|« Dec||Feb »|
AUSTRALIA: New legislation could make it unlawful to wear a cross if another person (i.e., Muslim) is offended because of that person’s religion
The Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012
An unprecedented threat to freedom of speech and thought
On 20 November 2012, the Commonwealth Attorney-General made public an Exposure Draft of the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012 (‘the Bill’). The Bill was referred to an inquiry of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. Submissions to the inquiry close on 21 December 2012, with its report due by 18 February 2013.
The Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012 makes a number of significant changes to anti- discrimination law in Australia, including:
• broadening the definition of discrimination to include conduct that ‘offends’ and ‘insults’ (clause 19-2)
• making it easier for a person to claim they were discriminated against, by requiring them to establish only that they were personally offended, not that a reasonable person would have been offended (cl 19-2)
• expanding the range of personal characteristics against which it is unlawful to discriminate, to include not only matters such as disability, race, and religion, but also ‘political opinion’ and ‘social origin’ (cl 17-1)
• reducing the legal protection of a person accused of discrimination, by: declaring them guilty unless they prove their innocence, i.e. the ‘onus of proof’ is reversed (cl 124-1) restricting their right to legal representation (cl 110-4) requiring them to pay all the costs of their own defence even if they are found to be innocent (cl 133)
If passed into law, the intended consequences of such a draconian Bill are far-reaching.
Impact on freedom of speech and thought
• Almost any comment about anything has the potential to offend someone under the Bill. There would be a chilling effect on freedom of speech and thought if someone could claim the expression of a political viewpoint insulted them and was therefore discriminatory.
• The consequences of the Bill go beyond restricting speech. Flying the Australian flag would be unlawful if a person felt such an action insulted them on the basis of their political opinion.
Impact on freedom of religion
• The Bill would make it unlawful for a person to publicly express their religious belief (for example, by wearing a crucifix) if another person was offended because of that other person’s religion. (How about wearing a burqa or headbag?)
• The Bill would also make it unlawful to debate religion and religious practices if another person was offended because of their religion.
Government officials gain enormous power
• Both the potential grounds of discrimination in the Bill—such as a person’s political opinion or their social origin—and the defences against claims of discrimination—such as the conduct being ‘in good faith’ and having a ‘legitimate aim’ (cl 23-3)—are unclear and vague. These ambiguous terms give bureaucrats and judges broad discretionary power to determine the boundaries of lawful behaviour.
• Discrimination on the grounds of political opinion and social origin is unlawful if it is in connection with ‘work and work-related areas’ (cl 22-3). These terms are so broad as to potentially apply to spheres of activity well beyond the workplace. Furthermore, the government intends to take a ‘broad’ interpretation of what constitutes ‘work- related areas.’
Process and penalties
• An accusation of unlawful discrimination starts a legal process that could last years. Complaints are heard by the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Federal Magistrates Court, or the Federal Court of Australia. Penalties for unlawful discrimination range from a forced apology, to the payment of monetary damages, to court-ordered censorship (cl 125).
To read the IPA’s submission visit Freedom Watch IPA or for more information contact: Simon Breheny, Director, IPA Legal Rights Project, 0400 967 382, firstname.lastname@example.org
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Nothing The Liberal Gun-Ban Freaks Love Better Than A Poor, Disabled Victim to Exploit for The Boo Hoo Effect
That would be Mark Kelly, husband of Gabrielle Giffords.
This morning, Gabby Giffords made an unannounced appearance at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on gun violence. Assisted by her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, the former U.S. representative slowly and deliberately relayed her message: that “too many children are dying,” that “we must do something” to fight gun violence, that “Americans are counting” on Congress to “be courageous.”
Over at Protein Wisdom, frequent commentator leigh expressed my feelings:
Mark Kelly should feel like a jerk for whoring out his wife as an anti-gun poster child. It’s the same way I feel about Sarah Brady shoving Jim Brady’s wheelchair into the middle of every anti-gun legislation that comes down the pipe. And, Carolyn McWhatshername, the congresscritter from Long Island whose husband got gunned down by Colin Ferguson thus launching her career.
