Recent News

What Obama’s Ferguson Sermon Left Out


In his 967-word statement to the nation about the Ferguson grand jury decision on Tuesday night, President Obama devoted precisely one sentence to the risks and sacrifices police officers make to keep the peace.


Obama delivered a tepid, obligatory acknowledgement that "our police officers put their lives on the line for us every single day." But he sandwiched it between a finger-wagging admonition that cops need to "show care and restraint" and a pandering discourse justifying the "deep distrust" that "communities of color" have toward law enforcement because of the "legacy of racial discrimination in this country."

Note: Multiple African-American witnesses told the panel that teen Michael Brown, suspected of robbing a local market, charged Officer Darren Wilson before his shooting death. The grand jury concluded that there was no probable cause for indicting Wilson after considering hundreds of pages and scores of hours of witness and expert testimony.

Yet, Obama's first priority was to dwell on racial injustice against "communities of color," and his first instinct was to warn police officers to restrain themselves.

Only after expending 756 words on the need to "understand" the "problem" that "communities of color" have with police did Obama address the thugs of color "throwing bottles" and "smashing car windows" and "using this as an excuse to vandalize property" in the name of social justice.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner had nothing to say about the hate-filled "F**k the police" refrain from rioters of color in Ferguson and anarchists of pallor in Oakland and Occupy Wall Street pot-stirrers of privilege poisoning social media.

The nation's self-styled healer of souls was mum in response to black radical grievance-mongers' calls to vengefully burn Ferguson to the ground--a seething sentiment echoed the next day by Brown's stepfather.

Mr. Hope and Change stayed silent about the lynch-mob instigators calling for Wilson to be shot and his family murdered.

And while the uniter-in-chief has given several public shout-outs to Brown and his family, he has delivered no special national address addressing the families of police officers ruthlessly targeted by domestic terrorists and racist radicals.

Obama used his bully pulpit this week

Moral Befuddlement in Ferguson

"It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters."

Edmund Burke's insight returned to mind while watching cable news coverage of the rampage in Ferguson, Missouri, after St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch announced that officer Darren Wilson would not be indicted in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

The rioting, looting, arson and gunfire that began after McCulloch relayed the grand jury's decision, a decision long predicted and anticipated, revealed the unspoken truth about Ferguson.

The problem in Ferguson is not the 53-man police department. The problem is the hoodlum element those Ferguson cops have to police, who, Monday night, burned and pillaged the stores on the main streets of their own community.

The police were portraits in restraint as they were cursed and showered with rocks, bottles and Molotov cocktails. If the police were at fault at all, it was in their refusal to use the necessary force to stop a rampaging mob that destroyed the lives and livelihoods of honest businessmen and women of Ferguson.

Many will not be able to rebuild their stores. Many will not be able to get insurance. Many will give up and move away, the investment of a lifetime lost in a night of thuggery.

One recalls that the Detroit riot of 1967 was the beginning of the end of Motown. And it was decades before D.C. fully recovered from the riot and arson that followed the assassination of Dr. King.

In the wake of the Ferguson riot, some seek absolution for the rioters by redistributing responsibility to police and prosecutor.

Why, they demand, did McCulloch wait until 8 p.m., St. Louis time, to report the grand jury findings? Why did he wait until after dark?

Well, perhaps it was to give time for kids to get home from school and off the playgrounds, for businesses to close and shutter down, for rush hour to end. Hoodlums from Ferguson earlier stormed onto I-70 and shut down the Interstate -- the way home for tens of thousands of St. Louisans.

Whatever reason McCulloch had for waiting until 8 p.m. does not explain or excuse the rampant criminality that lasted until midnight.

"No justice, no peace!" has been a howl of the protesters.

What they mean is strikingly clear: Michael Brown, one of us, is dead. Therefore, this cop, Darren Wilson, must go on trial for his life.

But this is not justice in America. We have a legal process to determine who was in the right and who in the wrong, and whether a crime has been committed by a policeman in the use of deadly force.

"No justice, no peace" is an encapsulation of the lex talionis, an eye for an eye. Do we really want to go back to race-based lynch law?

That 10 o'clock split screen of Obama in the White House briefing room calling for peaceful protest and greater efforts by police to understand "communities of color," side by side with graphic video of mob mayhem in Ferguson, tells a sad truth.

America's election of a black president has not closed and, for some, has not even narrowed the racial divide.

We are now half a century on from the Civil Rights Act of 1964. African-Americans have risen out of poverty and the working class to become successes as actors, artists, athletes, executives, politicians, TV anchors, journalists, scholars, generals, authors, etc.

