Category Archives: authoritarian swine

The Watchmen (and women) on the Wall

My colleague Y.B. has nailed it. Again.

 

There are those that see what is happening around them and see the pattern, and see it for what it is, they recognize that pattern. Then there are those that see the pattern and because it is ugly they tell themselves they can’t possibly be seeing exactly what they are seeing and pull the covers back over their head and top it off with a pillow. Then there are those that see the pattern, look at it for two seconds and ask what time “American Idol” comes on that night. Ok, if it were National Finals Rodeo I could maybe understand a little, maybe, but sure not much. That is sad, very sad. Then there are those that see the pattern, know exactly what it is, and in fact maybe helping to contribute to it but deny that it is a pattern and vilify those that point it out. They spend their resources assuring the nervous that all is well, it’s just fine,nothing to see here, move along.

 

A few random things, a NY city Council man David Greenfield went on a trip to Israel, while there he went to Ramallah. While there, after a visit with the American Consul-General in Jerusalem at his Ramallah office he and the group prepared to go back to their transportation. He was asked to remove his Kippah. He refused.

“I walked into Ramallah with my yarmulke on, of course,” he said. “I was pulled aside by security personnel and was told that I should not wear my yarmulke when I was leaving the building.” The surprised Greenfield asked why he was being told this, and the answer was that “there was a security situation on the ground” and that it was not safe.”I specifically asked them if it was unsafe for me or for the group – they said it was definitely not an issue for the group but they could not guarantee my personal safety. I explained for them that for me it’s a very significant issue and that quite frankly, had I been told this in advance, I never would have agreed to come to Ramallah.”I was told that the US government was providing security and as an official, I expected them to keep up their end of the deal,” he said, adding that the request to have him remove the kippah had come from the Palestinian hosts.

Councilman Greenfield certainly gets it. This is a response he presented at a meeting. He gets it very well.

Then there is this speech by the French Prime Minister.

He gets it.

Then we have those that have walked the streets of Europe wearing a Kippah, to show reactions.

 

 

And in Paris for ten hours, but this one just loops, it’s not really that long.

 

 

We have the 51 Democrats that are Anti-Semitic and Anti-Israel. They whined that they didn’t like how John Bohner invited Prime Minister Netanyahu to give the speech. Well, I don’t like Bohner. But I suspect he was correct, if he went through the White House aka the House of Hussein, there would be no speech. I’m pretty confident that if Iran develops a nuclear weapon it will affect the US as well as Israel. But barry is too busy trying to be buddies with the people that want to kill US than to allow mere facts to interfere with his enjoyment of his rainbow stew. This link has the speech embedded in the web site. Nancy Pelosi showed she could edge 20 steps closer to Prozac and a padded room when she called the speech “Insulting and condescending.” It would seem Democrats are far more invested in towing the barry boat than living in reality. They do not get it, and they also attempt to mislead the uninformed that vote for them. There is a very real threat.

 

I have a very sweet lady in a class I take and we had a conversation about guns. She told me she and her husband absolutely respect the Second Amendment, but they belong to the Brady campaign and they just think that all guns need to be registered to stop crime. Class was over and we were all leaving, but I suggested she do a quick internet search for the “Nuremberg Laws”. I pointed out that Hitler could easily keep Jews from owning weapons to protect themselves because they already had a list of who owned what. So when Hitler decided Jews could have nothing to do with firearms, or own them, they knew where the were, duck soup, round up. She doesn’t get it, at all. But she said she still loved me, and I still think she is a lovely lady. An easy target, but a lovely lady. That “Nuremberg Laws article is pretty interesting by the way. Some compare and contrast in it.

 

So knowledge and interpretation certainly play a role in what you see, and how you see it. But another aspect is your attitude about it. I recently had a very brief discussion with a Rabbi. It involved my wish that Moshe Feiglin would have been returning to the Knesset. He seemed to think that wasn’t such a great thing. I said I just think Jews should be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount, and I do, and I mean right now yesterday. His comment was “When the Messiah comes back”. Really. Because this attitude of accepting little scraps of freedom, the little bits of the Jewish identity people are allowed to retain, the areas where it is safe to walk or as Y.B. pointed out, worship should all be determined by others? The Southern Cowgirl in me rears up and says “OH HELL NO”!

