Britain Returns to Two Parties

The United Kingdom has largely returned to an era of two parties. Having been divided up between several causes over the past few years, the Liberal Democrats shrank, UKIP was wiped out, and voters moved back to the Conservatives and Labour.

With London area residents opposed to Brexit, they moved left. Scotland moved right. Everyone else just shuffled around. It was a disaster for Theresa May who never should have been Prime Minister in the first place. She was the milquetoast candidate who everyone settled on, but she stood for nothing and sat around doing nothing as terror was on the rise in the UK. She completely botched an election she called to advance her agenda. Those around her should be fired and driven from politics permanently. She herself needs to step down.

The Tories will keep control, but by the barest margin. Their majority will again be a coalition. They’ll have a hung Parliament, which I assure the President is not an off color joke about his tiny hands. Jeremy Corbyn, the nutter who makes Bernie Sanders look mainstream, will be able to gloat. But we should not see this as a win for Corbyn so much as a loss for May. She was rejected. He was not embraced.

One thing that we should note is that it appears in the London area it was not just Brexit that saw the Tories lose. A certain world leader with a Twitter candidate attacked the mayor of the city after a terrorist attack. That allowed said mayor to create a wedge issue against the Prime Minister over a state dinner invitation.

It is time for Prime Minister Boris Johnson, though I still wish we’d get to see William Hague as Prime Minister. That day, however, is past.

President Trump and ISIS Have Entered An Unlikely Alliance

It is pretty clear ISIS is trying to affect the British elections in favor of Jeremy Corbyn. They know he is both weak on crime and weak on immigration. Despite Corbyn’s rhetoric, the moment he becomes Prime Minister, Britain will surrender to ISIS and Corbyn will probably lead a good faith effort to veil the Queen.

Though accidentally, it appears Donald Trump has joined ISIS in their effort to elect Jeremy Corbyn. Trump’s self-centered dumbassery on Twitter has started a state crisis in Britain. His attacks on London’s Mayor have allowed Labour in Britain to demand a withdrawal of Trump’s state visit. Trump’s unpopularity coupled with the invitation by Theresa May has put May in a very difficult position right before an election that should have given the Tories a clear majority.

Donald Trump and ISIS are working in concert, though not coordinated, to get Jeremy Corbyn elected. ISIS is doing so intentionally. President Trump is just a dumbass with a Twitter account who cannot help himself.

Faith, Reason and the Fallacy of Changing Hearts and Minds

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Daniel 11:1 & 32-34

Hebrews Chapter 11 is known to christians as “The Hall of Fame Chapter”. It references both by name and actions, those who honored their God and Creator through faith and righteousness. Four names not explicitly mentioned, but acknowledged through their actions, are Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, and Daniel. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were Jewish, young men who were slaves in King Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian Empire. Daniel, a young Israelite was captured by the Babylonian army when they conquered Israel, taken back as a slave, and given the job of working in King Darius’s government.

Daniel Chapter 6 tells us about Daniel, who refused to worship and pray to King Darius. By faith, he continued his prayers to his One True God three times a day, defiantly praying in front of his open window. Although Daniel was a favorite of the King, in the end Darius had him cast into an open pit that held lions. The Lion’s Den. God sent his angel and shut mouths of the lion, allowing Daniel to spend the night safe from harm. In the morning, the King rushed to the den and beseeched Daniel to assure him he was alive:

19 At the first light of dawn, the king got up and hurried to the lions’ den. 20 When he came near the den, he called to Daniel in an anguished voice, “Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to rescue you from the lions?”

Daniel’s reply is renown for the definition of faith:

21 Daniel answered, “May the king live forever! 22 My God sent his angel, and he shut the mouths of the lions. They have not hurt me, because I was found innocent in his sight. Nor have I ever done any wrong before you, Your Majesty.” 23 The king was overjoyed and gave orders to lift Daniel out of the den. And when Daniel was lifted from the den, no wound was found on him, because he had trusted in his God.

Earlier in Daniel, Chapter 3 details the story of three young men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego who refused to obey the order given by King Nebuchadnezzar, to bow down, worship and pray to his golden image. When the King personally ordered them to obedience, this was their reply:

16  “O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17 If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. 18 But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.”

In anger, Nebuchadnezzar had them thrown into a fire furnace. When the King looked into the furnace, he saw the three young men, along with a fourth, the pre-incarnate Son of God:

24 Then King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished and rose up in haste. He declared to his counselors, “Did we not cast three men bound into the fire?” They answered and said to the king, “True, O king.” 25 He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”

What do these Old Testament stories have to do with Prime Minister Theresa May’s statement on terrorism last night? (Independent)

It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth. Defeating this ideology is one of the great challenges of our time, but it cannot be defeated by military intervention alone. It will not be defeated by the maintenance of a permanent defensive counter-terrorism operation, however skillful its leaders and practitioners. It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence and make them understand that our values – pluralistic British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.

