Beyond the Cusp

June 22, 2015

Some Misperceptions of the Arab Israeli Conflict

Filed under: 2012 Elections,24/7 News Reporting,Absolutism,Administration,Alexander the Great,Amalekites,Anwar Sadat,Apocalypse,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Babylon,Blood Libel,Britain,Cabinet,Calaphate,Canada,Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper,Civilization,Communism,Conflict Avoidnce,Court Order,Coverup,Crusades,Czarist Russia,David Cameron,Democrat,Domestic NGOs,Dutch Parliament,Egypt,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Foreign Aid,Foreign Funding,Foreign Minister,Foreign Minister Baird,Foreign NGOs,Gamal Abdel Nasser,Gaza,Geert Wilders,Government,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,Hezballah,History,Hitler,House of Representatives,Inquisition,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Intifada,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jim Bridenstine,John Bolton,Jordan River,Judea,Leftist Pressures,Mainstream Media,Media,Media Bias,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Muslim Expansionism,Muslim World,Muslims,Myth,Nasrallah,Nazi,Nazi,NGO,Non Binding Resolution,Oklahoma,Ottoman Empire,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Peace Process,Persians,Pogroms,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Promised Land,Response to Muslim Takeover,Roman Empire,Samaria,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Sinai Peninsula,State Department,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,Victims,War of Independence,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:33 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Back in the earlier and more innocent days of the State of Israel the world had little trouble discerning the main problem the Arab nations and the vast majority of their peoples have with Israel, the fact that it existed. This was made all the more obvious by their near constant threats to destroy Israel and drive the Jews into the sea. This was easy for most people, especially those in the western world, to figure out as numerous Arab spokespeople went out of their way to stress this point at every opportunity, and none more so than Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser and PLO leader Yasser Arafat. It was common perception until 1967 at the earliest and by the end of 1973 at the latest for many to realize that the Jews were not going to be overrun by any combination of Arab nations. The near outright victory in the Six Day War in June of 1967 in what many have thought would be the war that destroyed tiny little Israel as the numbers favored the Arab militaries by at least fifty-to-one and many thought even higher odds may have begun the perception of Israeli superiority. After the initial surprise attack having been launched in the Yom Kippur War it was again commonly thought that Israel was being overrun, that too led many to even begin mourning the death of Israel, even if a bit prematurely. Israel again turned the tide of battle once again. These two conflicts changed the perception of Israel as that small little country precariously clinging to life at the eastern edge of the Mediterranean Sea located in the midst of the core of the Arab world and the midst of those who most wished to destroy Israel and her citizens and seemingly had the military might to do so. That misconception was dispelled and was replaced with an equally erroneous expectation of Israel as the hegemonic power of the Middle East.

 

This perception was further enhanced by Israeli actions which themselves purported an enormous amount of pride and self-confidence. And why not walk proud and sound loud when one had vanquished their main and most immediate foes even after a surprise attack which many saw as the final Arab victory when initially the Arab forces had broken the Israeli defensive lines and were advancing towards Israel herself. Had it not been for the distance provided Israel by still holding the Sinai Peninsula having yet to return them upon making peace with Egypt, Israel would have easily been overrun and her Jews likely slaughtered. With the Sinai Peninsula Israel was afforded the time to gather her reserves and turn the tide which then led to immediate demands that the fighting be halted as Israel was now advancing on Cairo, Damascus and Alexandria and to completely routing her Arab foes in Egypt and Syria. During this period the Egyptian armies were under the command from Gamal Abdel Nasser’s successor, Anwar Sadat. It was the eventual routing of the Egyptian military which cinched the mind of Anwar Sadat to seek a peace with Israel as there appeared no other route, especially militarily, to regain the lost lands of the Sinai Peninsula which Israel hung out in total as an enticement for peace. This peace came about being signed in 1979 and taking effect in January of 1980. This was the reason given for the eventual assassination by a member of the Muslim Brotherhood of Anwar Sadat.