 

Because when you see attacks on a persons religion, on their ethnicity on their belief system when it harms no one else, you can just about bet the farm that not long after follow the physical attacks. WHY does it need to get to that point?

 

There are people who see what is happening, they see what is coming. And while the current regime uses government agencies to go after those that speak out, they still must.

1 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, speak to your people and sayto them, If I bring the sword upon a land, and the people of the land take a manfrom among them, and make him their watchman, 3 and if he sees the sword comingupon the land and blows the trumpet and warns the people, 4 then if anyone whohears the sound of the trumpet does not take warning, and the sword comes andtakes him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. 5 He heard the sound ofthe trumpet and did not take warning; his blood shall be upon himself. But if hehad taken warning, he would have saved his life. 6 But if the watchman sees thesword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned,and the sword comes and takes any one of them, that person is taken away in hisiniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.~~Ezekiel 33: 1-6

These people are called Watchmen.

 

There is a name for those that attempt to mislead people into thinking everything is fine too, or should agree to things that have been disastrous in the past and would be again. And this song keeps going through my mind when I think about them. Yesh lanu tayis.

owl and late mouse
What’s for dinner?

 

Keep your eyes open, and choose carefully who you listen to.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

“Disappearing” David Codrea

“Here today, gone tomorrow.”

ScreenHunter_03 Mar. 04 09.40

ScreenHunter_01 Mar. 06 08.43

As David says, KABA is Gottlieb’s site. He can do what he wants with it. But it’s also supposed to be a gun news site — which Gottlieb pledged not to nerf when he bought it.

The banned “Regrettable Announcement” was, of course, David’s post about leaving JPFO over … KABA’s banning of stories.

We now know that news is not news in the KABA world if it mentions Mike Vanderboegh. In the future will news not be news to KABA if it’s about or written by David Codrea? Only time will tell. But “disappearing” two of the most prominent figures in the gun-rights movement is … well, you know.

And war is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
We have always been at war with Eastasia
And Big Brother loves us.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

If this be cowardice, be glad we’re cowards

First, The Talk.

Last week one of TZP’s blog posts drew this response via Twitter: We ARE a nation of cowards. Proof: Holder is still breathing.”

The comment came from a long-time, much-respected freedomista. What follows is not in any way a knock on him. Anybody who’s been around the freedom movement, watching for decades as high-level rights-robbing criminals go unpunished, knows the frustration that drives statements like that.

But I’ve been dispatched by the rest of the TZP crew to say a few words about future comments that may go over the line, over the top, or around the bend.

We let that particular tweet remain in our feed because it stayed on this side of the dangerous line: no threats were made or implied. But the line is there. Any comment on our blog or our social media feeds that crosses that line — that advocates aggressive violence or threatens anybody — may be deleted posthaste or mocked mercilessly and Made An Example Of. The person making it may be blocked, banned, restricted, barred, disbarred, forbidden, kicked out, ejected, evicted, removed from under their troll bridge, defenestrated, given the boot, or given a pair of boots and be told the hit the road. We also generally follow the comment policy outlined by TZPer Nicki Kenyon on her personal blog.

Now, this position will inevitably lead some readers (see “around the bend,” above) to scream “Censorship!” and “You’re violating my First Amendment rights!” Some may call us collaborators and sellouts for refusing to give our online space to the cause of fomenting their revolution or assassinating their least-favorite politician. So be it. To those folks we say: Get your own webspace. It’s cheap (if not free) these days. Then you can have the joy of dealing with the FBI, ATF, DHS, or IRS when your posts come to their attention. We’d prefer to avoid such bad company, thank you.