All three have no shame.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Kelly did run for some elective office or end up heading an anti-firearm ‘non-profit’ where he pulled down over a million per year. Vile. Let the woman be.
SIDENOTE: See Twitchy’s fine work exposing another Leftist lie about the testimony.
Excellent article that explains how the Glock Pistol operates and how it is different from other pistol mechanisms.
This ad ran on Detroit SMART buses here
While the ads may offend some, SMART’s Beth Dryden tells Shea they met the system guidelines and were vetted by their legal department.
March 3, Crain’s: Additionally, because the ads are what SMART considers “viewpoint-neutral content” the agency can’t reject them, she said. That’s because a government agency cannot censor such content, which is protected by the First Amendment.
Got that? Good.We submitted the ad below to this same transit agency in Detroit/Dearborn, SMART, and we were DENIED. This ad was rejected:
The proposed advertisement submitted by Pamela Geller has been reviewed under SMART’s content policy. SMART, consistent with its review process, also reviewed the referred-to website: thetruthaboutmuhammed.com. Consistent with its policy, with the Sixth Circuit opinion in AFDI v SMART, and consistent with other law, SMART declines to post the advertisement.
Our message parallels the atheist ads. Since they were accepted, I modeled this ad after theirs, to see if the freedom of speech applied to criticism of Islam in our cowardly and politically correct age. This is the same government agency that refused to run our “Leaving Islam?” ads that were designed to help Muslim girls who wanted to lead more Western lives escape dangerous devout households. SMART refused. My legal team, David Yerushalmi and Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center and I sued. We won. They appealed to the 6th circuit court (a sharia-sensitive court). The Sixth Circuit said that the ad was a political ad — SMART doesn’t run political ads. So in my quest to fight on, I wanted to point out their hypocrisy as we go back to court. This rejection does just that. We fight on.
Billy Hallowell over at The Blaze has the exclusive:
Conservative’s Anti-Muhammad Ad Rejected by Detroit Transit System — But Can You Guess Which Ad Was Accepted?
Religious advertisements have been known to spark intense debate. Consider the anti-God billboards that are regularly posted by non-theist groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation and American Atheists. But it isn’t only non-believers who invoke controversy with their messaging.
Pamela Geller and her American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) have also come under intense scrutiny for subway and bus ads that target Islamic extremism. Now, the AFDI is embroiled in a new battle over a proposed anti-Muhammad ad that was rejected this week by Detroit’s Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) bus system.
In an e-mail to TheBlaze on Tuesday evening, the AFDI president noted that, while SMART previously accepted an “anti-God” atheist ad from the Detroit Coalition for Reason (DCOR), the public transit company has rejected her organization’s ad. This is particularly interesting, seeing as the AFDI modeled its design almost entirely after the DCOR’s banner.
“Our ad, same ad, with one word flipped, was rejected,” Geller told TheBlaze.
The original atheist design featured clouds and the words, “Don’t believe in God? You are not alone.” The organization’s web address was also present to the bottom left of the ad, sending Internet users to a web site that encourages people to “shine the light of reason” and to reject faith and religion.
In Boston The Liberals and mooslims (Whoops…Oxymoron) Strongarm The Dhimmi Catholics Into Canceling the Truth From Robert Spencer
Boston Globe’s Lisa Wangsness covertly agitates to strong-arm dhimmi Catholic diocese to nix Robert Spencer
This is unconscionable. Which is more egregious: the diocese caving to the same pressure that Christians, Jews, Hindus and countless others suffer all over the world, or the Boston Globe strong-arming behind the scenes to get Robert Spencer canceled? When did the Boston Globe start taking lessons from Hamas-TV? (Don’t answer that.) The enemedia has morphed into a criminal syndicate. This is a national scandal, but the American people are completely in the dark, because the enemedia controls the major flow of information. And the quislings on the right say nothing because they, too, have been cowed, which is why the right is in the dismal state it is in.