 

There are some, especially military historians, who believed at that time that this was an Israeli blunder as she could have retained at least half of the Sinai Peninsula retaining her mountainous midsection and the mountain passes allowing for greater tactical depth. Such a retention would also have set a precedent for Israel retaining lands gained in 1967 and defended in 1973, something considered normal and actually expected by most of the world. Israel, on the other hand, felt that little sacrifice was to be too excessive to make for peace. Still, it was this sacrifice which has long been used as the main argument that Israel realized that her conquest of the lands from her 1967 Six Day War to be illegal and thus imperative for them to be forfeit. Jordan proved to be the one who insisted Israel retain the lands that she retained after the war of 1948-9 knowing full well that those lands of Judea and Samaria and that Jordan had renamed West Bank to remove the obvious claim which Israel possessed over the lands. Jordanian annexation was refused by the entire world even to include the Arab League and its members with only Britain and Pakistan recognizing the annexation.

 

There has been a long period of time since the hot warfare erupted almost as if on a time schedule between the Arab world and Israel. This has permitted a sea of changes in the perceptions of the conflict and by that in the expectations for making peace. Forgotten is the peace with Egypt where the entirety of the Sinai Peninsula was returned to Egypt but that Egypt surrendered the lands she occupied and proved so by never annexing or incorporating them into Egypt, namely the Gaza Strip. After making peace with Egypt the Gaza Strip was returned unto Israeli rule as had been the default condition at the beginning of the war for Jewish genocide against the nascent state of Israel starting officially on May 15, 1948 and ending almost a year and a half later. The next to make peace was Jordan who also returned those lands she had occupied since the end of hostilities in that same war against Israel, returning to the originally drawn border between the two, intended to be the Jordan River. It was subsequent to this peace treaty that Jordan then backed the claim that there existed some state known as Palestine that had rightful claim to those lands of the West Bank and that Jordan had ruled over these lands illegally and that Israel was now obliged to give up the lands for the formation of Palestine. This was an enormous hoax by which the Arab League using Yasser Arafat’s PLO terror group to make a spurious claim of another Arab nation, the twenty-third, and claiming that Israel was occupying that nation’s actual homelands. Check history in 1967 before June and find Palestine on a map existing from any modern time before June of 1967 which has any reference to a nation known as Palestine. Unfortunately, the education system, the media, the European nations, the United Nations, the European Union, the Arab League and much of the remainder of the world even including the United States State Department all now support this fiction and the youth who were born after about 1960 have grown up much of their lives and all of their adult lives under this misconception that Israel stole through the 1967 war the lands destroying the nation of Palestine and that the area referred to as the West Bank replacing the names for the lands historically of Judea and Samaria, a substitution made by Jordan when she annexed these lands in 1950 leading to her being the occupying power of Israeli territory and never of anything named Palestine. Palestine is a fabrication meant to take land from Israel, and there is where the deceptions grow deeper still.

 

The deceptions grow deeper the more one connects the dots, dots being obscured by what are some very skilled and practiced deceivers who have funding beyond imaginations. Foremost amongst the deceptions is that all the Palestinians desire is their small homelands returned to them. Do not believe me then perhaps you can believe a member of the PLO executive committee. Zahir Muhsein. You see, way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”

 

Don’t want to believe me? I understand, but would you believe Wikipedia or Daniel Pipes or Wikiquote or simply use the search engine of your choice and query, Zahir Muhsein Dutch newspaper Trouw.

 

