53percenter's Blog

Colorado has bought into the popular vote mythology in presidential elections and the need to nationalize the process of electing presidents.  Although wrong-headed, the right of the Colorado Legislature to make these changes is constitutional.  

Republicans ought to use the power of those state governments they control to enact real reform by providing that the electoral votes of the state be cast by the state Legislature directly and not by voters choosing those electors.  I proposed this in November 2016, and nothing has changed since then, except, unfortunately, the overwhelming majority that Republicans had in state governments was eroded somewhat by the 2018 midterm elections.

Control of both houses of the Legislature and the governor is required to pass a law reverting power to the state Legislature to cast the electoral votes of a state, but once that becomes the law, only control of the state Legislature would be required to cast the state’s electoral votes in all future elections.

Republicans control both houses of the state Legislature and the governor in 23 states, counting unicameral Nebraska.  Democrats control both houses of the state Legislature and the governorship in 14 states.  Only three of those fourteen would ever conceivably vote for a Republican presidential candidate in the popular vote — Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.  But consider some of the states that would go Republican if state legislatures cast electoral votes:  Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas.

There is not a single state the Democrat candidate in a presidential election would have won if this change had been implemented in the states in which Republicans held the power.  Prior to the 2016 election, in three states in which Republicans then controlled, but do not now control, the governorship — Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan — the Republican candidate would have won every single state that President Trump carried without any popular vote in those states at all.

But the reform would be about much more than simply Republicans winning a presidential election.  This change would make state legislative elections vitally important in national politics, and it would restore to state governments the powers intended for them in the Constitution.  Washington would become much less important, and our political pox, “Capitolism,” would begin a long cure.

Moreover, this could serve as the springboard for re-asserting state power in amending the Constitution by convening and maintaining a Constitutional Convention.  The first amendment passed should be to provide for election of United States senators by the Legislature of the state.  The next amendment, perhaps, should be to take away from all federal courts the power to effectively bully state governments.

The beauty of having state legislatures regularly meet in an official capacity is that each state Legislature gains in power if power is taken from Washington and given back to the states.  State legislative members also must either stand for the rights of their states against an over-grasping Washington or face a crippling political position that would sound to their constituents something like this: “I and the other members of our state legislature know far less about how to solve our problems than distant and arrogant Washington insiders.  After all, we yahoos in the backwaters are not nearly as smart as the sophisticates of the Beltway.”

Finally, this would expose those “conservatives” who profess to care about our values and the preservation of our republic but who are just as much “Capitolists” as the most lickspittle leftist, the “conservatives” who view America as a land in two parts, one of which stretches from Boston to Washington and the other from San Francisco to San Diego, with a vast stretch of colonial territories between these two — those “conservatives” whose  lives are politics or law or some career of prostitution,  who would have nothing to do if states governed themselves without the unwanted “help” of Washington.

Restoring the rights and powers of the sovereign states is the linchpin of everything we need to begin to solve our problems.  The power of state legislatures remains in the language of the Constitution, and those rights ought to be given life again.  If that happens, we can begin the peaceful revolution our nation needs.  It is doable and ought to be done.  Nothing keeps Republican state legislatures from beginning the process but the guts and grit of their own members — and there is no reason for delay at all.

Colorado has bought into the popular vote mythology in presidential elections and the need to nationalize the process of electing presidents.  Although wrong-headed, the right of the Colorado Legislature to make these changes is constitutional.  

Republicans ought to use the power of those state governments they control to enact real reform by providing that the electoral votes of the state be cast by the state Legislature directly and not by voters choosing those electors.  I proposed this in November 2016, and nothing has changed since then, except, unfortunately, the overwhelming majority that Republicans had in state governments was eroded somewhat by the 2018 midterm elections.

Control of both houses of the Legislature and the governor is required to pass a law reverting power to the state Legislature to cast the electoral votes of a state, but once that becomes the law, only control of the state Legislature would be required to cast the state’s electoral votes in all future elections.

Republicans control both houses of the state Legislature and the governor in 23 states, counting unicameral Nebraska.  Democrats control both houses of the state Legislature and the governorship in 14 states.  Only three of those fourteen would ever conceivably vote for a Republican presidential candidate in the popular vote — Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.  But consider some of the states that would go Republican if state legislatures cast electoral votes:  Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas.

