bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘NEWT GINGRICH’

ILLEGAL ALIENS–THE WORLD’S UNWNTEDS: PART FIVE (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 9, 2026 at 12:19 am

If Americans decide they truly want to control access to their own borders, there is a realistic way to accomplish this.        

And it doesn’t involve building a wall along the Mexican border—which would prove ridiculously expensive and easily circumvented.

(1) The Justice Department should vigorously attack the “sanctuary movement” that officially thwarts the immigration laws of the United States.

Among the 31 “sanctuary cities” of this country: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.

These cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that do not allow municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce federal immigration laws, usually by not allowing police or municipal employees to inquire about one’s immigration status.

(2) The most effective way to combat this movement: Indict the highest-ranking officials of those cities which have actively violated Federal immigration laws.

In San Francisco, for example, former District Attorney Kamala Harris—who was once Vice President of the United States—created a secret program called Back on Track, which provided training for jobs that illegal aliens could not legally hold.

She also prevented Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting even those illegal aliens convicted of a felony.

(3) Indicting such officials would be comparable to the way that President Andres Jackson dealt with the threat South Carolinians once made to “nullify”—or ignore—any Federal laws they didn’t like.

Jackson quashed that threat by making one of his own: To lead an army into that State and purge all who dared defy the laws of the Federal Government.

(4) Even if some indicted officials escaped conviction, the results would prove worthwhile. 

City officials would be forced to spend huge sums of their own money for attorneys and face months or even years of prosecution.

And this, in turn, would send a devastating warning to officials in other “sanctuary cities” that the same fate lies in store for them.

(5)  CEOs whose companies—like Wal-Mart—systematically employ illegal aliens should be held directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates.

They should be indicted by the Justice Department under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, the way Mafia bosses are prosecuted for ordering their own subordinates to commit crimes.

Upon conviction, the CEO should be sentenced to a mandatory prison term of at least twenty years.

This would prove a more effective remedy for combating illegal immigration than stationing tens of thousands of soldiers on the U.S./Mexican border. CEOs forced to account for their subordinates’ actions would take drastic steps to ensure that their companies strictly complied with Federal immigration laws.

Without employers luring illegal aliens at a fraction of the money paid to American workers, the flood of such illegal job-seekers would quickly dry up.

(6) The Government should stop granting automatic citizenship to “anchor babies” born to illegal aliens in the United States.

A comparable practice would be allowing bank robbers who had eluded the FBI to keep their illegally-obtained loot.

A person who violates the bank robbery laws of the United States is legally prosecutable for bank robbery, whether he’s immediately arrested or remains uncaught for years. The same should be true for those born illegally within this country.

If they’re not here legally at the time of birth, they should not be considered citizens and should—like their parents—be subject to deportation.

(7) The United States Government—from the President on down—should stop apologizing for the right to control the country’s national borders.

The Mexican Government doesn’t hesitate to apply strict laws to those immigrating to Mexico. And it feels no need to apologize for this.

Neither should we.

(8) Voting materials and ballots should be published in one language—English. 

In Mexico, voting materials are published in one language—Spanish.

Throughout the United States, millions of Mexican illegals refuse to learn English and yet demand that voting materials and ballots be made available to them in Spanish.

(9) Those who are not legal citizens of the United States should not be allowed to vote in its elections.

In Mexico, those who are not Mexican citizens are not allowed to participate in the country’s elections. 

The Mexican Government doesn’t consider itself racist for strictly enforcing its immigration laws.

The United States Government should not consider itself racist for insisting on the right to do the same.

(10) The United States should impose economic and even military sanctions against countries—such as China and Mexico—whose citizens make up the bulk of illegal aliens. 

The Mexican government well remembers the 10-year Mexican Revolution (1910 – 1920) starring Francisco “Pancho” Villa, Emiliano Zapata and a host of other equally ruthless killers—and the one million dead men, women and children it produced.

So Mexico uses its American border to rid itself of those who might demand major reforms in the country’s political and economic institutions. 

Such nations must learn that dumping their unwanteds on the United States now comes at an unaffordably high price.  Otherwise those dumpings will continue. 

ILLEGAL ALIENS–THE WORLD’S UNWANTEDS: PART FOUR (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 8, 2026 at 12:06 am

On May 8, 2018, United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that a “zero-tolerance” policy toward people illegally entering the United States might separate families while parents are prosecuted.        

“We don’t want to separate families, but we don’t want families to come to the border illegally and attempt to enter into this country improperly,” Sessions said. “The parents are subject to prosecution while children may not be. So, if we do our duty and prosecute those cases, then children inevitably for a period of time might be in different conditions.”

Children who were separated from their parents would be put under supervision of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, Sessions said.

Jeff Sessions

Thomas Homan, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s acting director, backed up Sessions’ “get tough” policy change: “Every law enforcement agency in this country separates parents from children when they’re arrested for a crime. There is no new policy. This has always been the policy.”

That policy soon went into effect. And it generated widespread outrage by

  1. Civil liberties organizations; and
  2. Those who believe the United States should not have—or enforce—its immigration laws.

“Criminalizing and stigmatizing parents who are only trying to keep their children from harm and give them a safe upbringing will cause untold damage to thousands of traumatized families who have already given up everything to flee terrible circumstances in their home countries,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Americas director.

