About that "Undercover in Antifa" video...

The above video has been making the rounds on conservative internet. It's an undercover investigation by Steven Crowder, a popular internet personality, pundit and podcaster. I watched the whole thing and I wanted to make a few points. 

First, the video appears to show Antifa getting ready for violence at one of the various Berkeley demonstrations. You can see Antifa members passing out weapons and claiming that they have firearms. Crowder claims that the Antifa members were arrested. 

Second, the video claims that the mainstream media isn't interested in the video and both local and national journalists are shown passing on the story. 

So what's the problem? Well for one the raw footage is heavily edited. We don't know much of the context with these Antifa people and though I believe that they probably were up to no good, we can't be sure without the rest of the video. That might be part of the reason the media didn't pick this story up, but again, we can't tell because their responses are edited. There may very well be context missing from this video

What other context could their be? Well I think there is a slim chance that the Antifa people were calling for self defense, not murder. They kept saying if "things go down" then retreat to the car and pick up weapons. That sounds less like premeditation and more like just preparing for the worst. And I wonder if the footage that we didn't see showed them saying that. 

That being said, it's clear that, at the very least, Antifa was doing some stuff that looks really really bad. For one, claiming that he had a sawed off shotgun is a crime in itself if the Antifa guy actually had one. That's a federal offense of he didn't have a licence for it and I seriously doubt he did. And the AK's that they claimed to have would probably be illegal as well. Finally, I don't know if carrying knives is something that they can legally do in California, depending on the size of the knives and the local laws. For exposing that, Crowder does deserve some credit. 

But I don't really think he helped the cause with this video. It's very clear that this video was made to pander to people on the right and not trying to convince anyone else. It's not just the editing and the media bashing, though those won't fly for people on the left either. It's the fact that he seemed to be bashing transgender people. It's not really relevant that the ringleader of this group of Antifa and bashing that person is pretty much guaranteed to turn off anyone who like transgender people.  

This was my first time watching Crowder and I wasn't impressed. He strikes me more as an Alex Jones type, or, and this is a bitter insult for someone on the right, a CNN type. He seems a lot less interested in convincing people that Antifa is a threat and more interested in preaching to the choir and generating clickbait. Had he actually just posted the raw footage and some commentary it would be fine and a useful service for the country, but he really needs to be more professional. 

Health and Human Services Director Tom Price resigns over charter flight scandal.

Tom Price meets with Donald Trump. Reuters. 

Health and Human Services Director Tom Price has resigned after a scandal broke out over his use of expensive charter flights. Reuters. Price was using expensive charter flights for government business instead of commercial airliners or trains. This did not sit well with President Donald Trump who has ran as a candidate as someone who would cut waste. After Trump condemned the "optics" of the situation Price offered his resignation which was accepted by the President. Supposedly, Trump said that Price was a distraction from hurricane recovery and his tax plan and was quoted by a Reuters source saying "What was he thinking?"

My Comment:

I think this is one of those cases where a Washington insider, which Price is, was assuming that this was a status quo presidency. Under previous administrations I doubt this issue would have even come up. That doesn't mean I don't think it is serious, Price wasted a lot of tax payer money on this and from what I understand some of the travel was completely frivolous. 

But this is a different White House. First of all, the media is so desperate for a scandal that they are closely watching all cabinet members for a way to embarrass or discredit Donald Trump. Had Barack Obama still been in office I doubt anyone in the media would have cared about this story or reported on it. It's all about hurting the Trump presidency, not cutting government waste and shame on Tom Price for giving them that opportunity. 

And Price was a fool for thinking that Trump would have his back on this issue. In addition to the media concerns above, Price should have known that Trump campaigned on this kind of thing. He was elected in part to cut government waste and stupidity and taking chartered flights for no good reason is both. Of course Trump was going to have a problem with this!

I do have to say that Trump handled this issue very quickly. The scandal just happened and already Price is out the door. There was very little question that Price was going to get fired over this as opposed to other presidencies. He did the right thing but kicking Price out. 

There is a problem of course and that is the fact that Trump is now down two cabinet officials. He still hasn't replaced John Kelley at Homeland Security. Price wasn't a critical member of the cabinet but it still hurts the Trump White House to lose yet another major adviser over this scandal. 

One wonders if their might be more going on here. Price job was, in part, to run Obamacare and find a replacement and since all of the Obamacare repeal bills have failed perhaps Trump was angry with him? I mean it wasn't directly his fault, but it still might have soured the President on Price. Part of his role at Health and Human Services was to get senators to go along with Trump's preferred legislation and that didn't happen.  

Certainly though, it is a lot easier to let go your Health and Human Services director when it's pretty clear that a new healthcare law isn't going to get passed anytime soon. I wonder if one of the three Obamacare repeal bills had passed, if Price might have stuck around. Right now Trump can afford to have the position go vacant for awhile but had one of those bills passed would he still be around? I'm not so sure. 

As for the meat of the scandal itself, do I think it's a big deal? I would say so. I know that I don't like seeing this kind of waste from a government official. And some of the travel was truly trivial which should never happen. I think it is good that Price is going to pay back the money he used, but he never should have done this in the first place. 

On the other hand, this scandal is pretty minor compared to some of the other things that have happened in Washington. A slight misallocation of funds is nothing compared to the massive amounts of graft and corruption happening in government right now. Sure it's a good thing that Price went down as it sends a message to everyone else, but there are bigger fish to fry. Let's hope they get caught pretty soon. 

ISIS leader Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi lives? New tape seems to confirm it.

Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi. Reuters. 

Once thought to be dead, ISIS leader Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi has released a new propaganda tape urging his followers to fight to the death. Reuters. The recording is the first communication from Baghdadi since last November. In it he urges his fighters to keep fighting and urged them not to surrender. In it he mentioned current events such as North Korea's threats against the United States and Japan as well as the liberation of Mosul from ISIS. Baghdadi threatened the media in his message as well. Baghdadi has been reported dead many times but the Russians claimed that they had likely killed the ISIS leader earlier this year. Despite his survival, the Caliphate has been greatly reduced in power and influence. 

My Comment:

No surprises here. I was fairly skeptical of the reports of Baghdadi's death. He has been reported dead many different times and so far it seems as every single one of those reports have been false. That's not too surprising given how poor the public's information on this topic is but you would think that the various governments engaged against him would tamp down on speculation. 

I guess it's possible that this recording is somehow fake and Baghdadi's voice has been replaced, but I find that pretty unlikely. For one thing, I doubt ISIS has the capability of faking something like that. Perhaps they did at their peak but they have obviously been reduced so much that I doubt they have the technology left to do so. This is not the same ISIS that had a chemical weapons program and a state of the art propaganda arm. Current ISIS is barely able to hold on the territory they still have, let alone fake a recording of their leader. 

I also think that intelligence agencies would be able to determine if the voice is really him. They have voice analysis and can figure out who someone is just by listening to them talk and I am guessing that they have already used this tech to confirm that it really is Baghdadi. 