There is not a single state the Democrat candidate in a presidential election would have won if this change had been implemented in the states in which Republicans held the power.  Prior to the 2016 election, in three states in which Republicans then controlled, but do not now control, the governorship — Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan — the Republican candidate would have won every single state that President Trump carried without any popular vote in those states at all.

But the reform would be about much more than simply Republicans winning a presidential election.  This change would make state legislative elections vitally important in national politics, and it would restore to state governments the powers intended for them in the Constitution.  Washington would become much less important, and our political pox, “Capitolism,” would begin a long cure.

Moreover, this could serve as the springboard for re-asserting state power in amending the Constitution by convening and maintaining a Constitutional Convention.  The first amendment passed should be to provide for election of United States senators by the Legislature of the state.  The next amendment, perhaps, should be to take away from all federal courts the power to effectively bully state governments.

The beauty of having state legislatures regularly meet in an official capacity is that each state Legislature gains in power if power is taken from Washington and given back to the states.  State legislative members also must either stand for the rights of their states against an over-grasping Washington or face a crippling political position that would sound to their constituents something like this: “I and the other members of our state legislature know far less about how to solve our problems than distant and arrogant Washington insiders.  After all, we yahoos in the backwaters are not nearly as smart as the sophisticates of the Beltway.”

Finally, this would expose those “conservatives” who profess to care about our values and the preservation of our republic but who are just as much “Capitolists” as the most lickspittle leftist, the “conservatives” who view America as a land in two parts, one of which stretches from Boston to Washington and the other from San Francisco to San Diego, with a vast stretch of colonial territories between these two — those “conservatives” whose  lives are politics or law or some career of prostitution,  who would have nothing to do if states governed themselves without the unwanted “help” of Washington.

Restoring the rights and powers of the sovereign states is the linchpin of everything we need to begin to solve our problems.  The power of state legislatures remains in the language of the Constitution, and those rights ought to be given life again.  If that happens, we can begin the peaceful revolution our nation needs.  It is doable and ought to be done.  Nothing keeps Republican state legislatures from beginning the process but the guts and grit of their own members — and there is no reason for delay at all.

There was a superb column at The Federalist on Wednesday by George S. Bardmesser: “Every Time Democrats Talk, I Want to Vote for Trump Twice.”  It is as hilarious as it is frightening.  It is also a courageous confession, especially for a lawyer who lives in D.C.  Let’s hope he has personal security.

I am betting there are millions of us, many more millions than voted for Trump in 2016, who agree with the man.  He was a reluctant Trump-voter but is now completely on board the Trump train.  Why?  Because the current crop of Democrat candidates are moonbats all, with the possible exception of Howard Schultz, who has yet to officially throw his hat in the ring.  Mr. Bardmesser addresses in passing the election of Mlles. Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib, and the presidential candidacies of Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Joe Biden.  Each of them, as that author points out, is a thorough socialist nutjob.  Each of them is trying to out-fanaticalize the others.  Each of them is absolutely clueless about the American people outside the far-left bubbles all of them inhabit.

Mr. Bardmesser neglects to mention the bizarre, phony, and disturbing ”Beto” O’Rourke; Kirsten Gillibrand; and Andrew Yang.

O’Rourke, who has zero accomplishments as a Texas congressman, has captured the hearts of some mindless citizens and millions of Hollywood dollars, to which effect he got close to beating Ted Cruz in 2016.  But he has a creepy history of weird behavior: he was part of a hacking conclave, he eats dirt, he plays vicious pranks even on his wife, and he wrote about running down happy children when he was a teen.  He was arrested for burglary, for a DUI, and for leaving the scene of an accident.  The Democrats don’t care about such things, since the Kennedys were guilty of all that and much more.  But clearly, this man is not presidential material.  His only stated policy is to legalize marijuana and invalidate all arrests for crimes related to use or sale of it. 

Then there is the thoroughly insubstantial Kirsten Gillibrand, who has never held a position longer than politically convenient.  Now she is so pro-illegal immigration that she even wants to reward illegal aliens’ law-breaking with Social Security.  This woman’s character is as ephemeral as a puff of smoke.  She also sounds like a little girl who never developed an adult voice, rather like Ocasio-Cortez.

But even Gillibrand is not as silly as Andrew Yang.  One of his core issues is circumcision!  He is against it!  He is also for giving money away in the form of a “universal basic income.”

Like the rest of the Left, all of these people’s plans require taxing people beyond sanity — the kind of taxation that would destroy the country. 