In what bizarro world is the moral high ground ceded to America’s most oppressive and subjugating influence — Islamic supremacists? Islamic supremacists, sharia enforcers and stealth jihadists (all of the same piece) silence champions of freedom, whitewash an ideology that ethnically cleanses non-Musims and secular Muslims from Muslim lands, subjugates women, and incites the most vile Jew-hatred. One single ideology that is responsible for 1,400 years of abject human misery.
And those few brave ones who speak to the good are silenced and demonized?
This is further collusion between the enemedia and islamic supremacists to destroy our First Amendment rights. The Boston Globe is not unique in this. Chicago Transit, San Francisco Transit and WMATA appear to be colluding with Hamas-CAIR to keep our ads off city buses.
People, this is not about Robert Spencer or Pamela Geller, this is about freedom. This is about you.
Catholic diocese capitulates to Islamic supremacists and Leftist media, cancels Robert Spencer conference appearanceJihadwatch, January 30, 2013
While Christians face escalating persecution from Muslims in Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and elsewhere, the Catholic Church temporizes, ignores the victims, and plays at “dialogue” with Islamic supremacist groups whose announced intent is to “build bridges” with non-Muslims. Such bridges are really just proselytizing mechanisms to convert them to Islam, not an attempt to engage in genuine dialogue: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.” — Sayyid Qutb, Milestones, chapter 10.
And so it was that I was scheduled to appear at a Catholic Men’s Conference in Worcester, Massachusetts on March 16, until today, when the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Robert McManus, directed that my appearance be canceled. McManus was under pressure from Islamic supremacist groups who were calling and emailing the diocese demanding that he cancel my appearance. I’ve been informed that they were asked to call the diocese and demand the cancellation by a Boston Globe reporter named Lisa J. Wangsness, who contacted me this morning and appears to have instigated the entire controversy.
This isn’t about me. Robert Spencer will eventually go away, whatever happens. Do Bishop Robert McManus and Lisa J. Wangsness, and the Roman Catholic Church and the mainstream media in general, think that when I go away, their troubles will be over? Do they think that if they make nice with Islamic supremacist groups in the U.S. that Christians will not be persecuted in Muslim countries, and that persecution will not escalate? Do they think that when all the writers and activists who are smeared as “Islamophobes” are finally silenced that a new era of peace and harmony will dawn between the West and the Muslim world?
Such an era will not dawn. When we are silenced, the troubles of the enlightened kuffar who have placed all their hopes in “dialogue” will just be beginning. But when their own turn comes, as it inevitably will, there will be no one left to speak up for them.
Here is my exchange with Lisa Wangsness of the Boston Globe:
When it comes to combat women are pussies.
Nowhere is the military ethos more challenged than over issues of sex, pregnancy and motherhood. The high rate of pregnancy among females in the U.S. military is a big taboo and an operational nightmare. According to a study reported this week by Reuters, more than 10 per cent of active-duty U.S. military women had an unintended pregnancy in 2008 alone – a rate that one of the study’s authors called “really shocking.” But it shouldn’t be. One study of a brigade operating in Iraq, cited by commentator Linda Chavez, found that female soldiers were evacuated at three times the rate of male soldiers – and that 74 per cent of them were evacuated for pregnancy-related issues. [HT: Don Sensing]
From American Digest: http://americandigest.org/
Found at American Digest: http://americandigest.org/
“Not a single child’s life will be saved by gun control. Not. One. All such talk is pure emotionalism, bull excretion and horse manure. The federal government is utterly powerless to stop atrocities like Sandy Hook. Utterly, utterly powerless. They can do nothing. Nothing. The culture decides things like whether parents get divorced, whether madmen get locked up, whether all grown men tend to go armed or tend to rely on others to save them, whether schools proudly advertise the fact that they are in ‘victims disarmament’ zones, whether they mind their own business or mind each other’s, and so on. The culture is not under federal government control. The government makes laws, it does not establish values and virtues.”
