Bodycam video shows police evacuation during the Camp Fire

I just happened to find this video and I thought I would share. I don't have the time for an in depth analysis but I can sum it up. It shows the Butte County Sherriff's department trying to evacuate people from the Camp Fire in California. The officers involved were trying to evacuate four nurses at a hospital but had to walk their way out to rescue after the vehicles were disabled by the fire. 

I haven't covered the Camp Fire very much but I have been following it. Some of the images from it have been amazing and devastating. Some of those videos I can't post here due to Blogger's terms of service. 88 people have died in the fire and 196 are still missing... 

President Trump has canceled his G20 meeting with Vladimir Putin.

President Trump and Melania Trump board Air Force One on the way to the G20 conference. AP.

President Donald Trump has canceled his meeting with Vladimir Putin at the G20 conference in response to Russia's actions against Ukraine in the Sea of Azov. AP. Trump cited the fact that Russia has not released the ships and crewmen captured in the naval skirmish between Russia and Ukraine. President Trump has tried to improve the strained relationship between Russia and America, so the move is seen as surprising to many. 

My Comment:

I'm not sure what to think about this. I think there are good argument for canceling this meeting and good arguments for keeping it on. It seems as though Russia is surprised by this move but they really shouldn't be. With the actions of Russia in the news and Trump under constant attack from an incredibly biased media that will attack him no matter what he does, Trump has little choice but to cancel the meeting, even without the arguments for and against. 

Ignoring the domestic pressure from the media, was Trump right to do this? There is an argument for it. At the very least, Russia was being pretty stupid to provoke a conflict with Ukraine right now. They claimed security concerns, which may have been somewhat valid but it was still a huge overreaction. Capturing three ships and detaining the crews is way over the top. Had they just had a standoff, or simply let the Ukrainians through an filed some kind of protest, they would have been much better off. 

Clearly the Russians needed to pay some kind of price for their actions. If they had released the ships or at the very least, the crew, then things might be different. But since that didn't happen then I think Putin deserved this at the very least. I don't think it needs to go beyond this but you never know what is going to happen with US-Russia relations. 

Of course there are reasons for this meeting to go on though as well. For one thing Ukraine's actions are pretty despicable as well. Though the Russians overreacted, it's also true that if Ukraine hadn't tried to run the blockade for basically no reason none of this would have happened. Canceling this meeting is essentially rewarding them for their bad behavior. 

And there are way more important things with Russia going on right now than Ukraine. We need to make sure that Russia and America coordinate in Syria as ISIS is still a threat there. Plus our cooperation is needed to make sure that there isn't some kind of dumb incident between our jets and theirs. Both countries are better off in general if tensions can be ratcheted down.

All that being said, I have to say that Russia made a huge mistake with their Ukraine stunt. Though they could have had some response to what Ukraine did in the Kerch Strait, it didn't have to be as heavy handed as it was. Putin was counting on this meeting to improve relations and now that isn't going to happen. A huge unforced error for Russia and Vladimir Putin. 

Ebola outbreak in Congo now the 2nd biggest in history.

An aid worker in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Reuters. 

The Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo is now the 2nd largest outbreak of the virus in history. Reuters. Only the 2013-2016 outbreak in West Africa, which had 28,000 confirmed cases, has outpaced the current outbreak. There are 426 confirmed and probable cases in Congo. At least 245 people have died in the outbreak. International response has been complicated due to attacks on aid workers by local jihadist forces. Ebola response has improved since the 2013 outbreak and a vaccine has been developed but aid workers are unable to respond to this crisis. 

My Comment:

A quick update on this story as this is a major milestone. I don't believe that this outbreak will be as bad as the 2013 one but it's also very clear that the outbreak is nowhere near being contained. With hundreds dead and almost 500 people infected, it's the 2nd worst outbreak of Ebola ever. 

Can things get worse? Of course they can. All it takes is one person infected with the virus that decides to flee from the outbreak or from the violence from the local jihadists and it could spread to other cities or even other countries. 

How likely is that? Not very. The same violence and disorder that is allowing the outbreak to spiral out of control locally is preventing its spread. People are having a tough time fleeing the area and with aid workers unable to reach the victims they have zero chance of getting infected and bringing the virus back to their home countries. Plus with vaccines and more experience with treatment, any outbreak that occurs outside of the warzone should be easier to treat. 

Still, the situation in Congo is worth monitoring. Though I don't think that this outbreak will kill as many people as the 2013 outbreak, it could spread and it will likely devastate Beni and other effected towns and villages. 11,000 people died in that outbreak but I don't see that many deaths in this outbreak. 

Jeffery Epstein is back in the news...

Jeffery Epstein. Palm Beach Mugshot. 

The Miami Herald has a long-form piece on billionaire sex offender Jeffery Epstein. I don't have a whole lot to say about the story itself as much of it is stuff I already know. If you are unfamiliar with Epstein it's a good round up, though it revels in it's anti-Trump bias. The main impetus for the story seems to be a hitjob on Trump's labor secretary Alexander Acosta, who was the prosecutor on the Epstein sex slave case. I think Acosta deserves quite a bit of criticism for his actions in that case but it's clear that the story isn't about him and is a hit piece on President Trump. 

That being said, Epstein is one of the worst people that have made the news. The short version of what he did was use several teenage girls as sex slaves and prostitutes. He pimped those girls out to other elites and flew them to his island resort in the Virgin Islands on his personal jet, called the "Lolita Express". 

Epstein is the American equivalent of Jimmy Savile or Marc Dutroux, a hugely disgusting person that the larger government protected and still protects to this day. In both those cases more people were implicated in wider scandals but it never really got off of the ground. Epstein's case never really got off the ground though and very few people are familiar with it outside of the more conspiracy minded on the left and right. 

Should the Epstein case explode though, it could take down a lot of people. Many people have tried to implicate Trump with Epstein and it is true that they had links. Trump however banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after he found Epstein hitting on teens. Trump went on his plane once and then never again. It seems as though Trump was not that close to Epstein. 

However the Clinton's were both very close with Epstein and visited him often. And they aren't the only ones. Many politicians, celebrities and other important figures have spent time with Epstein. Most of those people aren't on the record like Trump is in rejecting Epstein. If this story blows up again it could take a lot of people down. 

I have always thought that the reason that Epstein didn't get a huge sentence for his extremely long list of crimes is that he has the dirt on pretty much everyone in Washington, Hollywood and among the media. Indeed, I sometimes wonder if his sex trafficking empire was just a shell for an effort to widely blackmail the elite. Still, that's pretty out there stuff, and I can't prove it. 

Still, I have to say, out of all the conspiracy theories, the ones involving elite pedophiles/sex offenders are the ones that are most convincing to me. There have been too many real ones in the past for there not to be active people now. I doubt that Epstein is alone. 

French President Emmanuel Macron refuses to repeal gas taxes after Yellow Jacket protests.

French President Emmanuel Macron. Reuters. 

French President Emmanuel Macron has refused to repeal gas taxes despite the "Yellow Jacket" protests. Reuters. Macron said he empathized with people affected by the tax but would not be intimidated by "thugs". The tax hike was an attempt to force France to switch to greener energy. Macron also pointed out that generous social programs that France has must be funded by taxes. Macron did propose to review the tax rate on fuel quarterly based on international oil prices. 

My Comment:

I don't think Macron is handling this crisis very well. The tax increase was a poor descion in the first place as France isn't a big contributor to global pollution and it was always very punitive to normal people. But even then calling people thugs probably isn't going to play well. Sure, he was talking about the minority of protesters that are violent and that probably is an accurate term to call them, but it is going to anger everyone who supports the goals of the Yellow Jacket/Vest protest. 