Pete Buttigeig is the current mayor of South Bend, Indiana.  He is openly gay with a stellar résumé, including the fact that he is a veteran.  His particular issue is “intergenerational justice,” whatever that is.  He is clearly a smart guy but, like all the others, makes catastrophic climate change part and parcel of his agenda.

Curiously, in a recent survey of Millennials that sought to determine the top twenty things that worry them, climate change did not make the list.  And to anyone paying attention, global cooling is very likely a graver danger.

Why are Ocasio-Cortez’s approval ratings falling?  Aside from the fact that she knows nothing about anything, her Green New Deal is a pathetic joke.

Oh, yes, and they all suddenly want to abolish the Electoral College!  Had HRC won, they would be singing its praises.

That anyone thinks Joe Biden has a chance in hell of being elected is mystifying.  The man has so many skeletons in the closet that he can’t remember them all — plagiarism; racism; corruption; and a penchant for fondling young girls, even in public on camera.  Like Bernie Sanders, he is too old.  They both seem decades older than Donald Trump, even though they are just a few years older.  They are without Trump’s energy.

Then there is the forgettable John Hickenlooper, who just the other night needlessly confessed to taking his mother to a porn film years ago.

Kamala Harris has a sketchy record as California’s A.G.  She apparently took bribes to let Herbalife off the hook; Heather Podesta lobbied her on behalf of the company.  She is known for having “slept her way to the top” as the mistress of former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown.  Like O’Rourke, Cory Booker, and Gillibrand, she is not ready for prime time.

As Mr. Bardmesser wrote, Bernie Sanders is just an old pretend-socialist ne’er-do-well hypocrite.

Elizabeth Warren?  She is perhaps the most self-unaware candidate of the bunch.  After faking her way onto the Harvard faculty by claiming to be American Indian, when asked if she had sympathy for the parents who bought their way into chi-chi colleges, she replied, “Zero.”  When asked even now about her ancestry, she insists she “learned her family history from her family.”  And while quite wealthy herself, she intends, if elected, to tax wealthy Americans into extinction.  She wrongly thinks that by stealing what others have earned, she can fund her dream of a socialist state.  She needs to read Thomas Sowell’s book Basic Economics.

Along with their support for open borders, all the declared candidates are vowing their support for reparations, of course.  There are no living persons who were slaves.  It is a ridiculous agenda issue, completely unworkable.  They all know this, but like all the Democrats in D.C., they really do believe that the rest of us are idiots, easily fooled by nonsense claims and promises.  That is why they claim to support Ocasio-Cortez’s plan to rid the nation of planes, cars, and all things fossil-fueled.  As we all know from watching all the climate alarmists in Congress and in Hollywood, they will not, do not intend to ever change the fossil-fueled lifestyle they enjoy.  No.  Their brand of socialist tyranny will apply to only the rest of us.

Chinese-Americans are already seeing the specter of Mao in this crop of candidates.  So, as Mr. Bardmesser advises, do anything and everything you can to convince those less politically aware that if any one of the declared Democrats wins in 2020, America as we know it will be relegated to the ash heap of tragic history along with our precious Constitution.

There was a superb column at The Federalist on Wednesday by George S. Bardmesser: “Every Time Democrats Talk, I Want to Vote for Trump Twice.”  It is as hilarious as it is frightening.  It is also a courageous confession, especially for a lawyer who lives in D.C.  Let’s hope he has personal security.

I am betting there are millions of us, many more millions than voted for Trump in 2016, who agree with the man.  He was a reluctant Trump-voter but is now completely on board the Trump train.  Why?  Because the current crop of Democrat candidates are moonbats all, with the possible exception of Howard Schultz, who has yet to officially throw his hat in the ring.  Mr. Bardmesser addresses in passing the election of Mlles. Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib, and the presidential candidacies of Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Joe Biden.  Each of them, as that author points out, is a thorough socialist nutjob.  Each of them is trying to out-fanaticalize the others.  Each of them is absolutely clueless about the American people outside the far-left bubbles all of them inhabit.

Mr. Bardmesser neglects to mention the bizarre, phony, and disturbing ”Beto” O’Rourke; Kirsten Gillibrand; and Andrew Yang.

