How Could Gun Control Lower Gun Violence?

 

This has been a basic question where conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, gun owners and advocates against gun control advocates have wrestled and neither side has ever found the magic, pardon our word usage, silver bullet to end the violence resulting from criminal firearm usage. Every time there is a dramatic milestone reached as was recently in Chicago where they reached five-hundredth homicide of the year or a dramatic firearms related death toll resulting from firearms usage such as the Orlando club shooting or the string of homicides in San Bernardino for the anti-gun forces to rush to blame the guns even if the real culprit was terrorism as in Orlando and San Bernardino. There is the demand for long waiting periods, deeper background checks, limits on firearm purchases per person per year or any of a number from a plethora of inventive laws which would presumably end criminal purchases of firearms at gun shows, gun stores, private sales or other legal forms of firearms purchases. This begs a simple question, how many criminals are purchasing their firearms legally. Yes, there have been some tragic cases where a person legally purchased the firearms they use all too often in violent mass shootings such as too many school shootings or mass public shootings such as in movie theaters or nightclubs or as vengeance workplace violence or even terrorism. These tragic cases often are the first criminal act of the shooters and they went through all of the existing checks and even if further checks and wait periods were enacted they would have had little if any effect beyond waiting periods causing them to plan longer and delay their shooting sprees but not preventing them. Still, over ninety percent of shootings are committed by people with criminal records who already would be unable to walk into a gun show or gun store and purchase a firearm legally and most of the firearms used in these crimes are often stolen weapons which were bought illegally from nonstandard sources which operate beyond the law. The idea that making legal firearm purchases more time consuming, burdensome and legally tangled with more and more layers of paperwork and legal hurdles does nothing to prevent criminal firearm purchases and the politicians know this and the crime data records prove this. So why if these facts are well known and understood do the politicians continue to call for restrictions on firearm purchases and even have many calling now for the repeal of the Second Amendment and the complete ban of legal firearm ownership despite all evidence pointing to this leading to increased firearm use by criminal elements as they then are assured they will be the only people armed in any criminal incident.

 

There are at least two easily understandable reasons for the politicians calling for more restrictive laws. The most obvious is their receiving funds for making such demands coming from the anti-gun lobbies who will love such legislation and will spend liberally supporting political campaigns for those supportive candidates. Another reason is the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) who also favor more firearm laws as each law, regulation and licensing required by law increases the numbers of government employees required to process and handle the additional forms, research, background checks, license issuing or renewal and any other directives and requirements such legislation demands. These are two of the most active groups a candidate can get behind them in order to finance their campaign. The other reason which looms over the gun debate even more than campaign finances is the general lack of real information and education of the public, especially in most major metropolitan jurisdictions. This is largely due to the complete lack of intimate knowledge, education, training or even the slightest use of a firearm by the majority of the voting public. With a smaller and smaller percentage of the population having served in the military, especially suburban residents, and even less training in firearms in such organization as the Boy Scouts and other youth groups and there no longer having any firearms training in summer camps, the public is generally unfamiliar with firearms and many even developing a symptom bordering on maniacal fear of firearms to the point of hyperventilating at the sight of a gun other than on the belt of a uniformed police officer. Additionally, the use of firearms in entertainment venues such as movies displaying firearms in ways which are wildly inaccurate such as handguns or rifles firing well over one-hundred rounds without ceasing fire for reloading even firing six-shot revolvers twenty or thirty times before changing to another weapon or reloading, has fueled misconceptions of the lethality and practical use of firearms which if applied to swords would have the sword being capable of killing merely by removing it from its scabbard. Another misconception furthered by the entertainment industry is the range at which weapons, particularly handguns, are lethal. With shots being taken with a 9mm or a 45cal semi-automatic handgun at well over a quarter mile, 440 yards or four and a half football fields (pitch) which is a highly dubious range even for a really good marksman, but that is the short end of impossible shots as many a movie aficionado can attest. I have actually seen neighbors shrink away when friends and I would return from the outdoor public range and transport normal handguns and a few hunting rifles from the trunk of the vehicle into the house for cleaning and once had an extremely paranoid neighbor call the police claiming that terrorists were meeting in my place with dozens of guns and other weapons. The police were not all that amused but as two of my friends had Federal Firearms Licenses and one had a Class III Weapons Permit and worked at a gun store, they were forced to allow us to retain our weapons. The neighbor was frantic that we were not taken away in chains and the arsenal confiscated. Ah, reliving the good old days of my misspent youth.