As for his message I am not impressed. ISIS fighters are mostly taking his advice but that was always going to happen. Most ISIS fighters have very little hope of returning to the real world after ISIS falls. The local ones will probably not be able to return to their homes, if they even exist anymore. The foreign fighters have pretty much zero chance of returning to their home countries. They pretty much have to fight to the death even though their situation is hopeless because the only other option is life in prison or execution. 

So why has Baghdadi been so hard to kill? Well for one thing he's out in the desert without much to mark him as a target. He probably moves frequently and keeps far away from computers and cell phones. My guess is he also surrounds himself with civilians which would make an assassination attempt more difficult. 

At this point I don't think that al-Baghdadi is really that relevant anymore. He is more of a symbol than anything else and his actual contribution to ISIS is limited to propaganda like this. ISIS has been splintered and destroyed so much that they hardly have any leadership anymore. And since Baghdadi's main goal seems survival, he's too busy to be much of a leader. 

I do hope that Baghdadi is brought to justice someday. I hope that he is captured and put on trial, but I doubt that will happen. Baghdadi is extremely unlikely to surrender and will probably kill himself if it looks like he is in danger of capture. Much more likely is that he is finally tracked down and killed. The best case for that is a commando raid like the one that took down Osama Bin Laden. 

Of course, no matter how he dies, as long as nobody has the body, people won't believe that he is really gone. The same thing happened with Osama Bin Laden. People still think he is alive and some believe he died long ago. If Baghdadi does die, I think the same thing will happen with him. The only way that won't happen is if he is captured and executed...  

Roy Moore defeats Luther Strange in Alabama Senate primary.

Roy Moore at a campaign rally. New York Times/Getty. 

National news media has called the race between Roy Moore and Luther Strange in the Alabama GOP Senate primary. This isn't surprising as Moore had been polling far ahead of Strange for quite some time. Moore is an outsider candidate while Strange was the incumbent who had the support of the establishment and President Trump. 

Indeed, Trump went all out for Strange, which puzzled many of his supporters. It made sense to me though. Why? For one, Strange was very loyal personally to Donald Trump and more than anything else Trump loves the people that are loyal to him. Even though Strange is more of a mainline conservative he has supported Trump in the Senate so it's no surprise that he wanted him to win.

I think there are other considerations as well. Roy Moore strikes me as a Rand Paul/Ted Cruz type. He's the kind of guy that will stick to his guns no matter what. In theory that's a great thing and something that a lot of Republicans want. But it has a major downside. When someone votes on principal and principal alone we get what we had with the Obamacare repeal. One or two senators who won't compromise so we end up with the status quo which is considerably worse than the compromise would have been. 

There is also concern that Moore might lose in the full senate race against the Democrats. I think that is pretty far fetched. Alabama is about as red as a red state can get so I seriously doubt that he will lose. But I think Strange probably would have been a safer bet. 

The New York Times makes it sound like this is a huge defeat for Donald Trump, but I don't really think it is. Sure, it's a defeat but not a damaging one. Trump hedged enough during his endorsement campaign for Strange and he acknowledged that he would support Moore if he won. He got a little egg on his face but not nearly as much as the establishment has gotten. Unlike Trump, they went all in, pouring money into the race. 

It does show the limit of Trump's endorsements though. The voters are still very angry and don't really care who Trump endorses if he's going to endorse an incumbent. The GOP base is still furious that the Senate has done almost nothing despite holding a majority and have proven that even if Trump supports one of them they aren't going along with it. 

I think this is a major warning to incumbent GOP members of congress. If you are an incumbent, there is a good chance of you getting primaried if you don't get anything done. Roy Moore shows that an insurgent candidate can and will win against you.

I think that this should put a fire under the asses of congress to actually get things done. Though they have failed at repealing Obamacare they could and should do other things that could win back the GOP base. Something as simple as funding Donald Trump's wall would go a long way to protecting them.

But I doubt they will do so. Most members of congress are neocons who don't support Donald Trump's agenda and they are simply trying to weather the storm. I still don't think they realize how dangerous the GOP base is. If the election of Donald Trump was the canary in the coal mine, the election of Roy Moore is a miner running around screaming "GAS!! GAS!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!". But I doubt the GOP will listen and pretty soon those that don't will be out of office. 

Yet another Obamacare repeal bill fails in the senate...

The latest Obamacare repeal bill, the Graham-Cassidy bill, has failed as Senator Susan Collins has decided to oppose the bill. The Hill. With Collins confirming that she is opposed to the bill, she joins Senators Rand Paul and John McCain in opposing the bill bringing it under the 50 votes it needed to pass. Collins did not like the prediction by the Congressional Budget Office that some would lose insurance under the bill. It is unclear if the vote will still happen as doing so would get the senators on the record. The Graham-Cassidy bill was the last chance to avoid the September 30th deadline that prevented Democrats from filibustering the bill. 

My Comment:

I don't have strong opinions on the Graham-Cassidy bill. Unlike the other iterations of the Obamacare repeal, I never read the bill. I don't really have strong feelings about it either way since, like most Americans, I get my health care through work.  I also had very little hope of this bill passing. There was always going to be a few people in the Senate that weren't going to vote for it. 

The important thing is that the GOP failed yet again to pass an Obamacare repeal bill. Considering that both Donald Trump and congress were elected on a mandate to do something about Obamacare, this is a huge embarrassment for the party yet again. They were elected to pass something and they have failed completely. It's a huge betrayal to the base of the party. 

This is a major reason why the GOP's approval ratings are so low and why most people support President Trump and not the party itself. They just can't get things done even when elected specifically to get things done. It's just a complete failure.

There are three Senators that came out in opposition to this bill and I think they all did it for different reasons. First, their was Susan Collins who, along with her ally Lisa Murkowski, were opposed to the repeals because they are from the far left wing of the GOP party. They are practically Democrats anyways... 

The other group was the libertarian side of the GOP. Rand Paul came out as officially against the bill 

 because it increased spending, and he was supported by former presidential candidate Ted Cruz. Though I like Paul, sometimes he does stupid stuff like this on principal alone. Sure, principal is a good thing to have but sometimes you have to do what is best for the party and that would have been passing this bill. 

As for John McCain, I have given up on trying to figure out what he is doing. As far as I can tell he is dying and before he goes he wants to do as much damage to Donald Trump as possible. Recent media reports suggest that he is still angry about the incident during the primaries where Trump said he wasn't a war hero. That pissed off John McCain to no end and I think he is torpedoing these bills for no other reason. 

There had been some rumblings that perhaps a few Democratic senators would cross the aisle for this bill. It was specifically designed to appeal to vulnerable red state Democrats but it appears unlikely that any of them are going to vote for it now.  Despite how divided and dysfunctional the Democrats are, they are still very united on health care. They won't cross over here, even if the bill would help their states. They want to twist the knife into the GOP so I am not surprised that they aren't going to help pass this bill. 

I think this dysfunction is going to cost the GOP in the 2018 elections. After all, the party has failed to live up to their mandate. It doesn't really help Democrats all that much because the people that want an Obamacare repeal aren't going to vote for the party that came up with the bill, but it might reduce turnout. Why would people want to vote for a party that fails so consistently? 

On the other hand, I have the feeling that many GOP senators might be taken out in the primaries. The anger at the party isn't going to go away and I am guessing that quite a few senators are now vulnerable... And if we do take out several vulnerable Senators and flip some of the Democrats, we might finally have enough to actually get some things done. 