His proposed solution isn't much of a break for the people affected by the tax hike. Even if it is based on oil prices it is still going to be an increase over what it was initially. Nobody wants to pay more on taxes, especially on something that you can't avoid using.  

Taxing critical commodities like oil and gas seems like a great way to ruin the economy as well. Any tax raise at all will damage the economy. First normal people will see more of their budget going into their cars. Public transportation will get more expensive as well. Businesses will have to raise their prices to help pay for the increase transportation costs and will pass that on to consumers. Normal people won't be spending as much money and won't be able to save either. Everyone understands this and that's a major reason why people in France are so sick of Macron right now. 

Macron does have a point though. In order to pay for social programs you have to have high taxes. The obvious solution to that is to cut those social programs, but France isn't going to do that. That leaves Macron in a bad position. He pretty much has to raise taxes but doesn't have a way to do so that will keep his country happy. 

Still, it's not like Macron is vulnerable right now. He has the position of president until 2022. He might very well lose that position by then but there isn't much to be done about his policies until then. He is probably counting on anger over these tax hikes to have faded by then. 

I don't know if he can count on it. This is an organic protest and not one funded by astroturf. It's real and the anger of these protesters go beyond the tax hike. They are mad about that as well but it's really more about how everyone feels broke despite living in a decently rich country. Taxes are so high in general that nobody can afford to live. 

I expect these protests to continue and for nobody to be placated by Macron's proposal. It's going to take a lot more than trying to set the tax rate to oil prices in order to stop this movement. He needs to provide real relief for high taxes and I don't think he can do it. What that means for France is an open question but I am expecting more civil disorder and riots. 

Syrian government claims rebels launched a chemical attack on Aleppo.

A civilian being treated in Aleppo. BBC/AFP.

The Syrian and Russian governments claim that rebels have launched a chemical attack on civilians in Aleppo. BBC. 100 civilians were injured in the attack which reportedly involved an artillery strike and chlorine gas. The rebels denied the attack and said that the governments of Syria and Russia faked the attack in order to justify new attacks. Russia did launch airstrikes at the location they said the attack was launched from. 

My Comment:

Somehow I don't see this attack getting the media attention that the ones supposedly committed by the Syrian government did. I don't think the usual suspects care if the rebels gas people, it only matters when the Syrian government does. My stance is the same either way, chemical weapons are dangerous and counterproductive and only has a use as a terror weapon. 

The rebels certainly have the capabilities to launch this kind of attack. Chlorine attacks are common in Syria and have been used by Jihadists in the past. ISIS certainly has but they aren't really likely to have been involved considering they don't have any outposts by Aleppo. Al-Nusra and their affiliates have used chemical weapons in the past and that area is their stronghold so I am guessing it was them or their allies that pulled off this attack.  

I guess there is a chance that this wasn't a chemical attack at all. Chlorine does have a lot of industrial uses and it's possible that this was a regular artillery strike that just happened to hit a place that had Chlorine. That seems very unlikely though and I am guessing that this really was an artillery strike. 

I don't think there will be much of an international response to this attack. The western media tends to ignore the attacks by al-Nusra and pretends that ISIS is the only jihadist group in Syria an downplays the atrocities by al-Nusra. If it is proven that al-Nusra that committed this attack I think there should be a similar response to reported chemical attacks by the Syrian government. Somehow I doubt that there will be any airstikes targeting al-Nusra though. 

I don't even know if there will be other repercussions for the rebels from the Syrian and Russian government. Russia did launch airstrikes and destroyed the area they think the attack came from, but that seems to be it. The truce between the rebels and the government looks like it will hold despite this attack. 

US-Mexico border crossing closed as immigrants attack border.

Illegal immigrants are dispersed by tear gas after attempting to cross the US border and attacking US CBP officers. ABC News/Reuters. 

The US-Mexico San Ysidro border crossing, which is between San Diego and Tijuana, has been closed after hundreds of immigrants attacked the border and attempted to cross illegally. ABC News. The migrants had attempted to cross through the vehicle lanes at the border crossing but were turned back. Some then attempted to climb the wall to the East and West of the crossing but were dispersed by tear gas after some of them attacked Customs and Border Patrol officers. The government says that the immigrants threw projectiles at the CBP officers so they had to respond with force. Mexico detained 500 people who participated in the attack and claims that they will deport them to their home countries. 

U.S.-Mexico border near Tijuana closed as migrants attempt to breach fence:

“Some of these migrants attempted to breach legacy fence infrastructure…and sought to harm CBP personnel by throwing projectiles at them,” DHS Sec. Nielsen said in a statement. https://t.co/YP5cIFX5KZ pic.twitter.com/U0voEg1yAs

— ABC News (@ABC) November 25, 2018

EDIT: Added tweet showing people throwing objects.

Here’s moment right before shot bang. You can see some rocks being thrown. pic.twitter.com/p0M9p7Rx4G

— WendyFry (@WendyFry_) November 25, 2018

My Comment:
This attack on the border was handled well. All the video and pictures I have seen has this somewhere between a riot and an out and out attack. Thankfully, nobody got hurt but it seems clear that these people were causing quite a bit of property damage and were up to no good. The US government responded with a proper amount of force and was able to repel this attack.

I am also pleased that Mexico is responding to this attack as well. They haven't deployed troops to the border like America has but they are working the strengthen the border. More importantly, they have vowed to deport anyone caught participating in this attack. I will believe that when I see it but if true it is an extremely positive step.

None of the people that participated in this attack should ever be allowed into America. And they should all be deported from Mexico as well. Not only have they violated the borders of Mexico, they are now attacking the US border. And they aren't doing it peacefully, so the gloves should come off. They should be thankful that they only had to deal with tear gas and not actual bullets. This kind of thing should never be tolerated by any country, let alone America.

Their actions could have resulted in injuries or even deaths for the CPB officers and soldiers assigned to the border. That elevates this from a simple attempt to violate US sovereignty to an actual attack. Throwing rocks and other objects at people is never acceptable and I sincerely hope that these people pay a price for it. Not to mention the property damage these people caused.

President Trump is threatening to close the entire border. I don't know if that is necessary yet but something has to be done to end this crisis. We can't have people attacking our border, destroying our walls and throwing objects at our federal employees. Closing the border would damage the economy and hurt relations with Mexico but we also can't allow these kinds of attacks to continue. It might happen though as Trump has canceled the rest of his Thanksgiving vacation and is returning to Washington. Part of that might be due to the Ukraine/Russia skirmish, but I am guessing he is back to deal with this crisis.

The media coverage of this attack has been extremely biased. The one photo that everyone has shown is a Reuters one that showed the one woman stupid enough to bring her two small children to a riot. That's an extremely misleading picture as she was about the only one there that wasn't a military aged male. They aren't showing the migrants tearing down the wall and throwing things at CBP officers, but somehow that one Reuters photo is everywhere.

I don't think people are going to fall for it. Whatever sympathy the caravans had is gone now and with many of the attackers going to be deported from Mexico there is a decent chance this doesn't happen again. Mexico has a major motivation to crack down as any border closure will be a disaster for them, so I think they probably will kick these people out and better control the ones who remain. Even if that doesn't happen though, the fact that these people were attacking the border instead of applying for legal entry is going to turn public opinion against them, more so than it is already. Since approval of the caravans is low in the first place, that is really saying something.