Read the entire article at John Wright’s Blog: http://www.scifiwright.com/2013/01/when-can-we-start-shooting-the-bastards/
Prepare to be infuriated!
After a long legal battle Morningland Dairy in Missouri was raided by the government and their property destroyed this week.
On January 25, 2013, Morningland Dairy in Missouri was raided and over 36 tons of personal property was confiscated by the Missouri State Milk Board. In operation for over 30 years, Morningland Dairy has never received one complaint from a customer or any illness reported as a result of consuming their product.
Will your business be next?
From the video: Moriningland Dairy, a family business that has been in operation for over 30 years without a single complaint or report of any illness has ceased today. The over two year battle they’ve had with the Missouri Milk Board ended today with a raid and confiscation of over 250 thousand dollars of inventory seized by the state. As a result of the legal stipulations put on Morningland Dairy which are impossible to comply with they will no longer be able to produce their product.
The real crime they are being persecuted for is producing cheese with raw milk. Whether the state wants to admit it or not that is what their real charge is and that in itself is criminal.
This should be the shot heard ’round the rural world. What has been done to this family is a travesty of justice. Their livelihood has been destroyed. These are good people who ran an honest business. How much more tyranny will we tolerate before we tell the state, Enough!
Truth Farmer has more.
And, here’s another video of the raid.
More… Here are the contact numbers for the Missouri State Milk Board Staff.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Liberal Dem Sen. Sherrod Brown: “Much Of The Progressive Agenda Is Going To Be Driven” By Obama Using Executive Power…
Apparently we’re supposed to roll over and play dead.
(CNSNews.com) – Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) says that he believes President Obama in his second term will drive the progressive agenda forward with a more aggressive use of executive power.
“We’re going to see a president of the United States use his executive powers as much as he’s allowed to under federal law and under the Constitution, in a more aggressive way than last time,” Brown said in an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
Brown added, “You’re going to see the president use the executive powers that are within his constitutional legal authority. I think much of the progressive agenda is going to be driven that way.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Via The Independent:
A leading playwright has accused the BBC of an “extraordinary” act of censorship after the corporation told her to cut key lines from a drama about “honour killings” which will be broadcast by Radio 4 this week.
Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti, whose controversial play Behzti was pulled from a Birmingham theatre in 2004 following protests from the Sikh community, wrote an episode for Radio 4’s DCI Stone series, which will be broadcast in the Afternoon Drama slot.
Bhatti’s episode, called Heart Of Darkness and due to air on Friday, tells the story of an investigation into the killing of a 16 year-old Asian girl, whose dumped body is found after being stabbed to death.
When it emerges that the girl was a victim of an “honour killing”, DCI Stone is told by his bosses is to treat the case “sensitively” because of her Muslim heritage.
“A week before recording I got an email from the producer saying the BBC compliance department had asked them to take lines out,” Bhatti told the Index On Censorship conference on artistic freedom of expression in the UK, held at the South Bank.
“At the end, a character says: ‘There is so much pressure in our community, to look right and to behave right.’ The compliance department came back and said ‘we don’t want to suggest the entire Muslim community condones honour killings.’
“It’s an extraordinary and awful situation. They said the lines were offensive but they absolutely were not. We live in a fear-ridden culture.
“Unbelievably, what the compliance department said was if you can find a factual example of community pressure leading to an honour killing, you can have the line. But it’s a drama, a story.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Found at Theo: http://www.theospark.net/
WALID SHOEBAT to America: “Your country has been infiltrated by Muslims. Your president is a Muslim”
Former PLO terrorist and Muslim, now a Christian and BNI friend, Walid Shoebat, says America has been taken over by evil people who have supported, armed (and probably funded) the radical Islamist takeover of Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and soon Jordan.
The Right Scoop (h/t Sharon H) Walid speaks of Bible Prophecy, the antiChrist, and the Muslim Messiah and how they are relevant to what is happening now.