But if the hate we saw on the streets of Ferguson...

Ferguson Fiasco Exposes Ruling Class’s Relentless Anti-White Agenda

The St. Louis County Police on Twitter

Although patiently explained in summer that The Answer To Race Riots Is Ruthless Coercion. What Is America Waiting For? , Missouri Governor Jay Nixon ignored us and refused to deploy the National Guard. As a result, after a grand jury declined yesterday to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown, Ferguson is now ablaze with violence, arson, and undocumented shopping.

But the real story isn’t the collapse of yet another racial hoax—it’s the perseverance of a Main Stream Media-created Narrative about “white racism,” even in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

No educated observer can still maintain that Michael Brown, hands held high in the air, was executed by Officer Darren Wilson. The grand jury declined not only to bring a charge of murder, but even a lesser charge like involuntary manslaughter.

According to St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch (a Democrat): “Even the image of Brown’s surrender may have been a fiction” as several witnesses (all black) claimed Brown ran towards the officer. [Ferguson police officer won’t be charged in fatal shooting, by Chico Harlan, Wesley Lowery, and Kimberly Kindy, Washington Post, November 25, 2014]

Autopsy evidence also showed that Brown was not shot in the back. Michael Brown’s “blood or DNA was found on the inside of the driver’s door, the upper left thigh of Officer Wilson’s pant leg, the front collar of Wilson’s shirt, and on his weapon.” And several eyewitnesses who initially said Brown surrendered “adjusted” their claims or admitted they weren’t even there and were recounting stories secondhand. [Ferguson Grand Jury Declines to Indict In Michael Brown Case, CBSNewYork/AP, November 24, 2014]

Officer Wilson’s riveting testimony has also been released and, as would be expected, matches the evidence. Wilson says that he was in fear for his life from the hulking robbery suspect, who charged him and punched him twice in the face. The young officer had also never used his weapon before. [Michael Brown shooting: What Darren Wilson told the Ferguson grand jury, by Rachel Clarke and Mariano Castillo, CNN, November 25, 2014]

In fairness, one critical detail reported by many conservative and MSM sources last August was that Office Darren Wilson suffered a severe orbital fracture. The pictures show (as I suspected) that this was not the case and that the initial report from Gateway Pundit was not true. [UPDATE: Officer Darren Wilson Suffered Severe Facial Contusions After Severe Beating During Mike Brown Attack, by Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit, August 19, 2014, updated November 24, 2014]

However, it is nevertheless true that Officer Wilson was physically struck in the face by Michael Brown. Evidence and testimony suggests Brown struggled for Wilson’s gun. And the Narrative that was originally presented—that Gentle Giant Michael Brown was accosted and executed by a police officer for no reason—is simply a lie and has been known to be a lie for some time.

Brown turned out to be a criminal and a thug, given to the constant aggression that’s par for the course in black “communities.” From Officer Wilson’s testimony, it seems the last words of the Gentle Giant were “You are too much of a p*ssy to shoot me.” And there is no case anywhere in the country where someone could expected to punch a police officer and grapple for his weapon and not expect to be shot. If anything, Wilson was remarkably restrained.

Nonetheless, incredibly, a new Narrative is taking shape: that Wilson was not injured severely enough to justify shooting Brown. The quasi-literates at Jezebel taunted Officer Wilson’s purplish bruise as a “razor-burn.” [Here Are Images the Grand Jury Saw of Darren Wilson’s Injuries, by Rebecca Rose, Jezebel, November 24, 2014]

Presumably, he should have let the 290lb Gentle Giant pummel him a few more times and then give Brown his pistol to make it fair.

Indeed, even though everything the MSM told us about the case for months has turned out be wrong, most of the coverage in the aftermath has the underlying premise that there has been a great travesty of justice and people are right to be outraged. Protests in other cities were given a largely positive spin...

Peter Brimelow On Amnesty On SunTV: “No, It’s A Pack Of Lies.”

This is Peter Brimelow being interviewed on SunTV by Brian […]

Executive Amnesty Is A National Emergency, It’s Time For Patriots To Act Accordingly

President Obama’s unilateral Amnesty/Immigration Surge means the end of politics as usual. Impeachment, though necessary, is just the beginning. Patriots are going to need to take a more activist approach in response to what is nothing less than a national emergency.

At least one politician, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), understands what is at stake:

You're going to see — hopefully not — but you could see instances of anarchy... You could see violence.