It seems clear that the border wall needs repairs and reinforcement. I know razor wire has been deployed but it looks like that should be expanded. We also need a higher wall that isn't so easy to climb instead of the rusted out wall that we have in the area now. In a perfect world Congress would authorize wall funding today in response to this event but the Democrats and wimpy Republicans in Congress will likely do nothing, even with pressure from their constituents...

Naval skirmish between Russia and Ukraine inflame tensions.

Russian military jets fly over the bridge on the Kerch Strait, currently blocked by an oil tanker. BBC/PHOTOSHOT.

A naval skirmish between Russia and Ukraine has greatly inflamed tensions between the two countries. BBC. Two Ukrainian gunboats and a tug were captured after a brief naval skirmish that left several Ukranians injured and many others captured after the ships tried to move through Kerch Strait, the connection between the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea. The tugboat was rammed by a Russian patrol boat and the ships were prevented from entering the Sea of Azov by a tanker that blocked the way. Russia has said that they closed the entrance to the Sea of Azov due to security concerns from Ukrainian nationalists.  

My Comment:

Not very good news from Russia and Ukraine. It seems like a situation that got out of hand quickly. Both sides wanted to show the flag and show the other side who was boss but with neither side backing down it quickly devolved into a conflict where a couple people got hurt. Thankfully nobody got killed but it was a black mark for everyone involved. 

I think both sides deserve the blame here. Russia probably doesn't need to protect the bridge this much. Though I do think the threat from Ukrainian nationalists is real, they are going to hard on the Ukrainians, and I doubt that the security concerns are the most important considerations here. My guess is that the security inspections and this skirmish are nothing more than a middle finger to the Ukrainians. 

Of course the Ukrainians aren't without blame either. Though they should have the right to pass through the Kerch Strait, they had other options than engaging in this stunt. They could have tried to let diplomacy work but instead they tried to ram through the blockade and ended up with three of their vessels being captured. My guess is that they did that to gain sympathy from the west.

How well that will work is unclear. The West has always had an unhealthy obsession with Ukraine despite some very obvious flaws in doing so. None of this would have happened if the West hadn't helped to overthrow an admittedly corrupt president. And I always find it frustrating that everyone seems to ignore the fact that some of the Pro-Ukraine militias are actual Nazis. None of this excuses Russia's bad actions in the region, but I do think there is some obvious bias. 

So what happens now? The usual suspects on social media are claiming that this will lead to World War 3 while ignoring the fact that much worse incidents happened during the Ukraine War that didn't lead to much of anything. The rebels shot down a civilian airliner and basically nobody cared. If that didn't lead to war than the capture of a few gunboats and a tug isn't going to cause anything. It's obviously not a positive development by any stretch of the imagination, but it's not going to lead to a wider war, not matter what people are saying. 

Major riots and protests in France over high fuel costs.

Protesters gather at the Champs-Elysees. BBC/AFP.

Massive protests and riots over high fuel costs and taxes have rocked France with over 100,000 participating throughout the country. BBC. The Yellow Vest movement is protesting high taxes on fuel and general high prices for both diesel and gasoline. Though the protest was started on that issue it has grown to general discontent with high cost of living prices in France. The protests are different than other French protests as it has united right and left wing groups as well as some people that even voted for embattled French president Emmanuel Macron. In Paris the protest turned violent as 19 people were injured in a riot that broke out. Despite the violence the protests were more severe last weekend where two people were killed and 600 people were hurt. 

My Comment:

The civil unrest in France has largely been ignored by American media, including me. I was vaguely aware of there being some disorder there but I had no idea about the cause or scale of the protests and riots. It seems that something big may be on the verge of happening in France and, as usual, the US media is out to lunch. 

I think it is important to note that this isn't one of those paid events like we have in the United States. No group appears to be funding this and it seems to have been organically grown from the grassroots supporters. This means to me that this is an actual threat to the government of France and could even result in violence. Indeed, some of the protests have become violent an there is always a chance of that happening again. 

It seemed odd to me at first that high gas prices and taxes are enough to drive the French people to disorder. The entire world has had high gas prices and it hasn't resulted in too much chaos. I remember the bad days here in America where it was $4.00 a gallon just to fill up and nobody here rioted. The article mentioned that it was high cost of living in general that was driving this movement, so the high taxes could just be a spark that ignited the flame. 

Of course high gas prices increase the price of every product that is transported by truck, which is pretty much all of them, so the whole thing has a ripple effect on the entire economy. Even if the economy doesn't crash due to fewer sales and higher prices, it still makes living day to day much harder for normal people and can wipe out any raises or benefits increases. 

It is possible that the cause of the taxes is the reason people are upset. Raising gas taxes to fight global warming seems like an obvious cash grab for anyone on the lower half of the income scale. France isn't a huge contributor of greenhouse gases in the first place and any reduction in pollution from France would be offset by China and India anyways. It seems like virtue signaling on a massive scale and nobody wants to see their paycheck going to making rich environmentalists and politicians feeling better about their jet-set lifestyle. 

Of course these gas taxes were always meant to be punitive in nature. The whole point is to reduce consumption by raising prices. It's a hit to the standard of living of anyone who relies on cheaper gas. Since gas is such an ubiquitous commodity for both normal people and many of the blue-collar workers that work in transport, it's a deep cut for normal people to pay. 

It also seems like a fairly obvious transfer of wealth from the lower classes to the rich companies that are developing other fuel sources. You can make the environmentalist argument that doing so will help the world, but it is always funny how the people on the lowest rungs of society end up paying the cost. Is it any wonder why they are upset? 

 I think that this is one of the rare things that the far left and the far right can agree on. Emmanuel Macron is essentially a "radical centrist" in that he is pushing the status quo even further than most other center-left  politicians. The left wing thinks he is committing class warfare on the poor and blue collar workers while the far right think he is selling out France to globalism. Neither side wants anything to do with these high taxes.

Either way, it's hard to see what kind of constituency Macron is going for here. Other than radical environmentalists, who wants higher gas and commodities prices? I think if Macron wants another term he is going to have to change course and do so fast. Considering his approval rating is at 26%, he might be in trouble. In comparison, President Donald Trump's approval rating is, as of this writing, at 51%. 

Tijuana declares humanitarian crisis due to the immigrant caravan.

ICE shuts down the border crossing at San Diego to install additional fortifications. AZ Central/USA Today. 

Tijuana Mexico has declared a humanitarian crisis due to the illegal immigrant caravan and is calling for international support. AZ Central. The 5000 migrants have had a major impact on Tijuana as the city is spending $27,000 a day to support them. Tijuana's Mayor  Juan Manuel Gastelum has called on the UN and other international organizations to help with the crisis. Gastelum has also criticized the Mexican Federal government saying they haven't done enough to help and even wearing a parody "Make Tijuana Great Again" hat. The caravan has met with a chilly reception in Tijuana as local citizens are upset that they are there while waiting for asylum. President Trump has threatened to close the border with Mexico completely in response to the crisis. 

My Comment:

It's kind of surreal to see Mexico complaining about illegal immigration. After all, so many millions of them went to the United States illegally over the years. And now the same thing is happening to them, or at least to the ones that haven't crossed the border themselves. 

I do think they have a right to complain though. These illegal immigrants have no right to be in Mexico right now and should have been stopped at the border. They never should have been Tijuana's problem in the first place, let alone Americas. Anyone who doesn't use the legal way to enter country should get zero sympathy. It doesn't matter if that country is America or Mexico. 

These people are a pretty huge burden for Tijuana and it seems like everyone is leaving them out to dry. They are costing $27,000 a day in a country where that is a lot of money. It's money that could go to a dozen different things as I am sure that Tijuana has it's fair share of problems. 