SEE THE FULL LENGTH VERSION HERE: WALID SHOEBAT
CALIFORNIA: Home to one of the largest Muslim communities in the nation, the Southland has become fertile ground for a new generation of designers crafting clothes for women who are limited by faith and conviction from flashing too much skin. Although Muslim women have been dressing fashionably for years (they have?), many in the U.S. say they still face tricky challenges when getting dressed — and especially dressed up.
LA TIMES “We are Muslim and we can still express ourselves, be fashionable, as long as we do it in a halal way” or in keeping with Islamic law, said LaTanya Maassarani, 30, a postal carrier from Long Beach. (That’s right, throw your religion in the faces of the few people who don’t know that Muslim so-called “modest” clothing represents centuries-old oppression of women by Muslim men)
Filling that void now are designers such as Afra Said-Ahmed and her sister Eiman Ahmed, both Muslims, who launched Irvine clothing company Mohajababes. The name is a mash up of the words “babe” and “Muhajiba,” or one who wears a hijab scarf. (Sounds more like it comes from Mujahideen – Islamic jihadists, Holy Warriors) ”Trying to conform to Muslim dress codes, you get stuck in a rut of black, black, black all the time,” said Ahmed, 26. “It’s definitely very difficult, especially in the U.S. You want to fit in, but still be appropriately dressed.” So she and her sister scraped together $2,000 and began selling caftans and rhinestone accessories for head scarves at the end of 2011. The line is modest — caftans sweep the floor and hang loosely on the body. Yet the jewel-colored clothing comes with feminine frills such as silky fabrics and metallic embroidery.
Said-Ahmed said their goal was to dress fashion-conscious shoppers who are faithful to Islamic mandates but want nothing to do with traditional black coverings such asabayas and burkas, which are too hot for the California sun. Southern California has a ready pool of more than half a million Muslims concentrated in areas such as Anaheim, Irvine and West Los Angeles, said Munira Syeda, spokeswoman at Hamas-linked CAIR (Council on Anti-American Islamic Relations)
“If a non-Muslim looks at you, it obviously makes them more comfortable if they don’t see the standard black that they see in the news all the time.” (That’s right, non-Muslims are too stupid to understand that a Muslim in a colorful garbage bag would never have a bomb under her clothing, while A Muslim in a traditional black garbage bag just might)
Mohajababes carefully tailored the marketing to the audience: Models show very little skin. Its website has links to tutorials on stylish ways to wrap head scarves. And the company’s tag line delivers the message: “We’ve got it covered.”
Even so, Ahmed penned a long blog post on the firm’s site in response to “violent” online diatribes from Muslims against popular Muslim fashion bloggers and designers. But the company has made some concessions, shelving plans for a shorter, knee-length caftan and embroidered trousers.
“If we sold pants, people would say, ‘These trousers — you can see the legs, that is totally inappropriate,’” she said, adding that their vibrantly colored clothing has already drawn harsh critics. “We have heard people say ‘It’s too bright, the caftans are too pretty, and they attract too much attention.’”
“Our ultimate goal is to sell in a department store like Bloomingdales and Nordstrom,” she said. “Right now we are marketing toward our Muslim community because we know there’s a void, but many non-Muslim women would want a long-sleeved dress every now and then.”
Found at Rural Revolution
From FIJAW: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Found at FIJAW: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
The American Thinker: Dial 911 and Die:
Titled “Percent distribution of incidents where police came to the victim, by police response time and type of crime”:
Crimes of Violence:
- Within 5 minutes 31.0%
- Within 6 – 10 minutes 24.5%
- Within 11 minutes – 1 hour 32.4%
- Within 1 day – 6.5%
- Longer than 1 day – 1.9%
- Time of response not known – 3.6%
- Not ascertained – 0.2% 
From American Police Beat website: the average of seven same-sized city police response to a High-Priority 911 call is a staggering 11 minutes, 11 seconds. 
Before I go further, note neither our national media nor our national crime fighter data takes into account if you are – (1) middle of a heavily populated metropolitan area, (2) in the perimeter urban areas, (3) in suburban areas or (4) you’re out there in rural areas.