Finally, I have to say that Donald Trump is about the only thing going for the GOP right now, as much as the party leadership hates it. Though Trump hasn't been able to pressure Congress into getting anything done, he is at least fighting the Democrats through the culture war. Things like the NFL boycott are at least keeping the GOP base fired up and distracted that the party isn't getting anything done... 

Donald Trump renews travel ban, adds three more countries.

International travelers arrive at Dulles in DC. Reuters. 

In a news story that is getting buried on an unreasonably busy news day on a Sunday, Donald Trump has renewed the travel ban and has added three new countries to the list. That the travel bans on Syria, Iran, Libya, Yemen and Somalia continued is not surprising, but it is somewhat surprising that North Korea, Venezuela and Chad ended up on the list as well. Though Iraq has not been included in the ban, visitors from the country will have more extreme vetting. 

It's not surprising that most of those countries are on the list. ISIS and Al-Qaeda are still very active in Syria, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Iran is still a threat due to their nuclear program and their support for terrorism. It's not surprising at all that they haven't been taken off the list. Giving extra vetting for Iraq makes sense as well since they are both a critical ally and one of the few countries that still has large numbers of ISIS fighters.  

Adding North Korea seems like a no-brainer as well. Tensions with the country are very high and it's pretty much impossible to vet anyone from the country since they don't talk to us at all. And given the high level of tensions it's very possible that North Korea could use immigration as an opportunity to infiltrate commandos and terrorists. Plus, North Korea doesn't allow tourism for their citizens anyways so there is no chance of this ban hurting anyone.

As for Venezuela, it makes sense as well. The country is in chaos and there is a very good chance that the government will collapse. We don't want anyone in that government coming to our country and escaping justice when the government eventually falls. Trump is also getting in front of a possible refugee crisis that will happen when, not if, the government falls. 

The one I can't figure out is Chad. Chad isn't really a country you think of when you think of terrorism. They are a Muslim country but they don't really export terrorism. I do know that Boko Haram is very active in Chad's border region and that they have used the country as a refuge. Boko Haram is affiliated with ISIS and is one of the most brutal terror groups around, but they don't really export terrorism. That being said, I am fine with them not being allowed in the country. 

Either way, due to the timing of this news, I doubt this story will get as much coverage as the original travel ban. Adding North Korea and Venezuela also helps the argument that the travel ban was never about discriminating against Muslims. I think people will realize that fighting the ban will be unpopular now and the story will likely die and get overshadowed by culture war stuff.  

Gunman in church shooting subdued by usher with his personal firearm.

The scene of the shooting. Washington Post/Getty.

A gunman in a church shooting in the Nashville area was subdued by an usher who retrieved his personal firearm. Washington Post. The shooting killed one woman and wounded six others of the 50 people in the church at the time. During the rampage the suspect pistol whipped one of the ushers who was involved in a struggle with the attacker. The suspect, a Sudanese immigrant named Emanuel Kidega Sampson, was shot with his own weapon in the struggle, allowing the usher, Robert "Caleb" Engle to escape and retrieve his weapon from his car. Engle was able to keep Sampson from continuing his attack or escaping until police arrived by holding his gun on him. Sampson has been charged with murder and attempted murder and the U.S. Attorney's office has opened up a civil rights investigation as well. No motive has been released for the attack at this time.

The suspect, Emanuel Kidega Sampson. Police handout.

My Comment:

Good on the usher for fighting this guy. From what it sounds like he was able to subdue this attacker unarmed, which is pretty amazing considering this guy was armed with two handguns. And the first thing he did after he beat this guy up is retrieve his handgun. 

That's some serious heroism there. It's a brave enough thing to fight a guy like this when you are armed, but to fight when you accidentally left your carry piece in your car? Hugely brave. Doing so probably saved several lives. 

I do have to say that this case makes a strong case for concealed carry. Sure, this time someone was able to take the attacker down long enough to retrieve his weapon from his car, but if he had it on him, he probably wouldn't have been hurt in the melee. And even after beating this guy up and injuring him with his own gun, the usher didn't feel safe until he got his own gun back. He was still a threat after being shot and the good guy in this case still needed his gun. 

The choice of target in this case is disturbing. This seems like an attack on a religious place of worship. Just like the Dylann Roof shooting awhile back, this attack is disgusting and horrible. I'm not very religious myself but that doesn't mean I won't be outraged when someone attacks a church. 

Nobody has said anything about what the motive could be. I think we can probably rule this out as an ISIS attack though. Why? Because even though the suspect comes from a Muslim country, his social media didn't make it sound like he was active with any terror groups. Plus the fact that the US Attorney opened up a civil rights case instead of a terror case probably means that this wasn't terror related. 

My guess is that this is a run of the mill hate crime, the black equivalent of Dylann Roof. It may not have been because of race but because of religion, but either way the man seemed to be targeting white Christians. That means this was a hate crime and should be treated as such. 

One wonders if this isn't related to the NFL protests in anyway. My guess it was just a coincidence, but there is a chance that this attack was due in part to the reaction to the NFL protests. That's just speculation though and I doubt it had much to do with it. 

I do have to point out something I find particularly disgusting that I noticed in the article. This church was very active in helping the Sudanese community in the Nashville area. They helped feed the homeless and provided support for Sudanese refugees. As a member of the Sudanese community, Sampson returned that support and help with murder and mayhem. I doubt that the members of the church will hold that against other Sudanese people, but it's still fairly disgusting that he attacked people that were trying to help... 

Weekend movie night: Alien: Covenant

Alien: Covenant movie poster. 20th Century Fox. 

It's been a long time since I have posted a movie review but it's not because I haven't been watching movies. The movies I have seen have either been "so ok it's average" or too out there to write up on this blog. I mean, I could have wrote up The Neon Demon, but I think Google would have kicked me off the site for that one! I just haven't watched many that I had much to say about, even though I generally watch one or two new ones a week. 

But I finally found one I want to review. Alien: Covenant. I've been a fan of the Alien series for quite some time. I believe that Aliens was the first R-rated film I ever saw and Alien: Resurrection was the first R-rated film I saw in theaters. I've seen all of the main movies and the first dreadful AVP movie but temporarily gave up on the series after AVP2, which I resolved to never see and is widely regarded as total garbage. When I was in college I took a film class and my big paper for that class was analyzing the last scene in Aliens. And I got an A on it, just in case you were wondering! As the years when on though, my interest in the series waned, largely because I thought that the AVP movies ruined the series, even worse than Resurrection did. 

My interest returned after Prometheus. Though the reaction to that film was divided to say the least, I am one of its defenders as I enjoyed it and saw it in theaters. It wasn't as good as Aliens or the original film, but I put it above Alien 3 and way above everything else. So I was excited when I heard that there was going to be a direct sequel  to Prometheus and I was hoping to see it in theaters. 