Then there is that reputed grassroots effort which goes by the name of BDS and has infected unbelievable campuses of colleges and universities in the West and untold numbers of mainstream media types and politicians around the world, yet probably less than 10% know the actual origins and financial support for the entirety of the BDS movement. The BDS movement originated as the Arab boycott and at some point it was thought that this boycott could be taken to the international audience and that the world was ready to join with this idea. Imagine the shock when the BDS movement did not catch on like wildfire. So it was turned over to be managed out of Ramallah by the PLO’s successor, the Palestinian Authority or PA. The PA would invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and eventually hundreds of millions of dollars and who even knows the full extent of the monies now invested in the BDS movement which is still primarily supported out of the PA budget but hidden under Fatah or the PLO or any number of different entities such that it is never discovered except as being amongst the information propaganda efforts. The monies used by the BDS movement is distributed through a system of channels through which everything flows as cash money, no bank accounts or other such traceable revenue streams, it is an all cash business and as such numerous people have been greatly enriched personally by the BDS cash flow. The BDS is sold in the Western World as a boycott of items from Israel which has some connection to the West Bank and never as a boycott of Israel itself. That is a deception as the BDS movement is designed by the PA and PLO to continue, as stated honestly in the literature, until Israel has been removed from all of their occupied Palestinian lands, code words for that chant you hear so often at rallies for the Palestinian cause, “From the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea; Palestine must be free.” There is no differentiation between inside and outside the Green Line; the BDS movement is designed to destroy all of Israel. The leadership of the BDS movement mostly serves double duty as they also organize the Israel Apartheid Week (or month) on campuses across the Western World once again to vilify all of Israel. Most of these efforts were launched at the first two Durban Conferences which were titled as “The United Nations World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,” one of the greatest misnomers in the history of deceptions. The conference broke down into a few separate items with one subject serving as the overriding target covered though there was also mention about reparations for slavery mostly to be paid by the United States and European powers and none to be paid by Middle Eastern and Asian nations. By and large the conference became a bash Israel fest to such a point that Canada joined the United States and Israel in quitting the first conference and not returning for subsequent conferences as they appeared to be simply updates and devising new tactics in the war against Israel.

 

The BDS movement lies and hypocrisies are just the tip of the iceberg. The proof has been easy to see if one just opens their eyes. Numerous of the store assaults, something often used against supermarkets or department stores, are not delicate surgical procedures, they are slash and burn procedures. They are riotous assaults where participants storm through the victimized location knocking over displays and showing a general disrespect for property all in the guise of BDS. They storm throughout the store seeking any items which are made by specific companies as well as any items marked as being produced by Israel without the slightest concern for whether they were manufactured or grown within the Green Line or in the disputed territories. There is little if any surgical precision or even the remotest attention to nuanced targeting, they are simply slash and burn of all items Israel and any mistake, well, it was an honest mistake and doesn’t Israel deserve the additional monetary price being paid. The sad item is that it is the store owner paying that price and actually their insurance provider. The truth is that the eventual price tag falls to the consumer as they will pay the increased price eventually.

 

But all that does not matter because the truth is in the message and that message is that Israel is an evil occupation force which stole Palestinian Lands during the war in 1948-9. Wait, I hear many of you calling out, don’t you mean in 1967? I mean 1967 as much as the Arabs and their stooges mean 1967 and I mean starting with the war that went officially hot in 1948 just as they mean 1948 and finally I mean to infer that this war started in 1922 with the first Arab anti-Jew pogrom just as they see this as a continuation of the 1922 riots and do not plan on stopping until the Jew has been entirely erased from all of their lands from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea just as many Arab nations drove the Jews from their soil by the middle of the 1950s possibly keeping a few remnants just as back before the 1960s numerous companies had the ‘company Jew’ which proved they were not guilty of anti-Semitism. The Hamas Charter goes the additional step of demanding that all of Israel be liberated from the Jew and then the world be cleansed of the Jew and only after that does the final conversions begins to take place. Once again we see one group telling the truth that what they plan to start with the Jew will end with all others once the Jew has been eradicated. Then there was the desire stated by Hezballah leader Nasrallah who hoped that all the Jews from every corner of the globe would make their way back to Israel so that his terrorist armies would not be required to search all over the globe to eradicate the last Jews as they would all be gathered in Israel. What is frightening is that Nasrallah might just get his way as far as religiously observant Jews outside of a small number of super-religious Jews who will refuse to leave until the Messiah gives them a hand written gold-leaf embossed personal invitation on perfumed stationary before they will even debate if the Messiah is the real deal. In the meantime I am simply trying to figure out how to get my daughter and grandchildren to make Aliyah.