Makes a difference. Makes a big blankety blank difference.
From Nice Deb: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/
January, 29, 2013 — nicedeb
Last Thursday, the Ohio National Guard 52nd Civil Support Unit was deployed to Portsmouth to run a mock disaster drill. The exercise, overseen by the Ohio Emergency Management Agency was to practice their response to the potential release of a chemical, biological or radiological weapon. Terror drills like this one are somewhat commonplace since 9/11/2001, but there is one telling and scary difference.
Via The Examiner:
WSAZ reported: “The make-believe scenario is timely. Two school employees who are disgruntled over the government’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, plot to use chemical, biological and radiological agents against members of the local community.”
Portsmouth Fire Chief Bill Raison told the Portsmouth Daily Times:
“I think sometimes we tend to think of terrorism as just international terrorism. What’s the likelihood that’s coming to Portsmouth, Ohio? Most people think it’s not very likely. But we forget that there’s a lot of domestic terrorism. There’s organizations and things that go on within the United States that can be every bit as devastating as the international terrorism is.”
Where would someone get such an idea?
Perhaps, from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano who has described gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential terrorists.
In April 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a report entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”
The report claimed that “rightwing extremism” is not limited to religious and racial hate groups but extends to “those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report.
That’s right…according to the Obama administration anyone who believes that babies should be protected are just as dangerous as al Queda.
They would also get the idea from the “Small Wars Journal”, a respected site, that last yearissued a report entitled, “Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A Vision of the Future;
It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army’s University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an “extremist militia motivated by the goals of the ‘tea party’ movement” seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, “occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.” The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It’s a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.
The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that “once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.” They claim that “the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,” not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy.
Anda West Point think tank, which recently issued a paper warning America about “far right” groups such as the “anti-federalist” movement, which supports “civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government.”
The center — part of the institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement.”
The West Point center typically focuses reports on al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists attempting to gain power in Asia, the Middle East and Africa through violence.
But its latest study turns inward and paints a broad brush of people it considers “far right.”
Combine this with an unsubstantiated but alarming report that Obama is using a new “litmus test” for his military leaders, and we’ve got trouble.
“The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.”
From Nice Deb: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/
Why Does “Anyone” – Jewish or Otherwise Want to Live in Britain? A Nation Rapidly Committing Cultural Suicide
At that link is Melanie Phillips’ essay discussing the disease of British anti-Semitism. It’s a powerful piece. I beat a lot of folks to the story and, mostly out of haste, decided against posting the rabidly anti-Semitic cartoon that ran at the Sunday Times (William Jacobson has it, in any case).
It turns out there there’s even more news out of Britain on this. Blazing Cat Fur links to Douglas Murray at the Gatestone Institute, “Britain’s Little Anti-Semitism Problem.” Murray discusses the recent London panel discussion on Israel’s settlement policy held at Intelligence Squared, “Israel Is Destroying Itself With Its Settlement Policy,” and he writes:
There are good places and reasons to debate Israeli settlement policy. But it is, to say the least, questionable to make the one Israel debate in a debate series a discussion proposing that it is settlements that threaten Israel’s future. Rather than (plucking them off the top of my head) the promise of nuclear-bomb-owning Mullahs or say (admittedly old story) the seven-decade long refusal of any leading Palestinian to recognise the Jewish State? There is something obscene about presenting a debate in such terms. But debates need to be punchy and provocative. They also need to involve open minds. What Glick and the other Israeli guest on her side – Danny Dayan – had to witness was very far from a demonstration of that.
Glick rightly saw that the case for Israel needed to be made. But against her and Dayan were two young darlings of the London anti-Israel establishment. The undeservedly arrogant J-Street founder Daniel Levy enjoys a following in such London circles because of his father (Lord Levy)’s money. Meanwhile, the other member proposing the anti-Israel motion, William Sieghart, is a member of a prominent London family who did poorly in the family brains distribution and so has ended up promoting Hamas. Both are the sort of rich, privileged figures who mistake their own ignorance and stupidity for profundity with daring. Their careers are spent providing respectability to those who would erase the Jewish people.