(So to review, my rating scale is Aliens>Alien>Prometheus>Alien 3>MASSIVE GAP>Resurection>EVEN BIGGER GAP>AVP>GAP SO LARGE THAT IT MAKES THE GRAND CANYON LOOK SMALL>AVP2)

Then, through word of mouth, I decided to wait until it came out on DVD. And it turns out that was a good descion. I did not like Covenant at all. It's not a horrible film, like Alien: Resurrection or the AVP movies, but it's definitely one of the poorer entries in the series. It's a bad movie, but sad to say, there are worse entries in the franchise. The main problem is that the film didn't seem to know what it wanted to be. It tried to both be a sequel to the deeper, more cerebral Prometheus, a big dumb action movie like the AVP series and a straight horror film like Alien. By trying to do all it failed. 

And I also have to say that I am not sure I like the direction the series is taking. This movie totally changed the lore of the origin of the Xenomorphs from what it used to be. Now I am not talking about the AVP origins where they were ancient creatures used by the Predator aliens to test themselves. Thankfully, that has been excised from cannon officially by this movie, so at least the film did something right. But I think that the choice that was made was fairly controversial. 

I would have to say that I do not recommend the movie to all but the most dedicated fans of the series. Traditional Alien fans won't like the Prometheus lore that dominates the film. Prometheus fans won't like how much of that lore got pushed to the wayside to focus on the Aliens. Horror fans won't like how cliche and non-scary it is. And there just isn't enough action to call it a true action film. Right now the only reason to watch it is to cleanse the AVP lore out of your system and to perhaps setup the next movie in the series. Everyone else can probably skip it. 

The rest of this review will have SPOILERS, so if you haven't seen Covenant and still want to for some reason after all that, skip the rest of it. Also, it's pretty much impossible to discuss this movie without completely spoiling Prometheus as well, so if you haven't, you might want to skip this part as well. Given the relative quality of Prometheus compared to Covenant, that might be a shame, so keep that in mind. 

Spoilers begin now!

This just wasn't a good movie. Regardless of what side you are on with the previous film, I think that everyone will be disappointed in this movie. Like I said before this movie tried to do too many things at once and it failed at all of them. Which is very disappointing because there was potential here. 

My first huge problem with the movie is just how stupid the characters were. I know that was a major criticism of Prometheus as well, but at least some of those incidents were handwaved. Yeah, it might be dumb that the guys in charge of the maps got lost, but they were smoking pot, and so on. They made some bad decisions, but at least the movie attempted to justify it. 

In this movie there were no excuses. First of all, the landing party decided to land on an uncharted planet with no kind of biological protection. Sure that happened in Prometheus eventually too, but at least they started with protection and took it off when it seemed safe. A dumb move, yes, but not comically stupid. It was NEVER safe on the Engineer's planet, since it had an advanced biosphere, and every death could have been avoided had they just had even the most basic PPE. 

Second, the movie overused the horribly cliche horror movie trope where one person wanders off alone and gets killed. That could kind of be justified with the guys that got infected because then nobody knew there was danger about, but once the neomorph aliens showed up, they should have stuck to the buddy system. The fact that they didn't was just baffling and is a descion that can't be defended. And it was so unnecessary as well! The attack in the wheat field showed that even when they were all together the neomorph was still a major threat, so why not up the tension a bit and keep people together so you don't instantly know who is going to die?

Third, there was the entire lander sequence. The deaths of Faris and Karine were about the most stupid sequence of events I have ever seen in film. I'm going to bullet point it: 

-Two people help a third into the medbay and realize the security officer is having problems. 

-Karine sees that something horrible is happening to the dude's back and instead of getting away or trying to do something medial, she HUGS him and gets a spike near her hand. 

-Faris LOCKS Karine in with the monster after it bursts out of his back! 

-Karine, instead of picking up the fully loaded assault rifle sitting right next to her, grabs a knife after slipping on blood (ok, i'll accept the clumsiness, but everything else about that was stupid!)

-Faris runs and picks up a gun, but gets her leg caught in a doorway and runs away again without killing the neomorph.

-She then heads to the hanger and her potato aim ends up destroying the entire shuttle, killing her and the monster. 

The whole scene was so stupid! I mean, yes, people panic but the only way that happened was because of massive amounts of stupidity. And it came from a character, Faris, who was described as a person who never gets scared! 

That scene is often cited as the worst in the movie, but one later in the movie was even more baffling. Captain Oram, fresh after seeing that David is communing with the neomorph and gets really pissed after he kills it, goes along with him, completely alone and listens to him admit that he's been experimenting with the aliens. 

Right now, if I was him, I'd been shooting his ass for admitting that. Hell, I probably would have shot him when he was trying to talk to the neomorph. The fact that he was trying to save the monster probably means that he's not my buddy. Oram has ZERO reason to trust David right now and should know that he's in mortal danger.

But no, Oram decides that following David is a good idea. He also decides that touching the alien egg was a good idea as well. And when David says to look inside the egg, what does our genius of a captain do? Well he looks right inside it! And that is how the first Xenomorph gets born people! I mean I guess it's better than the whole "Predators brought them to Earth and nobody seemed to remember it in the future" origin story that the AVP movies had, but not by much. We deserved better than that. 

At this point I had the critical reaction that dooms any movie. I thought to myself, "I don't care what happens to these people". They were all so stupid that I am convinced that they would have all died no matter what happened. It also ruined much of the horror of the movie as you have to care about people to be scared with them. And these aren't even the only examples, there were more! But if I covered them all I wouldn't have time to cover anything else about this movie that I didn't like. 

Another problem I had is how they wasted a few characters. Sure, the stunt casting of James Franco in a cameo role was probably a waste, but he wasn't the main problem. I would have preferred if he had been killed by an alien, but whatever, not a big deal. He does kickstart the plot so I guess it was ok.

Completely wasting Noomi Rapace's Elizibeth Shaw though? Unforgivable. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind that she was killed off. Indeed, doing so was in tradition with other Aliens movies. But she didn't get any kind of sendoff and we don't even really know how she died other than that David killed her. 

Hell, I think they wasted a great opportunity to completely freak out the audience and ramp up the horror levels considerably if they had her speak when she was found by Walter. Sure, it wouldn't make any sense, considering her... um... condition, but it would have scared the hell out of everyone and nothing else in the movie makes sense anyways. Why not go for it?   

Worst of all, they wasted an entire race. We never learn anything else about the Engineers, which was one of the big draws of Prometheus and a reason I liked that movie. I was hoping to learn more about them and their culture but they all end up dying without contributing much to the plot. 

Are they extinct? Why did they create life on Earth? Are they all jerks or was the guy from Prometheus just having a bad day? None of these questions were answered at all, and it was disappointing. Supposedly the next movie in the series will cover them, but who knows when that will be? I wanted it in this movie! 

This review has been fairly harsh, but I do think there were some good parts to this movie. I think that both Danny McBride and Kathrine Waterson gave good performances and the special effects were very good. Not enough to save the movie mind you, but good. 

If there is anything to salvage from Alien: Covenant it's the performance of Michael Fassbender in a duel role. Both Walter and David were compelling characters and Fassbender portrayed them very well. And I think the dueling ideas on humanity that the characters expressed were the most interesting part of the movie. Had the movie focused on them more and fixed at least some of the issues I posted, i'd be willing to call it a good movie. But as it is now? No way. 