While you’re explaining yourself in an interrogation cell, we’ll go right on following Aaron Zelman’s original mission of educating, inspiring, and providing a safe place for a lawful conspiracy to restore freedom and gun rights.

You have been warned. Not that most of you need it. But there it is, on behalf of the entire might of TZP officialdom.

Second, The Action. Even when the best action may look like inaction.

Now to the more interesting part.

I suspect there’s not one of us who, in some dark moment, hasn’t wished death (or at least a severe case of genital fungus) upon some haughty villain whose badge or title or office or rank (not to mention the presence of heavily armed bodyguards, iron gates, security systems and suchlike) makes him (or her) untouchable by We the Peasants.

We watch as bureaucrats, elected officials, or puffed-up billionaire cronies rampage over our freedoms. We stand here shouting and waving our arms as our country oozes downhill — and we feel as if we’re doing nothing. Or at least nothing useful.

I grok the feeling.

We fantasize about uprisings. We read novels or watch movies about rebellion. We gaze backward to the days before the American Revolution, looking for similarities, for trigger events, for courage. We cheer for some other mouse to “bell the cat.” Then (oddly enough) when the occasional would-be leader actually does step forward to propose gathering an army to march on Washington, DC, we suddenly find we have something better to do.

But that’s not cowardice on our part. It’s good sense. Because the wanna-be generals are usually either damnfools or agents provocateurs.

The fact is: violence (even in the name of freedom) isn’t the sure sign of courage or principles, and non-violence in the face of oppression isn’t the sure sign of cowardice.

Violence is often just the sign of dangerous idiocy or desperation born of a failure to think creatively. Non-violence (not inaction, mind you, but non-violence) may be not only a sign of wisdom and prudence; it may in the long run be the surest course toward restoring freedom.

Sixteenth-century proto-freedomista Étienne de La Boétie put it well in his Discourse on Voluntary Servitude (1548): “I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.”

The poet Shelley had a thoughtful take on tyrants, too. He and La Boétie could have had a great conversation over a bottle of wine.

TZP’s own Oleg Volk made an apt comment on the understandable desire to see any specific official “terminated with extreme prejudice”: “While assassinations are cathartic, they are generally counter-productive in a democratic society because the evil is usually a feature of the position held as much as a feature of the specific personality. If Holder dies, his handlers will appoint another of similar moral qualities.”

And ain’t that the truth? Not only will some similar lump of excremental corruption replace anyone who’s assassinated; but we’ll get entire new agencies, directorates, bureaucracies, departments, and dictatorship, all dedicated to combatting the threat to fedgovian power. Government is worse than a Lernaean Hydra when it’s directly attacked.

There may come a time when defensive violence in the cause of American liberty is necessary once again. But that time is not now — and if we commit ourselves to promoting and preparing for freedom in the present, that time may never come. We should hope for that. We should hope — and we have reason to hope — that big, overreaching government will bloat and die from within. We should hope — and we have reason to hope — that dedicated freedomistas, including gun owners, will hasten that death by refusing to yield, refusing to obey, refusing to grant any respect to those who sieze our rights.

Revolutions and assassinations look good in the movies, but in real life they mostly bring crackdowns and other catastrophes. Frustration makes them seem appealing, but the reality is otherwise. If you want a revolution or you want to see some politician dead, you’re entitled to your point of view. But if that’s what you want, you’d better not let your frustration do your thinking and planning for you. And if that’s what you want, don’t bring it here.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Morons Will be Morons

I’m beginning to think the residents of New York deserve every bit of stupid heaped on them by their drooling nimrod politicians. After all, they do keep electing these monkeys into office!

The latest bit of stupid comes from New York state senator Tony Avella, who has decided that New York needs to ban machetes.

No, I’m not kidding. Get a load at this tool.

tool

He’s perfectly serious. Apparently machete crimes are now a problem in the Empire State. And under the proposed legislation, one could get a year in the pokey for merely possessing this gardening tool.

Smaller knives such as switchblades and gravity knives are already banned and listed as deadly weapons under state law, but machetes are considered the same as butcher knives.