Where do secular governments go so wrong in their understanding?

This is not isolated misplaced ideology, this is their faith, this is the essence of their religion, and the sooner we recognize that fact, the sooner we can combat it.

Scripture is replete with a panoply of stories about those with enmity against Israel fighting to the death because of their fervor and faith for the false Gods they worship.

Essentially, the enemies of Israel were in reality, enemies of the One True God. While the Church has replaced Israel as representative of Christ the King here on Earth, the battle against the Triune Sovereign Creator has not. There remain those opposed to the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob, those who would and will seek to destroy his saints serving in His Kingdom here, and those who will go to their death doing so.

At no time in history has “changing hearts and minds” been successful outside of the Gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit. At no time in history, have secular governments convinced Muslims to willfully deny their faith, not to mention those ardent believers willing to follow Mohammad to the death.

Theresa May’s approach to solving extreme Islamic terrorism will have no more success than Pope Urban II, when in November 1095, he initiated the first Crusade against Muslims, who ruled Jerusalem and the Holy Land. History has shown neither the sword, nor diplomacy will move the heart of the Muslim away from Mohammad .

Today it is of utmost importance that we recognize the implacable strength of faith. Throughout history, men have sought out a “higher being” for worship. Whole nations have practiced child sacrifice in wicked belief in their false gods. Whole nations have fought to the death both defending their gods, and attempting conversion of others into their belief systems.

The point is this, we will not successfully remove the threat of Islamic terrorism by thinking we can convert their faith-based system via secular reasoning. Reason is natural, faith is spiritually unnatural. These two worlds can do nothing but collide. Centuries of history has shown us the only successful collision is aggressive confrontation with the sole goal of threat elimination.

Perhaps one day, reason will lead us to understand history does repeat itself, and does hold valuable lessons.

‘Difficult’ and ‘Embarrassing’ Conversations: How We Stamp Out Islamic Radicals

British PM Theresa May had some strong words today about dealing with the now-enormous threat posed by radical Islamists in the United Kingdom. We in America have much to glean from her statement.

The prime minister minced no words, saying “things need to change.”

First, while the recent attacks are not connected by common networks, they are connected in one important sense. They are bound together by the single, evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division, and promotes sectarianism.

It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth.

Defeating this ideology is one of the great challenges of our time. But it cannot be defeated through military intervention alone. It will not be defeated through the maintenance of a permanent, defensive counter-terrorism operation, however skillful its leaders and practitioners.

It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence – and make them understand that our values – pluralistic, British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.

If Muslims wish to live in England, they must assimilate and desegregate.

Since the British have not yet developed a mind-control device, this talk is probably not one about “winning the hearts and minds” of people dedicated to the destruction of Western (“pluralistic, British”) values.

The whole “winning the hearts and minds” thing has been tried, and to date, has failed miserably, every single time.

So May is talking about something else. She mentioned military action to destroy ISIS, but although ISIS claimed responsibility for both the Manchester and the London Bridge attacks, dealing with ISIS is not enough.

While we have made significant progress in recent years, there is – to be frank – far too much tolerance of extremism in our country.

So we need to become far more robust in identifying it and stamping it out – across the public sector and across society.

That will require some difficult and often embarrassing conversations, but the whole of our country needs to come together to take on this extremism – and we need to live our lives not in a series of separated, segregated communities, but as one truly United Kingdom.

I agree with everything May said, except one paragraph: “It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth.”

It’s going to be difficult to sell that thought to people who see Sharia law being enforced in areas with a high concentration of Muslims. It’s going to be harder to sell it when the measures to deal with extremism kick in.

According to Fox News, these may include a burka ban, “round ups” of suspected terrorists, and stripping of citizenship.

Given that these measures in general only apply to Muslims (like President Trump’s travel ban, and Obama’s before him), the intention is clear: large populations of Muslims, unassimilated and led by their religious figures, are incompatible with pluralistic British values.

In other words: If Muslims wish to live in England, they must assimilate and desegregate.

Could America do what May suggests?

I have had long discussions with various people here in the U.S. about how this could work in our country. How could Americans deal with a population that refuses to assimilate, refuses to integrate into American society, and rejects pluralistic, American values?

Yes, the U.S. government could set up internment camps for Muslims.