[GOP Senator warns of violence after immigration order, by Susan Page, USA Today, Nov. 19, 2014]

Of course, we already have anarchy—or at least, anarcho-tyranny. The operative line from Emperor Obama’s speech is: “[W]e’re not going to deport you.” [Transcript: Obama’s Immigration Speech, Washington Post, Nov. 20, 2014] This means that Obama is simply refusing to enforce immigration law because he sees political advantage in dispossessing Americans.

At the same time, we can expect further legal crackdowns on the historic American nation itself. As even Breitbart recognizes:

Whites face a government that is explicitly working against their interests, the economic prospects of their children, and democratic processes they have spent more than 200 years defending.

[Morci: Whites face a government working against their interests and their children’s, by Peter Morci, Breitbart, November 23, 2014]

Patriots must take two steps immediately in response:

The Left forces the political system to choose between the demands of the radical Left and the policy preferred by the Establishment Left. They control both the revolutionaries and the “moderate” opposition.

It is time for patriots to force Conservatism, Inc., into the same position. Beginning with the Civil Rights era, the Left has employed protest effectively, and the publicity garnered by protest has forced officials to accommodate. Political technology is ideologically neutral and we need to use what works.

If the political system won’t respond to citizens’ lawful demands for the enforcement of existing laws, then citizens need to adopt a more activist approach. When faced with the choice of a surge of Minutemen providing security along the southern border, or deploying officially approved personnel, many of the cowardly Republicans will be pressured to opt for law enforcement.

Patriots—especially those with military, police, or legal expertise—need to become more adept at incentivizing the enforcement of existing laws. This could include joining or supporting the Minutemen and other patriots who are actively interfering with the invasion. Also, border patriots need to repeat, all across the southern border, the direct physical action taken by patriots in Murrieta, California.

Nothing will bring the National Guard to the border faster than legions of citizens carrying placards and cameras, and filing lawsuits whenever illegal immigration leads to crime or monetary loss.

Hordes of ingrates make themselves heard on a daily basis. Patriots should consider what it means for a group to “make themselves heard.” It’s not just about making noise but making sure those in power are forced to hear your message, whether they want to or not.

We have to create a bigger spectacle out of abysmal border security, and exploit the Main Stream Media’s hunger for sensationalism and conflict.

Second, blocking funding...

Libya, Isis, Rioting In Kiev: Hagel Didn’t Start the Fire

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, a Vietnam war veteran and the […]

The Myth Of The 11 Million: Wall Street Analyst Estimates 21-25 Million Illegals Now In U.S.


Or you know, whatever.

Obama just gave legal status to an estimated five million illegal aliens and the Treason Lobby and its foreign allies are already shrieking for more. But how many more? Just how many illegal aliens have invaded America? There’s reason to believe the government’s estimates are wrong—and that the real number is shocking larger.

For a suspiciously long time, the Main Stream Media has been using the figure of 11 million illegals, presumably because the current official estimate from the U.S. Census Bureau is 11 million-12 million. And Steven Camarota, of the Center for Immigration Studies, tells me that, using various Census Bureau tools such as the Current Population Study, he concurs that the number is around 11-12 million.

But my colleague, economist Edwin S. Rubenstein, while considering Camarota’s estimate to be credible, distinguishes between “net” and “gross” levels of illegals. The “net” level is the number on American soil at any given time. The “gross” number is the number that many have been on American soil at any time in the course of a year, which may contains a great deal of duplication. In an extreme case, a Mexican illegally crossing the border to work in a Texas border town 365 times in a year, and being counted as 365 illegal aliens.

To put it another way, the transient “flow” of illegal may greatly exceed the quasi-permanent “stock”—which means that the “stock” might increase sharply if the President’s action encourages the transient “flow” to stay.

And in January 2005, Robert Justich and Betty Ng, analysts at the major Wall Street investment bank Bear Stearns, caused a stir with an exhaustive report, The Underground Labor Force is Rising to the Surface. [PDF]This report particularly delighted because it supported the daring 2004 estimate made by D.A. King in in 2004: 20 million illegals.

The Justich-Ng report actually cited’s Rubenstein, on the divergence that illegal aliens are causing between the Household and Payroll employment surveys, although the citation was mutilated in the footnotes, no doubt for reasons of Political Correctness.

Justich and Ng found the claims and the processes of the Census Bureau lacking in credibility. Seeking to get more accurate numbers, they developed a brilliantly inventive methodology. As variables, they measured cash remittances (wire transfers) to the nations that are the chief sources of what they call “undocumented immigrants”; housing starts; the building of new schools; and border-crossings. Based on these, Justich and Ng estimated that there were 20 million illegal aliens residing in America.