New Yorkers carrying those knives can be ticketed for a blade longer than 4 inches, an administrative code violation. They face up to 15 days in jail and a $300 fine.

“They’re DAAAAAAAAAAAAANGEEEEEEEEROOOOOUUUUUUSSS,” he simpers!

“The fact that anyone can easily purchase this potentially lethal tool is just crazy,” he said.

And anything dangerous is bad for you, and therefore must be banned.

For real.

So, let’s ban hammers, household chemicals, and of course automobiles!

Why stop at machetes? Ban teeth and fists while you’re at it. Those kill as well.

And maybe we should mandate that every citizen leave the house only when wrapped in a copious amount of styrofoam. And maybe bubble wrap.

Tyranny starts with stupid. I’m convinced of it.

So until New Yorkers get educated and start exhibiting some independent thought and intestinal fortitude when dealing with their own lives, perhaps they deserve these types of lunatics as legislators.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

NYT hyperventilates about concealed carry, skews statistics

I know you will be shocked, just SHOCKED, to find out that the New York Times editorial board is soiling itself over what it calls “Concealed Carry’s Body Count.” Apparently the editors at the Times decided to take on people who are legally permitted to carry firearms concealed.

In other words, they are quaking in their collective panties at the thought, and have decided to paint concealed carry permit holders as a group of murderous villains, using data from the Violence Policy Center, which they describe as a “gun safety group,” making me want to choke on my coffee.

There is no central tally of the effects, with states often barring release of concealed-carry data and Congress hewing to the gun lobby’s opposition to research on guns’ effects on public health. But a methodical gleaning of eight years of news accounts by the Violence Policy Center, a gun safety group, found that in research involving 722 deaths in 544 concealed-carry shootings in 36 states and the District of Columbia, only 16 cases were eventually ruled lawful self-defense — even though this has been a major gun rights selling point for the new laws.

In my old life, when I worked as a reporter, inflammatory words such as “horrifying,” “slain,” and “alarming” were discouraged. I was taught we were there to report the news, not tell people what to think. I realize the above-linked is an editorial, and therefore does not have to conform to those standards (I would submit that given the Grey Hag’s tendency to skew its reporting, it doesn’t abide by those standards anyway), but the outright absurdity of painting concealed carriers with the broad brush of violence and murder prompts me to take a look at the larger picture.

Enter the Crime Prevention Research Center’s study on concealed carry in America. It seems there are a few facts the NYT editorial staff either did not know, or did not bother to research.

They did not mention until the very bottom of the article (more as an afterthought), for example, that there are at least 11.1 million concealed carry permit holders in the United States. I say “at least,” because according to the CPRC, that number is likely much higher, given the fact that several states, such as New York, don’t report the number of their concealed carry permit holders. And several states have no permit requirements for concealed carry at all.

But let’s go with that 11.1 million people, which represents roughly 4.8 percent of the population.

According to the VPC, there were *GASP* 544 shootings involving concealed carry permit holders, 16 of which were ruled lawful self defense. That would leave 528 shootings between 2007 and 2014 (I’m assuming they are including 2014, as the editorial merely states there were that many shootings since 2007) or 75.4 per year.

In comparison, between 2007 and 2012 (the latest year for which the CDC has data),  average of 548 people were stabbed to death per year, 425.6 were beaten to death, and 138.5 per year were strangled or suffocated.

Now let’s look at those 528 shootings. Let’s assume that these involve 528 separate concealed carry permit holders. Given that there are at the very least 11.1 million concealed carry holders currently residing in the United States, those 528 represent .048 percent of people with valid concealed carry permits. Not even a half a percent.

And this is what the NYT editorial staff chooses to hyperventilate about? These are the statistics they choose to report as some kind of horror involving those evil concealed carry holders?

Really?

So not only does the editorial staff cite a VPC report that apparently not only contains inaccuracies, such as double or triple counting cases that shouldn’t even be counted as crimes or problems with guns to begin with, but the numbers they use are so minuscule in comparison to the concealed carry population at large, that it hardly qualifies as “a problem.”