Unfortunately, and predictably, the smart London audience sided overwhelmingly with the local idiots, heckling and shouting down points made by the visiting team. The hostility – heckling, booing and more – shown towards Glick and Dayan was unique and appalling. At the end the vote was 5 to 1 in favour of Levy and Sieghart.
In a searing response to what she had seen, Glick penned the article ‘Bye-bye London’, writing:
I can say without hesitation that I hope never to return to Britain. I actually don’t see any point. Jews are targeted by massive anti-Semitism of both the social and physical varieties. Why would anyone Jewish want to live there?
There’s more, but upon reading that I clicked over to Caroline’s site for the links and immediately listened to her talk, and was riveted. I doubt few people are as knowledgeable on these things, and virtually no one evinces as much moral clarity. Do yourself a favor, take a few minutes and listen to this talk:
And as I always point out, it’s all of a piece. No matter how compelling, no matter what overwhelming evidence Caroline could have presented, the results of the debate were preordained. She landed in an ideological cesspool. Arguments against Israel are always based on hatred and illogic. People of decency, of moral righteousness just have to stand their ground and keep up the fight. And sometimes that requires removing yourself from the scene of so much utter atrocity. It’s too bad for all of us that that includes the entirety of Britain itself.
SIGN UP FOR THE COMING DAY OF RESISTANCE ON FEBRUARY 23, 2013. TELL OTHERS ABOUT THIS IMPORTANT TIME AND PLAN ON SUPPORTING EFFORTS IN YOUR AREA. NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE A STAND. GO TO:
DAY OF RESISTANCE. COM TO SIGN UP AND FIND OUT MORE.
By T.L. Davis
From the Revolution on down we have fought wars against the same people: tyrants. We have sent our young men into butcher mills in Europe to protect the British, to free the French, to conquer Hitler. For what? To merely roll over when our own despot arises on a popular platform with propagandists singing hymns to collectivism? Elections don’t matter when the overall purpose of the government, run by whomever, is to alienate not just yourselves from your rights, but all subsequent generations from theirs.
The United States Government, no matter who has been at the top, or which party has controlled congress, has not paused even a second while reducing our children to abject future poverty, burdened from birth by enormous debt; to effectively enslave them to the government or even to a foreign government. What makes you think they are not interested in bankrupting not only their finances, but their society?
Comply? Are you seriously taking a look at the modern landscape, where the government rolls on unabated in the destruction of every aspect of freedom and are not alarmed? You seriously are not planning your resistance; are not lying in wait for that one final defilement that causes you to flash?
God, save us from our allies!
Look, just give your weapons to someone who will use them to defend the rights all of us have. Do not turn them over or register them with the government, give them away to local militias, to strong liberty groups who understand what is at play here. We are at the precipice of absolute subjection to government authority.
It is not our choice to fight this fight, just as it was not the choice of the children of other generations to fight in the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the French and Indian Wars, the Civil War, the wars on the frontier, the World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. It is not our choice, it is our duty. And, while some might pick and choose which wars were legitimate and which were not, let me emphatically point out that this one is more legitimate than all others, because it is the very survival of our society, of our nation that is at stake.
America has always stood out as a nation where one might rise above poverty; one might exercise control over government; one might sleep at night unafraid of the knock on the door; unafraid of a policemen on the street; unafraid of military columns traveling down the highway; unafraid of a judge or a court. What has become of that America? If it was ever worth fighting for it is now.
Systematically, over generations, the government has exerted more and more power; reached into more and more aspects of our personal, private lives and all with the consent of those we sent to Washington to represent us. We have had elections upon elections to try and get rid of the scoundrels, but the scoundrels are the only ones with the power to get elected. We now know that there is no one we can send who will not be corrupted by the power and prestige of government; who will not come to lust over the power to control the people. They just don’t make them strong enough anymore.