I recently spoke to Justich, now a consultant. He told me he now thinks that there are 21 million to 25 million illegal aliens present on American soil.

Justich says the Census Bureau simply has no reliable methodology for determining the numbers of illegal aliens. His experience is that illegals avoid census workers—even though there are not asked about their immigration status—and refuses to otherwise participate in the census.

Therefore, the current numbers (as of 6:15 p.m., Friday, November 21, 2014), of 319,303,696 “residents” in the U.S.—including citizens, legal immigrants, and undocumented immigrants—and 12 million illegal aliens, bear no relation to one another. In other words, we cannot say that there are 319.3 million people residing in the U.S., including 12 million illegals; or that there are 331.3 million people residing in the U.S., including 12 million illegals.

Not only are the Census Bureau numbers worthless regarding illegals, but they are worthless

Memo From Middle America | Obamnesty Not Approved By Congress? No Problem, It’s Been Approved by Mexico And Central America!

The hapless Republican Congress may not know what to do about Barack Obama’s unilateral Amnesty, but the governments of Mexico and Central America are already moving to take advantage.

Only a few minutes after Obama’s speech, the Mexican Foreign Ministry had already released a statement on its website entitled: México Da La Bienvenida A Medidas Administrativas Que Beneficiarán A Mexicanos En Estados Unidos [Mexico Welcomes the Administrative Measures That Will Benefit Mexicans in the United States, SRE Comunicado 532, November 20, 2014]

The Mexican government explicitly welcomed Obama’s action because of the perceived benefit to its own citizens:

The government of Mexico, through the Secretariat of Foreign Relations (SRE) welcomes the administrative measures in migration announced….by the government of the United States that has the potential to benefit a significant number of Mexicans in that county and improve their opportunities, as well as their dignity and certainty. This decision will permit the increase of the substantial contributions of Mexicans to the economy and society of the United States.

And Mexico’s statement also contained a warning to the United States

In respect to the announcement made in reference to border control, the government of Mexico will be attentive that its implementation respect the security and human rights of the migrants.

Emphasis added.

The Mexican government statement invited “the Mexican community in the United States” to get more information from Mexico’s 50 consulates in the U.S.A. It provides an 800 phone number and promises to “continue offering assistance and consular protection to all Mexicans, regardless of their migratory condition.”

So whatever Barack Obama’s claims, the government of Mexico certainly understands that these “migrants” aren’t becoming Americans by any definition.

You would think Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto would have his plate full with the Iguala Massacre (in which Mexican police and gang hitmen attacked and killed students, then disappeared 43 others) and a domestic political scandal. Violence is rampant in Mexico and well over two-thirds of Mexicans report they feel unsafe.

Nonetheless, Pena Nieto has found the time to call the Amnesty “an act of justice” and gave orders to Mexico’s consular network to help illegals. [ 'Un acto de justicia', medidas migratorias en EU: EPN, El Universal, November 21, 2014]

Central America also responded quickly to the Obamnesty, dependent as those countries are on remittances from the U.S.

The Honduran presidential office released a statement declaring:

The government of Honduras salutes the announcement of the President of the United States, Barack Obama… which will benefit hundreds of thousands of Hondurans…. The decision will benefit Honduras and tens of thousands of families, as it will permit that Hondurans residing in the United States and with children born on U.S. soil can benefit from the relief and have permission of temporary residence and that they will not be subject to deportation for three years.

Latin America applauds Obama’s immigration plan, Associated Press November 22, 2014

Emphasis added.

Note this reference to the Anchor Baby loophole, gleefully exploited by Latin Americans seeking to flee their own countries, and by corrupt governments exporting their problem populations.

Needless to say, while Latin Americans know full well about abusing birthright citizenship, American politicians (including Republicans) are pretending the problem doesn’t exist.

Indeed, nowadays, even Latin Americans repeat the Obama-certified “nation of immigrants” nonsense for their own benefit:

We share the words of President Obama that the United States is a “nation of immigrants”…..the migrants drive the economy of the great Nation of the North.

Yet while the Honduran government is undoubtedly happy with Obama’s Amnesty, it isn’t completely satisfied. It thinks Amnesty doesn’t go far enough:

This temporary relief is a great step in the right direction of the United States to resolve the migratory problem ...

The Answer To Obamnesty: Impeachment—Or Insurrection


The question is--will the GOP Leadership even try?