 

The lies and deceits are deep beyond imagination. There are those who when speaking of Jews and Israel will come out, this has been done by a number of Iranian Imams and leaders as well as other Islamic Holocaust deniers who in a single breath will proclaim that there never was a holocaust and the Jews invented it and Allah willing there will be another Holocaust this time perpetrated by the Arabs or Muslims. Others have denied the Holocaust only to turn and claim they are dedicated to finishing what Adolph Hitler began. Abbas has made a perfectly valid statement knowing full well that the World and especially the political and media worlds will misinterpret what he meant and he can continue in his duplicitous stratagems. His comment is that he simply desires to claim his rightful 22% of the lands and then he will be satisfied, and in that he is speaking the truth. But the Western politicians and media will interpret this as meaning that all he wants are the lands of Judea and Samaria and then some even add in Gaza which places the error on the other end. You see there is only one measurement of lands that comes out almost within a few square meters of being exactly 22% and only one. When one takes Judea and Samaria compared to the entirety one finds that to be just a smidgeon above 21% and if then adding in Gaza the amount climbs to just short of 23%. But if one takes the British Mandate and subtracts the almost exactly 78% of the lands which constitute Jordan that leaves 22.06% of the lands not taken to form Jordan thus making all of Israel including Judea, Samaria (West Bank), Gaza and everything within the Green Line it is basically Abbas’s 22% plain and simple. People argue that I am splitting hairs and if I am it is only because I have seen not only Mahmoud Abbas be accurate to that degree of fault, especially when using a fuzzily and hazily defined set of terms to misdirect a willfully-blind media, but to lead easily doped hypocritical politicians and the rest of the useful idiots out in the world.

 

There has recently begun a very troubling and, though not at all unexpected, disconcerting set of events which has shown a growing tendency for those who are anti-Israel and anti-Zionist to also add a new feather to their bonnet which is an ancient feather which some have claimed is the feather representing the most ancient of hatreds, anti-Semitism. This had been manifest originally by the rampaging hooligans who destroyed anything labeled made in Israel and then blamed Israel for not denoting which merchandise was occupied-lands-free. This has now spread just that one next step to a bigger circle to include Jews as a guilty party by inference of possibly supporting Israel. Before going further into this, please allow us to predict the next and undeniably obvious incrimination to include another select and hated group to the list of guilty of the sin of Israel and that will be Evangelicals followed subsequently by conservatives of almost any stripe which is not anti-Semitic in nature to begin with. The worrying part in all of this has been the indoctrination of the youth, in particular those impressionable students in the colleges and universities and now starting to be brought into the classrooms of the high schools and lower grades as well. The problem with this is that today’s college, and especially high school, students are the leaders and shapers of society tomorrow (tomorrow = one to two decades but this is already well on its way so say five to ten years). The other fronts which are being implemented through intervention have been prison populations and the unions, especially teachers’ unions.

 

The BDS and anti-Israel and anti-Zionist leadership have already largely taken over the steering and defining of one of the United States two major political parties and in many European nations taken a grasp on many if not all political parties. One is guaranteed to find these views supported by the Communists, the Fascists, the Socialists and the leftist human rights guarantors. The conservatives are not completely above these influences but do tend to be the less confused and fooled. If we look around the Western World we find the staunchest supporters of Israel on the right of the political spectrum. Let’s talk first about the conservatives and leftists where they are most easily to differentiate, the two main political parties in the United States. The few Democrats who remain strong supporters of Israel are also the moderates and almost squeezed from the Democrat roles. One of the most conservative of the Republican hopefuls for the ticket for President in 2016 is Ted Cruz who is about as pro-Israel as they come as are many of his supporters. Some other true conservatives who fall heavily on the side of Israel and some even willing to claim that Israel is at the forefront of this culture war and the real leader of the Western World are former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, former Florida United States Congressman and retired U.S. Army Colonel Alan West, and current District One Representative in Oklahoma Jim Bridenstine. The reality struck home to those paying attention, a select few and you know who you are (our readers of course, the informed few), during the 2012 Democrat convention. There was a motion on the floor before the delegates which was to restore to the platform faith in G0d and support for Jerusalem to be the recognized capital of Israel. They called for a voice vote and it failed so the shocked chair restates the motion more deliberately and it is voice vote refused once again, and finally, after a quick consult from a ranking member, call for the vote again not hearing much in the way of a change, simply pronounced the motion adopted and moved on to a somewhat disturbed and perturbed hall. To watch the profound and shocking train of events for yourself see below or click for the YouTube video.