The Mexican federal government doesn't seem to be doing much to help them either. They did try to stop the caravan when it first formed but they failed and they haven't been able to get these people to turn around. My guess is that they just want them to go away but that doesn't seem to be something that is going to happen. 

It's also very clear that President Trump isn't screwing around with these illegals. He is not going to let them in and has put down quite a bit of razor wire and other barriers to make sure they don't cross the border. Though his new asylum requirements got struck down, for the time being, he is threatening to close the border with Mexico entirely, which may force Mexico to do something about these people. 

The international community could be doing more to help Tijuana. The best thing they could do is to convince these people to go back home, but that doesn't seem to be the goal. The main goal appears to be to force America to accept open borders, a concept that is not going to fly while President Trump is in the White House. These illegals are just pawns in that battle and I doubt any of them care that Tijuana is being bankrupted by having to take care of these criminals. 

I do have to say that I feel quite a bit of kinship with Mayor Gastelum and the residents of Tijuana. They realize that they are in a bad situation through no fault of their own but they are not taking it lying down. They are being loudly critical of both the illegals and the people that support them. For that they have my respect. 

Happy Thanksgiving!

I hope all of my American readers are having a good Thanksgiving! Not much else to say but I hope everyone had a great day!

American killed by uncontacted tribe on North Sentinel Island.

A Sentinel Island man shoots arrows at an Indian Coast Guard helicopter. Reuters/Indian Coast Guard. 

An American has been killed by an uncontacted tribe of natives on North Sentinel Island in the Indian Ocean. Reuters. John Allen Chau, a 26 year old, was killed by the tribe after he arrived their to proselytize the Christian faith. North Sentinel Island is populated by the Sentinelese people, a tribe that has had no official contact with the outside world. They have attacked and killed several people who have trespassed on their land, including a couple of fishermen in 2006. Chau had visited the island on the 15th and gave the natives there gifts of scissors, safety pins and footballs, but the Sentinelese were aggressive with him. When he returned on the 16th he told the fishermen who had brought him there that he wouldn't be returning and that they should return home. Chau was killed on the 16th and his body has not yet been recovered and given how aggressive the Sentinelese people are it may not ever be. Travel to North Sentinel Island is forbidden. 

My Comment:

I've always been fascinated by the North Sentinel Island people. We know very little about them as they have always been very resistant to outside contact. I even read a fictional book set on the island which was good until it went off the rails at the end. The idea that there are people in the middle of the Indian Ocean that have no idea about the outside world is fascinating to me. 

Of course John Chau should have known better than to go to this island. Attempting to proselytize to these people was always going to end in failure. They have almost no tolerance to outsiders and it was a minor miracle that he wasn't killed on his first trip to the island. Had he simply left after that first trip he'd still be alive with quite a story to tell, though he would have likely been charged for violating the travel ban.

Just try to imagine things from the Sentinelese perspective. A man that they had never seen before who doesn't look anything like them who they might not even recognize as being a fellow human shows up. He brings a few trinkets with him that are useful but then he starts babbling in a language you don't understand. You try and tell him to go away and he does but the next day he shows up again and it's clear that he isn't going to leave. It's no surprised that they killed him. 

I don't think we should condemn the Sentinelese people for this. After all this is less of a murder and more a case of castle doctrine. If someone showed up on my private island and refused to leave he might get killed too, even if his intentions aren't bad. Without understanding the language there was no crime committed when they shot him with their arrows. And even if they could have understood him, which was likely impossible, it wouldn't have been morally wrong to kill someone that was trespassing and trying to live on the island without permission.

However a crime was committed by both Chau and the fisherman who brought him to North Sentinel Island. It is good that they are being charged for violating the travel ban. Chau may have been massively naive but the local fishermen did know what was going to happen to him after they left him there. They knew they were sending him to his death but they did so anyways. 

Even worse the media attention this story is gaining may encourage more foolish people to come to North Sentinel Island for their own reasons. Some might be more Christian missionaries but they could also be random adventures or troublemakers. Those people would also likely face violence and I fear that they may end up harassing these people and it will end with more blood...  

Several charged for election fraud scheme in Los Angeles involving fake signatures for ballot measures.

Los Angeles' Skid Row. L.A. Times. 

Nine people were arrested for an election fraud scheme in Los Angeles involving paying homeless people for fake signatures for ballot measures. LA Times. The schemers would pay homeless people $1 or a cigarette to register to vote and sign ballot measures. California's ballot measures system is a popular way to change the laws in the State. However, the people involved in this plot were paying the homeless to help get those ballot measures on the ballot. Ballot workers are paid for the number of signatures they get but it is a crime to offer to pay for it. None of the homeless people involved in the scam were charged while the offenders have been charged with felonies. 

My Comment:

For all the people that say that voter fraud doesn't happen, here's another example of it occurring. Local officials downplayed how serious this is and claimed that no fake petition signatures were found, but I don't believe either account. It is good that these people were caught but it does call things into questions. 

It seems very unlikely that the local officials are right and this didn't effect ballot measures. They said that the check signatures against voter registration forms but the suspects in this case were paying off people to register as well! Depending on what ballot measure these people were trying to support it may have changed what was on the ballot. It's very possible that voters ended up voting for ballot measures that should never have been in the ballot if not for this fraud. 

It's unclear how widespread this fraud was. LA's Skid Row is one of the largest collection of homeless people in the state of California but it is far from the only one. Were there similar schemes in places like San Francisco, San Diego and other large California cities? We really don't know but I am guessing that this wasn't a one off thing. 

I have been rather annoyed that none of the articles I have read about this story have said what ballot initiatives these people were paying people to sign for. That seems like extremely relevant information but I haven't found it anywhere. California tends to have a ton of ballot measures every election so even ignoring the obvious political implications it's pretty much impossible to figure out which ballot measure these people were trying to scam. 

I would also be very interested in if these people were working for a specific organization. There are a ton of political organizations out there that try to register voters and gather signatures for petitions like this. If they put these workers up for it than they are just as guilty and should be charged as well. 

 Finally, I think the possible sentences are extremely lite. They are felonies, so these people shouldn't be able to vote themselves for quite some time, but they only face a maximum of six years and four months in prison. That seems like a very slight punishment for undermining the elections in California... 

Major terror plot in Melbourne broken up.

Australian police during raids on the suspects. BBC/EPA.

A major terror plot in Melbourne, Australia, has been broken up by police. BBC. The three suspects were of Turkish descent and were trying to acquire a .22 rifle for a mass shooting. The men were allegedly inspired by ISIS to commit the attack which would have targeted a large gathering of people. The attackers had not settled on a final location for the attack but officials felt they had to move fast to prevent them from carrying out their plot. The plot occurred just weeks after a man in Melbourne killed one person and stabbed two more before being shot by the police. 

My Comment:

Another major terror plot in Australia. They have had quite a few lately as well as the successful attack in Melbourne earlier this month. It has been slightly odd, as I haven't heard too much about plots outside of Australia. Perhaps the plots there have made the news but other ones have not? 

The attackers choice of weapon is fairly dumb. Though you can certainly kill people with a .22 rifle, especially in a country like Australia where nobody is armed, it's not the best choice for this kind of crime. A heavier caliber would do a lot more damage. Or they could have gone with a shotgun which would have been fairly easy to obtain and would be an effective weapon. 

One wonders why they wanted to use a gun at all. Trying to obtain one in Australia is a bad move. The underground black market isn't likely to sell to Turkish terrorists and it's a great way to get the attention of the police. Getting a gun in Australia isn't that hard but it's not like Europe where despite draconian gun laws it's very easy to get full auto AK's. 