As for one issue that I am not sure about, I don't know if having David be the creator of the Xenomorphs is a good idea or not. We can't really call them aliens anymore if they were created by a human-made android. On the other hand, we always knew that the Xenomorphs were a weapon, so someone had to have made them. Still, I kinda wish that it was a joint project between David and the Engineers or something.

Do I regret seeing it? Maybe? It was pretty terrible and I even the dumbest of horror movies tend to have smarter characters. I also don't like the direction the series is heading. But on the other hand, it got me to write another movie review. That's something at least, right? 

A few thoughts about the NFL, Donald Trump and the anthem protests.

Colin Kaepernick in 2013. Daniel Hartwig.

The NFL anthem protest movement has made the news again, largely because of Donald Trump. During a speech last night for US Senate candidate Luther Strange, Donald Trump said that NFL owners should fire anthem protesters. Obviously, that has exploded into a wider counter protest with many people calling for boycotts. 

What are my thoughts on this? Well for one, I think Trump is pretty much correct. Trump's main argument is that these anthem protests have been a huge ratings disaster for the NFL. This has been backed up by several surveys that say that the main reason people aren't watching is because of the anthem protest movement started by Colin Kapernick, who is now so toxic that he hasn't been hired even as a backup. 

I personally watched less football last season because of the anthem protests. Though I watched most of the regular season, I skipped out on most of the playoffs and when the Superbowl happened, I took an overtime shift instead of watching it. I had even considered bailing on fantasy football this season even thought I have played the game for about a decade. Ultimately, I decided to stay in, not because of the NFL, but because I didn't want to disappoint the other people in the league. My passion for the sport itself has dwindled considerably. 

Why? Well, for one I don't like seeing people disrespect the flag and the national anthem. I never liked watching the anthems anyways because I always felt that the NFL players didn't take it seriously except in the short period right after 9/11. But seeing people actively disrespect it, by taking a knee, as opposed to passively doing so, by scratching their ass or spitting, is too is a bridge to far. The anthem means something to me and I hate seeing people hate my country. So even when I did watch the NFL the past two seasons, I never watched the anthem anymore just on the chance of some idiot protesting it. I didn't want to give them any attention whatsoever and didn't want to get myself worked up. 

The other main problem I have is that these people have no reason to protest whatsoever. The anthem protesters seem to be an offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement, who I consider a racist separatist group. Their only goal seems to be to make this better for black people somehow by making it legal for them to kill cops and commit crime with no consequences. If they were protesting a more just cause, like black on black violence or drug use, then they would have gotten a better reception. But as it stands right now what we have is a racist movement disrespecting the anthem. 

Plus, millionaire athletes are about the most privileged and spoiled people on earth. There have been so many cases, OJ Simpson being the most prominent case, where the cops and justice system went easy on NFL players just because they could play ball. They are not the people getting a hard time from the cops at all.   

Finally, I am sick and tired of seeing the NFL being politicized. As someone who spends quite a bit of time on politics, I like to watch football to unwind and not think about things for awhile. The last thing I want is to be reminded of politics while watching football. It was one of the few things that I could use to escape the culture wars for awhile. 

But the NFL has been hyping the politicization. They always seem to focus on the protesters when they take a knee and they allow the sports media to talk about almost nothing else. What they should do is what they do when some idiot runs onto the field. Cut the video feeds and let the talking heads talk about something else. Don't give the protesters any attention. The fact that they don't shows me that something else is going on. 

So what, exactly, is the NFL doing? I think that they are attempting to expand who watches the NFL. Instead of just focusing on their core demographics, ie white males, they want to expand to other groups, most importantly white females. Their reasoning is that white females spend way more money and can be influenced by advertisers, so by expanding to them they can raise the rates on their adds. They seem to be doing this by trying to focus on narratives, and not the sports themselves. They think that by focusing on the protest story, they can get women and other minority groups to tune in. That's probably considered sexist and if it got out it would probably turn off women who actually watch football for the game (ie most of them who watch), hurting their ratings even more. 

By doing so I don't think they have helped their ratings any at all because the kind of person that wants to see idiots like Colin Kaepernick aren't going to want to see the rest of the game. And they have alienated their key audience who otherwise would have stood by them through pretty much anything. In short this was always a terrible business move and if the NFL had been smart, they would have nipped it in the bud last year. They seemed to have righted the ship after Colin Kaepernick was essentially kicked out of the league, but now the issue has been brought right back to the spotlight. Is that fair? Probably, since there were still a few protests going on, but it's got to be about the worst case scenario for the NFL.  

As for Trump, I see this as a very powerful political move. The anthem protest is extremely unpopular among his base and we have been waiting for leadership on the issue. It's about the lowest of low hanging fruit that a Republican politician could go for. His supporters love him for this and it doesn't come at much cost. Unlike the NFL, he realizes that the only people that will disagree with him on the issue are people that already hate him so it's a win win all around. 

Trump also understands that by stirring the pot here, he will force yet another overreaction, not only from the NFL but from the left as well. He knows that there will probably be more players protesting which will cause more people to tune out. He also knows that the sports journalism world will turn on him as well, which fits into his anti-media narrative. The only thing worse than a spoiled athlete taking a knee is an overpaid and under-talented sports journalist complaining about something outside of sports. 

I also think that this has a lot to do with the Alabama primary between Luther Strange and Roy Moore. Trump has backed Strange due to his loyalty but he has fallen in the polls behind Roy Moore thanks to Breitbart and other groups bashing Strange. By making this statement at a Strange rally he is going to get a lot more attention to Strange's election run. It might not be enough to get "Big Luther" elected, but it might help. 

As for me, I think I will probably be "taking a knee" on the NFL this weekend. I really don't want to give any player that does this anymore attention than they have already gotten. And I want to send a message to the NFL that no matter what else they do, if they let people disrespect our anthem I don't want to watch them anymore. If after this weekend things return to normal, I will watch again, but if not, I can find other things to do with my time. 

Newly released video shows shoot down of Syrian SU-22 by US F-18's

Syrian SU-22 before being shot down. Via The Aviationist. 

The Pentagon has released video of this summers shootdown of a Syrian SU-22 by a US F-18 hornet. The video shows the jet being hit by an AIM 120 AMRAAM and being destroyed. 

My Comment:

A very extensive commentary on this incident can be found here via The Drive. It's a very good round up of why this incident played out the way it did and how we ended up destroying that SU-22. It was the first air to air kill for the United States since the first Iraq War and a critical part of the history of the Syrian Civil War. 

Not much else to say on this one other than the fact that this incident was quickly forgotten. At the time people were worried that this incident would spawn a greater conflict between the United States and Syria with it perhaps spiraling to a larger conflict with Russia. That obviously didn't happen because cooler heads prevailed and we quickly set up more "deconfliction" lines to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. I sincerely hope that this incident was a "one off" thing and we won't have to shoot anything else down in Syria. 

Given the circumstances of the shootdown, I don't fault the actions of the F-18 pilots. They had little choice but to shoot down this SU-22. It was refusing the back down even after being repeatedly warned. Still, I wish we could have avoided this particular incident... 

Iraqi forces have launched an offensive on Hiwija one of the last cities controlled by ISIS.