 

Dianna Rigg as Emma Peel in The Avengers

 

The truth is that should the anti-gun and anti-weapons fanatics get their way, we will be eating steaks with butter knives if the vegans allow us to continue to eat slabs of cows. This claim is made as there have been calls in the United Kingdom, or at least in London and other cities of the Isles to make knives beyond six inches illegal which would make a number of carving knives and my bread knife illegal and some steak knives I have seen such as the ones at a restaurant in the United States and likely elsewhere called Outback. By our figuring, if these fanatics against weapons of all venues got their way, we would no longer have forks and instead be using sporks with our butter knives. The people who wish to make life so guarded that even the roads are made soft enough that falling will not scrape an elbow or a knee really have lost all sense of excitement and see danger not as a challenge to be overcome but a peril which must be eradicated so even the most inept cannot harm themselves no matter how recklessly they address life’s challenges. Where if they desire to round every corner in their homes and pad every piece of furniture while only using safe utensils such as butter knives and sporks and eat only the most bland fruits and vegetables rushing to the doctor’s office at the first sneeze or cough, let them live such lives but do not force your phobias on the remainder of us who wish to live lives dangerously using real forks and steak knives just to eat an apple because we love the thrill of the hunt. Truth be told, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution was argued in the Federalist Papers as being the last line of defense against and to prevent Government Overreach and assure the Constitutional limits on Government power was in the hands of the people.

 

Safe Knife and Spork of the Future

 

These people who claim that the gun is evil are carrying paranoia to an extreme beyond reason. I am willing to bet any of these people that a fully loaded handgun of any caliber could be placed on my kitchen table and sit there in the open for a full year and nobody I know would pick it up or fear it and it is highly unlikely, to the point of absurdness, that it would ever injure, let alone murder, anybody during that year or any number of additional years. I am willing to bet that they could not produce one person who robbed a convenience store who was claiming the firearm walked up to them, grabbed them by the hand and dragged them to the convenience store forcing them to rob it. Yet these same people would claim it was the gun if that same person had shot the clerk and simply wounded him requiring three stitches and a band aid. The tired old phrase that it is the person who commits the crime and not the firearm is true but there are those who insist on believing otherwise. They will claim that had the criminal not had the gun they would not have committed the crime. Somehow we believe it is more likely that the criminal would easily be able to buy a gun from, wait for it, another criminal if they were without a gun and believed one was needed to commit their crime. They would not go to Joe’s Gun Emporium or the county fair gun pavilion or any other legal means, they would go to a well-known criminal world individual and purchase a gun and for a few dollars more a gun without any serial number as it had been removed. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the criminal world will sell you guns made to order for the right price. It probably comes as a shock to the gun control supporters that there exist individuals who actually sell guns illegally and if they desire making it more difficult for criminal elements to use firearms, then the people they need to prevent from selling guns are the criminal elements and not the local gun store. Are there those gun store people who might sell guns under the table? Probably, but they are a rare minority and eventually they will be caught which every gun owner will be glad and hopes such a person is put away for a very long time. Gun owners are responsible citizens and are just as abhorred at criminal gun use as the next person, even the anti-gun lobbyist. Nothing would make gun owners happier than for every gun to be legally owned and never used for a criminal purpose and for not another person to die from gun violence. As far as gun accidental deaths, when you can figure out how to end the fifty-thousand plus vehicle deaths each year on the American highways and streets, then we can worry about the few hundred accidental gun deaths. It is nice to keep things in perspective and every gun death is a tragedy as is every premature death. But please let us remain sane and address the more serious causes of accidental deaths such as swimming pools and bathtubs, honestly folks.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Terror Strikes United States in Orlando Club

 