What we are dealing with here is not mere legislation, a law here or there to try and find some answers to social problems. These laws being passed now are to the direct detriment of the Constitution, to diminish it and along with it any protections the people themselves have against the power of political office. They are laws to insulate government officials from the people and if we are not liberal enough to pass these laws, they will allow the immigration of people more liberal than us to do it. They will pass election laws, or rather prevent election laws that will prevent these immigrants from voting until establishing citizenship.
They will have their way with us, legally or illegally.
Our only chance, the last option left to us who seek laws that are solid and available to all of us; the sanctity of a Right; the sanctity of privacy; of self-determination; of liberty is to stand tall now and use the Second Amendment while it still has a few supporters and challenge the power of government over the people.
The government has declared its intent to disarm us. They have to do it. They have to do it soon, because they have to crash the dollar in order to re-arrange the finances of this nation. Everyone understands that the borrowing cannot continue, that services have to be eliminated. There are too many people reliant on the government for survival to somehow provide for all of the pensions, all of the Social Security payments, all of the welfare checks, provide for all of the health care they have promised us. They know they can’t live up to the promises, so before they start breaking these promises, they have to make sure we cannot react with firearms to the intolerable abuses they know they have to inflict.
To give up on our ability to fight back against tyranny is only to hasten the worst they have to offer. The reason there is no one we can send to Congress who will stand up for us is because they know that when the government has to own up to its impossible situation, they will likely be targets of the citizen ire that is bound to mount in the wake of their admission. So, Republican and Democrat alike have to play this game, kick the can down the road until all of us are disarmed and defenseless. Then they can admit the lies they have told. Then, they can re-order society into something more manageable, without rights, or laws or Constitutions getting in the way.
Resist. Do not comply. Do not let them have the upper hand. Make them face our wrath as justly they should.
By - Eric Peters
It is a very hard question. Perhaps the hardest question Americans have had to face since 1861. As then, there may be no peaceful way to preserve our rights. There may be blood. As then, one side is absolutely determined to impose its will at bayonet-point. To murder us in the thousands – perhaps millions, this time – if we refuse to submit. There is no reasoning, no discussing. What we face is violence against our persons by people who absolutely will not leave us in peace – no matter how peaceful we try to be – until we have submitted to them utterly and for all time to come. We wish only to be left alone – and demand that our right to defend ourselves against those who will not leave us alone be respected. That self-defense is the most basic of rights – a right conceded even to the lowest animal. They do not acknowledge our rights; they despise the very notion of us having any rights at all. They regard their power over us as limitless in principle – and rage at even the smallest assertion of freedom of action. They loathe our guns because our ownership of guns is an expression of our determination to defend our very lives – and thus, of self-ownership.
And that is what cannot be tolerated. Which is why the current bum-rush to disarm us has become absolutely frantic. The moment is at hand. We will either stand up and be reckoned with as free men – or we will sit down forever and accept any degradation, any humiliation. And in that case, we shall have proved worthy of such treatment. Future generations will look upon us with the same mixture of incomprehension and contempt that our generation looked upon those who meekly lined up naked in queue for their turn at the edge of the pit. Because it will come to that, in time.
I am not a “tough guy.” I am not looking for a fight. Rather, I desperately wish to avoid one. I’m a middle-aged American just trying to live my life, work, enjoy my pastimes and my friends and family. To be an American. A free American. I dearly value my life. Which is precisely why, if I am backed into a corner by those who refuse to leave me be – even though I harm none – then I will turn and fight. God help me.
My Buddy, Semper Fi, 0321, sent me the link to this article. I’m reprinting this with the permission of the author, Eric Peters.
From Ninety Miles from Tyranny: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
…is awarded [even though it is only 28 January — you'll see why in a moment] to Marcus Tullius Cicero for warning us some two thousand years ago what we would face if we let the Left dominate every square inch of our society [tip of the fedora to RedBrightandTrue for reminding me of this gem]:
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.
From Bob Belvedere: http://thecampofthesaints.org/