In fact, alien-smugglers have increasingly used children as a wedge against American immigration laws. Their strategy: “Surely, Americans won’t arrest innocent children—or the adults who bring children with them.

The Trump administration set out to prove them wrong.

This is typical behavior for law enforcement agencies: When criminals devise new ways to defeat existing police measures, the police devise new ways to counter those methods.

Meanwhile, those who believe the United States should throw open its doors to everyone who wants to enter are missing—or ignoring—a vital historical lesson.

Ironically, Mexico knows even better than the United States the perils of unchecked illegal immigration. 

In 1821, Moses Austin sought a grant from Mexico to settle Texas. After he died in 1821, his son, Stephen, won recognition of the grant by Mexico.

The Mexican government had been unable to persuade large numbers of its own citizens to move to Texas, owing largely to raiding by such fierce Indian tribes as the Comanches.

The government saw the Anglo settlement of Texas as its best hope to tame an otherwise untamable frontier.

Stephen Austin

Austin convinced numerous American settlers to move to Texas, and by 1825 he had brought the first 300 American families into the territory.

Throughout the 1820s, Austin helped ensure the introduction of slavery into Texas, even though, under Mexican law, this was illegal. Tensions developed between unchecked numbers of Anglo settlers flooding into Texas and the Mexican authorities in charge there.

(“GTT”—“Gone to Texas”—was often carved on cabin doors by debt-ridden settlers who decided to seek their fortune in Texas. And some of the most notorious criminals on the frontier—such as slave-trader, land swindler and knife-fighter James Bowie—joined them.)

James Bowie

Eventually, the irresistible force of unlimited Anglo illegal immigration rebelled against the immovable object of Mexican legal/military authority. 

The result:

  • The battle of the Alamo: From February 23 to March 6, 1836, about 200 rebellious Texans withstood a 13-day siege in a former San Antonio mission, only to be slaughtered to the last man by an army of 2,000 Mexican soldiers commanded by President (actually, dictator) Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Among the victims: James Bowie and former Congressman David Crockett.  
  • The massacre at Goliad:  On March 27, 1836, 425-445 Texans captured after the battle of Coleto were shot en masse by Mexican soldiers.
  • The battle of San Jacinto:  On April 21, 1836, Texans led by General Sam Houston won a surprise Texas victory over Mexican forces who were caught in a mid-afternoon siesta. Santa Anna—who had fled—was captured the next day. 

Mexico was forced to give up all rights to Texas—which, nine years after winning its independence, became a state.

But ongoing conflicts between Mexico and the United States over Texas led to the Mexican war in 1846.

This, in turn, led to a series of devastating American victories over the Mexican army, and the capture of Mexico City itself.

Should the USA return to Mexico all the land it took from them during its imperialist stage? - Quora

Territory (in brown) that Mexico lost after the Mexican War

Mexico suffered the humiliation of both military defeat and the loss of its land holdings within the American Southwest—which, up to 1848, it had controlled. 

This territory later became the states of California, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, and western Colorado. 

And the United States finally spread “from sea to shining sea.”

So Mexico knows what it’s doing when it unloads millions of its own citizens—and those of other Latin and Central American countries—on the United States.

Mexico, in short, is a textbook case of what happens to a country that is unable to enforce its own immigration laws.

ILLEGAL ALIENS–THE WORLD’S UNWANTEDS: PART THREE (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 7, 2026 at 12:29 am

On January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom (UK) withdrew from the European Union (EU).        

The United Kingdom—England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—had been a member state of the EU or its predecessor, the European Communities (EC), since January 1, 1973.

The vote had been a long time coming—and a major reason for it lay in the unrestricted immigration—legal and illegal—of Central and Eastern Europeans, who are allowed by EU regulations to freely live and work in any member state.

United Kingdom PDF Map

The United Kingdom

So the United Kingdom decided it would no longer be an EU member state. 

Britons believed that migrants were clogging Britain’s health-care system and schools, while also depressing wages. By leaving the EU, Britons believed they could gain more control over their borders and drastically reduce immigration.

Immigration, the economy and health care had long been the top three issues on British voters’ minds.

The number of foreign-born people living in the UK went from 2.3 million in 1993 (when Britain joined the EU) to 8.2 million in 2014.

By 2020, the non-UK-born population was 9.5 million and the non-British population was 6.1 million. Most of these came from other EU countries: Cyprus, Malta, Croatia, Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were the top three countries with the highest number of UK passport holders.   

Critics of Brexit have blamed xenophobia for Britain’s leaving the EU. While that may have been true, it ignores a vital truth: People feel most comfortable around others like themselves. 

In schools and prisons, it’s commonplace to see white sitting among whites, blacks sitting among blacks and Hispanics sitting among Hispanics.

In addition, people feel most comfortable among those who speak their own language. In the United States, there has been widespread resentment over having to “Push 1 for English” when calling government agencies.

Two factors are driving unprecedented levels of world migration: 

  • The world’s population at 8.1 billion, which puts unprecedented stress on available food, housing, medical care and other essential services; and 
  • The rapid escalation of climate change has brought drought/flooding to major parts of Africa, Asia and Latin and Central America.

Added to these must be an insight into human character offered by Niccolo Machiavelli, the sixteenth-century historian and political scientist, in his work, The Discourses

Quote by Machiavelli: “Necessity is what impels men to take action ...