 

 

Other examples exist headed by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and British Prime Minister David Cameron with other notable supporters such as Geert Wilders who is a Minister in the Dutch Parliament. Unfortunately, supporting Israel is beginning to become a difficult position to hold through much of Europe and the rise in anti-Semitism is one of the lagging indicators. A direct relationship can be drawn between the drop in support for Israel and a coming increase in anti-Semitism. The rising anti-Semitism takes a number of different paths and like water it finds the paths of least resistance initially and then builds until it has the powers of tsunami and then comes the horrific and heinous results which if left unchecked anti-Semitism inevitable leads to. The proof of this is written throughout the over three-millennia of Jewish history from the Egyptian enslavement to the Babylonian exile to the eventual dark times under Persia to Greece, Rome, to Muslim and Crusader treachery alike to Muslims across North Africa and in the Middle East to European Kings and Barons to the Inquisition to the pogroms of the Czars and the Caliphs of the Ottomans and their lessor officials to the Nazis and the Communists to the current day Islamists and the coming waves of hatreds which now appear on the verge of cascading across the world from numerous equally volatile sources leading to potentially unprecedented levels with previously uncharted ramifications. Where the current spiral of hatreds will end or even if it will have an end is beyond any mortal perceptive intellect. One might ponder as to where are the prophets when one needs their guidance more than ever as threats and ravenous beasts rage at the gates and the barbarians have already found entrance ahead of the dark and ominous clouds on the horizon. One might hope that the threat of a previously unknown and apocalyptic storm perched on the horizon waiting for the sunrise simply to burst from its moorings and dissolve the sunlight into the pitched darkness of the darkest night and winds howling like the midnight wolves hungering for fresh meat leaving even the sane screaming against the thought of what the next precious hours of history may unfold quaking in fear of the unknown horrors now imagined. Is this our time, is this our destiny, is this the end of ends.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

May 11, 2015

As If Only Followers of Islam Take Offense

Filed under: 24/7 News Reporting,Administration,Allah,Amalekites,Amendment I,Amendment II,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,AP,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab Winter,Arab World,Arabist,Arabs,Armed Services,Assimilation,Battle of Khaybar,Blood Libel,Calaphate,Christians,Civilization,College Campus,Columbia University,Conflict Avoidnce,Consequences,Constitutional Government,Constitutionalist,Core Beliefs,Coverup,Debate,Domestic NGOs,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Geert Wilders,Guns,Hate,Havard,History,Idividual Protection,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Iranian Pressure,ISIS,Islam,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State,Islamists,Israel,Israeli Interests,Jihad,Judaism,Judeo-Christian,Leftist Pressures,Mainstream Media,Media,Media Bias,Media Censorship,Muslim World,Muslims,Myth,Nationalist Pressures,New York Times,Palestinian Pressures,Pamela Geller,Police,Politically Correct,Politically Incorrect,Politicized Findings,Politics,Religion,Robert Spencer,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Sharia Law,Shooting,Submission,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Constitution,United States Pressure,University,Victims,Washington Post,Washington Times,World Media,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:15 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