O’Rourke, who has zero accomplishments as a Texas congressman, has captured the hearts of some mindless citizens and millions of Hollywood dollars, to which effect he got close to beating Ted Cruz in 2016.  But he has a creepy history of weird behavior: he was part of a hacking conclave, he eats dirt, he plays vicious pranks even on his wife, and he wrote about running down happy children when he was a teen.  He was arrested for burglary, for a DUI, and for leaving the scene of an accident.  The Democrats don’t care about such things, since the Kennedys were guilty of all that and much more.  But clearly, this man is not presidential material.  His only stated policy is to legalize marijuana and invalidate all arrests for crimes related to use or sale of it. 

Then there is the thoroughly insubstantial Kirsten Gillibrand, who has never held a position longer than politically convenient.  Now she is so pro-illegal immigration that she even wants to reward illegal aliens’ law-breaking with Social Security.  This woman’s character is as ephemeral as a puff of smoke.  She also sounds like a little girl who never developed an adult voice, rather like Ocasio-Cortez.

But even Gillibrand is not as silly as Andrew Yang.  One of his core issues is circumcision!  He is against it!  He is also for giving money away in the form of a “universal basic income.”

Like the rest of the Left, all of these people’s plans require taxing people beyond sanity — the kind of taxation that would destroy the country. 

Pete Buttigeig is the current mayor of South Bend, Indiana.  He is openly gay with a stellar résumé, including the fact that he is a veteran.  His particular issue is “intergenerational justice,” whatever that is.  He is clearly a smart guy but, like all the others, makes catastrophic climate change part and parcel of his agenda.

Curiously, in a recent survey of Millennials that sought to determine the top twenty things that worry them, climate change did not make the list.  And to anyone paying attention, global cooling is very likely a graver danger.

Why are Ocasio-Cortez’s approval ratings falling?  Aside from the fact that she knows nothing about anything, her Green New Deal is a pathetic joke.

Oh, yes, and they all suddenly want to abolish the Electoral College!  Had HRC won, they would be singing its praises.

That anyone thinks Joe Biden has a chance in hell of being elected is mystifying.  The man has so many skeletons in the closet that he can’t remember them all — plagiarism; racism; corruption; and a penchant for fondling young girls, even in public on camera.  Like Bernie Sanders, he is too old.  They both seem decades older than Donald Trump, even though they are just a few years older.  They are without Trump’s energy.

Then there is the forgettable John Hickenlooper, who just the other night needlessly confessed to taking his mother to a porn film years ago.

Kamala Harris has a sketchy record as California’s A.G.  She apparently took bribes to let Herbalife off the hook; Heather Podesta lobbied her on behalf of the company.  She is known for having “slept her way to the top” as the mistress of former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown.  Like O’Rourke, Cory Booker, and Gillibrand, she is not ready for prime time.

As Mr. Bardmesser wrote, Bernie Sanders is just an old pretend-socialist ne’er-do-well hypocrite.

Elizabeth Warren?  She is perhaps the most self-unaware candidate of the bunch.  After faking her way onto the Harvard faculty by claiming to be American Indian, when asked if she had sympathy for the parents who bought their way into chi-chi colleges, she replied, “Zero.”  When asked even now about her ancestry, she insists she “learned her family history from her family.”  And while quite wealthy herself, she intends, if elected, to tax wealthy Americans into extinction.  She wrongly thinks that by stealing what others have earned, she can fund her dream of a socialist state.  She needs to read Thomas Sowell’s book Basic Economics.

Along with their support for open borders, all the declared candidates are vowing their support for reparations, of course.  There are no living persons who were slaves.  It is a ridiculous agenda issue, completely unworkable.  They all know this, but like all the Democrats in D.C., they really do believe that the rest of us are idiots, easily fooled by nonsense claims and promises.  That is why they claim to support Ocasio-Cortez’s plan to rid the nation of planes, cars, and all things fossil-fueled.  As we all know from watching all the climate alarmists in Congress and in Hollywood, they will not, do not intend to ever change the fossil-fueled lifestyle they enjoy.  No.  Their brand of socialist tyranny will apply to only the rest of us.

Chinese-Americans are already seeing the specter of Mao in this crop of candidates.  So, as Mr. Bardmesser advises, do anything and everything you can to convince those less politically aware that if any one of the declared Democrats wins in 2020, America as we know it will be relegated to the ash heap of tragic history along with our precious Constitution.

The “American Dream” is the opportunity to achieve success and fulfillment through hard work.  Some definitions, such as here, focus on the pursuit of happiness.  There is an underlying idea that “anyone” can achieve the American Dream, but this is false, and not because of any systemic bigotry.  Nor is income equality relevant to the American Dream, since income is relatively unrelated to level of happiness.  I am happier with income below the national average than I would be had I won the Powerball lottery last night, although I would prefer to be employed.