Niccolo Machiavelli 

It was a saying of ancient writers, that men afflict themselves in evil, and become weary of the good, and that both these dispositions produce the same effects. 

For when men are no longer obliged to fight from necessity, they fight from ambition, which passion is so powerful in the hearts of men that it never leaves them, no matter to what height they may rise. 

The reason for this is that nature has created men so that they desire everything, but are unable to attain it.  Desire being thus always greater than the faculty of acquiring, discontent with what they have and dissatisfaction with themselves result from it. 

This causes the changes in their fortunes—for as some men desire to have more, while others fear to lose what they have, enmities and war are the consequences.  And this brings about the ruin of one province and the elevation of another.

In addition: Those who have spent their lives as law-abiding citizens resent it when immigrants—especially illegal aliens—gain advantage by breaking the law. 

Such a case occurred on January 1, 2024.

That was when California became the first state to offer health insurance to all illegal aliens. All of these uninvited foreigners, regardless of age, now qualify for Medi-Cal, California’s version of the federal Medicaid program for people with low incomes.

Previously, illegal aliens could receive only emergency and pregnancy-related services under Medi-Cal as long as they met eligibility requirements, including income limits and California residency in 2014.

In 2015, then-Governor Jerry Brown allowed illegal alien children to receive coverage under Medi-Cal.

The final expansion starting January 1 will give full coverage to at least 700,000 illegal aliens who have no right to be in the country. 

At the same time, about 3.2 million California citizens remained uninsured in 2022. 

Meanwhile, California faces a record $68 billion budget deficit. Tax collections are off by $26 billion,  combined with the economic slowdown California has been facing since 2022.

News stories announcing this taxpayers’ giveaway don’t refer to the recipients as “illegal aliens.” That’s because “illegal alien” is—for all its accuracy—Politically Incorrect. 

Instead, those who defend the wanton violating of American immigration laws prefer the term “undocumented immigrant.”

As though these lawbreakers had valid citizenship documents but somehow lost them during their swim across the Rio Grande.   

It’s entirely natural that those living in abject poverty—as millions do in Asia, Africa and Latin/Central America—want to escape it.

It’s also entirely natural that those who have escaped poverty want to hold on to all they have worked hard to attain.

The refusal of liberal politicians—in England, Italy, France, Germany and the United States—to accept these truths has led to the rise of authoritarian, Right-wing movements in those countries.

By refusing to address rising anger over such invasions, liberal politicians throughout the world are endangering the very democracies they cherish.

ILLEGAL ALIENS–THE WORLD’S UNWANTEDS: PART TWO (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 6, 2026 at 12:10 am

In May 20, 2010, Mexico’s then-President Felipe Calderon addressed a joint session of the United States Congress—and attacked a recently-enacted Arizona law that allowed law enforcement officials to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.       

According to Calderon, the law “introduces a terrible idea: Using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement.  

“I have said that Mexico does not stop at its border, that wherever there is a Mexican, there is Mexico.”

The hypocrisy of Calderon’s words was staggering. He was condemning the United States for doing what Mexico itself has long done: Strictly enforcing control of its own borders.

Felipe Calderon 

World Economic ForumCopyright by World Economic Forum / Photo by Remy Steinegger 

Mexico’s immigration laws state: Any foreigner that enters the country to stay less than six months is considered a visitor. To meet immigration requirements, you must: 

  • Have enough money to pay for your stay in the country;
  • Have an invitation from a private or public interest organization.   

If you want to stay more than 180 days, you must obtain a temporary residency visa in Mexico. This requires you to:

  • Have a family relationship with a Mexican citizen.
  • Have a job offer issued by a Mexican employer.
  • Have an invitation from a private or public institution.
  • Have enough money to pay for your stay in the country.
  • Own real estate in Mexico.
  • Have investments in Mexico.

After being a temporary resident for four years, you can apply for permanent residency.  To obtain this, you must meet these requirements:

  • Be a refugee or under the condition of political asylum.
  • Have a family relationship with a Mexican citizen.
  • To have been a temporary resident for four years.
  • Be a pensioner with enough monthly income to pay for your stay in the country.
  • Be related in a straight line up to the second degree to a Mexican by birth.
  • To have been a temporary resident for two years in the case of a conjugal or concubine relationship with a Mexican citizen or permanent resident.

Eight years after Calderon demanded that Americans repeal their immigration laws, Mexicans suddenly discovered they hated illegal aliens, too.

On October 13, 2018, a caravan of at least 5,000 men, women and children from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras set out for the United States.

On October 18, President Donald Trump closed the U.S.-Mexico border to keep the caravan from entering the country.

By November 19, migrants had begun piling up in Tijuana, which borders San Diego.

Suddenly, Tijuana residents began carrying signs reading “No illegals,” “No to the invasion” and “Mexico First.” And marching in the streets wearing Mexico’s red, white and green national soccer jersey and vigorously waving Mexican flags. 

“We want the caravan to go; they are invading us,” said Patricia Reyes, a 62-year-old protester. “They should have come into Mexico correctly, legally, but they came in like animals.”  

The El Paso Times noted the resentment of many Mexicans toward the increasing numbers of Cuban illegal aliens in Juarez, which lies across from El Paso.