The least important fact about the Orlando club assault was that the club specialized in entertainment for gay men as that may have figured somewhat in the attackers motivations but his main motivation was satisfying his fanatical religious beliefs. The Tel Aviv attack proved that the aim is murdering those who are non-Muslims, the Kafirs, and if they are Gays or Jews it just makes it all the better in their minds. They even take just as much pleasure murdering Muslims who have the audacity of being the wrong kind of Muslim or even the right kind of Muslim but following a rival terror group such as the state of war between the Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front, both offshoots from al-Qaeda and both Sunni Muslims and both dead set on murdering the other simply to prove which is superior. If this reminds you of the Highlander series with the line, “in the end there can be only one,” don’t feel so bad as we have often had that feeling as well to the point that we have one of our favorite scenes as a picture for just that line (see below). There are Muslims slaughtering Muslims all over Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya and Muslims slaughtering Christians in all those places plus Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Chad, Cameroon, and the surrounding nations with the Muslims who have fled from their homelands in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as well as Western Asia raping any of the European women who do not measure up to Islamic dress requirements which is virtually all of them and in some instances even dressing modestly is insufficient to protect the European women. Making matters even worse the police have apparently been instructed or have chosen to turn a blind eye towards such activities and simple everyone pretends it is not happening or that it is normal. I honestly believe that there exist fathers who allow such horrors to be inflicted on their daughters. One can only wonder when some place there will be those who reach their breaking point and snap and after that it is anybody’s guess what will follow. The continuing inpouring of Islamic refugees will only serve to exacerbate the problems which always arise when two different cultures come into contact and conflict becomes inevitable. The strange thing is the more violent and willing to take the war to the other does not always win though they do win almost half the time. The barbarians did defeat Rome which was well on the way to defeating itself by that time. On the other side, the Vikings did not defeat the more civilized Europeans and tribes and kingdoms of the British Isles but instead were transformed and ended up married and an integral part of much of European history. The Native Americans probably did far better on average in the actual history than they did in the Hollywood depictions and were likely less savage and had a far better command of English but in the end they pretty much lost the long war. The Incas and other Central and South American peoples did poorly against the Spanish. The Africans did poorly against the spread of Islam across northern and central Africa. As a rule the civilization with the more advanced technology usually ends up with the victory even if it takes time.

 

 

The attack in Orlando resulted in the murder of fifty and resulted in fifty-three more injured. The murderer, the mass assassin, Omar Siddiqui Sateen claimed to have been acting for ISIS as he informed the 911 operator he phoned and of course ISIS was glad to accept the credit when they heard the news. In a statement of the over-obvious, FBI Special Agent Danny Banks informed the media that the Orlando mass murderer had “leanings toward radical Islam.” I would dare say he suffered from something a little more serious than leanings. What escapes me is if he was investigated for possible connections to radicalized Islam, as they call Medina Quran observant Muslims, back in 2013 and 2014 and was found to have an association with Moner Mohammad Abusalha, an American from Florida who became a suicide bomber for an extremist group in Syria driving sixteen tons of explosives into a restaurant used as a headquarters for al-Assad allied troops and exploding it in March of 2014 and might have warranted another check in on Omar Siddiqui Sateen periodically forever as that would seem to be an investment the public would have gladly authorized and been quite correct in doing so. There are likely those who would claim that we cannot simply profile and just because he knew somebody who ended up radicalized who lived in the same area should not allow for periodic profiling as people have rights to their privacy. One wonders if these people would have had the same difficulties if the FBI, then known as G-men, were profiling members and relatives of members of the Capone or other gangland members just as a means of gathering and information and if possible preventing criminal enterprises and shootings, especially those which might potentially kill or injure innocent bystanders. Perhaps modern liberalism is a recent mental illness with no precedent in earlier times, though I would be willing to bet there were bleeding hearts back in the late 1920s and early 1930s during prohibition. With the methods available for monitoring communications it should be far easier than during the prohibition days to keep track of people and determine if perhaps a closer look is warranted. The technology exists and there is little chance that the government is not using their ability to listen in on the entire planet to monitor those things they deem worthy, so what is preventing them from monitoring those they deem as potential threats. We understand that there are those who would claim that we need to be monitored as we are way too political and appear to be getting information which we should not be privileged to have access for receiving all we claim to know. Well, then perhaps we should be monitored as if we are getting such information, then the government should research us and if they find the leaks, plug them. On the other hand, if we end up bamboozling them and they cannot figure out our sources, or source which is a hint for them, then all the better for us and our source. For the record, any source we may have, they are not named or ever have been referred to a Deep Throat.