Nancy Pelosi thinks people with guaranteed medical insurance will quit their jobs and become photographers or writers, or start their own businesses, rather than being locked into a job.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez thinks unemployed people, replaced by robots, will devote themselves to being more creative.  Unfortunately, most people don’t have enough talent to support themselves with freelance jobs or artistic endeavors.  Maybe that’s why a universal basic income sounds like a good idea.

The trouble with being a mediocre artist or freelancer is that we all want approval, affirmation, etc.  If we are unemployed and doing art, and no one buys it, or we are photographers and no one pays us for pictures, or we open businesses but find few or no customers, then we feel terrible.  No matter how tedious the paid job, at least we know that our work has a basic value to someone.  Free money from a UBI will not make us happier, even if it relieves stress somewhat because we can pay some of our bills.  Intrinsically, we all know when we’ve earned our keep rather than having it handed to us.  The UBI is just an expensive participation trophy for breathing.

I have been unemployed and seeking work as a software engineer for the last couple of months.  While I think I am reasonably competent as an opinion writer, I am not paid to do this, nor do I feel as though this is unfair.  If I were really good at writing, my books on Amazon would sell like hotcakes.  I will keep looking for paid work, even though I collect Social Security each month so I can pay my bills.  It, too, is a participation trophy, for past work.

My American Dream is that I should be able to find work instead of wondering why H-1B visa-holders and their spouses have jobs, some of which are in I.T.  If I work, I know I have value, and I don’t have to worry about the government continuing to be able to send me those monthly checks.  A century ago, there were frontier areas where a person could go, clear land, and homestead, where government’s protection and its interference were both absent, and monthly expenses were paid for with hard work rather than dollars.  I’m too old and infirm to do that at this point, so I keep looking for my happiness in doing work within my capabilities.

It isn’t a house or wealth that I dream of.  It’s not upward mobility for family.  It’s not that any of the half-baked inventions in my head take off and make the world a better place.  It’s a job, so I can feel independent in spite of paying taxes, because I wouldn’t be a government dependent anymore.  That feeling of independence is my American Dream.

The “American Dream” is the opportunity to achieve success and fulfillment through hard work.  Some definitions, such as here, focus on the pursuit of happiness.  There is an underlying idea that “anyone” can achieve the American Dream, but this is false, and not because of any systemic bigotry.  Nor is income equality relevant to the American Dream, since income is relatively unrelated to level of happiness.  I am happier with income below the national average than I would be had I won the Powerball lottery last night, although I would prefer to be employed.

Nancy Pelosi thinks people with guaranteed medical insurance will quit their jobs and become photographers or writers, or start their own businesses, rather than being locked into a job.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez thinks unemployed people, replaced by robots, will devote themselves to being more creative.  Unfortunately, most people don’t have enough talent to support themselves with freelance jobs or artistic endeavors.  Maybe that’s why a universal basic income sounds like a good idea.

The trouble with being a mediocre artist or freelancer is that we all want approval, affirmation, etc.  If we are unemployed and doing art, and no one buys it, or we are photographers and no one pays us for pictures, or we open businesses but find few or no customers, then we feel terrible.  No matter how tedious the paid job, at least we know that our work has a basic value to someone.  Free money from a UBI will not make us happier, even if it relieves stress somewhat because we can pay some of our bills.  Intrinsically, we all know when we’ve earned our keep rather than having it handed to us.  The UBI is just an expensive participation trophy for breathing.

I have been unemployed and seeking work as a software engineer for the last couple of months.  While I think I am reasonably competent as an opinion writer, I am not paid to do this, nor do I feel as though this is unfair.  If I were really good at writing, my books on Amazon would sell like hotcakes.  I will keep looking for paid work, even though I collect Social Security each month so I can pay my bills.  It, too, is a participation trophy, for past work.

My American Dream is that I should be able to find work instead of wondering why H-1B visa-holders and their spouses have jobs, some of which are in I.T.  If I work, I know I have value, and I don’t have to worry about the government continuing to be able to send me those monthly checks.  A century ago, there were frontier areas where a person could go, clear land, and homestead, where government’s protection and its interference were both absent, and monthly expenses were paid for with hard work rather than dollars.  I’m too old and infirm to do that at this point, so I keep looking for my happiness in doing work within my capabilities.