“They don’t get along with Mexican people,” said a burrito seller. “They get in a little group by themselves. A lot of people don’t like them here.”

And a business consultant complained, “There are people who are coming looking for a handout, who want us to help them, when they could also look for work.”

Over the weekend of October 12-13, 2019, a National Guard commander addressed his platoon before confronting the latest caravan: “No one will come to trample our country, our land!”

In the past, Mexicans comprised the largest group of illegal aliens entering the United States. But the Mexican economy has grown and developed to the point where fewer people see the need to emigrate. 

Most illegals are now mostly from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. And there are growing numbers from Haiti, Cuba, various African countries, and even the Middle East. 

During the first eight months of 2019, the number of asylum applications submitted to Mexico’s refugee agency (COMAR) more than tripled, compared to the same period in 2018. As a result, the refugee agency removed the how-to-apply video it once hosted on its website.

In the past, the Mexican Government refused to halt illegal immigration to the United States.

It remembered the bloody upheaval known as the Mexican Revolution. This lasted 10 years (1910-1920) and wiped out an estimated one to two million men, women and children. 

Massacres were common on all sides, with men shot by the hundreds in bullrings or hung by the dozen on trees.

A Mexican Revolution firing squad

All of the major leaders of the Revolution—Francisco Madero, Emiliano Zapata, Venustiano Carranza, Francisco “Pancho” Villa, Alvaro Obregon—died in a hail of bullets.

Francisco “Pancho” Villa

Emiliano Zapata

As a result, every successive Mexican Government lived in the shadow of another such wholesale bloodletting. These officials quietly decided to turn the United States border into a safety valve. 

* * * * *

No other nation has ever allowed itself to become a dumping ground for the world’s unwanteds. And no law—religious or secular—obligates the United States to do so.

Space is limited in schools, hospitals and housing, and the more people who cram into limited spaces, the more frictions they inevitably create. 

As native-born Mexicans are angrily finding out. 

ILLEGAL ALIENS–THE WORLD’S UNWANTEDS: PART ONE (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Military, Politics, Social commentary on July 3, 2026 at 12:06 am

“Good fences make good neighbors.”     

Robert Frost penned those famous words in his 1914 poem, “Mending Wall.”    

For millions of Americans, illegal immigration was the issue empowering the candidacy of Donald Trump to regain the Presidency in 2024.

For them, Frost’s opening line has become gospel: “Something there is that truly loves a wall.” 

A September 16, 2022 article in The Daily Mail headlined:

“America’s $78B Bill for Teaching Schoolkids With Poor English is Rising by BILLIONS in Biden-era Immigration Surge, Study Says, and 76,000 New Language Instructors Are a Tall Order in a Teacher Shortage.”

Among its findings: 

  • One million public school students—ranging from kindergarten to high school—need special training in speaking and writing English.
  • It costs $78 billion each year to educate them.
  • Texas, California, Florida and New York are among the states most burdened with such students.
  • Only three percent of these students are proficient in English when they graduate from high school.
  • These costs are raised by billions owing to an unceasing tide of illegal alien children at the southern border.

These alarming statistics were produced by a study from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). 

The 5.1 million students lacking English language skills need help in all their classes.

As a result, it costs 15 to 20 percent more to educate them than American-born students who grow up learning English.

Central American migrants seeking asylum reach US-Mexico border in Tijuana - ABC7 San Francisco

Illegal aliens climbing over the border fence 

With the United States facing a severe teacher shortage, some states have lowered their hiring rules to recruit teachers with only a high school diploma.

In 2020, the 5.1 million illegal alien students in public schools cost American taxpayers $78 billion—an $18.8 billion jump from the cost in 2016.

Of those students, 1.15 million were in California, costing the state $19.5 billion. One million more lived in Texas, costing that state $11.4 billion. And 278,000 lived in Florida, at a cost of $3.1 billion.

Only 370,000 teachers nationwide are trained to teach them, and 76,000 more will be needed during the next five years. 

Immigration remains a highly divisive issue among Americans. “Red” Republican states want to close borders. “Blue” Democratic states are more open to newcomers.

Yet even famously liberal enclaves of support for illegal aliens like New York are beginning to have second thoughts about taking in unlimited numbers of uninvited foreigners. 

On October 7, 2022, then-New York City Mayor Eric Adams declared a state of emergency in response to the city’s migrant crisis, which he said would cost the city $1 billion that fiscal year. 

Eric Adams

“We now have a situation where more people are arriving in New York City than we can immediately accommodate, including families with babies and young children,” Adams said.

“Once the asylum seekers from today’s buses are provided shelter, we would surpass the highest number of people in recorded history in our city’s shelter system.”

Behind this unwanted influx lies Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

By May 1, 2025, Texas had spent more than $229 million busing illegal aliens found in Texas to famously liberal supporters of illegal immigration: Washington D.C., New York City and Chicago. 

Abbott announced the program on April 13, 2024, as his response to the Biden administration’s immigration policies. 

Abbott in 2024

Greg Abbott

In October, 2023, New York City had 90,578 people in its shelter system. Thousands of these are American citizens who are homeless. They are competing for assistance with illegal aliens who were bused to New York City from the southern border since April, 2022.

Three Communist-ruled countries—Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba—are responsible for this huge surge in illegal aliens and their continuing drain on America’s schools, housing and hospitals (among other facilities).