 

The terror murders which have taken place in the recent past from Paris to Brussels to Tel Aviv to Orlando and numerous lesser ones as well as the ongoing wars in Islamic lands and violence against non-Muslims at the edges of the Islamic world as well as within the Muslim world one would not be too suspicious to believe that there may be a problem with modern Islam and how it is being observed by far too high a percentage of Muslims for it to remain ignored if a civilized world is the aim of humankind. Yes, we understand that the majority of Muslims which most of us have ever met have been sedate people willing to live in peace with their neighbors. We understand that it may be a tiny percentage of Muslims until somewhat recently. What we do not agree with which so many are insisting on telling us are that Islam means peace and Allah and the Judeo-Christian Deity Hashem are the same entity. The first item we must clear up if we are to have an intelligent and reasoned discussion is the definition of Islam. Islam does not equal Shalom nor does it equal Aloha. Shalom and Aloha both mean peace, and can be used as greetings of hello and good-bye. Islam means surrender. Islam demands one to surrender to Allah. Now we need to address the Allah part of the definitions. Hashem, the Judeo-Christian Deity is the Deity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Allah is the Deity of Abraham, Ishmael and Mohammad. Completely different Deities and that is as important as the definition of Islam being surrender and not peace. By demanding that all Muslims in order to follow Islam must necessarily surrender to Allah and his messenger, Muhammad, and thus need to surrender their will to the Imams who are the messengers of Muhammad and Allah here in Earth. There are the most basic lies and differences we must come to grips with if we are ever going to understand why Islam keeps producing these killers from even wealthy families and if educated usually young individuals; even physicians and engineers as those who attacked the Glasgow International Airport on Saturday, June 30, 2007. The perpetrators of this suicide attack were two men, Bilal Abdullah, a British-born, Muslim doctor of Iraqi descent working at the Royal Alexandra Hospital and Kafeel Ahmed, an engineer and the driver who was treated for fatal burns at the same hospital.

 

So, what does any of this have to do with the Orlando attack? Everyone stated that the perpetrator loved basketball, was an outgoing and funny young man, was well adjusted and everybody who knew him expressed shock and disbelief that he was the terrorist who attacked the Gay Club. His father claimed, understandably, that his attack had nothing to do with Islam and everything to do with his anger from seeing two men kiss in public months earlier. Excuse us if we are just a tad bit incredulous over this excuse. There is this one item which the presumed civilized Muslims and their neighbors need to discuss and settle on a plan of action. If your Islamic neighbors refuse to have this discourse then your neighbors just declared themselves to be ticking time bombs just waiting for their fuses to be lit. The needed discussion is what should be done if an Imam or radicalized leader, especially youth leader, joins their community. Hang with us a minute. Assume for a moment that you are one of the presumed ninety-nine percent of passive and nonviolent Muslims but also have a weakness or an embarrassing item in your past or present such as a girlfriend you rather your wife not know of. Well, a violent Islamist joins your community and initially appears to be just another fellow Muslim. Slowly you see his starting to express more and more radical ideas slowly and innocently at first and more forcefully as time passes. As soon as he finds a weakness of a member of the Mosque or somebody who he sees as persuadable to taking a more violent stance, then he starts to work on these individuals one or two at a time. He then works with this individual and others and now there is a core of Islamists. This core grows through any method required and before you realize it you are in a radicalized Mosque. At some point in time guess what you find out? First you hear that one of the former members from your Mosque who disappeared without any notice except that the core of Islamists are not surprised and did not inquire about this lost sheep. Your lost sheep then turns up in the news as having been a suicide bomber in Syria. Is it time to panic and if so what exactly do you do? Leave the Mosque and join a different Mosque? What will you tell your friends and neighbors as to why you are changing Mosques? Even if they suspect, everybody will pretend that there is nothing behind your charge, especially that their Mosque has become a breeding ground for radicalized Islamists and everyone knows their children are being propagandized and radicalized and are at a loss as to what to do. They dare not challenge the Imam who was either replaced or found to be very agreeable to the new path and even started adding far more of an edge to the sermons. Would you challenge these radicalized Muslims who have taken control of your once friendly Mosques or just keep your head down and go along praying you do not get tapped to commit an act of terror. This is how a Mosque is transformed, a single instigator and before you know it your world is upside down. You have no recourse because you must surrender to Allah and the Quran does explicitly claim that the Medina Quran replaces any weak laws and instructions from the Mecca Quran as the latest writings are considered superior. The main Surah dealing with Abrogation is the Ayah Surah 2:106 and reads:

None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?

 

Or as writ in Arabic:

 

A slightly different translations we found states:

We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?