It isn’t a house or wealth that I dream of.  It’s not upward mobility for family.  It’s not that any of the half-baked inventions in my head take off and make the world a better place.  It’s a job, so I can feel independent in spite of paying taxes, because I wouldn’t be a government dependent anymore.  That feeling of independence is my American Dream.

President Trump’s powwow with Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro was a fairly good one, setting the stage for upgrading security ties between the two giants. Now, an attempted theft of uranium in Brazil by armed gunmen demonstrates in spades why that’s a good idea.

Here’s the Reuters report of the incident:

RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) – Armed men shot at members of a convoy transporting uranium to one of Brazil’s two working nuclear power plants on a coastal road in Rio de Janeiro state on Tuesday, police and the company managing the plant said.They said the truck carrying the nuclear fuel and its police escort came under attack when it was passing by the town of Frade, about 30 km (19 miles) from Angra dos Reis, where the reactor is located.

Policemen guarding the convoy returned the attackers’ fire, police said. They said there were no injuries or arrests and the armed men fled.The case is redolent of similar attempted robberies on Mexican medical trucks carrying nuclear supplies.

The case is redolent of similar attacks on medical trucks in Mexico carrying nuclear supplies – in 2013, 2015 (the BBC linked report says there were two unspecified incidents in 2014, as well), 2017, and 2018. Many of these cases have been dismissed as the work of clown-thugs who had no idea what they were taking, mainly just wanting to steal the truck. Often, it’s perfectly true. Some cases have been solved, or rather, solved well enough; others have not, or possibly, not been covered by the press. These kinds of robberies have also happened in the U.S. And Canada, according to this report, has reported 17 such thefts. VICE News reports that nuclear thefts are more common than anyone thinks, citing IAEA data.

But the Brazil case is interesting, because the country does seem to be a target, raising the possibility that terrorists might be looking for some dirty bomb supplies.

Why do I think that? Because, well, Hezb’allah has a lot of reported “bases” up north in Venezuela and elsewhere in the region. They might even have some in Brazil. What do they do? Why would a Middle Eastern terrorist group need  a base, or spend money on such ‘bases’ in this hemisphere? According to Stratfor:

South America is a strong base of operations for the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, which has had a presence in the continent dating back to the 1980s. The group established finance and logistical networks, which it used to facilitate two bombings in Argentina in the 1990s. The first bombing in 1992 targeted the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people and injuring 242 more. A second bombing in 1994 bombing targeted the Asociacion Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA), a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 and injured over 300. Since then, Hezbollah has shifted its operational focus from terror attacks to criminal activity to raise money, entering South America’s lucrative drug-trafficking business and dealing primarily with cocaine and heroin. Previously, we explored what Hezbollah now does in South America, and where it does it. 

Now there’s this sudden robbery attempt of nuclear supplies, in a nation with a large Hez’ballah presence in the country’s tri-border area, and another large Hez’ballah presence up north in Venezuela, and yet another in Colombia. Maybe it was thugs. Maybe it was local terror group, such as the disgruntled holdouts from Colombia’s FARC. Maybe it was Hezb’allah.

The Reuters report is a bare bones story, but it highlights the nature of the security issues, and why an alliance with the states might be helpful in sweeping Hez’ballah, or whoever is doing this, if the purpose is a dirty bomb, out. Brazil is a country still digging out from the rubble of extended socialism and all the lawlessness and terror-coddling that fosters, and now has a sharp new president very clear about his opposition to all of it. A U.S. security alliance with him would make sense. This report from Politico demonstrates the Trump administrations ferocious determination to get rid of Hez’ballah using every means necessary from the resources of the U.S. government. Politico of all places writes:

The renewed focus on Hezbollah’s presence and operations in Latin America is long overdue. Hezbollah’s last attempted international terrorism plot was in Peru, where a Lebanese Hezbollah operative, Mohammed Amadar, arrived in Peru in November 2013 and married a woman of dual Peruvian-American citizenship two weeks later. The U.S. connection got the attention of the FBI’s Miami Field Office. Shortly thereafter, Amadar moved to Brazil, living in Sao Paulo until he returned to Lima in July 2014. Peru’s anti-terror unit questioned him upon his arrival at the airport, put Amadar under surveillance, and arrested him for planning attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets that October.

Hezbollah today is deeply invested in operations in South America. One of the most prominent operatives behind the AMIA bombing has now risen up the ranks of the organization and is personally overseeing Hezbollah operations in the region. 