Rising levels of repression, food shortages and economic stability are motivating Cubans, Venezuelans and Nicaraguans to enter the United States. And assisting them is the longtime policy of the United States government to automatically accept those leaving Communist countries as refugees.

At some point, the United States must face the economic and social absurdity of allowing some cities and states to provide sanctuary to every illegal alien who appears.

Even Eric Adams, emphasizing that New York City remains a sanctuary city, warned it could not cope with such an overwhelming influx of migrants:

“We are not telling anyone that New York can accommodate every migrant in the city. We’re not encouraging people to send eight, nine buses a day….We’re saying that as a sanctuary city with right to shelter, we’re going to fulfill that obligation. That’s what we’re doing.”

Abbott clearly believes he has the right to inflict thousands of illegal aliens on other states. And illegal aliens clearly believe they have the right to demand unlimited access to the United States.

At some point, America must stop allowing itself to be a dumping-ground for other countries’ unwanteds. 

* * * * *

An “open door” policy proved essential 250 years ago, when most of America was unsettled and largely unpopulated.

But the United States is no longer a largely unpopulated, agricultural country. Most of its population lives in coastal cities—which is where most illegal aliens tend to settle as well.

Space is limited in schools, hospitals and housing, and the more people who cram into limited spaces, the more frictions they inevitably create.

WANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH TRUMP? STUDY HITLER: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 20, 2026 at 12:05 am

The “negotiating” methods of German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler serve as a useful guide to what domestic and world leaders can expect from trying to reach an agreement with President Donald Trump.  

In September, 1938, seven months after seizing Austria, Hitler gave another exhibition of his “negotiating” methods.                 

This time, the target of his aggression was Czechoslovakia. Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”

Then he threatened war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”

For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.

He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”

[Mistake #1: Showing his willingness to placate a brutal dictator. Such men see any concessions as weakness—leading to only greater demands. Trump, like Hitler, relishes attacking those weaker than himself.]

The two European leaders met in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.

Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler

Hitler denied that he had threatened war:Force? Who speaks of force?“

Then, suddenly, he accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized—in response to the mobilization of the German army.

“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler.I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”

Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”

Hitler, taken aback, softened his tone and said they should consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.

Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland. Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.

[Mistake #2: Instead of conceding to Hitler, which emboldened the dictator, Chamberlain should have pressed his advantage. When Hitler faced an opponent he couldn’t bribe or cow—such as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill or Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin—he raged and sulked.

[When Trump faces an opponent he can’t buy or intimidate—such as Special Counsels Robert Mueller and Jack Smith—he does the same.] 

Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.

He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.

To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.

On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.

The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30. 

It actually had no choice. It faced the threat of an immediate German invasion after being deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.

[Mistake #3: Selling out an ally and making a concession to an insatiable dictator—and believing that Hitler could be trusted to keep his word.

[Just as Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia, Trump plans on selling out Ukraine to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. He’s blamed Ukraine for starting the 2022 war—even though Russia invaded Ukraine.

[He’s also attacked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky—and repeatedly praised Putin. And he’s unilaterally announced that he will begin directing “peace talks” with Putin to end his war on Ukraine.]

Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”

OnThisDay 3 September 1939, Neville Chamberlain addressed the nation in a public broadcast that Adolf Hitler had ignored Britain's ultimatum to withdraw German troops from Poland and that consequently a state of

Neville Chamberlain

Hitler—still planning more conquests—knew better. In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.

Believing himself invincible, Hitler turned his attention—and demands—to Poland. 

German General von Manstein meets Hitler for dinner, to propose ambitious new plans for the Western invasion: rather than fighting French & British troops in Belgium, encircle & trap them against Channel

Adolf Hitler and his generals

Believing himself invincible, Trump threatened violence against Canada, Greenland and Cuba.

Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. To his surprise, France and England honored their pledges to support Poland—triggering World War II.

On February 28, 2026, Trump—in concert with Israel–attacked Iran without warning. To his surprise, the Iranians closed the Straight of Hormuz, through which 20-30% of the world’s oil total daily oil supply passes.

Hitler couldn’t “turn off” the war he had started. He could only lash out as his enemies multiplied.

The same has proven true for Trump.

WANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH TRUMP? STUDY HITLER: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 17, 2026 at 12:10 am

To understand the “negotiating” style of Donald Trump, it’s essential to study that of Adolf Hitler

Both men, dictatorial by nature, did/do not believe in compromise. Their idea of “compromise” was/is: “You do what I want—or I’ll destroy you.”                 

In Hitler’s case, his mania for absolute control began with the Nazi party and eventually extended to Germany. Then it reached to Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Norway, Denmark, France, Greece, Yugoslavia and Russia. At least 50 million men, women and children perished in the wars he unleashed from 1939 to 1945.

Newly released doctor's letters show Adolf Hitler's fear of illness | Adolf Hitler | The Guardian

Adolf Hitler 

Similarly, Trump’s mania for control started with building a real estate empire. Then it encompassed his “reality TV” show, The Apprentice—and finally politics.

He began dominating the Republican party by winning a series of Presidential primaries—and then the White House. Then came asserting control over the Justice Department and the judiciary—up to the Supreme Court.

Re-elected in 2024, he now seeks to dominate Americans, demands military control over Iran, threatens Mexico and Canada with trade wars, and Greenland and Panama with invasion.