 

Keeping this Surah in mind and reference our article which gives a simple to understand, straight forward, basic level introduction to the Quran and the differences between the parts written in Mecca and the verses written in Medina plus the bonus of numerous links provided by many of our readers added in the comments section at our article Which Quran, Mecca or Medina? This Sura adds even more to the meaning of what we reveal in our article.

 

There are two items which one need take with them from this particular article. The first is how a small cadre of radicalized Muslims coming to your formerly peaceful Mosque can bring about changes beyond anything you or your friends could believe possible and then you might likely find yourself in the crosshairs and there is little one can do about being targeted. The other truth is that it takes but one instigator to empower a core of disenfranchised young adults and teens and from there you will soon find yourself in a radicalized Mosque and your children will be future targets and your attempts to shield them will initially cost bringing you to the attention of the radicalized and your good wishes may find you being volunteered for a mission or else and you will be hard pressed to take the chances with your family and take the or else. A thousand peaceable Muslims can be transformed into a core of two to three-hundred radicalized true believers who will be at the ready to begin training and radicalizing an entire Mosque because those willing to use violence will always succeed over those who profess pacifism, a truism we have seen in far too many historic examples. Unless every Mosque is steeled against Islamists, they will win and our neighbors will turn on us as the Palestinians have largely turned on the Israelis with the aid of Islamists. It is the old adage, prepare or find yourself struggling against the worst that the world has to throw at you. Falling prey to the Islamist powers from Iran who is currently ascending with the billions of dollars and businesses throwing themselves at their feet offering deals and weapon systems of formerly embargoed systems which are now being sold at cheaper by the hundreds pricing; add in the Islamic State, and you have the recipe for a disaster just waiting to happen, and happen it will.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

And France Doubles Down

 

Right on the heels of the disastrous French initiative taking confab of twenty plus Foreign Ministers last week where they could not even join together to condemn Israel, let alone demand Israel commit some form of concessions once again to restart the moribund peace process, French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault now had the audacity to lecture Israel about the extra security measures taken after the deadly Tel Aviv terror shooting. His claim was by cancelling the work and other passage permissions for the extended family of the terrorists and the cancellation of the Ramadan liberal permissions in response to the attack which murdered four and wounded a score more was simply collective punishment and would lead to more terror and exacerbate an already difficult situation. You can read about and see videos and pictures of the actual assault and aftermath in our article on the terror attack and other related events Look Back and Forward to Coming Incitements for War. The steps Israel took were the same basic types as any sane and rational government would take facing the same situation. The terrorists were cousins from a family which already has a terror history of radicalization with an Uncle of both young men still serving in an Israeli prison for terrorist assault he took part in previously. Israel went so far as to freeze work entry visas for some 204 members of the attackers’ extended family. Israel went further and rescinded approximately eighty-three-thousand general entry permits given to Arabs from Judea and Samaria for Ramadan without running security checks on the vast majority. To run individual checks on this many people would take far longer than the Ramadan holiday and cancellation was a safety precaution, not a punishment. Goodwill gestures to Gaza Arabs, including travel permits to Jerusalem to participate in Ramadan prayers on the Temple Mount, were also rescinded, especially after the reaction of the Hamas government and their sister terror organization Islamic Jihad support for the terror attack and threat that more of the same was imminent. To the French Foreign Minister such actions were overreacting like the French are all of a sudden security experts on how to prevent terrorist attacks. Let’s look at the recent record, oh, yes; Paris just had a slight problem in this area, didn’t they. The reasoning behind the French reaction against Israel’s steps in the aftermath of this horrific attack was blame the victim, side with the terrorists and maybe, just maybe the terrorists will think the French are so wonderful they will not strike there ever again. Talk about throwing everybody else to the alligators so that they will be eaten last thinking which has such a great track record when it comes to terrorism.

 

Adding to the preposterousness of French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault hyperventilating over Israeli security measures was the location from where it came. He was in the United Nations to take part in a Security Council debate on the protection of civilians in peacekeeping. Talking about the United Nations, on Friday the United Nations Human Rights Chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein spoke along with the rest of his office to express how so “deeply concerned” by Israel’s response they were while only offering a mild condemnation of the actual terror attack itself or concern for the families of the slain or for a recovery of the injured. These were not the exception but when the terrorist attack was condemned in equivocating terms, it was more often than not followed immediately with stronger terms denouncing Israeli actions as horrid overreactions and in the wording of the office of Mr. al-Hussein, “includes measures that may amount to prohibited collective punishment and will only increase the sense of injustice and frustration felt by Palestinians in this very tense time.”