You would think that they would have tried what the last attacker semi successfully pulled off. A car ramming/arson/mass stabbing probably would have been a lot easier to pull off. Doing so would not attract attention at all and could be attempted with things the attackers already had. Thankfully, they went for a more complex plot that was doomed to failure. 

This attack was apparently inspired by ISIS but I doubt the terror organization did anything to help the plot. They no longer have the resources or connections to help these kinds of terrorists pull off their plots. They can offer propaganda to encourage them but that's about it. They are a shadow of their former selves as they have lost almost all of their tax base and possessions. 

Syrian regime takes the last ISIS holdout in the south of the country while US ups pressure on the eastern holdouts.

US backed members of the SDF attend a funeral. AFP.

The Syrian regime has taken the last ISIS holdout in the south of Syria while the United States has brought heavy pressure onto the other holdout area in the east. AFP. Regime forces took control of Tulul al-Safa, which lies between Damascus and Swadia provinces in the southern desert. ISIS fighters withdrew to the east and have abandoned the area, likely under a deal with the regime. The regime had brought reinforcements and were launching heavy airstrikes in the area. ISIS had regained some territory in Swadia province over the summer and launched some major attacks but they have now been pushed out. 

In the east, ISIS's last territory is in Dier Ez Zor province where they are under heavy assault by the United States and local forces. Major airstrikes have occured in the area with local observers reporting civilian casualties. The assault on the ISIS holdouts is slow due to heavy minefields, booby traps and other defenses.

My Comment:

Yet another major defeat for ISIS and one that isn't getting much coverage. With the Swadia pocket eliminated it's pretty clear that the regime isn't going to be focused on fighting ISIS as much. They will likely put some pressure on ISIS in the east, but I am guessing they will leave that fighting to the US backed rebels and Kurds in the area. 

My guess is that the regime will now focus on Idlib province. Indeed, there are signs that the Russia/Turkey peace deal for that region will fall apart. The deal never covered al-Nusra Front, the Jihadists who control most of the province. Those Jihadists, who are almost as bad as ISIS, are continuing the fight and I am guessing that is where Syria's focus is going to be. They will leave some forces to screen against ISIS and may conduct some minor offensives against them, but I am guessing the regime wants to protect their northern flank more. 

As for ISIS, they still control some territory in the east. They have been under a prolonged joint assault with the Kurds and rebels on the ground while the US provides backup through the air and via special forces. It has been somewhat slow going due to fear of casualties and a greater conflict with the Syrian regime. 

The Kurds have also been very worried about Turkish moves in the region. They have been reluctant to put their full force into the battle with ISIS due to fears that the Turks could hit them in their rear areas. Turkey and the Kurds obviously don't get along so those fears are somewhat justified. This has been slowing things down quite a bit. 

ISIS has very few places in the region left to hide in. They have very little left in Syria and even less than that in Iraq. Officially, ISIS has been defeated in Iraq but they still have some presence there, if not any actual territory. Eventually ISIS will run out of places to hide and will have to go completely underground. Once that happens ISIS, in Syria and Iraq at least, will cease to function as anything other than another local terror groups. 

Of course that doesn't mean that ISIS is over though. They still have holdouts in Yemen, Nigeria and Egypt and are also hanging on in Afghanistan. They aren't anywhere near the threat they used to be but they are not dead. If we ignore them they could rise again from the ashes, just as ISIS itself rose from the ashes of al-Qaeda in Iraq... 

Finally, the AFP article mentioned that there may have been heavy "civilian" casualties due to an American airstrike on ISIS. Those civilians were apparently the wives and children of ISIS fighters. That might not make them fair game under international law, but it also means I am not going to mourn for them. The US denies those reports and I am honestly not sure either way. Civilians die all the time in war, even when you try to avoid it, so if something did happen I am going to chalk it up to the fog of war and nothing else. 

Ebola containment efforts suspended after rebel violence.

An aid worker in Africa. BBC/Reuters. 

Efforts to contain an outbreak of Ebola virus in the Democratic Republic of Congo have been suspended after rebel Islamist violence. BBC. World Health Organization workers were forced to flee after a battle broke out just feet away from their base at an emergency center. The battle was between government forces and the Allied Democratic Force, an Islamist militia active since the 1990's. After the battle, the WHO workers fled the city of Beni, where the outbreak is centered. The outbreak has already killed at least 200 people. 

My Comment:

A quick update on the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It seems that things are not going very good in Beni. With the WHO pulling out, it's going to be up to local officials to try and prevent the spread of the outbreak. And if they were capable of doing that the WHO wouldn't be there in the first place. This outbreak is going to spread quickly now and I am guessing the already overworked doctors are going to be overwhelmed.

Efforts to vaccinate people will have stopped and that is the only sure way to stop the Ebola virus. After all the work to create the vaccine after the major outbreak a few years back, it is now useless because aid workers can't get to the people that need the vaccine. 

Contact tracing can't happen now either. That means people that may have been infected won't be isolated and the virus can be spread without anyone able to slow it down. Contact tracing and medical isolation are necessary steps to slow down the virus but that can't happen with rebels running around getting into running gun battles with the government. 

The good news is that the virus isn't likely to spread beyond the conflict zone, and if it does it will be much easier to contain. Indeed, if it wasn't for the war with the ADF I am guessing this outbreak would have been taken care of already. Our response to Ebola virus has gotten better since the huge outbreak a few years back and we have successfully beaten a few similar smaller outbreaks. 

The bad news is that the people in Beni are pretty much screwed. No help can reach them now and it isn't clear when the WHO is going to come back, if ever. That means the virus is going to spread rapidly and it is going to continue to kill people. And that's assuming that they aren't killed in the fighting. It's a lose lose situation for the civilians caught in the crossfire. 

What is needed is a cease fire. Both sides need to stay away from Beni and let the heath workers do their jobs. Doing so would be in their best interests as well as they are just as vulnerable to the Ebola virus as anyone else. Time will tell if that happens but I am not holding my breath. The ADF has been around since the 1990's so I doubt they are the type to give up even if there is a damn good reason for them to do so. 

Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell says the US government would use nukes against gun owners in case of a revolt.

Eric Swalwell. Washington Times/AP.

Eric Swalwell, a Democratic Congressman from California, said that a revolt in favor of gun rights would be put down with nuclear weapons. The Washington Times. Joe Biggs, an e-celeb and pundit tweeted at Swalwell that he wanted a war as gun confiscation would result in one. Swalwell replied that the war would be short due to the use of nuclear weapons. Swalwell's comments caused a firestorm on Twitter. 

And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.

— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

My Comment:
Before I say anything else I have to say that Twitter is probably one of the most dangerous things out there. People say such stupid things that I can't believe people use it the way Eric Swalwell does. All I do on Twitter is post links to my blogs, make short comments and VERY occasionally, have a conversation with one of my followers. Doing anything else on there is a great way to get into this kind of trouble. And though Swalwell is trying to back down from what he said, people are going to remember he said this for a very long time.

As for what Swalwell said, it's pretty much one of the worst things anyone has said in terms of gun control. Very few gun control advocates would be willing to follow through with their plans if they knew that violence was going to be the result. I also think that is a major reason why gun control hasn't passed lately outside of the state level as they know a national gun control push that involved a confiscation scheme, which is what Swalwell is advocating, would end with a lot of people on both sides dead.

I do remember a few people saying during the Bundy Ranch standoff that the protesters there should have been bombed. Those people were at the extreme fringe and were largely ignored by the mainstream left. There is an undercurrent of violence on the left but even the most violent among them understand that threatening war is a bad idea. A war over any issue would destroy the country and even the winning side would rule over a country that would be shadow of what it was before.