We have a First Amendment that protects religious speech and practice. Christians bristled with outrage and fought Houston Mayor Annise Parker in her bid to subpoena sermons preached by pastors to vet them for “hate speech” against LGBTs. Would we now support similar measures against Muslims?

It’s a slippery slope.

Would we be able to remain friendly with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iraq while rounding up Wahabist and Salafist Muslims as terror suspects and taking action to jail or strip them of their citizenship? Probably not, but it might be in their interests not to burn bridges.

We have the Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment to protect against such things done to American citizens. But we also have Korematsu v. United States, a legal precedent giving the government wide powers to “round up” and intern Americans–even citizens–to protect against espionage or other threats in time of war.

If America could somehow declare war against a stateless, “single, evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division, and promotes sectarianism” (to use May’s words), then would the government have authority to round up adherents to that enemy, just like Roosevelt did with Executive Order 9066?

On its face, it seems likely, although given the toxic environment on liberal federal benches regarding anything Trump does, it would be a long legal battle, punctuated with the worst invective. But if it was an actual time of war, with American civilians perishing?

Yes, the U.S. government could set up internment camps for Muslims.

But no, it probably wouldn’t have the right to close down mosques, or demand the contents of sermons preached by imams. But the FBI does have quite a range of intelligence-gathering methods, as we’ve seen recently.

I don’t suppose it would be difficult, using gumshoe investigation techniques and good old-fashioned surveillance and informants, to keep tabs on America’s relatively small Muslim population. (Actually, there are more Muslims in America than in the U.K., but a far smaller percentage of the population, and they are not as segregated as in the U.K.)

After 9/11, these techniques were used by the Joint Terrorism Task Force and the NYPD to keep tabs on New York area mosques, but the program was shut down after it was exposed. If what’s happening in England happened here, I expect we wouldn’t hear the same complaints we heard just a few years ago.

I also suspect that if not for the secret NYPD program, we might actually be having the same “difficult and often embarrassing conversations” they are having right now in England. It might be time to look at reviving those measures, before we actually need to do something more drastic.

I know that, to liberals and politically correct snowflakes, that’s less palatable than having seven or ten or twenty people die every month or so. In England, however, they’ve had enough of politically correct deadly fantasies.

Trump Promises To Ferret Out The Source Of The Leaks In The Manchester Terror Investigation

In light of diplomatic tension between the United States and the United Kingdom over leaks involving the investigation of the Manchester terrorist bombing earlier this week, President Trump has promised to find the origin of the leaks and deal with that source.

Suicide bomber Salman Abedi unleashed his attack at the Manchester Arena after an Ariana Grande concert on Monday night. The American press first published Abedi’s identity and victims’ identities as well as specific details about the attack, which led British authorities to express their concern over intelligence leaks.

Trump’s vow to ferret out the fissures in the intelligence community came after British Prime Minister Theresa May halted the sharing of intelligence with the US and even suggested that the “special relationship” could be in jeopardy over the leak of classified information. May initially spoke to Trump ahead of a NATO meeting in Brussels, and they talked again at a NATO dinner.

Mrs May said: “On the issue of the intelligence-sharing with the USA, we have a special relationship with the USA, it is our deepest defence and security partnership that we have.

“Of course, that partnership is built on trust. And part of that trust is knowing that intelligence can be shared confidently and I will be making clear to President Trump today that intelligence that is shared between law enforcement agencies must be shared securely.”

Trump also mentioned the “special relationship” when he reiterated how seriously he takes both the intelligence leaks and British-American relations.

“There is no relationship we cherish more than the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom”, he said.

The president also restated his assertion that NATO and other American allies must work together to stop terrorism, or else the “horror you saw in Manchester, and so many other places, will continue forever.”

In light of Trump’s assurances, the UK has resumed sharing intelligence with the US again. Here’s hoping the White House can stop these leaks and mend the frustrations with our British friends once and for all.

Manchester Update: New Details, Trump Responds, ISIS Claims Responsibility

Details continue to emerge about the horrific bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, U.K. yesterday. Here’s the latest updates.

  • The death toll now stands at 22 people, including children.
  • The bomber, as yet unidentified, was killed in the blast, and used an “improvised explosive device.”

“We now know that a single terrorist detonated his improvized explosive device near one of the exits of the venue, deliberately choosing the time and place to cause maximum carnage and to kill and injure indiscriminately,” Prime Minister Theresa May said in a televised statement. (Source)

  • May called the attack “appalling, sickening cowardice, deliberately targeting innocent, defenseless children and young people who should have been enjoying one of the most memorable nights of their lives.”
  • President Trump, in his remarks with Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas, condemned the attack, and called the perpetrators “evil losers.” (Source)

Mr. Trump said that he would not call people like the assailant “monsters” because they would “think that’s a great name.” Instead, he said that people who conducted attacks like the one at the concert were “evil losers.”