Additionally, if you look at the data, concealed carry permit holders, are a fairly law-abiding bunch.

Consider the two large states at the front of the current debate, Florida and Texas: Both states provide easy web access to detailed records of permit holders. During over two decades, from October 1, 1987 to May 31, 2014, Florida has issued permits to more than 2.64 million people, with the average person holding a permit for more than a decade. Few — 168 (about 0.006%) — have had their permits revoked for any type of firearms related violation, the most common being accidentally carrying a concealed handgun into a gun-free zone such as a school or an airport, not threats or acts of violence. It is an annual rate of 0.0002 percent.

The already low revocation rate has been declining over time. Over the last 77 months from January 2008 through May 2014, just 4 permits have been revoked for firearms-related violations. With an average of about 875,000 active permit holders per year during those years, the annual revocation rate for firearms related violations is 0.00007 percent – 7 one hundred thousandths of one percentage point.

For all revocations, the annual rate in Florida is 0.012 percent.

And the numbers are similarly low in Texas, according to the same report.

So what is it that the Grey Hag’s editorial staff is hyperventilating about?

Well… their attempts to foist the gun grabbers’ agenda onto us for the most part has been a miserable failure, even with them screeching hysterically and dancing in the blood of innocent children after the Newtown massacre.

Americans overwhelmingly kicked gun grabbers in the giblets during the last election. And while we have experienced a few notable losses, overall, the tide is turning.

Major polling data confirms the same thing: Americans oppose new gun control legislation. They treasure their right to keep and bear arms.  Less than half of Americans support additional infringements on our Second Amendment rights, according to Gallup. Rasmussen points to similar results. And Pew agrees, leaving the New York Times editorial staff mourning its cause.

So what do they have left? Their limited options are to drop this ridiculous crusade against our freedoms (good luck getting them to do that!) or find faulty reporting with a bunch of skewed statistics, and use it to attack a rather large group of law-abiding Americans.

Want to take a guess which they chose?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

The Holocaust: Through Their Eyes

Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”~~John Donne

I attended a showing of The Holocaust: Through their eyes at the Jewish Community Center. It is the accounts of local holocaust survivors. Not people who heard about it from their distant cousin or parents, but lived it, survived it.

According to one of the survivors, in 1930 Berlin, hitler’s SS beat  to death 8 Jews who were walking down the street. That was the start of the spiral down. The harassment of Jews in public places had already started, the anti-Jewish notices and slogans had started. But these were the first deaths. That act was the start of the holocaust, no matter what other signs there were or were not, THAT was the start, according to this survivor.

Some of the survivors seemed astonished that their non-Jewish friends began to turn against them, people they had known for years, played with, grown up with would no longer associate with them. Not only would they not associate with them, they turned on them. There was a government who’s leader had the opinion that “The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew” and a very obliging media who was willing to spread the message. I suppose it should be no big surprise that when a population constantly hears a message it eventually wears down resistance & rational thought. The persecution was embedded in laws like the Nuremberg laws, which defined who and who was not a Jew according to the Reich, and based on those definitions what people were allowed to do, and who they were allowed to marry or be with. The discrimination further curtailed privileges such as riding on a bus, going to a public park or sitting on a bench in a park. All decreed by having one Jewish Grandparent. Then it became Jews weren’t allowed to go to school and Gentiles weren’t allowed to go into Jewish homes. Then they were denied the ability to own a radio, or animals. One lady talked about how the family had a pet dog and a bird, they had to get rid of them. My heart just broke for her, you could tell, hers still hurt. With all she had endured, the loss of the pets still hurt. Then the Jews were denied service. The baker, butcher, barber refused to serve Jews. More than one of those interviewed talked about people they had known most of their lives that were turning against them. Labensraum was begun, the German policy of taking land belonging to those that the nazis considered inferior. Because in their deluded minds, taking land from the inferior people to give me superior people “living space” and room to grow food was necessary. The nazis felt this was a fair way to encourage and increase the natural vigor of the superior race.