Much can be learned about Trump’s “negotiating” methods—and what it takes to counter them—by studying those of Germany’s Fuhrer.

Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus: 

“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse. 

Related image

Donald Trump

“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.”

What Payne writes about Hitler applies equally well to Trump.

Hitler revealed his “bargaining style” in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany. 

Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of this, but felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.

The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.

Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.

HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!

Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business. The German Reich is a great power.  Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers. 

[Like Hitler, Trump relies on insults and anger to put his victims on the defense.]

 Kurt von Schuschnigg

SCHUSCHNIGG: We simply have to go on living alongside one another, the little state next to the big one. We have no other choice.

And that is why I ask you to tell me what your concrete complaints are. We will do all in our power to sort things out and establish a friendly relationship, as far as it is possible to do so.

HITLER: That’s what you say, Herr Schuschnigg. And I am telling you that I intend to clear up the whole of the so-called Austrian question—one way or another. Do you think I don’t know that you are fortifying Austria’s border with the Reich? 

SCHUSCHNIGG: There can be no suggestion at all of that—

HITLER: Ridiculous explosive chambers are being built under bridges and roads— 

This was a lie, and Hitler knew it was a lie. But it gave him an excuse to threaten to destroy Austria.

[For Trump, winning—not truth—is all that matters. During his first term as President, he told 30,573 lies.]

HITLER: I have only to give one command and all this comic stuff on the border will be blown to pieces overnight. You don’t seriously think you could hold me up, even for half an hour, do you?

The S.A. [Hitler’s private army of Stormtroopers] and the [Condor] lLegion [which had bombed much of Spain into rubble during the Spanish Civil War] would come in after the troops and nobody—not even I—could stop them from wreaking vengeance.

Schnuschigg made a cardinal mistake in dealing with Hitler: He showed fear.  And this was precisely what the Nazi dictator looked for in an opponent. 

[Like Hitler, Trump relies on fear: “Real power is—I don’t even want to use the word—fear,” he said in March 2016 when still only a candidate for President.]

Contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not constantly rage at everyone. He used rage as a weapon, knowing that most people feel intimidated by it. 

In the case of Schuschnigg, Hitler opened with insults and threats at the outset of their discussion. Then there was a period of calm, to convince the Austrian chancellor the worst was over.

Finally, he once again attacked—this time with so much fury that Schuschnigg was terrified into submission. 

With one stroke of a pen, Austria became a vassal-state to Nazi Germany.

[Like Hitler, Trump threatens only those he feels are weak—thus his threats to use military force against Canada, Greenland and Panama.]

AMERICA’S BRUSH WITH ARMAGEDDON: PART FOUR (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 7, 2026 at 12:17 am

“John and Robert Kennedy knew what they were doing. They waged a vicious war against Fidel Castro—a war someone had to lose.”       

And the loser turned out to be John F. Kennedy. 

So writes investigative reporter Gus Russo in Live By the Sword: The Secret War Against Castro and the Death of JFK, published in 1998.

In what is almost certainly the definitive account of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Russo reaches some startling—but highly documented—conclusions:

  • Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated Kennedy.
  • He did it alone.
  • Oswald, a former Marine, was a committed Marxist—whose hero was Castro.
  • The CIA’s ongoing campaign to overthrow and/or assassinate Castro was an open secret throughout the Gulf.
  • Oswald visited New Orleans in the spring of 1963.
  • There he learned that Castro was in the crosshairs of the CIA.
  • Oswald told his Russian-born wife, Marina: “Fidel Castro needs defenders. I’m going to join his army of volunteers.”
  • Jack Ruby, a Dallas nightclub owner, murdered Oswald because he was distraught over Kennedy’s death.
  • Ruby was not part of a Mafia conspiracy to silence Oswald.
  • Skeptics of the Warren Commission—which concluded that Oswald had acted alone—asked the wrong question: “Who killed Kennedy?”
  • They should have asked: “Why was he killed?”
  • The answer–according to Russo: “The Kennedys’ relentless pursuit of Castro and Cuba backfired in tragedy on that terrible day in November, 1963.”

Another book well worth reading about America’s Cuban obsession during the early 1960s is American Tabloid, by James Ellroy.

Although a novel, it vividly captures the atmosphere of intrigue, danger and sleaziness that permeated that era in a way that dry, historical documents never can.

“The 50’s are finished,” reads its paperback dust jacket. “Zealous young lawyer Robert Kennedy has a red-hot jones to nail Jimmy Hoffa. JFK has his eyes on the Oval Office.

“J. Edgar Hoover is swooping down on the Red Menace. Howard Hughes is dodging subpoenas and digging up Kennedy dirt. And Castro is mopping up the bloody aftermath of his new Communist nation….

“Mob bosses, politicos, snitches, psychos, fall guys and femmes fatale. They’re mixing up a Molotov cocktail guaranteed to end the country’s innocence with a bang.”