“I will call them from now on losers, because that’s what they are,” Mr. Trump said. “They’re losers. And we’ll have more of them. But they’re losers. Just remember that.”


  • This was the worst attack on British soil since 2005, when 52 people perished in the London Underground bombings. It’s the worst attack in northern England’s history.
  • British police tweeted that have arrested a 23-year-old man in South Manchester in connection with the attack.

  • ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack. (Source)

In a statement translated from Arabic, ISIS said that a soldier of the caliphate placed explosives among a gathering of crusaders — meaning Christians — at the Manchester Arena. The statement said about 30 were killed and about 70 were wounded.

  • For the survivors, what should have been a memorable night out has become a nightmare. Teenagers are stricken with grief and shock. Families are worried, and terror has briefly taken hold in the numbness following such an evil and heartless act.


This is personal

My own personal reaction initially was anger. That has turned to intense anger. This morning I told my 6- and 7-year-old kids about the bombing. The 7-year-old asked why? I told him they are evil. President Bush called terrorists who target innocents like this “evildoers.” Trump called them “evil losers.”

I don’t think either of them cover the enormity of this. They are evil-hearted people, whose souls and ability to care about a single life other than their own twisted lie of paradise, have been hopelessly seared. They find their places in hell for eternity.

Justice will prevail, but nothing can restore the lost relationships, the lost futures, and the lost love of children who will never grace this earth because of evil. C.S. Lewis said God uses suffering as his megaphone. Those who would applaud the deaths of children deserve to be hunted like animals, without remorse.

Let this event not be lost in the news cycles or politics of the day. Let this be the galvanizing cry to eliminate ISIS, as Trump said, “DRIVE THEM OUT OF THIS EARTH.”

Brexit: Is PM May Brilliant or Will It All Go Pear-Shaped?

British Prime Minister Theresa May broke her vow not to seek early elections and called a snap national election on June 8, exploiting what’s widely been called a weakness in her opposition.

The Labour Party was caught completely flat-footed, so many think this was a brilliant move to consolidate power and consensus in Parliament over Brexit. Last month, May formally invoked “Article 50” which started a two-year clock for the U.K. to remove itself from the European Union.

Is it brilliant? The Washington Post offers some strong evidence.

The Labour Party has been at war with itself since the election of the far-left Jeremy Corbyn as leader in September 2015. A recent poll showed that, in a head-to-head matchup between May and Corbyn, not even a majority of Labour votes would want Corbyn as their prime minister.

Other parties are similarly weakened, or more so. UKIP, having fulfilled its purpose and without its leader Nigel Farage, may as well fold into May’s Conservative Party, and the Liberal Democrats are a tiny shell of their former selves.

This could either go very well for May, giving her a firm mandate at Westminster, or it could unravel Brexit if voters make this a referendum–a do-over–on Brexit.

Imagine if the U.S. had a parliamentary system like England, where Speaker Paul Ryan could simply call for new elections in 51 days? The liberals would be calling for new elections every six months until they got their way. Hillary Clinton would never go away, and Bernie Sanders would have 100-foot billboards all over the east and west coasts. It would be absolute Bedlam.

I’m flying out across the pond tonight (not for this). I’ll follow this story from England. They can much better explain the fineries of their electoral and legislative system to me than I could ever learn on my own. It’s like trying to learn cricket. If you don’t grow up with the game, don’t even bother.

But in England, snap elections, do-overs, and their own brand of politics is all they know. Hopefully, May has this well thought out. As they say over there, it could definitely go pear-shaped if she doesn’t.

BREAKING: UK Will Host Election June 8th, Conservatives Expected to Dominate

Earlier today, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced that her nation will push forward their upcoming general election to June 8th–a move that has been labelled a “snap” election.

Her full remarks on the subject can be found below:

This comes at the heels of the impending U.K. exit from the European Union, which was officially launched its exit on March 29th. If all goes to plan, Great Britain will be fully autonomous by March 2019.

Per initial polling from YouGov, if the general election were held today, the Conservative Party would hold an overwhelming lead with 44 percent of the vote — followed by Labour Party (23%), Liberal Democrat Party(12%), UKIP Party (10%), and other parties (10%).

It’s refreshing to see Great Britain reasserting itself as a leader in Europe. Let’s hope the current May government stays in office so reformers can continue to influence policy there.