Stick A Fork In It

Outrage.  Where's the outrage?  Recent developments this last week has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the demise of justice is complete.  Et mortuus est; it is dead.  There should be armed citizens in the streets, not only demanding, but seeing to it that those perpetrators of injustice are hanged by the neck in the public square.

The first travesty of justice is the political theater surrounding the ongoing coup de e'tat against a duly elected and sitting American president.  With the Mueller report out, clearly revealing what every critical thinking American already knew, is that there is no Russian collusion by the Trump campaign.  But what has come to light is that, first, the real collusion with Russia was conducted by the Hillary Clinton campaign designed solely to torpedo Trump's presidential campaign.  (We'll set aside for the moment details of the infamous deal Hillary cut with Russia by selling off a significant amount of the United States' uranium assets).  And second, that the Democrat Party, enabled and emboldened by their conspirators the MSM, invented the entire matter, and perpetrated this scam with fake news for two-and-a-half years.  In case you missed Civics 101, those kinds of actions are defined as treason and sedition.  And those are hangin' offenses.

The major players in this coup, those at the tippy top of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, continue to walk free as we speak.  The public trust in those organizations will continue to erode proportionately with the length of time that goes by before they are formally arrested and charged.  But I won't hold my breath.

To add insult to judicial malfeasance, the Jusse Smollett case is a perfect example.  Here's a black homosexual B-list actor who fakes a racial and sexual "hate" hoax, and basks in the victimization that the race baiters and MSM heap upon him.  But after the Chicago Police Department investigates his complaint, it becomes painfully obvious that he faked the whole thing, including hiring a couple of Nigerian immigrants to act as the perps.  He's charged with filing a false police report and felony disorderly conduct, arrested and  jailed.  Now comes a Kenyan-regime lawyer, and viola!  Overnight, the despicable Smollett is not only released, but all charges against him are dropped.  Even the far left Chicago mayor, Rahm Emmanuel, is rightly outraged.  Now that's what I call black privilege.

But wait.  These are just unfortunate and unrelated instances, one may point out.  Hardly an indictment of American justice and rule of law, one may posit.  Nope, I'm not buying it.  In both cases, that other despicable Chicago organizer has his Marxist, homosexual fingerprints all over it.  He has to perpetrate his "legacy," after all.

It's apparent that now have a two tiered justice system: one for the privileged and well-connected, and one for the rest of us.  Worse, these law-breakers are actually rewarded for their deceit and criminality.  This country's founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.

So unless and until there is an overwhelming public reaction against this blatant corruption at DoJ and FBI, there is no way that American jurisprudence can survive.  Republicans in congress are screaming for investigations, but we can be forgiven for having a degree of skepticism.  We'll see.

So you can stick a fork in fair and blind American justice, because it's done!

About Goddamn Time

The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife.  Even the established leftist global thought police is struggling to figure out how to spin this one.  But the fact remains that 89 Muslims were shot or killed in assaults on a couple of mosques in New Zealand.  And it's about Goddamn time.

Before you accuse me of being insensitive or a monster, let me refresh your memory.  It is Islam that has been conducting terror on civilization in general and Christianity in particular for over one thousand four hundred years.  After Mohammed's - the self appointed prophet - death in 632 AD, Abu Bakr, the new Muslim caliph, launched the newly established cult of  Islam into fourteen centuries of continual bloody conquest and subjugation through invasion, terror and war.  And it's a role Islam continues to this very day.  When their vicious, savage and primitive onslaught becomes too much, civilization reacts; it defeats them and knocks them back into their seventh century desert hives.  Or Afghan caves.

This is one of those times.

It happened before on September 11, 1683 (that's a familiar date, isn't it?) at the siege of Vienna, when the Islamic Ottoman Empire was crushed by Christian Europe.  Saxon, Pole and Austrian allies turned back the Muslim attack on Vienna, then seen as the gateway to Europe.  They ultimately defeated the the vicious Turk "Black" Mustafa, whose goal was to conquer all of Christian Europe and fold it into the caliphate.  

And perhaps it happened again Friday in Christchurch, New Zealand with attacks on two mosques, perpetrated by as many as four people - facts are changing on an hourly basis at this time - resulting in forty-nine Muslims killed and some thirty-nine wounded.  For those individuals harmed, my sympathies.  For their ideology, my condemnation. 

What if, in the face of the abject failure of national leaders to effectively rid civilization of this insane cult, individuals took matters into their own hands, and applied vigilante justice to the problem?  Would that action "raise awareness" of Islam's vicious methods?  Of its incessant aggression?  Of its stated cultural jihad?  Not in this case, because New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's initial response to this reaction is to further tighten New Zealand's already extremely strict gun laws.  Further, the globalized media has already condemned the shooter(s) as being white supremacists, whatever that is, ignoring completely one shooter's manifesto praising communist China - which is neither white nor Christian - as his preferred master.  But no fault whatsoever may be lain at the feet of Islam.  No questions ever arise as to the inherent incompatibility of Western and Islamic cultures.  Nope, it's always bad white guys with guns.

