

Reuters contributed to this report.

From NTD NewsLorenz Duchamps Lorenz DuchampsTOP NEWS

The Michelangelo of Wood: Grinling Gibbons

FINE ARTS & CRAFTSMANSHIPThe Michelangelo of Wood: Grinling Gibbons3

US Embassy Warns Americans of ‘Violence and Security Threats’ During Kabul Evacuation

INTERNATIONALUS Embassy Warns Americans of ‘Violence and Security Threats’ During Kabul Evacuation40

More than 18,000 Evacuated From Kabul Airport: NATO

INTERNATIONALMore than 18,000 Evacuated From Kabul Airport: NATO26

Dairy Farmers to Be Compensated for Losses From Pandemic-Related Price Volatility

MARKETSDairy Farmers to Be Compensated for Losses From Pandemic-Related Price Volatility15

Afghanistan Evacuees Don’t Need Negative COVID-19 Tests: State Dept

EXECUTIVE BRANCHAfghanistan Evacuees Don’t Need Negative COVID-19 Tests: State Dept54

West Virginia Sues Biden Administration Over Refusal to Restart Remain in Mexico Policy

“Unfortunately, there will be no sacking of Biden.”



Joe Biden and Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chief of staffs, claim that no one anticipated the Taliban would quickly take over Afghanistan when the U.S. pulled out. Secretary of State Blinken says the Taliban’s takeover “happened more quickly than we anticipated.”

But The Wall Street Journal reports that 23 State Department officials serving at the embassy in Kabul sent an internal memo to Blinken last month warning of the potential collapse of Kabul soon after the August 31 troop withdrawal deadline. That’s a far bleaker picture than the one Team Biden painted for us and planned for.

So Biden and Milley aren’t telling the truth. Nearly two dozen U.S. officials anticipated what Biden and Milley say no one did, and what Blinken says “we” didn’t.

The cable was sent via the State Department’s confidential dissent channel. It warned of rapid territorial gains by the Taliban and the subsequent collapse of Afghan security forces. Which, of course, is what occurred.

The cable also offered recommendations on ways to mitigate the crisis and speed up an evacuation, according to the Journal’s sources. One recommendation was to begin registering and collecting the personal data of Afghan interpreters and other allies who qualify for special immigrant visas to leave the country. Another was to begin evacuation flights no later than August 1.

Were these recommendations adopted? Were others that the diplomats proposed?

I don’t know, but we’ll find out. The House Foreign Affairs Committee has already asked Blinken to appear to discuss the administration’s planning for the withdrawal.

State Department spokesman Ned Price declined to address the cable in question. However, he did say that Blinken reads every dissent and “value[s] constructive internal dissent.” So at least we know that Blinken saw the grim predictions of the 23 officials, who were certainly in a position to know the state of play in Afghanistan.

But Blinken didn’t “value their dissent” enough to heed their warnings. Why didn’t Blinken take the views of his own diplomats on the ground more seriously?

I don’t know, but Blinken will soon have the opportunity to say. As noted, he’s been asked to appear before the House Foreign Affairs Committee to explain.

Milley and Blinken should be fired, but Biden will be hard pressed to sack them as long as he keeps saying that nothing really went wrong in connection with our withdrawal from Afghanistan or, alternatively, that whatever went wrong was the fault of Donald Trump and the Afghans.

However, if the Taliban kills Americans or takes hostages, the pressure on Biden to sack some high level members of his team may well become irresistible. Unfortunately, there will be no sacking of Biden.