Then hitler was elected in Austria. Anschluss, March 12, 1938, when the Austrians welcomed the Germans rolling down the streets with cheers and waves. Banners were unfurled out of windows, swastika pins appeared on lapels and in parks signs stating “No dogs and Jews” appeared. Austria was not invaded, the Austrians choose this. And again, the turning away of life long friends, their scorn and derision on open display. The painful realization those people had never been their friends. They had always hated them, it was just that now it was permissible to publicly show the hatred.

Then Kristallnacht, “Night of the broken glass” 9-10 November 1938. A series of pogroms that caused the death of between 1-2 thousand when the total includes those that died in German custody, concentration camps and suicide as a result of what they suffered are included. Over 1 thousand Synagogues were burned and Jewish owned businesses and homes were destroyed.

In September 1939 Germany and Russia invaded Poland.

Then Operation Barbaross, when Germany invaded Russia generated some horrible atrocities.

One lady talked about being a 16 year old girl the night the Germans came to their home at 0400. They told her Father to walk outside. As he was complying they shot him in front of her, six times and left him in the doorway for the family.

On December 7th, the day America’s Pearl Harbor was attacked the first of the Jews were sent to be gassed. The witnesses that spoke of this seemed saddened that so many don’t realize that was the day the gassings started. One witness talked about how the nazis would enter a town, drive the people to the town center square then take them to a building, like a brewery to sort them. Who lives, who dies? As one witness stated matter of fact, if you were old, or very young or sick, you had no chance. Up the chimney you would go, they said. If you were healthy you would be sent to a camp to work. One survivor of the Gross-Rosen camp talked about eating grass and snow to survive. Germans liked starving people to death.

Of one ghetto in a Polish town that had once held 5000 souls only 3 survived. One lady told of enduring 25 lashes for being caught with a pound of butter. Another told of seeing a baby being thrown at a truck, another recounted the brave German soldiers tearing a baby into pieces and throwing it out the window. Remember, these are not stories that were handed down by grandparents, these are the things the witnesses saw themselves.

At camp you got to keep your clothes, and there would be 150-200 people per barrack. You were given a blanket, a bowl and a cup and then maybe some food for the first time in two days. One man said they had to sing. Once a day they were given some noodle or potato soup. On those meager rations you worked from day to night. The prisoners would lay pipe, and shovel coal despite having no shoes, and that was the women. One man painted portraits of the Russian guards for food. One recounted how they became very good at realizing about a week out when someone was going to die within the week.

One addressed the question of why didn’t they fight back? More than one reason it seems. The first was possession of a weapon was a death sentence. And thanks to the German version of Universal Background Checks it was easy to know who had what where, so when Jews were forbidden to own guns it was easy to divest them of their now illegal guns. The other factor he mentioned was how weak, physically, everyone was. He said with the amount of food you got, you were lucky to survive, let alone fight or run. It sounds like it was less than a moochelle obama school lunch. He also pointed out even if you got away, you are wearing a stripped uniform, you are tattooed, gaunt and they have cut your hair into a reverse Mohawk, and go where? Although one lady did have her means of resistance. She passed on Jewish history and knowledge to the children.

In 1943 from 19 April to 16 May the Warsaw Ghetto uprising took place. It was the largest single revolt by Jews during WWII, and they held off the Germans longer than the whole country of Poland. But poorly armed with virtually non-existent re-supply they were finally overrun.

One talked about being on the cattle cars the Germans used. They said if the boxcar held 100, they would cram 150 in. The witness talked about little children and old people in those boxcars. They said there was no food or sanitation. They would drive the boxcars back and forth for 11 days. For 11 days the people in those boxcars would starve, vomit, defecate and die. Mothers would be trying, Fathers would be praying and no one was listening and 60% died.