An Iraqi tank battling ISIS. BBC/AFP.

Iraqi forces have launched an offensive on Hiwija, one of the last areas ISIS controls in the country. BBC. The small city is located north of Baghdad and is the only part of the country that ISIS controls except for the western deserts. Those desert holdouts are also under attack as well with the town of Ana already falling to Iraqi forces. Hiwija has long been a stronghold for Sunni insurgents for more than a decade but ISIS forces have been cut off from the main ISIS force for a year. 

My Comment:

The fight against ISIS in Iraq is in its final phase. Hiwija is about the last major outpost ISIS has in Iraq. Other than that, ISIS only controls some of the border outposts next to Syria. They have been pushed out of their major strongholds, including their former de-facto capital of Mosul. Soon, they will have nothing left at all. 

I am expecting that the battle for Hiwija to be fast. Mosul did not last anywhere near as long as I thought and the battle for Tal-Afar went even quicker. Considering Hiwija has been cut off from other ISIS forces for more than a year, they have to be running low on morale and supplies. I expect them to fold quickly. I think we are past the point of months long drawn out battles with ISIS. They are just too weak these days. 

That doesn't mean I expect them not to fight. I doubt many of these ISIS fighters are considering surrendering. Many of them are true believers and think that death in battle is their ticket to paradise. Some of them might be foreign fighters who understand that they can't go home again. Others may fear, quite correctly, that some of the Shiite fighters arrayed against them will show them no mercy. Either way, I expect most of the fighters in Hiwija to die. 

The BBC post made a big deal about all the civilians left in the Hiwija area. I am not too concerned. As I have said many times before, one of the reasons why ISIS is falling so quickly is the fact that we aren't so terrified of inflicting civilian casualties. I have said for months now that it is better to inflict a few civilian casualties now so the war doesn't last quite as long and so far I have been proven correct. 

The big question now is what happens after Iraq is fully liberated. Given the fast pace of battles and the almost total collapse of ISIS, I expect that to happen before the end of this year, with only a few holdouts remaining. ISIS will still exist in Iraq but they won't hold much in the way of territory. They won't be anywhere near the force they once were. 

So what is the future of ISIS in Iraq? I am guessing the survivors will either flee to Syria or revert to the guerrilla force they were before they started taking territory. Instead of trying to take and hold territory, they will try to commit terror attacks, much like they do throughout the rest of the world. They will still be a major threat but Iraq itself should be much safer. There will still be commando raids and suicide bombings, but I doubt they will be able to recover as an actual fighting force. 

As for Iraq, they will have to remain vigilant against ISIS and, more importantly, make sure that sectarian divisions don't undo the progress they have made. There is already tensions over Kurdish independence and though Sunni-Shia relations have improved, there are still many raw wounds there. I hope that Iraq can rise to the challenge and remain a stable and prosperous country, but we will have to wait and see...  

Hurricane Maria devastates the island of Puerto Rico

Rescue workers help someone effected by the storm in Puerto Rico. NBC/Reuters. 

Hurricane Maria has devastated the island of Puerto Rico. NBC News. Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico as a category 4 storm with winds up to 155 mph, but has now weakened to a category 2 storm. Puerto Rico suffered severe damage and power has been knocked out for the majority of the island. There is a chance that parts of the island will be without power for up to six months. The hurricane also devastated the US Virgin Islands, which were also severely damaged by Hurricane Irma. 

My Comment:

This has been a devastating Atlantic Hurricane season, and it isn't over yet. The United States alone has been hit by three major hurricanes, all of which have been hugely powerful storms. First there was the slow moving Hurricane Harvey, that dumped massive amounts of rain onto Texas. Then there was Hurricane Irma that devastated the Caribbean and Florida. Now we have Maria greatly damaging Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. 

This has been a devastating blow to the United States. We have been relatively lucky in terms of storms. The last major one to hit was Superstorm Sandy. Before that it was Katrina and for the most part we didn't have many storms. Though we have a long history of hurricanes, we got pretty lucky during the Obama years when it came to Hurricanes. 

That run of luck has officially ended. Having three storms hit us in a row is an extreme amount of bad luck. It's also fairly unprecedented. So far Maria has just hit our island territories but our resources have already been stretched thin by the other two hurricanes. 

I also fear that Puerto Rico isn't going to be able to handle this storm. They are already an economic basket case. There was fear for awhile that they would go completely bankrupt. And that was before the whole island was inundated by this storm. They are going to need a whole lot of help, but I fear that most Americans won't care as much about our overseas territory as they do about Texas and Florida. The federal government is going to have to step in and help quite a bit. 

The US Virgin Islands have been devastated as well. In Hurricane Maria, the more southern island, St. Croix, was spared. This time they were not so lucky. Again, I worry that our overseas territories won't get as much support as the rest of the country that have been effected by these storms. On the other hand, the US Virgin Islands is a popular tourist destination so many people know about it and like it. The people I know that have visited have all said it's a great place and many of them are helping out. 

Still, I am wondering how much more we can take in terms of these storms before it starts hurting us economically. We have been in the middle of a fairly good economic recovery but if we keep getting damaged by these storms it could stop that in it's track. Gas prices are already up and the money that is going to this storm recovery is money that could be going to other things. 

Of course, when there is a major disaster like this, we need the government to step in. They have done a good job with the Harvey and Irma recovery operations and I have faith that they will do the same thing with Maria. 

Report: Donald Trump prevented a war between UAE/Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

President Donald Trump. Bloomberg. 

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates considered military action until President Donald Trump called them and told them to back off. Bloomberg. The Saudi and UAE leaders wanted regime change in Qatar due to the countries support of terrorism and relationship with Iran. Trump warned the leaders that regime change in Qatar would destabilize the region and would only help Iran. Trump has called for a political solution to the dispute. Both the governments of Saudi Arabia and the UAE dispute that military action was ever considered. 

My Comment:

Huge news if true. The problem is that the Bloomberg report only relies on anonymous sources. Though the report cites multiple sources, those sources are still anonymous and can't be vetted by the public. During the Trump administration there has been a real problem with fake news reports relying only on anonymous sources, so I would take this report with a grain of salt. 

However, I do think that this does have a chance of being true. For one thing, it is a rare positive story about the Trump administration at a time when those are basically non-existent in the United States media. The leaks that have plagued the White House have mostly been negative and I doubt the leakers would leak something that paints the administration in a positive light. 

I also recall quite a bit of hand wringing a few months back over Qatar and the fear that a war was possible. There were a lot of troop movements on both sides. Turkey was sending troops to back up the Qataris and there was a real fear that war would break out. People were extremely concerned what was going to happen to the US troops that were stationed in Qatar. The fear of war was real at the very least. 

A war between Qatar and the Gulf States would have been a complete disaster. At the very least the entire region would be completely disrupted. There would have been massive casualties. Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE all have modern advanced military's with top of the line US military equipment. It would have been a war like no other in recent history. 

And Trump was right, the only people that would benefit from the war would be Iran Sure, they would lose their interest in Qatar but most of their enemies in the region would be devastated by the war. It would also help their support of the Houthi rebels in Yemen as the UAE and Saudis would almost certainly have to pull out troops to fight in Qatar. 