But Swalwell has gone far beyond that. He actually thinks that the government should deploy nuclear weapons if there is some kind of revolt. That is, quite frankly, insane. Just on morality alone it's an act of shear depravity unmatched in human history. Using a nuclear weapon on your own people is about as evil as you can get. Murdering the people you swore to protect and serve with nuclear hellfire is just beyond the pale, even if they are revolting against your authority.

And using nukes on your own people? I doubt that the military would go along with it, even if they did go along with an insane scheme to confiscate guns. Using nukes on civilians would not only kill any rebels it would kill millions of innocent people and government soldiers as well. The government would have no legitimacy at all and would be overthrown, either by their own people or by foreign governments horrified by what they did.

Using nukes against a rebellion is just stupid as well. There is no point in ruling a country that has been reduced to ashes. And it wouldn't even end the war! Most gun owners live in rural areas and are spread across the country so unless you nuke the entire country there will be people left over to fight you. And seeing their country men reduced to ash imprints on the sidewalk and dying from radiation burns would be a hell of a motivation.

I am hoping that this was just a case of Swalwell putting his foot into his mouth so far that he's past his knee and he doesn't actually believe this. If not though, then he should be removed from office. Anyone who thinks it's ok for the government to use nukes on its own people, no matter the circumstances, should be forced to resign.

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. Outside of social media and conservative media, this story is getting zero coverage. And even if it was getting major coverage I doubt the Democratic Party would do anything. Though they might not agree with nuking innocent civilians fighting for their civil rights, they do think that gun control is desirable and don't really care anymore if people get hurt if it means getting what they want...

First illegal immigrant caravan arrives in Tijuana

Razorwire being deployed on the border with Mexico. AFP. 

The first members of the illegal immigrant caravan from Central America has arrived at the border with the United States in Tijuana Mexico. AFP. After a 2700 mile journey the first people have arrived, but have little chance of actually crossing into the United States. President Donald Trump has deployed thousands of troops to the border and has issued an executive order saying that all asylum requests must be made at official border posts. The reception in Tijuana has been as chilly as locals have attacked the illegals and the mayor criticized them. 

My Comment:

Sorry about the source article, it's very clear that their sympathies lie with these illegal criminals and not with the people that have to deal with them in Mexico and America. It's very clear that even generally less biased sources, like AFP and the other wire services, are not to be trusted on this issue. They don't call these people what they are, which is criminals. 

Though it may be surprising that the local Mexicans are unhappy with these people, it doesn't surprise me. Just because many illegal immigrants in America are Mexican it doesn't mean that Mexicans should have to suffer the same things their neighbors across the border do. It is honestly surprising that the caravan hasn't come under harassment before this time. 

The Mexican locals understand that these people will bring crime, disease and disorder with them. And they are sucking up resources that could better be used on the less fortunate in the Tijuana community. If these illegals are there long term they could steal jobs that could go to locals instead. This is why there has been some violence and harassment aimed at the caravan. 

I am guessing the people of Tijuana don't like being used as pawns. They know that this caravan was not an organic thing and was funded by NGO's that were more about hurting Donald Trump than actually helping people. They were able to see through this and aren't happy about how they now have to deal with the consequences. 

As for the illegals themselves, it seems very likely that they will not be let in. Tijuana has some of the better border controls in the region and they have now been reinforced by US soldiers. Those soldiers have deployed even more defenses, such as razorwire which means that they will be unable to simply jump the fence. 

They are also not going to be able to request asylum, thanks to Trump's executive order. Now they have to go to an official border posts to even have a chance and even then it's not likely to be approved. If they do manage to cross the border they will be deported right away, which is honestly what they deserve. 

The illegal caravan always had the option to request asylum in the United States at any US embassy or consulate in any of the countries they came from or even from Mexico itself. Even worse, Mexico has offered asylum to these people and most of them refused. They knew that they were committing a crime and that they had other options but chose to do this anyways. I have no sympathy for them. 

Armed security guard stops a mass shooting, is killed by cops.

Protesters rally for Jermel Roberson. WSJ/AP.

An armed security guard working at a bar stopped a mass shooting but was shot and killed by police responding to the attack. Wall Street Journal. Jemel Roberson, 26, was working as an armed security guard at a bar in Robbins, Illinois. An armed man came into the bar at 4:00 am, shot four people and was shot by someone and subdued by Roberson who was pointing his gun at hi. A Midlothian police officer than shot and killed Roberson. The police claimed that the officer told Roberson to drop his weapon and get on the ground several times and then shot him. It is unclear if Roberson was wearing a security uniform with witnesses saying he had a cap and a shirt that said security on it while police say he was wearing just a black shirt. The case has turned into a racial issue as the officer who shot Roberson was white while Roberson himself was black. 

My Comment:

Ugh, what a mess. It's very unclear what happened in this case and without bodycam footage, and even with it, we might never know who was at fault here. It is another nightmare scenario for CCW folks and security guards or anyone who goes out armed. Managing to help stop a mass shooting only to get shot by the police? A nightmare. Most of what follows will be speculation on my part, as until more information is released we can't be sure if there wasn't exculpatory evidence or something that clearly justified the shooting. 

I can see both sides of the argument here though. From Roberson's side, it's fairly clear that he was doing the right thing. It was his job to help protect the people at the bar and though it's very unclear if he had fired his weapon, it is clear that he was justified in pointing his gun at the suspect and subduing him, even if he was already injured. Just because someone is shot and down doesn't mean they are not still a threat. If he did hear the cop's commands to put down his gun and get on the ground, he should have complied and/or identified himself as a security guard, but it's very unclear if he did and even if the officer in question ordered him to. 

From the police side, it's very likely that the officer in question saw an armed guy standing over an injured man, who was the actual shooter, and just assumed that it was the shooter and fired. Even if the officer didn't demand that Roberson drop his weapon, and it is very unclear if the officer did or not, it's understandable that the officer would shoot. It does seem fairly trigger happy to me but it's possible that the officer thought Roberson was going to shoot the suspect. It's understandable but if that is how it played out then the cop was morally responsible even if it's not clear legally. Officers should take at least a little time to figure out if someone is a threat.

I don't know how Roberson avoids getting shot though. A more clear security uniform might have helped but it's also possible that the cop wouldn't have seen it anyways. I have worn several security uniforms over the years and not all of them would be easily identified as such at night. And even a uniform with clear markings might not have done much even if the officer had saw it.

I think the restrictive gun laws in Illinois may have something to do with it. Illinois was the last state to legalize CCW in 2013 and though it is now a shall issue state cops may not yet be used to the idea that non-cops can carry firearms in the state. The police may still assume that anyone that has a gun is a bad guy, especially in the Chicago suburbs. 

I've avoided talking about the racial issues in this case as I don't really think it is relevant. I doubt that if Roberson had been white he would not have been shot. Similarly, a black officer may have shot him as well. I think the focus on the respective races of the officer and Roberson is a needless distraction but one that will likely dominate the discussion. The usual suspects are out in force despite this case being more about gun rights than racial issues. I suspect more rational voices are going to be drowned out by the activists who don't have anyone's best interests in mind. 

Michael Avenatti arrested for domestic violence.

Michael Avenatti. Politico/Getty. 