Among the legacies of America’s twisted romance with anti-Castro Cubans:

  • Following the JFK assassination, there was a coverup.
  • Its purposes: To protect the reputation of the United States government—and that of its newly-martyred President.
  • Thus, the CIA and FBI concealed the CIA-Mafia assassination plots from the Warren Commission assigned to investigate Kennedy’s murder.
  • Other government officials participating in the coverup included Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and President Lyndon B. Johnson.
  • Ironically, this secrecy ignited the widespread—and false—belief that the President had died at the hands of a government conspiracy.
  • Robert Kennedy feared that his relentless pursuit of Castro might have led Castro to “take out” JFK first.
  • Fearing his own assassination if he continued Kennedy’s efforts to murder Castro, President Johnson ordered the CIA to halt its campaign to overthrow and/or assassinate the Cuban leader.
  • The huge Cuban community throughout Florida—and especially Miami—continues to exert a blackmailing influence on American politics.
  • Right-wing politicians from Richard Nixon to Donald Trump have reaped electoral rewards by catering to the demands of this hate-obsessed voting block.
  • These Cuban ex-patriots hope that the United States will launch a full-scale military invasion of the island to remove Castro.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was the deadliest moment of the Cold War, when the world stood only minutes away from nuclear Armageddon.

That crisis stemmed from America’s twisted obsession with Cuba, an obsession that continues today.

Sixty-three years after that crisis, the world wonders: Could nuclear war erupt over Cuba? 

And, once again, that decision lies in the hands of two men—Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump—out of a world population of more than eight billion. 

The Soviet Union began aiding Cuba in early 1960, shortly after the 1959 revolution, with a formal trade agreement signed in February 1960. This deal involved exchanging Soviet oil for Cuban sugar. The relationship quickly expanded to include extensive economic subsidies and military support that continued through 1990.

On January 29, 2026, President Donald Trump threatened to impose huge tariffs on goods from any country that supplied oil to Cuba. Declaring a national emergency, he aims to cripple the island’s energy supply.

On February 18, Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez in Moscow and reaffirmed his support for the island nation. Putin reminded his guest that Russia “will not accept anything of the sort” when discussing the sanctions against the country. 

“I do believe I’ll be having the honor of taking Cuba. That’s a big honor. Taking Cuba in some form,” Trump said on March 16. “Whether I free it, take it, I think I could do anything I want with it, if you want to know the truth. They are a very weakened nation right now.”

Nikita Khrushchev, facing a choice of humiliation or Armageddon during the Cuban Missile Crisis, chose humiliation—so his country could live another day. 

It remains to be seen if Vladimir Putin is willing to make the same decision.

THE DICTATORS’ DANCE–PAST AND PRESENT: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 1, 2026 at 12:17 am

Now, fast-forward 85 years—from 1941 to 2026. Substitute President Donald Trump for Fuhrer Adolf Hitler and Mojtaba Khamenei for Joseph Stalin—and Iran for the Soviet Union.

Opinion | Yes, it's okay to compare Trump to Hitler. Don't let me stop you. - The Washington Post

Just as Hitler launched his attack on the Soviet Union without warning, so did Trump launch his on Iran—on February 28.

Hitler—and numerous members of the Wehrmacht—believed that Germany’s mechanized panzers would quickly subdue Soviet armies.

“We were fast,” recalled Panzer Lieutenant Hans-Erdmann Schonbeck. “And our tank forces could cover huge distances. And once we broke through the enemy’s defenses, our orders were not to worry about threats to our right or left but to keep going, deep into Russian territory.”

Panzer tank

But the tanks soon faced unexpected difficulties. Most roads in Russia were unpaved, so the tanks raised huge dust clouds almost everywhere they went. The dust clogged their engines and brought many tanks to a halt. Repair crews worked themselves to exhaustion so that the lightning-fast advance could continue.

Another drawback not evident at the outset of the invasion: Summer uniforms. For a war that began on June 22, 1941, these were entirely appropriate. But as the months quickly passed, the notorious Russian winter season loomed ever closer.

Germans in summer uniforms

The German command underestimated the campaign’s duration, expecting a victory by autumn 1941, and prioritized ammunition and fuel over winter equipment. Although winter gear existed, it was stuck in supply depots in the West, and transport lines were too strained by the Soviets’ “scorched earth” tactics to move it to the front.

Without proper greatcoats or insulated boots, soldiers suffered from extreme cold, with temperatures dropping far below zero. Many resorted to stealing blankets from civilians or using blankets as makeshift clothing.

In its war with Iran, American’s air force completely dominated the skies. But then both American planes and ground forces faced an unexpected enemy: Mass-produced drones.

The same weapons—some of them supplied by Iran to Russia—have been used since 2022 in Ukraine. Unmanned and remotely-controlled, Ukrainian and Russian drones have transformed the battlefield. They’re estimated to inflict around 80% of combat casualties on both sides.

The technology—like that forged in Germany’s Blitzkrieg tactics—is revolutionizing warfare and  evolving rapidly. To adapt to the new era, the U.S. military is learning lessons from Ukraine.

Iranian drone 

Student News Agency, Attribution, via Wikimedia Commons

Not only are American military forces being targeted, so are those Gulf nations that have allied themselves with the United States: The United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman.

Primarily targeted: Energy infrastructure, airports and sites hosting American military personnel.

For Iran, the drones are relatively cheap. For the United States, the costs of countering this threat are steadily mounting. A typical Shahed-136 costs Tehran roughly $20,000 to $50,000, while interceptor missiles, such as the Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), cost millions.