In the wake of the “Draw Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest” in Garland, Texas, the world of reporting and opinion journalism has largely taken the side of the Jihadists taking great offense each attempting to out-do the Muslims in taking insult. Their grand excuse is that what Ms. Geller, Mr. Spenser and Mr. Wilders were not expressing free speech but were expressing hate speech and therefore not worthy of Constitutional protection. I wonder if this exception which makes the “Draw Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest” not protected speech as it gives strictest followers of Islam so upset that they believe that Ms. Geller, Mr. Spenser and Mr. Wilders, especially Ms. Pamela Geller, deserve to be put to death for their insult to Islam also apply to my distaste and deep seated ire when Islamic Imams and others when they call for “Death to Israel” or compare Jews to Apes and Pigs. Would the same self-righteous giants of the world of news and opinion journalism and other media moguls give the same leeway to Jews if they were to respond to such insult in a similar manner as the two would-be jihadists and assaulted the Imam making such reference and took out the same righteous indignation taken from such insult? We all know the answer to such a situation, they would claim that the Imam’s speech was protected as free speech and religious freedom and my insults taken were insufficient for me or others so taken with insults and angers to be permitted to take such drastic actions. There appears to be a slight difference of standards to which Jews, Christians, Hindus, Bahá’í, Buddhists, Shinto or virtually any religion other than Islam are held but to such behavioral expectations the most violent and easily offended practitioners of Islam are granted a special sympathy and understanding. So, according to some of the greatest stalwarts of the left, right and center of the media who control the reporting of news, opinion and the making of standards for the masses concerning that which is to be tolerated and that which must be persecuted as they deem that Islam has special rights when it comes to expectations of actions, commentary, even the simple drawing of pictures of the Prophet Mohammad even should they be honorable and perfectly good taste and distinctly noble by those outside Islam and even presumably by the adherents to Islam. Never mind that there exist a plethora of renditions representing the Prophet Mohammad in books and paintings from numerous periods of Islamic history.

 

Still, the lack of nerve shown by so many but at least there have been those who did stand upright and take a stand for free speech such as Foxx News Megyn Kelly and former CNN host Piers Morgan, while I doubt this will endear him to his old bosses and regain him his position with them, though perhaps it would be to their credit to take him back for showing a modicum of fortitude taking the path less taken. There were many others who have usually stood when others crumbled like a house of cards but this time they too tumbled and trembled from the fear of Islamist disapproval and violence. Such former heavyweights as Don Imus and the No Spin Zone’s own Bill O’Reilly among others went limp and wilted blaming Pamela Geller, and interestingly enough Pamela Geller alone not mentioning Robert Spenser and Geert Wilders taking on the most vulnerable target, the one already targeted for her standing against Islam and the attacks from so many Islamist groups such as CAIR which is tied to Hamas, Muslim American Society which has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups which have also slandered and assaulted the reputation of Pamela Geller as well. It was a disgusting case of piling-on the weakest target. Fortunately for Ms. Geller, she has experienced such targeting before and continued to bounce back and continue in her crusade to uncover the less attractive sides of Islam and its most vehement and violent reactions which go beyond the accepted norms and expectations placed on all other religions.

 

The vehement attacks on Ms. Geller is a reaction she has faced before which will not have the effect which her attackers may hope it might as she has made a practice of walking the edge in her efforts to display the duplicity of the reactions to Islam and Israel and the media hypocrisy. We should not expect for Ms. Geller to calm her approach continuing forward though it is very likely she may not see any sympathetic media coverage with perhaps a few brave souls who have already warmed to her side already claiming that her freedom of speech though controversial is exactly the kind of speech the Constitution’s First Amendment was designed to protect. Where the First Amendment also protect the free exercise of religion, such freedom of religious exercise does not include murdering those who may not follow the precepts of ones’ religion and no matter what rules the religion exercises. Ms. Geller will continue pushing the envelope and continue proving that in the United States the people’s freedoms are paramount and will not be compromised simply because somebody’s sensitivities might be upset beyond measure and to the point of violence. Instead, if one uses violence to silence any American they may likely find the freedoms are better protected than initially believed. Let us hope that the freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution continue to be kept sacred and not compromised in order to placate the sensitivities expressed and even to respond to the fact that some were driven to violence as a response. Violence must not be used to sacrifice freedoms as once such a response to violence destroys freedoms then all freedoms will become suspected as vulnerable to violence attacks over time. Such weakness can eventually lead to the compromise of all the Constitutional freedoms and the end of the promises of the Constitution and Bill of Rights which have survived just over two-hundred years. Could this be the first assault which will lead to the compromise of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and an end to the freedoms which have been taken for granted by the American people since the institutions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified and took their place as laws never before enshrined by any government in history. That may depend on the reaction of We the People and fortunately not on the weak kneed media elites, and for that the world can be thankful.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

May 8, 2015

Trembling Before Societal Threats

 