It actually leaps out at me now that Trump has allied up with Bolsonaro on security. Combining U.S. and Brazilian resources and sharing intelligence on terrorist operations with dirty bomb dreams such as Hezb’allah, who are reportedly “up to no good” in the hemisphere, is a potential game-changer.

Now read this report from Susan Crabtree of Real Clear Politics, who covered the actual Trump-Bolsonaro meeting:

 

Beyond all the colorful mutual admiration, the real magnitude of the historic meeting should not be lost, especially when it comes to advancing U.S. security interests, regional experts stress.

Brazilian political leaders have long held the U.S. at arm’s length, harboring deep anti-imperialist suspicions since a 1964 coup, supported by the U.S. government, overthrew then-President Joao Goulart. The suspicions remained even after the country’s shift to democracy in the mid-1980s.

But Bolsonaro eschewed that past, pledging a new “chapter of cooperation” and a grand new alliance between the two most populous nations and largest economies in the Western hemisphere. He and Trump promised to work together to improve trade, oppose socialism and other leftist movements, and specifically to confront the political crisis in Venezuela.

Trump and Bolsonaro also signed an agreement with U.S. companies on technical safeguards to allow commercial satellite launches in northern Brazil. Bolsonaro even stopped by CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., to discuss “international themes in the region,” according to his son, Eduardo, a Brazilian lawmaker accompanying the president on his first overseas trip.

And it may have implications for the fate of Venezuela. Besides being a failed state and socialist hellhole, it’s also a Hez’ballah playground with a mafia-like criminal ruling coterie premised on the Hez’ballah specialty of drug-dealing. That’s what’s holding the Maduro regime together and keeping its military leaders loyal – it’s the prospect of drug money, along with the support of distant imperial powers such as China, Russia, Iran and Cuba.

Trump has stated that he’s after the Maduro dictatorship to get out and allow Venezuela’s legitimate leader, Juan Guaido, to govern. He also said he hasn’t unsheathed his sharpest sanctions weapons against the Maduro regime, which, surprise, has been bruited about earlier as putting the country on the state sponsor of terrorism list.

Is there a plan with this new security alliance with Brazil? Does Trump know what he’s doing? Sure looks like it. Together the two giants and their Latin American allies can squeeze kill-minded terrorists with dirty-bomb dreams, – and their hosts — right out of the hemisphere.

 

 

President Trump’s powwow with Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro was a fairly good one, setting the stage for upgrading security ties between the two giants. Now, an attempted theft of uranium in Brazil by armed gunmen demonstrates in spades why that’s a good idea.

Here’s the Reuters report of the incident:

RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) – Armed men shot at members of a convoy transporting uranium to one of Brazil’s two working nuclear power plants on a coastal road in Rio de Janeiro state on Tuesday, police and the company managing the plant said.They said the truck carrying the nuclear fuel and its police escort came under attack when it was passing by the town of Frade, about 30 km (19 miles) from Angra dos Reis, where the reactor is located.

Policemen guarding the convoy returned the attackers’ fire, police said. They said there were no injuries or arrests and the armed men fled.The case is redolent of similar attempted robberies on Mexican medical trucks carrying nuclear supplies.

The case is redolent of similar attacks on medical trucks in Mexico carrying nuclear supplies – in 2013, 2015 (the BBC linked report says there were two unspecified incidents in 2014, as well), 2017, and 2018. Many of these cases have been dismissed as the work of clown-thugs who had no idea what they were taking, mainly just wanting to steal the truck. Often, it’s perfectly true. Some cases have been solved, or rather, solved well enough; others have not, or possibly, not been covered by the press. These kinds of robberies have also happened in the U.S. And Canada, according to this report, has reported 17 such thefts. VICE News reports that nuclear thefts are more common than anyone thinks, citing IAEA data.

But the Brazil case is interesting, because the country does seem to be a target, raising the possibility that terrorists might be looking for some dirty bomb supplies.

Why do I think that? Because, well, Hezb’allah has a lot of reported “bases” up north in Venezuela and elsewhere in the region. They might even have some in Brazil. What do they do? Why would a Middle Eastern terrorist group need  a base, or spend money on such ‘bases’ in this hemisphere? According to Stratfor:

South America is a strong base of operations for the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, which has had a presence in the continent dating back to the 1980s. The group established finance and logistical networks, which it used to facilitate two bombings in Argentina in the 1990s. The first bombing in 1992 targeted the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people and injuring 242 more. A second bombing in 1994 bombing targeted the Asociacion Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA), a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 85 and injured over 300. Since then, Hezbollah has shifted its operational focus from terror attacks to criminal activity to raise money, entering South America’s lucrative drug-trafficking business and dealing primarily with cocaine and heroin. Previously, we explored what Hezbollah now does in South America, and where it does it. 