 

Meanwhile the French Foreign Weasel, we mean Foreign Minister, did we really say Weasel? Anyway, the foreign minister further stated, “There must be a political initiative from the international community to create conditions conducive to appeasement and a return to negotiations,” according to AFP. France is always working for the security of Israel.” Really now, and were not you the leading figure right next to French President François Gérard Georges Nicolas Hollande calling for a ministerial meeting last week in Paris to discuss what concessions Israel could take to prove their honest desires for peace on top of near countless previous concessions to do the exact same desire for peace? Did not your office recently threaten Israel with recognizing an Arab State called Palestine and setting their borders unilaterally as if the French ran the world? Are you not that same French Foreign Minister head whose office is working furiously with other parts of the French government to find some way of punishing Israel in order for President François Hollande can show he is on top of taking steps to prevent further terror attacks like the one recently in Paris and before that two others including the Charlie Hebdo murders where Israeli Prime Minister flew to Paris to state himself in French, “Je suis Charlie” and march with the other dignitaries? Oh, I remember, he was placed a number of rows back while Mahmoud Abbas was given front and center of the processions for the pictures and there were articles claiming that the Israeli Prime Minister was a news hound just trying to get himself into the picture like the pushy petty Jew that he was, that was the reaction expressed out of Paris after the picture below was released. Who again was being given the glory hound position and why was he smiling after a dozen people and more were just murdered in Paris and all others had their serious faces on as was appropriate; that clown Abbas was doing one of the only two things he knows how to do, condemn Israel and smile like a jackal when before cameras even at a remembrance for terrorist victims murdered in the name of Islam.

 

Mahmoud Abbas smirking while at remembrance rally for Charlie Hebdo in Paris after terror slaughter of a dozen writers and cartoonists for the satirical magazine.

 

The two-facedness of your condemnation immediately after siding with the terrorists and attempting to give them a state taken out of the gut of Israel from which to paralyze Israeli industry and threaten directly seventy percent of her population, you then turn around and condemn Israel for reacting to terrorists who came from that very same area you meant to make a terrorist state from. They came from a small town just outside Hevron, a small town which could not help but celebrate their little warriors with fireworks and candies as two of their own gunned down four unarmed civilians at a market and when encountering Israeli security forces who were armed, they dropped their weapons and attempted to act as victims themselves. The one shot while escaping was shot in such a manner as to prevent his escape but not to kill, a form of shooting to arrest rather than center of body mass which requires the security personnel in Israel to take additional training to master such a difficult task. In one of the videos at our aforementioned article you can witness the Israeli security personnel shooting the suspect three or four times and the resulting generally non-life-threatening wounds placed him at the same hospital being treated by the same Israeli physicians as were the victims of he and his cousin’s terror spree where they opened fire in a crowded market full of unarmed people in Tel Aviv one nice evening, well, it was nice until those two jackals, and we apologize for insulting jackals everywhere, opened fire and then immediately threw their weapons down, one of them after one of the market patrons kicked his gun from his grasp breaking it making it unusable, and attempted the innocent victim routine as they knew that police and Israeli armed security personnel would soon arrive and they were not prepared to take on anyone who would be capable of shooting back. Then they ran and we are waiting for the first complaint that the Israeli security personnel shot an unarmed terrorist making him a victim of Israeli brutalism. The vermin, again, vermin, we mean no disparaging but the words for these terror swine, now we need apologize to swine, was running from the scene and it was entirely likely he was still armed thus shooting rather than take further chances with loss of innocent lives warranted his actions. Let us state further that this security personnel came running towards the sounds of gunfire, not away or hiding in place but running towards a situation more than likely which would place them in danger themselves, a rare breed amongst humankind and we have numerous just like them here in Israel and we are thankful for every last one of these brave and selfless individuals. As far as for the French Foreign Minister and President attempting to raise their standing with the French people on the backs and lives of the Israeli people, we remember the case of Alfred Dreyfus and can plainly see that the French leadership has not moved all that far from their pedigree of that day. Let us conclude, “Nous sommes Dreyfus” and in his memory, that of French perfidy then and now.

 

Beyond the Cusp