What we witnessed in Garland, Texas was the intentional display of one American freedom and the necessary display of a second |American freedom. Though somewhat risky, the first freedom on display was a risky, outright, and in your face expression of free speech, the kind of free speech which Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders have both made their signatory claim to fame though I would be hard pressed to choose which has been more brazen. The third person mentioned in the coverage of the event also is no stranger to controversy though his method is through political writings where Robert Spencer has also challenged Islam and the Western World’s cowardly reaction, something extremely appropriate at this event as here too subjects and brutal truths were the theme of the day. The three are all well-known by the media and often interviewed leading up to and in the aftermath of their often edgy events or their provocative speaking engagements, but this time have been mostly left high and dry by media at both extremes of the political spectrum and many inbetween. What makes this particular series of events an interesting juxtaposition was how the First Amendment right to free speech was so appropriately protected by the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. This was proof in spades that the First Amendment would be worthless without the Second Amendment to protect it and why the Second Amendment needs to be forever protected by the First Amendment. The main spectacle displayed was the depiction on the inexorably changing media view of Draw Mohammad Cartoon events with near universal expressions and even outright support and praise across the political spectrum for the bravery of the original draw Mohammad cartoon contest when it first appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten which published twelve initial editorial cartoons on September 30, 2005; which shrank to largely conservative and libertarian support for Charlie Hebdo Magazine and its slaughtered cartoonists and staff in the assault on their offices by two violent Islamist extremists in Paris, France; to the near universal condemnation from the self-proclaimed stalwarts of the conservative media as well as the liberal media, which has long held out long knives for Pamela Geller, for the event in Garland, Texas sponsored American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) of a Draw Mohammad Art Contest to honor the murdered Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. Equally craven has been the excusing of those condemning this event claiming that the main reason for the sudden timidity exhibited by much of the conservative media has to do with the proximity of the Texas event bringing the kind of threat to people attending one such event from happening in “distant” Europe and bringing it to America’s doorstep and in this they saw in this their own vulnerability to attack by similar forces over much of their former coverage of such events and this motivated the weak-kneed responses as they attempted to back away and distance themselves from such controversial and provocative events.

 

We would be remiss were we not to point out the true hero of the hour who stood single handed, out gunned and facing what must have appeared to be certain death and with the cool and steady hand one could only expect to see on a movie screen, an off-duty police officer who before his heroic stand had been assigned to traffic duty. The statement made by Garland police spokesman Joe Harn stated the obvious, “He did what he was trained to do and under the fire that he was put under, he did a very good job.” I might be tempted to go slightly beyond a “good job” in my description and be inclined to use words like heroic, herculean, courageous and the kind of actions beyond all expectations and more inclined to be witnessed performed by movie heroes than expected from one previously not apparently inclined to such heroics. The officer’s name is being withheld for his own safety and rightly so. Even so, there was a SWAT team also on location placed behind the building just in case they might prove needed, and they would have been except for the gargantuan bravado of a single man to whom many owe their lives. The two would-be jihadists were armed with, according to a law enforcement source close to the investigation, six guns, a mix of assault-style semiautomatic rifles and handguns exited their vehicle firing AK-47s, a high-powered assault style semi-automatic .30-calibre rifles against the lone armed officer with a .45-caliber Glock semi-automatic pistol. Making the standoff even more uneven was the fact the would-be jihadists were wearing full body armor leaving only limited target area vulnerable to the officer’s handgun while he at best was wearing standard police protective jacket which the rifle rounds would have torn through almost effortlessly. Still, when the smoke cleared and by the time the SWAT team arrived on scene from behind the building the lone officer who was accompanying the unarmed security person who had been responsible for checking the tickets of those entering the hall and who did receive injuries, had taken down both perpetrators and did so in under fifteen seconds. That is what is called excellent and efficient gun control, the good guy standing his ground despite being grossly overmatched in firepower and armored protection and yet calmly and coolly took down both threats presented before him. One could continue to lavish praise upon praise and still not match the acts of pure bravado and stouthearted selflessness by this sole brave individual and had preventing the two criminals from gaining entrance to the hall where events were still unfolding.