The fearless leader of the American Right, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, knows exactly what he’s going to do in response to Barack Obama’s unilateral grant of Amnesty to five million illegals. Priebus is going to raise money.

Only hours after Barack Obama’s speech, the RNC sent out a fundraising email signed by Priebus telling donors to “take a stand” by donating to the Republican Party. Of course, what the Republican Party intends to do with the money—or for that matter, with its new Congressional majority—is unclear.

But we do know one thing the Republican leadership intends to do: keep its own rank and file from acting to stop the President.

As Jonathan Strong of Breitbart noted:

As they departed the House floor, many en route to the airport for a Thanksgiving recess, many GOP lawmakers seemed as interested in explaining why options floated by colleagues from their own party wouldn't work as denouncing what they describe as an unprecedented power grab by a president they just decimated at the ballot box.

[Republicans Leave Town Without a Plan to Fight Obama, November 20, 2014]

Virtually all Congressional Republicans have already ruled out impeachment, of course. According to Breitbart’s Strong, even a motion of censure seems to be a bridge too far for Republicans. And he quotes Congressman Pat Tiberi’s detached musings that the whole issue might end up before the Supreme Court.

The awful truth: Barack Obama just handed a gift to the Republican leadership. Speaker John Boehner, the RNC, and the professional political class of consultants and party hacks have long favored Amnesty to reward their donors, but they feared retribution from the conservative grassroots c.f. Eric Cantor. Nevertheless, as Steve Sailer has noted, the clueless Republican leadership probably would eventually have passed Amnesty on its own, and in so doing would committed political suicide. Now, Barack Obama has made the issue a fait accompli and taken full responsibility for the action. All Republican leaders think they have to do is sputter convincingly for their base, and then they can get on with plunging their snouts into the trough provided by the party’s midterm victory.

Some GOP presidential contenders in 2016, including Scott Walker, Mike Pence, and Rick “All Hat, No Cattle” Perry are proposing to rely on that bastion of right-wing populism, the American legal system [What Can the GOP Do to Stop Obama’s immigration order?By Pema Levy, Newsweek, November 20, 2014].

This option appears especially attractive to conservatives who are uncomfortable talking about just what President Obama did, but prefer to focus how he did it. Thus Rand Paul, who has consistently flirted with Amnesty, is again trying to be clever by comparing Obama to a king, grounding his complaint in process rather than policy.

But this legalistic kind of stand is hopelessly reactionary in the worst sense of the world. As Joe Sobran said long ago, “The U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government.” Conservatives may fantasize about a court or judge acting as a deus ex machina to save Republicans...

It’s Treason (Again). The Answer Is Impeachment. It Would Work.


"Your country needs you.Our American family will only be as strong as our growing Latino community." Obama To The NCLR, 2011

Back in the summer, when the Obama Regime was conspiring with the drug cartels to dump tens of thousands of illegal alien minors into the U.S., I wrote Obama’s Border Dissolution Is Treason. The Answer Is Impeachment. It Would Work. Tonight, after reading the President’s speech announcing his attempt to impose Amnesty through executive branch coup—easier on the blood pressure than actually watching him—I stand by every word of my argument. And I believe that, had the GOP precipitated an impeachment fight and nationalized the midterm elections on the issue of immigration, it would now have a veto-proof majority.

Still, the result of the midterms means that the GOP can control the Senate’s agenda and now needs to persuade fewer red-state Democrats to change sides to reach the necessary two-thirds approval. In the volatile atmosphere of Senate trial, pressure on these Democrats will be intense. Obama really could be convicted.

But the real objective will be to get him to back off Executive Amnesty. Unlike Bill Clinton, whose crime had been irrevocably committed, Obama can always undo the cause of his indictment. Many queasy white liberals—remember, even the Washington Post editorialized against this reckless step—will press him to do so.

There are, of course, other steps the GOP could take. At, we particularly like the immediate abolition of birthright citizenship, which would deprive the Democrats of their incentive to encourage illegal immigration. But none sends the same simple, devastating message as the disgrace of impeachment.

I occasionally argue that no-one—least of all professional politicians—really knows what is politically possible. Miracles happen—the Gang of Eight Amnesty bill was stopped.

But this means that someone has to think the unthinkable and say the unsayable, because no-one knows when what might suddenly become thinkable, sayable—and doable. I believe that this is’s role—to take risks and push the envelope of public debate. I want to thank our readers for their loyal support at this dark and dangerous moment for the historic American nation.

Peter Brimelow [Email him] is the editor of His best-selling book, Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster, is now available in Kindle format.