Now there’s this sudden robbery attempt of nuclear supplies, in a nation with a large Hez’ballah presence in the country’s tri-border area, and another large Hez’ballah presence up north in Venezuela, and yet another in Colombia. Maybe it was thugs. Maybe it was local terror group, such as the disgruntled holdouts from Colombia’s FARC. Maybe it was Hezb’allah.

The Reuters report is a bare bones story, but it highlights the nature of the security issues, and why an alliance with the states might be helpful in sweeping Hez’ballah, or whoever is doing this, if the purpose is a dirty bomb, out. Brazil is a country still digging out from the rubble of extended socialism and all the lawlessness and terror-coddling that fosters, and now has a sharp new president very clear about his opposition to all of it. A U.S. security alliance with him would make sense. This report from Politico demonstrates the Trump administrations ferocious determination to get rid of Hez’ballah using every means necessary from the resources of the U.S. government. Politico of all places writes:

The renewed focus on Hezbollah’s presence and operations in Latin America is long overdue. Hezbollah’s last attempted international terrorism plot was in Peru, where a Lebanese Hezbollah operative, Mohammed Amadar, arrived in Peru in November 2013 and married a woman of dual Peruvian-American citizenship two weeks later. The U.S. connection got the attention of the FBI’s Miami Field Office. Shortly thereafter, Amadar moved to Brazil, living in Sao Paulo until he returned to Lima in July 2014. Peru’s anti-terror unit questioned him upon his arrival at the airport, put Amadar under surveillance, and arrested him for planning attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets that October.

Hezbollah today is deeply invested in operations in South America. One of the most prominent operatives behind the AMIA bombing has now risen up the ranks of the organization and is personally overseeing Hezbollah operations in the region. 

It actually leaps out at me now that Trump has allied up with Bolsonaro on security. Combining U.S. and Brazilian resources and sharing intelligence on terrorist operations with dirty bomb dreams such as Hezb’allah, who are reportedly “up to no good” in the hemisphere, is a potential game-changer.

Now read this report from Susan Crabtree of Real Clear Politics, who covered the actual Trump-Bolsonaro meeting:

 

Beyond all the colorful mutual admiration, the real magnitude of the historic meeting should not be lost, especially when it comes to advancing U.S. security interests, regional experts stress.

Brazilian political leaders have long held the U.S. at arm’s length, harboring deep anti-imperialist suspicions since a 1964 coup, supported by the U.S. government, overthrew then-President Joao Goulart. The suspicions remained even after the country’s shift to democracy in the mid-1980s.

But Bolsonaro eschewed that past, pledging a new “chapter of cooperation” and a grand new alliance between the two most populous nations and largest economies in the Western hemisphere. He and Trump promised to work together to improve trade, oppose socialism and other leftist movements, and specifically to confront the political crisis in Venezuela.

Trump and Bolsonaro also signed an agreement with U.S. companies on technical safeguards to allow commercial satellite launches in northern Brazil. Bolsonaro even stopped by CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., to discuss “international themes in the region,” according to his son, Eduardo, a Brazilian lawmaker accompanying the president on his first overseas trip.

And it may have implications for the fate of Venezuela. Besides being a failed state and socialist hellhole, it’s also a Hez’ballah playground with a mafia-like criminal ruling coterie premised on the Hez’ballah specialty of drug-dealing. That’s what’s holding the Maduro regime together and keeping its military leaders loyal – it’s the prospect of drug money, along with the support of distant imperial powers such as China, Russia, Iran and Cuba.

Trump has stated that he’s after the Maduro dictatorship to get out and allow Venezuela’s legitimate leader, Juan Guaido, to govern. He also said he hasn’t unsheathed his sharpest sanctions weapons against the Maduro regime, which, surprise, has been bruited about earlier as putting the country on the state sponsor of terrorism list.

Is there a plan with this new security alliance with Brazil? Does Trump know what he’s doing? Sure looks like it. Together the two giants and their Latin American allies can squeeze kill-minded terrorists with dirty-bomb dreams, – and their hosts — right out of the hemisphere.