One witness talked about getting to Auschwitz. The guards would yell “Rouse rouse” Come quick. They signaled to go left or right. If you went to the right, you went to the barracks, if you went to the left “You went to the crematory and up the chimney”. If you didn’t move fast enough they hit you, if you still didn’t move fast enough they shot you. Some saw their whole family murdered. More than one talked about the sky high fires.

In 1945 the Allies arrived and the death marches to the next camps started. They weren’t allowed to take a blanket and it was winter. Maybe 10-20 below. There was no food and anything that could be grabbed along the way was, corn, wheat, potatoes, beets anything they saw, they would grab and share with the others. Of the 55,000 that left the camp 12,000 survived to arrive at the next death camp.

In April of 1945 when the Allies found the death camps they initially had no scope of the magnitude of what they were seeing. Then they realized they prisoners were mostly civilians, so weak and with heads like skulls, words mumbled and garbled. They found bodies not fully burned and wagon loads of bodies to be burned. The soldiers were shocked. They had heard about the camps but didn’t realize what they were hearing meant in reality.

Reality? While the dead by category differs according to different researchers it’s basically around 6 million Jews, or 78% of German occupied Europe were murdered. Roma, or Gypsies 130,000 to 1,500,000 depending on which researcher. Handicapped, 200,000 to 250,000 were murdered, POWs around 3.1 million, Ethnic Poles 1.8-1.9 million. Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians lost around 13.7 million including 2 million Jews. 10,000-15,000 Homosexuals died in the concentration camps. Around 1,000-2,000 Catholic clergy, 1,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses and some Freemasons were killed in the camps. The price tag for vulnerability is very, very high.

One lady talked about what to do after liberation. Where do you go? You could stay in the camp, but no one wanted to, and most no longer had a home.

Ok, so the camps are liberated, all is well now, right? Not so much. July 4, 1946 The Kielce Pogrom took place.

The soldiers and the policemen then went into the building. Jews were told to surrender their weapons, but not all of the residents obeyed the order. The entry of the policemen and the soldiers into the Jewish house marked the beginning of the pogrom. Excerpts from testimony supplied by people who witnessed the outbreak of the pogrom describe what followed.

Ewa Szuchman, resident of the house on Planty Street, said: After the police took away the weapons, the crowd broke into the Kibutz ( on the second floor) and policemen started shooting at the Jews first. They killed one and wounded several others. Albert Grynbaum, another inhabitant of the Jewish house who was on the first floor, said: The soldiers went up to the second floor. Several minutes later two Jews came to me and told me that the soldiers were killing Jews and looting their property. It was then that I heard shots. After the shooting on the second floor, shots were heard from the street and inside the building.

Apparently by then some of the people had learned when the government starts demanding groups of people hand over their weapons bad things are about to happen. Unfortunately not enough of them were armed to stop what was coming. And this was AFTER the war had ended. One man told of his brother going in to try to get their Mother and his Girlfriend out. The man said his brother was never seen again.

One witness told of coming to America, seeing the Statue of Liberty and looking at the crowds of people waiting to greet loved ones getting off the ship, and he had no one. It’s not just that there wasn’t anyone there to greet him, it’s that he literally had NO ONE.

The witnesses had messages for us. How fragile is liberty and civilization. Life is precious and wonderful. Change the world around yourself. Not my children, not nobody’s children should have to live through what we lived through. I didn’t want to tell people because I’ve never gotten over that my family died. My Mom was 45, my sister 22 and another sister 25, a brother 10 and a little nephew 2 or 3. I tell people what happened so it won’t happen again. I saw it with my own eyes. People helped me rebuild my life. I live in a world that has changed, the holocaust can’t happen again, then I realize it IS happening again in other parts of the world. And their suffering becomes our suffering.

One witness talked about hearing of hilter and eva braun’s deaths after he was liberated from the camp. He said they are dead and we are alive. We have won. That is how I defined victory.