 

In the aftermath the coverage had mostly been vindictively assailing Pamela Geller claiming that she had endangered people needlessly by her provocative actions. CNN reporter Chris Cuomo accused Pamela Geller in his tweets of being guilty of hate speech is not protected by the Constitution and the First Amendment. Kudos goes to Fox News’s Megyn Kelly shooting down a guest and the host, Bill O’Reilly, on the O’Reilly Factor. According to the presumed intrepid Bill O’Reilly, “It’s always cause and effect, OK? And the cause, because they did it, the two jihadis are dead. Now I know a lot of people aren’t feeling sorry for them, and I’m certainly not either because they were trying to kill other people. However, all right, this is what happens when you light the fuse. You get violence.” This is from the ‘No Spin Zone?’ This sounds more like the ‘Centrifugal Spin Zone’ where the target of Mr. O’Reilly had shot straighter and with less spin than was evidenced on his show. Megyn Kelly’s retort ending the discussion may have appeared over the top but how else does one halt a charging O’Reilly on his own show, so she shot back, “You know what else the jihadis don’t like? They hate Jews. Should we get rid of all Jews? That’s the path we’re gonna go down if we start catering to the jihadis.” Still, she has a point even if the description was a bit coarse and over the top. Then there was one we must credit with getting it correct; Piers Morgan, somebody I likely feel about the same towards as he does Pamela Geller, but he got it right stating, “Pamela Geller is a revolting human being. I despise everything about her, and everything she stands for. Yet I also support her right to free speech.” Very well stated and framing the argument near perfectly. I believe it was attributed to Voltaire as a summation of his attitudes towards free speech where it was succinctly put, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

 

That should be the attitude of every American and every lover of freedom when it comes to free speech. Uncontroversial speech does not need protection. Popular speech needs no protection. Everyday banter at the water cooler needs little protection. Political speech, especially radical speech, that is what needs protection. Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer with their Mohammad Cartoon contest and tribute to Charlie Hebdo required protection of free speech and if the two men who came to shoot the purveyors of speech with which they disagreed had instead of baring guns and the intent to use them had instead broken out protest signs and protested replete with their speaking out against the insult they perceived, that too would have deserved protection. Where people may have been offended by somebody’s spoken word, no words spoken have ever killed somebody and if there has been speech which called for violence against others, especially if the intent was purposeful to have people thus act, that is not protected. That is true hate speech which many are attempting to equate Pamela Geller with making. Their argument falls apart under any scrutiny as the only people threatened to become victims of the speech being practiced within the convention hall in Garland, Texas, were the people inside the hall exercising free speech for which two men illegally were attempting of denying them their right to free speech. Had somebody held a counter rally outside the convention hall, they too would have been making protected free speech. But had either the people within the hall or those outside the hall called for their group to proceed to kill the others, that is not protected speech. What so many are getting confused over is the difference between ‘hate speech’ and ‘call to violence speech’. The former is protected while the latter is not protected speech. Where both are a form of hate speech, only the one calling for the commission of violence is illegal. Has everybody forgotten the fight in the courts over the Nazi Party’s plans to march through the largely Jewish community of Skokie, Illinois, outside Chicago where a Nazi concentration camp survivor brought suit to stop their march and the ACLU and some of their lawyers who happened to also be Jewish defending the Nazi right to march won the Nazis defense of their freedom of expression. The march itself never took place and their demonstrations drew less than fifty people total including the media, but they won their day in court against a Jewish man while having Jewish lawyers argue their case, a point they were quite pleased with, but they proved there can be no limit to speech provided there is not call to violence. If Jews can defend the rights for Nazis to march through Skokie, then why have so many former defenders of free speech turned out to have arguments of clay as soon as it becomes slightly dangerous to protect their freedoms? Has the desire to remain free wilted to such an extent that we now must fear the death of those freedoms? I pray not, for the United States should stand for the rights of the weak and the threatened against all threats of violence and do so steadfastly and with the bravery shown by one exemplary actions of a traffic cop who must remain nameless in Garland, Texas. Perhaps if he could depend on all Americans to stand as he did when the chips were falling, then perhaps he would not need to have his name withheld and we could celebrate this man as he deserves.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.