Michael Avenatti, lawyer of Stormy Daniels and one of the Brett Kavanaugh accusers and a potential Democratic candidate for President in 2020, has been arrested on domestic violence charges. Politico. Los Angeles police arrested Avenatti for felony domestic violence with injuries and bail was set for $50,000. It is unclear who the accuser is as both Avenatti's ex-wife and his current estranged wife have released statements saying that he didn't do anything. Avenatti has been campaigning for president in 2020 on the Democratic ticket. 

My Comment:

I'd like to say that we shouldn't pre-judge this case even though Michael Avenatti has never done the same thing to his various victims, including President Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and Tucker Carlson. Just because Avenatti was arrested doesn't mean that he is guilty of the crime. Until he either pleads guilty or is found guilty by a jury of his peers, he is entitled to the same due process that he would deny others. 

Avenatti has a long history of falsely accusing people of serious crimes. The fact that he is blaming this on a vast right wing conspiracy is pretty hilarious as it's obvious he can't claim that a woman is lying after all. He has always said that we should believe accusers no matter what so if we take him at his word we should just believe that the arrest means he is guilty.

That being said, these accusations seem pretty serious. Felony domestic violence with injuries is a very serious charge and if he is convicted his law license is gone and his presidential aspirations are completely out of the question. It's very hard to run for president if you are sitting in a prison cell. 

It is unclear who the victim is. Both Avenatti's ex-wife and his current estranged wife have denied being victims. It's very possible that the alleged victim was a third woman. That wouldn't be surprising as Avenatti's marriage had fallen apart, so it's very possible he had a mistress or a girlfriend. We should find out who the victim was in time.

If the allegations are true then Avenatti is the worst kind of hypocrite. He has positioned himself as someone that protects the rights of women from evil men when he may be the very same monster he claims to be fighting. I'm not feminist but I am pretty sure you can't claim to be one if you are beating on women. He's also accused of something way worse than Donald Trump (who supposedly paid off a pornstar) Brett Kavanaugh (unfounded accusations of sexual assault) and Tucker Carlson (who's son may have gotten into a fight with someone who called his sister a "cunt" and "whore). 

I do think that this probably torpedoes Avenatti's chances for 2020. Not that those chances were all that great to begin with. Avenatti was polling at near zero to begin with so there wasn't much of a chance of him winning the 2020 primaries, let alone beating Donald Trump. He essentially had no chance to begin with and I always said that his running was nothing more than a stunt. 

Still, even though Keith Ellison's abuse scandal didn't destroy him, I doubt that a straight white male could ever get away with accusations of abuse in the current Democratic Party. And I never thought that the Democratic Party wanted much to do with him anyways. If he somehow still decides to keep on the campaign path, even if these charges get dismissed, he's not going to win. 

I also think that this destroys Avenatti's career as a news pundit. Avenatti has been showing up on talk shows all the time but I doubt that will continue. Obviously if he is convicted, he won't be calling in from prison but even as the case makes it's way through court, he won't be in demand anymore. 

I have to say that though I don't think domestic abuse is a laughing matter and that Avenatti's alleged victim shouldn't be made light of, I do hope that Avenatti is done. The man is a scumbag even if he isn't a beater of women. He's been on the wrong side of too many issues and I am glad that he isn't going to have anymore impact on this country. 

Despite holding the world's largest oil reserves, Venezuela has gasoline shortages.

Venezuelan civilians wait in line for gasoline. Reuters. 

Despite holding the world's largest oil reserves, Venezuela has been suffering from gasoline shortages. Reuters. Venezuela has hugely subsidized fuel to the point where one could fill their tank 20,000 times for the price of 2.2 pounds of cheese. But despite the subsidies and the drop in demand due to the failing economy fuel lines have broken out in the larger cities. Logistics have been a problem as well as bottlenecks have formed at refineries, ports and distribution centers. The fuel shortages are due to a collapse in demand for iil and Venezuela's failure to reinvest oil profits into infrastructure. 

My Comment:

Venezuela has completely fallen apart. The idea that a country with the largest oil reserves in the world could ever run out of gasoline is ridiculous, but that seems to have happened. The government is completely incompetent and honestly deserves to be removed from power. 

The lack of gasoline makes things even tougher for citizens of Venezuela. Now they can no longer look for work, food or other resources. Some of them can't even do their jobs due to a lack of fuel. It seems as though the situation has stabilized, but that was likely a rough couple of weeks for everyone. 

It doesn't speak well to Venezuela that even though demand for gasoline has plummeted they are still running out. People haven't been driving as much and commercial demand has decreased as well as the economy collapses. Plus, millions of people have left Venezuela for brighter pastures. 

This is, of course, due to the policies of Venezuela. The collapse of oil prices may have had an effect too but many other countries have had oil based economies but survived. Russia, the Gulf States, even America were all effected by the oil prices being low but they all have managed to survive economically. 

So why didn't Venezuela? They decided that socialism is the answer. Instead of funneling their money back into their oil industry or trying to diversify the economy, they gave it to social programs. This bankrupted Venezuela to the point that even with the social programs the people of Venezuela are now much worse off. 

Picking a fight with the United States was probably a bad idea as well. Sanctions alone can't be blamed for Venezuela's economic woes but it is going to make fixing things a lot harder for Venezuela. Nobody wants to invest in a country that is on America's bad side. 

Venezuela should be a warning for the world against left wing governments and I think they did provide a good example for Brazil who elected a right wing president for the first time in a long time. At this point anyone who votes for something like Venezuela style socialism should know for sure that doing so is a fool's errand... 

Videos showing the conflict between Israel and Gaza are being posted on Twitter.

As you may be aware the conflict between Israel an Gaza has gotten hot again. As a rule, I try not to comment on the Israel/Palistine issue as it's one of those subjects that attracts the worst kinds of people on both sides. I'm not going to go in depth on my thoughts on the conflict because doing so is like wrestling with a pig. Even if you win you have to jump into the manure and the pig is going to like it. No thanks.

That being said, there are some pretty interesting videos being posted on Twitter. I am going to post them without any commentary other than to say that the opinions on the tweets may not be my own. I just want to share the videos! Though it looks like a major war is on the horizon, I don't really want to get into it.

#BREAKING The moment when #Israel army's bus was hit by a #Kornet missile from #Gaza pic.twitter.com/V0CbKYRPY4

— Guy Elster (@guyelster) November 12, 2018

طيران الاحتلال الحربي يقصف ويدمر مقر فضائية الاقصى بغزة. pic.twitter.com/VSnUpYUb2s

— شجاعية (@shejae3a) November 12, 2018

#BREAKING: 100 rockets & morters launched from Gaza towards Israel in less then 40 minutes (video: Eliran Hajbi) pic.twitter.com/cJJH2vndM5

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) November 12, 2018

#BREAKING #Hamas warns Israel that it would widen the range of its rockets if it would attack in #Gaza in response to the heavy barrages pic.twitter.com/s0ciZemujr

— Guy Elster (@guyelster) November 12, 2018

Weekend Movie Night: Solo: A Star Wars Story.

Solo movie poster. Copyright Disney. 

Yesterday I finally got around to watching Solo: A Star Wars story. It is the first major Star Wars film I have not seen in movie theaters. I was too young for the original trilogy but I watched all three prequels and all three of the Disney films before Solo in theaters. I even watched the Special Editions in theaters. The only Star Wars movie that I haven't seen in the theaters that was the Clone Wars pilot movie which hardly even counts. 

I wrote before why I skipped Solo. The short version was that I was already to go but was so frustrated with the culture war and the low quality of The Last Jedi that I stayed home instead. I was burnt out on Star Wars and wasn't expecting much from the film. It was getting middling reviews and the various controversies around the film and the Last Jedi had sucked the air out of the room. 