However, one brave voice, Sen. Fraser Anning of Queensland, has uttered the dismal truth. "Does anyone still dispute the link between Muslim immigration and violence?"  Of course not.  Ask that of Sweden.  Or of London.  Or of Minneapolis.   He also noted, " . . . the real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place." 

Well now.  Speaking of speaking truth to power.  He's right and we can't have that. Watch now as the "woke" Islam apologists, fascists that they are, begin their inevitable destruction this man's career, life and family. 

But what if there's a new view, a new tactic, in dealing with Muslim atrocities? One that brings the battle to ground level, fought by individuals?  One on one.  Mano a mano.  What do you call a citizen-non-soldier?  The lone wolf?  The patriot?  The minuteman?  We may now have a new paradigm that is willing to fight fire with fire.

Terrorize the terrorists.  Random.  Unexpected.  Brutal. 

Even John Miller, New York Police Deputy Commissioner for Intelligence and Counter-terrorism, sees it in this way, too.  He recently said the New Zealand attack was further evidence that, "in terms of tactics, the neo-fascist groups, the white supremacists, are borrowing from the ISIS playbook."  By using those labels I'm sure he's referring to civilized, informed and responsible citizens.

But if he's right, and it would appear that he is, it's about Goddamn time.

Hate That Speech

I rise in favor of hate speech, whatever that is.  Before you roll your eyes, let's look at the topic dispassionately.

Speech is speech.  I've addressed this recently in these pages.  There's no such thing as hate speech. What is referred to as hate speech is merely a pejorative label that some people in power have assigned to ideas and opinions with which they find objectionable.  What may be hate speech to one is simply an opinion to another. And the concept of hate speech, not surprisingly, is a construct of the Marxist left.  If we must be tolerant of others' worldviews and opinions, as they so often and loudly proclaim, why do we have a concept of hate speech at all?  Aren't those on the left advocating for a free and open dialogue and tolerance on all things?

No, they are not.  The left realizes that the right to not be offended supersedes any right to utter a contrary opinion.  And being offended is a natural right, according to the left.  Let's take just one recent real world example regarding antisemitism.

White and Black anti-Jew.  So what?

Dr. David Duke has, throughout his career, maintained that he believes the Jews are the cause of most of the world's troubles.  And it would seem that freshman congressman Ilhan Omar agrees with him.  Duke is, according to those knowledgeable in the matter, a "radical racist, white supremacist, and anti-Semite," and Omar is a black Somali Muslim, but apparently not a radical racist, black supremacist, and anti-Semite.  Both have served in Congress, and both have a negative opinion of Israel in particular and Jews in general. But Duke's opinion about Jews is condemned as hate speech, but so far Omar's is merely a misstated tweet.  The media and pundits on both political sides decry Duke's endorsement of Omar, because anything or anyone Duke supports or endorses is the kiss of death to the recipient. Most folks would condemn their positions on Jews as being hateful, anti-Semitic and bigoted.  Those folks say you can't say anything derogatory about Jews.  That's bad.  And they may well be right. Others may passionately and vigorously disagree.  They may say you can't say anything derogatory about Muslims.  That's bad.   And they may be right.  But the left is out of its mind being offended by an opinion on Jews.

So why should I care if Duke and Omar hate Jews?  Why should I care that Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton hate white people?  Why should I care if Jews hate Muslims, or Muslims hate Jews?  And why should I tolerate the left's demand that I condemn anyone simply because of the left's condemnation?  What if I share some of those offensive-to-the-left's opinions?  Is that hate thought?

I'm free to form my own opinions, my own biases, my own ideas, and my own likes and dislikes.  I'm free to express those positions and ideas vocally.  If that offends someone, they have the right to simply not listen to me, or certainly disagree with me.  But they do not have a right to not be offended.

So as a society, let's grow up, and be mature about all this so called hate speech goin' on, and identify it for what it really is and for what purpose it serves. The purpose of the whole hate speech boondoggle is to make folks afraid to say anything that runs counter to the Marxist left's ideology.  It's a mechanism for the left to further control the national discourse about what a perfect society should be.  To politicize - and by that I mean to weaponize - constraints on thought and opinion expressed vocally is just taking one step closer to totalitarianism.  George Orwell warned us about that.  It's a form of censorship.

Take back your liberty, your God-given right to express yourself freely, and say what's on your mind.  Defy political correctness; speak the truth.  By that I don't mean to imply that one should be discourteous, as decorum and common sense still prevail.   But don't fall into the trap of self censorship, either:  there are plenty of voices out there that will gladly do that for you.