On the Limits of DOGE, By Brian Simpson

Many of the Alor.org bloggers are excited about the challenge Musk's DOGE may make to the Deep State. However, I think we should keep things in perspective and not fall into the fallacy of over-optimism. The article titled "DOGE is Not Radical Enough"

https://unherd.com/2025/02/doge-is-not-radical-enough/

offers a critical perspective on the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and its approach to reorganization and fiscal responsibility under Elon Musk's leadership. The author highlights that while DOGE's goal is to improve government efficiency by reducing spending, the initiative is fundamentally inadequate to address the United States' deeper financial issues, especially its growing national debt, which now exceeds $36 trillion.

Musk, known for his leadership at companies like Tesla and SpaceX, has been placed in charge of DOGE, a body designed to overhaul federal agencies and recommend cost-cutting measures. However, the author argues that these efforts, although well-intentioned, are too superficial and do not go far enough to address the systemic problems within the U.S. government. The reforms proposed by DOGE are compared to looking for loose change while ignoring the massive structural issues—such as bloated government programs, wasteful spending, and unsustainable fiscal policies—that contribute to the country's enormous debt.

The critique also emphasizes the lack of meaningful action in addressing the larger political and economic issues at play. The article suggests that true fiscal responsibility would require more fundamental changes, such as a major rethinking of how the U.S. government operates, potentially through political reforms or a re-evaluation of its approach to budgeting and regulation. There is a sense that DOGE's proposed reforms are not disruptive enough and do not challenge the established systems or power structures that perpetuate the current situation.

Additionally, the piece touches on the broader context of government inefficiency and the political challenges of implementing large-scale reforms. It points out that any genuine reform would require significant bipartisan cooperation in Congress and a willingness to make difficult, even unpopular, decisions. The author also suggests that without addressing these broader issues, reforms like those proposed by DOGE could become a distraction rather than a solution, offering temporary relief but not providing long-term answers to the country's financial problems.

In conclusion, the article contends that DOGE's initiatives, despite their potential, fall short of the radical changes needed to address the serious fiscal challenges facing the U.S. Instead of tinkering around the edges, the author argues that a more profound transformation is required to get the nation's finances under control. That is true for all nations in the West, including Australia, so the financial reform battle at the political level, especially incorporating Douglas social credit ideas, is in its infancy.

The Saga of the Mugshot is the Epitome of Multicult Britain!

By Richard Miller (London)

In a bizarre turn of events, even for multicult UK, police released a mugshot of Farishta Jami, a woman convicted of terrorism offences, but it wasn't quite what she expected. Jami, a 36-year-old single mother of four, had been preparing to take her children to Afghanistan to join the ranks of the Islamic State, all while documenting her extremist views. When the police released a mugshot showing her hair tied back without her head covering, Jami was, understandably, upset. After all, she's an "observant" Muslim and had a wardrobe malfunction when it came to her public image. Her defense barrister, Matthew Brook KC, informed the court of her distress, and in the spirit of customer satisfaction, police swiftly provided a new mugshot, now featuring Jami's eyes peeking out from under a full niqab. Really good for ID purposes!

This new image arrived just in time for her sentencing hearing, which, unsurprisingly, was delayed. The judge explained that, in such a serious case, it was important to ensure that the sentence was based on "cogent material," which presumably does not include a conversation about her head covering. It's fascinating to witness how a nation's justice system can be sidetracked by the headwear preferences of someone attempting to indoctrinate her children for jihad. Nevertheless, the judge refrained from making any decisions about the photos, leaving it to the press to choose which version of Jami to feature: the one showing her hair or the one that makes her seem more ... modest?

Jami was found to have been actively involved in Islamic State propaganda on encrypted messaging apps, trying to recruit others while planning a family vacation to the frontlines of ISIS-Khorasan, the most active branch of the terror group. Jami had hidden 30 SIM cards and numerous phones in her bedroom, presumably not just to avoid getting caught, but to make sure she could still upload family vacation photos while in hiding.

And let's not forget the police's claim that releasing multiple mugshots is "common practice" if a suspect wears something on their face, like glasses or, in this case, a niqab. A statement from the West Midlands Police confirmed that their decision was merely procedural. In a separate, nearly identical instance back in 2013, Lancashire Police managed to release a mugshot of Shaheda Lorgat without her niqab after she was charged with stealing £21,000. But, hey, that's fraud—far less glamorous than planning a terrorist mission. The police didn't hesitate to assure the public that crimes like fraud "would not be tolerated." How reassuring!

All in all, this spectacle makes it clear that in the age of terrorism and national security, nothing quite beats the drama of a courtroom debate over whether a criminal's hairstyle should be on full display or hidden behind a veil. All in Islamic UK!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14398893/Police-mugshot-ISIS-terrorist-picture-British.html