I don't think I was alone in feeling that way as Solo was the first and biggest flop of the Star Wars franchise. Regardless of the quality of the prequels and the sequels, people have always came out in droves to support the Star Wars franchise. That didn't happen in Solo and I think it was largely due to the poor reception of The Last Jedi, various political controversies and general fatigue induced by releasing so many movies at once.  

Now that the dust has settled and I finally saw the movie, what do I think of it? Not much really. Unlike The Last Jedi which invoked strong feelings by everyone who saw it, I just kind of felt nothing. Indeed, it felt a lot like The Force Awakens. An average movie that didn't really stick with me. As a standalone film it's fine but after the complete shitstorm that was The Last Jedi it had pretty much no chance of standing out. 

It didn't have the charm and simplicity of the original trilogy. It didn't have the combination of awesome special effects and world-building combined with a weak story and bad dialog of the prequals. And it didn't have the massive controversy and impact of The Last Jedi. Even Rogue One, the other Disney spinoff film had an awesome space battle and Darth Vader going nuts during the ending. Solo? It just kind of is. 

SPOILERS BEGIN NOW!

Solo is essentially a mishmash of genera's. It's kind of a space western mixed in with a crime film all set in a sci-fi universe. It never really sticks to any of these things well. It could have gone more Western, like a modern Firefly or it could have gone more mobster, but it really didn't. It was nice that they tried to do something different but it didn't really make a whole lot of sense. Out of all the Star Wars films, this one feels the least like Star Wars

It almost feels like the fourth Star Trek movie, which is beloved by most but always seemed so out of place to me. You still have the same old Star Trek characters but instead of cool space adventures in the far future, they decide to hang out with whales in the present day. Solo is kind of the same way with all the familiar Star Wars characters all getting together to... rob a train? Really? I mean the execution was ok, but the concept is just weird to me. 

The plot is fairly predictable. You always knew that Han and Chewbacca were going to meet. Lando was going to be there and he and Han would have a complicated relationship. The love interest was never going to end up with Han and his mentors would betray him. I didn't even need to watch the movie or even read a plot synopsis to understand what was going to happen in this movie. If The Last Jedi took way too many chances with the plot, I think Solo may have gone too far in the other direction. 

I do have to say that I was surprised at how many people died in this movie. Pretty much the only characters that didn't die are the ones that stick around for the original trilogy. I kind of expected that since Rogue One did the same thing, but in that case it was justified by the story. Not so much in Solo. It kind of felt like a whole lot of interesting characters like Val and Rico end up getting killed off way too soon. The only new main character that wasn't killed off was Qi-ra, which kind of rules out ever seeing any of the better new ones again. 

The stakes were also pretty low in this film. In every other Star Wars flick, there is some kind of huge war, new weapon or dangerous conspiracy going on. In Solo there is nothing but a heist of some spaceship fuel, which is valuable, but not not interesting in anyway. We don't really learn anything in Solo that wasn't already established in other Star Wars movies. 

I think the fanservice was a bit out of control, to the point where they were getting pretty obscure with their references. Most casual fans of the series aren't going to have a clue what the Pyke Syndicate is or why Darth Maul is even alive. If you had missed the Clone Wars and Rebels cartoons you would have been completely lost. And even with having watched the Clone Wars I was still kind of lost as to why Maul would be in charge of a huge criminal organization. He had done that in the cartoon but then the Emperor came and curb stomped him and broke the whole thing up. So how did he end up reestablishing himself? 

Darth Maul also seems to have come out of nowhere. They seem to be trying to use him to set up a sequel but that seems fairly unlikely now that the movie bombed so hard. And as far as I am aware I think Maul ended up dying in the Rebels cartoon so I don't even know what they could use the character as. Just like in the Phantom Menace he has been built up as a total bad-ass and then wasted. 

I also think the film explained a lot of things that didn't really need to be explained. I mean it's fine that we now know the story behind the infamous Kessel run, but did we really need to know that story? Did we really need to know that Han had a girlfriend back in the day and that he and Chewbacca won the Falcon from Lando in a card game? I mean none of this is really that shocking to me. I'd rather have something that moved the plot along in some way, but like Rouge One it didn't really happen. 

Probably the most frustrating thing was that there were some obvious storylines that they could have gone with instead. Why not have Jabba the Hutt in the movie? There is obviously a lot of history there and it would have been a cool villain to expand on. And why not spend more time on Han's time in the Imperial military? We get almost zero perspective to the people who live and work in the Empire so it might be interesting to see that for more than the few scenes we got here. Some of that was cut from the movie which is a shame but you can see the deleted scenes which I think would have improved the movie a bit if they were left in. 

As smaller nitpick, I have to say that I think it was pretty dumb that Han ended up as an Imperial Solider. So he gets busted out of the flight academy and gets busted all the way down to the Army? How does that work? If you flunk out of the Naval Academy in real life you don't suddenly get enlisted into the Army. Plus, pilots are already cannon fodder in the Star Wars universe, at least when it comes to the Empire. It's not like getting transferred to ground forces is really going to decrease his life expectancy much.

From a filmmaking perspective I have to say that the darkness of the film was very annoying. Not in terms of tone but in terms of actual physical brightness. Not seeing the movie on the big screen, there were a lot of scenes where I just couldn't see much due to how dark everything was due to the crappy monitor I was watching it on (I wasn't home when I saw it). I can put up with that in a horror movie, for example, but in a big dumb action movie? I want to be able to see what is going on! 

As far as casting and acting go, that was probably the movies best strength. Though many people didn't like Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo, I thought he was ok, even if he doesn't look a damn thing like Harrison Ford. Donald Glover was the perfect choice for Lando though and you could tell he was having a blast with the role. Woody Harrelson has always been a favorite of mine and it wasn't an exception here. As for Emilia Clark, I am usually not a fan after Terminator Genisys (ugh) soured me on her, but she kind of redeemed herself in my eye in this one. Everyone seemed to give a good performance and there was very little cringeworthy acting that seems to plague Star Wars. 

The culture war stuff that overshadowed the film didn't really seem to have much of an effect on the finished product. Much was made of the so called "feminist" robot L3-37, but it didn't really effect much. She was only in the film for a couple of scenes, and hilariously enough everyone thought she was a joke in universe as well. I'd almost say that she was an obvious parody that everyone took seriously but that's probably giving Disney too much credit. 

I generally think that Disney was trying to drum up controversy as the film was pretty average on it's own. If so, it backfired horribly because I think many people stayed home because they thought they were going to be preached at. They were trying to sell it as a social justice movie when it really wasn't. Sure there were strong women characters and more non-white people, but the actual story itself wasn't some kind of feminist/cultural Marxist statement/nightmare. Lando wasn't gay or sleeping with a robot, like he was implied to be in various interviews and honestly the whole controversy was pretty stupid in the end. 

So was Solo a bad movie? Not really. It wasn't a good one either. I think out of the four Disney Star Wars films, it's probably the most boring but it is still a much less frustrating movie than The Last Jedi was. It was well acted and decently written but it also didn't take any risks at all while at the same time never answering the question "why did this movie need to be made?" 

Would I recommend it? Not really, but if someone wanted to watch it I would say go ahead. I don't think anyone that does is going to really be blown out of the water but I doubt there will be any of the anger and confusion that happened after The Last Jedi. As a movie, Solo just kind of exists and isn't really a good or bad thing. You don't gain much by seeing it and don't miss much by ignoring it. I am guessing 20 years from now Solo is going to be the Star Wars movie that everyone forgets about while the rest of the Disney films will still be talked about, one way or the other.