On August 22, 1939—the eve of his invasion of Poland, which would ignite World  War II—Adolf Hitler delivered a secret address to his supreme commanders and generals. Its climax:

“Close your hearts to pity. Act brutally. Eighty million people must obtain what is their right. Their existence must be made secure. The stronger man is right. The greatest harshness.”

Hitler urged his generals to act similarly toward the Russians, whom he regarded as subhumans. 

The results of this policy soon became obvious when the Wehrmacht invaded Ukraine. Ukrainians, long suffering under the yoke of Stalin, greeted the invaders with bread and salt, the traditional greeting of comrades.

Within a month, they realized that the tyranny of Stalin had been replaced by an all-out extermination campaign of Hitler. For every Ukrainian the Germans killed, 10 more emerged to seek revenge.

Eighty-five years later, Donald Trump and officials of his administration are celebrating the indiscriminate slaughter of Iranians, whether civilian or military.

“We totally demolished Kharg Island, but we may hit it a few more times just for fun,” Trump said on NBC News.

On March 22, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, hosting his monthly Christian worship service at the Pentagon, prayed: “Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation.

“Give them wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”

United States Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in his official portrait. He is wearing a dark navy blue suit and tie, with American and Department of Defense flags behind him.

Pete Hegseth

“I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and did not turn back till they were consumed,” he read from Psalms 18:37. “Those who hated me I destroyed. They cried to the Lord, but He did not answer them.”

Former House speaker and Trump advisor Newt Gingrich posted on X: “Instead of fighting over a 21-mile-wide bottleneck [Strait of Hormuz] forever, we [could] cut a new channel through friendly territory. A dozen thermonuclear detonations and you’ve got a waterway wider than the Panama Canal, deeper than the Suez, and safe from Iranian attacks.”

This would produce countless numbers of casualties and cover the Middle East with radioactive fallout.

It remains to be seen if such exhortations will lead American soldiers to act as barbarically as those of the Wehrmacht and SS—and inspire similar barbarism in return.

THE DICTATORS’ DANCE–PAST AND PRESENT: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on March 31, 2026 at 12:48 am

The city: Berlin. 

The date: November 12–13, 1940.

The event: A meeting between German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov.

The purposes: To discuss:

  1. Soviet expansion and control over Finland, Bulgaria, and the Turkish Straits; and
  2. Germany’s desire for the USSR to attack British interests in India and Iran.

Hitler wanted the USSR to join the Axis (Germany, Italy, and Japan) and expand “southward” toward the Indian Ocean to avoid conflict in Europe.

Adolf Hitler

Molotov ignored the talk of India and instead demanded control over Finland, Bulgaria, and the Turkish Straits.

Hitler adamantly opposed Soviet control over Finland, which he considered a strategic ally. He feared a Soviet expansion into Scandinavia would threaten German iron ore supplies from Sweden and northern interests.

And he deeply feared that the Soviet Union would cut off Germany’s vital Romanian oil supplies. Romania provided roughly 75% of German oil in 1941. A late 1940 Soviet attack on the Ploiești oil fields would render Germany helpless and force an end to the war.

At the outset, the odds clearly favored the Germans.

The invasion caught the Soviet Union by surprise. Joseph Stalin had received Intelligence reports from Great Britain that Germany was preparing to attack. But Stalin, who believed the British were trying to drive a wedge between him and Hitler, put his faith in Hitler, whose guarantees had long proved worthless.

German army units

From June to September, the Wehrmacht captured vast territories and encircled hundreds of thousands of Red Army troops. German forces quickly advanced toward Leningrad, Moscow, and Kiev, inflicting massive casualties.

The Luftwaffe destroyed much of the Soviet air force on the ground.

In June and July, German panzers quickly advanced, capturing over 300,000 Soviet prisoners in the Minsk-Bialystok pocket. By late September, Army Group South captured Kiev, resulting in the largest encirclement in history, with roughly 600,000 Soviet soldiers trapped.

By the end of 1941, more than three million Soviet soldiers were captured or killed. Still, the Soviet Union did not collapse and continued to commit new field armies to the conflict.

By December, the Wehrmacht, besieging Moscow, were literally freezing to death in their summer uniforms. Then, on December 5-6, the Soviets launched their decisive counter-offensive before Moscow, forcing German forces into a retreat.

It marked the first major land defeat for the Wehrmacht since its September 1, 1939 invasion of Poland, which ignited World War II.

Now, fast-forward 85 years. Substitute President Donald Trump for Fuhrer Adolf Hitler and Mojtaba Khamenei for Joseph Stalin—and Iran for the Soviet Union.

Opinion | Yes, it's okay to compare Trump to Hitler. Don't let me stop you. - The Washington Post

Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler

Just as Hitler launched his attack on the Soviet Union without warning, so did Trump launch his on Iran—on February 28.

Hitler’s attack didn’t kill Joseph Stalin, the all-powerful dictator of the Soviet Union. But Trump’s airstrikes killed Ali Hosseini Khamenei, who had ruled Iran as its supreme leader from 1989.

A photograph of Khamenei, 77, in 2017

  Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 

Still, the Iranians quickly elevated his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, to the same position—and went on fighting. 

Hitler—and numerous members of the Wehrmacht—believed that Germany’s mechanized panzers would succeed where Napoleon Bonaparte had failed in 1812. And that they could conquer the Soviet Union in only three months. 

They were wrong.