A war in Qatar would have also disrupted relations with Turkey for pretty much everyone involved. Turkey was deploying troops to Qatar and would have likely joined their side. That would expand the war to a regional level and would put the United States in a very awkward position where two of their allies were fighting each other. We would probably have to choose one over the other and that would again only benefit Iran. Choosing the Saudis would greatly disrupt our efforts against ISIS in Syria and Iraq and choosing the Turks would essentially break our relations with every other Arab state that isn't Qatar and Turkey. It was a lose-lose situation all around. 

There would have been massive economic consequences as well. Any war would greatly disrupt oil production which would raise prices across the world. This would have a massive effect globally and could start a rescission. 

Avoiding the war was a key goal for America and if this report is true than Donald Trump deserves a lot of credit. A weaker president would have caved to the demands of the Saudis and UAE but Trump did not. Will Trump get credit for that? Of course not. The official media narrative is that Trump is the bad guy and that anything he does is evil, even avoiding a war. He will get zero credit for preventing this war...

Today's top news story? This retweet...

Donald Trump's amazing golf swing #CrookedHillary pic.twitter.com/vKhxxFCBV1

— CNN SUCKS (@Fuctupmind) September 14, 2017

Trump retweeted that and the media went nuts. I don't have much to say about it other than the following:

1. It's pretty funny.

2. Retweeting dumb stuff like this is a major reason why Donald Trump won. Many of his fans love stuff like this.

3. The media is completely stupid by taking this seriously. They are acting like he actually hit Hillary Clinton with a golf ball. Once again they are showing they are completely out of touch when it comes to humor.

4. The media is covering this over other stories that actually are important. Trump's tweet earlier about Kim Jong Un, while also funny, is actually newsworthy. There was also an arrest in the London bombing case, more Atlantic hurricanes and a horrible acid attack in France, but the president retweeting a stupid gif is the number one story. Just goes to show how skewed the priorities are in the media...

I spoke with President Moon of South Korea last night. Asked him how Rocket Man is doing. Long gas lines forming in North Korea. Too bad!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 17, 2017

A few quick thoughts on the protests in St. Louis

Riot police in St. Louis. ABC/AP.

As you may know there were some major protest in St. Louis tonight over the shooting of a black man by a white officer back in 2011. ABC News has information about the trial and acquittal of the officer involved. People were upset by the verdict and have rioted in response. A few thoughts.

1. I'm no expert on the case but from the little information I have from the above video, the shooting look justified. The man who got shot, Lamar Smith almost hit police officers with a car and came very close to hitting a civilian. It was pretty clearly a good shooting, but the officer was accused of using a "drop piece". That's where an officer drops a gun after a shooting to make claims of self defense more believable. If he did do that, he's an absolute idiot because the shooting looked justified anyways. But even if he did, I don't think that rises to the level of a murder conviction. Losing his job maybe, but only if there was rock solid proof. Not something to go to prison for the rest of his life.

2. The usual suspects were out in force. Groups like Black Lives Matter and Antifa were out and about and were up to their old tricks. Unlike the more recent riots, they did not target innocent civilians but attacked the cops instead. Quite a few cops were injured and there was also some property damage. I'm fairly disgusted by the reaction of the violent rioters.

3. Now the problem has nothing to do with the actual case at hand and what groups like BLM and Antifa are going to do next. I am guessing that these groups are sending people to St. Louis to riot tomorrow as well and considering how bad things were tonight, it might not bode well for tomorrow.

4. This event took me completely by surprise. I hadn't heard anything about this case until yesterday when the verdict was announced. Unlike many of the other cases that caused a riot, this one only got local media attention. I generally get the feeling that the national news media doesn't want to cover this kinds of thing anymore because they understand that doing so helps Republicans. There has been a very solid turn away from radical protest groups after the Charlottesvile incident.

5. I'm really getting sick of civil disorder in this country. It seems like every day there is some kind of stupid protest, rally or riot and most of the time it's over something stupid. Sometimes far right groups show up to brawl and that just makes things worse. I just wish we could move on from this and get back to acting like adults. I don't have much hope for that though...

ISIS takes responsibility for bombing in London that wounded 29 people.

An image of the bombed tube car. Reuters. 

ISIS has taken responsibility for a bombing in London that wounded 29 people. Reuters. The injured included several that were burned by the bomb and others that were injured while fleeing. The IED used in the attack seems to have been a fizzle and did not fully explode. No suspect has been arrested and the United Kingdom has raised it's threat level to critical, which is the highest level. It is unclear if ISIS was actually responsible for the attack as they have falsely claimed attacks before. It is also unclear if the attack was a "lone wolf" plot or was planned by a larger cell. The attack is the 5th major incident of terrorism in the UK this year. 

My Comment:

It's a minor miracle that this bomb didn't explode fully. Even though this bomb was a fizzle that didn't fully explode, it still hurt almost 30 people. Had the bomb gone off correctly their might have been double digit deaths. Given how crowded these tube trains are, it would have been a horrible incident. Thankfully, that didn't happen. 

The fact that it didn't is significant. From what it sounds like, this probably wasn't a skilled bomb maker. That makes the lone wolf theory on this attack more credible. A larger cell would probably have a better bomb maker and would have likely used a suicide bomber instead of just leaving the bomb there. Still, it's very possible that their is an active cell in London and they just don't have someone who is competent at bomb making. 

What is very important now is to find whoever made this bomb and capture him as soon as possible. As long as that person or persons is on the run they can attempt further attacks. And next time the bomb might actually work. I am guessing that they are hot on the trail and if Donald Trump is correct in that the suspect is known to police than he should be easy to find. I doubt that he has anywhere to run and he will likely be picked up before he can attempt any further attacks. 

Another attack in London by a loser terrorist.These are sick and demented people who were in the sights of Scotland Yard. Must be proactive!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2017

Speaking of Trump, the above tweet got a lot of noise in the media. Even more noise that the attack itself. For some reason the UK was pissed that Trump said that the there were people being watched by Scotland Yard. There hasn't been any indication that Trump was wrong about what he said, but some people, including Prime Minster Theresa May, weren't happy that Trump said it.

I disagree in general. The UK has always played their terrorism problems very close to the vest and have often downplayed the threat caused by Muslim immigrants. I am guessing that if Trump didn't make that tweet, the world wouldn't have known that the suspect was known to Scotland Yard until long after everyone had stopped caring. Given how dishonest the UK is on this issue, I think Trump did the right thing.

As for ISIS, they haven't been as effective as terrorists lately. They have been attempting quite a few attacks in Europe, but none have been all that spectacular. Their hasn't been another on the scale of the Paris attacks or the Nice ramming. Most of the attacks have been lower scale and less effective.

Why? I think that core ISIS has been greatly disrupted by the massive turn around in Syria and Iraq. With ISIS fighters largely cut off from the rest of the world and their source of income greatly reduced, ISIS doesn't have as much ability to fund and commit acts of terrorism. They have to rely on local forces and people that they inspire to violence. This is obviously a good sign, but I fear that more attacks like this one in London are going to happen.

American citizen ISIS fighter surrenders to Kurds in Syria.

The ISIS flag. 

An American member of ISIS has surrendered to Kurdish fighters in Syria. Fox News. The man has not yet been identified and it is unclear where he is being held, but it is known that he turned himself into to Kurdish YPG fighters. The YPG have signed an agreement saying that they will turn over captured fighters to their home countries. The fighter is not the first American citizen to have been captured after fighting for ISIS. In 2016 Mohamad Jamal Khweis joined ISIS and then turned himself in. 

My Comment:

It will be interesting to learn the fate of this individual. The last American ISIS fighter that we captured, Mohamad Khweis got off with a slap in the wrist. He was charged and convicted for aiding a terrorist organization and weapons charges and has yet to be sentenced. Still, even though he joined ISIS, the terrorism charge only has a sentence of 15 years, unless he killed someone.It doesn't appear that Khweis killed anyone when he was with ISIS but we have no idea if that is the case for this second fighter. The weapons charge will increase his sentence but the fact that someone could join ISIS and get out after a 15 year sentence is fairly disgusting to me. 

You would think that fighting for ISIS would make you eligible for the death penalty. Treason is still a crime in the United States and though it was intentionally made hard to prove, you would think that we would eventually be able to convict someone for it. And I think joining a terrorist organization that kills Americans would count as treason. I would be satisfied if we sent captured ISIS fighters to the death chamber, but I don't see it happening. 

Of course there are arguments against treating captured or surrendered ISIS fighters so harshly. We do want to encourage them to surrender. Everyone that does is one less fighter that ISIS controls and will end the war that much sooner. Perhaps only charging them with the more minor aiding a terrorist organization charge will encourage more fighters that might be rethinking martyrdom to give up the fight. 

One wonders how many Americans are still fighting for ISIS. I don't have good numbers on how many actually joined. Most articles seem to say that it is around 200, but all of those articles are from two years ago. We do know that compared to other countries, there are few members of ISIS that are American, and many of the ones that did join are likely dead. I would be surprised after ISIS falls, that we will have to deal with double digit numbers of surviving fighters. Hell, these two guys might end up being it considering how rare it is for ISIS to surrender and our new policy of killing every terrorist we can find. 

Still, we are probably going to be capturing more of these ISIS fighters and we will have to prosecute them as ISIS falls in Syria and Iraq. I don't think there is any reason to believe that we will be able to reintegrate or reform these people and I think they should probably stay in prison for the rest of their lives. 

What we do have to make sure of is that none of these people return as free men. Even as ISIS the state dies, ISIS the terrorist organization and religious movement lives on. If we don't work hard to kill and capture these fighters they can return to their home countries and commit acts of terror. We have to work very hard to make sure that doesn't happen. 

A grand bipartisan deal on DACA?

President Trump speaks at the White House. Reuters. 

President Donald Trump says he is close to closing a deal with the Democrats in congress on DACA and immigration. Reuters. The deal will provide protections to the so-called "dreamers" who are illegal immigrants brought here as children in exchange for increased border security funding. However, such a deal would not include funding for the border wall, a key election promise for Trump. Trump ended the DACA program due to legal challenges which would have likely ended the program and gave congress a six month window to fix it. Trump has shown willingness to work with Democrats after congressional Republicans have failed to implement his agenda. 

Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!.....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 14, 2017

...They have been in our country for many years through no fault of their own - brought in by parents at young age. Plus BIG border security

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 14, 2017

My Comment:

It's amazing to me how crooked the media has been on the DACA issue. After Trump removed the order, which was going to fall in court no matter what, the media said he was a horrible racist and basically a monster that was probably going to round up all the poor "dreamers" and personally deport them, probably while saying something nazi-like.

What has happened instead? Donald Trump has become the "dreamers" biggest advocates, and he is doing so in spite of the fact that it probably hurts him a bit with his base, many of which, including me, don't like DACA and want the "dreamers" deported. He's working so hard to get some kind of deal in place that he's even working with the Democrats.

Regardless if you agree or disagree with keeping DACA, you have to admit that the press pretty much lied about what Trump was going to do with it. Indeed, if you have been paying attention, it was always clear that Trump had a soft spot for the "dreamers". This really shouldn't have surprised anyone and I think that the people that are acting surprised at this are either lying or were never paying attention in the first place. I mean, even though I don't like the "dreamers" I knew when I voted for Trump that deporting them was probably a non-starter and would have been for pretty much all of the GOP candidates.

I do think that Trump deserves some criticism though. I think DACA could have been a bigger bargaining chip that he could have cashed in for something bigger than just border security. Obviously funding for the wall would have been a great prize, but he could have also cashed it in on tax reform or any of the other things that he could potentially work with the Democrats on. I do think that DACA is one of those things we can compromise for, but I do wish we could have gotten more for it. I just don't think that Trump wanted to risk having to deport these people so he caved too quickly. On the other hand, Trump got a lot of bad press on the issue and any deal is probably better than the status quo.

So why is Trump so suddenly eager to work with Democrats? Well for one thing I think it shows he's not a complete partisan. He's willing to reach across when it benefits him and the country and I think that this is probably one of those times. Both Trump and the Democrats can get something they want from a deal, so it makes sense that they work together. This too is pretty far from the image the media likes to project onto Trump. Far from the radical far right crazy person that the media says he is, Trump is actually fairly centrist.

I also think that people saying that Trump should never work with Democrats are either concern trolling or are people that forgot how horrible it was when our last president pushed through legislation without bipartisan agreement. I hate purity spirals and if there is a rare case when we can get something we want from the Democrats that is beneficial for both of us, than we should do it!

It's also pretty clear that if Trump wants to get anything done in congress he is going to need help from the Democrats. Right now his own party is more reluctant to work with him than the official opposition party. Trump can get deals made with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi but can't do the same with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. That not bashing Trump, the fact is that the GOP has completely failed to back him on health care, immigration and other issues is their fault not his. Trump doesn't have much of a choice but to work with the Democrats.

I also think that this is incredibly damning for GOP leadership. The entire purpose of people like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell is to pull of deals like this but they haven't shown any leadership at all on this issue. Indeed, it seems as though GOP leadership cares more about hurting Donald Trump than they do about doing their jobs. Had they wanted to, they could have worked with Trump immediately and passed their own version of this without the help of the Democrats. The fact that they didn't is pretty much unforgivable.

 I know that if I lived in a state where these guys were up for reelection, I would be supporting their primary opponents, and even though I don't want DACA to stay I'm way more mad at them for forcing Trump to work with Democrats than I am at Trump for giving up DACA cheaply. I mean Republicans control both the House and the Senate as well as the presidency and Supreme Court, but they still can't get anything done? Say what you want about the Democrats policies but at least they do things.

As for the deal itself, I think it has a pretty good chance of passing. With the Democrats largely on board, he should be able to convince at least a few members of the GOP in congress to go along with it. Supporting DACA has been fairly popular among GOP leadership, so I doubt they will resist it too much. My guess is that pretty soon the "dreamers" will be legalized in some fashion. It's not exactly what I wanted but if it has to happen I am glad that we got something out of it and did so in a way that exposed the GOP leadership as being useless.