With all due respect, this is NOT how I define victory. I would define victory as when the nazi’s tried to enact their Nuremberg laws and used their universal background checks to begin gun confiscation people would have seen the writing on the wall and stopped it right then. Yes, I do think the Christians would have needed to stand with their Jewish neighbors and realized that the only hope any of them had was to stand together. Had it happened? Millions of people would not have died. We can not compromise to “common sense gun laws”. We can not compromise to political correctness. We can not compromise to universal background checks. We can not compromise to phony public opinion polls. We can not compromise to phony anti-gun groups funded by anti-gun millionaires with armed security guards. We can cease to support Hollywood anti-gun liberals with armed security guards. We can look critically at the choices of Second Amendment groups and pick the ones that truly fight for our rights. Now we have choices, use them wisely. Resolve to do something each day to regain our liberty. Be resolved, we are. The Zelman Partisans, no compromise, no surrender, ever.

Holocaust
Remember
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

David Hardy on “compromise”

Gun Owners, Gun Legislation and Compromise (pdf). Why we’re right to distrust and reject “reasonable” compromise.

Abstract:

An important human aspect of firearms ownership and regulation includes the reluctance of gun owners to consent to measures that, viewed in historical isolation, appear quite limited. But this opposition is understandable if placed in historical context. During the rise of the modern gun-control movement in the early 1970s, gun-control proponents publicly proclaimed their objective was a complete or nearly complete ban on private handgun ownership. And they made it clear that lesser measures were but a means to that end. While they subsequently focused on those lesser measures, they returned to the objective of a complete handgun ban whenever that target of opportunity presented itself. When, in the 1990s, a focus on handguns became politically inexpedient, they switched the focus to semiautomatic rifles—notwithstanding their earlier avowals that rifles were not their concern.

Gun owners thus learned by experience that their opponents were not interested in genuine compromise, where each party gives up something to the other. Their opponents had no stopping point, no exit strategy, no “enough is enough.” Under these conditions, real
compromise is impossible. Any concession given would not be a stopping point, but rather a stepping stone to further restrictions.

This conclusion has been underscored by the experience of gun owners in states with restrictive gun legislation, where waiting
periods for purchase started at one day but were later increased to three, five, and then ten days. And initially limited restrictions have expanded to fill over a thousand pages of annotated text. Many of these measures serve no discernible purpose except to make legal firearm ownership as difficult, expensive, and legally risky as possible.

Intelligent actions are usually founded upon experience. Gun owners’ experiences have taught them one lesson: there is no true compromise to be had.

Et tu, background checks?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Background checks: inside the mind of Alan Gottlieb

Washington state gun owners are being smashed between a rock and a hard place. The disaster — which is bound to be bloody — will likely shape the gun-rights fight in states across the nation.

And the outcome for people far beyond Washington state may depend on Alan Gottlieb. Which terrifies me. And should terrify you.

—–

I was talking the other day with another gun blogger who hoped that after last year’s JPFO debacle I would have insight into Gottlieb’s mind. I have none. I’ve had the same thought; I wish I knew what Gottlieb could possibly be thinking. I’ve said I wished I could be a fly on the wall of that man’s brain. OTOH, I fear that experiencing Gottlieb’s thinking from within would make me puke.

But there are so many mysteries about what that man is up to! Why would a gun-rights advocate — any gun-rights advocate, anywhere — want background checks? Why would he want the federal control, the de facto gun registration, and the risk of confiscation that inevitably follow? How could he be so clueless about rights? So clueless about the threat to gun ownership? So clueless about how gun owners think?

And beyond that … how could a man who wants background checks continue to present himself — and be widely accepted! — as a gun-rights leader?

Of course he continues to be widely accepted partially because of SAF’s several successful lawsuits and partially because too many people don’t look at what he’s really doing. Most followers are also unaware of his sordid history. But more recently (and I expect ultimately more tragically) Gottlieb’s leadership is being accepted by some primarily because he has forced Washington state gun owners to choose between that rock and that hard place — between him and activist rivals who are overtly, unabashedly radical.

—–

Gottlieb has long ruled gun-rights activism in Washington state. He not only owns several major groups himself, but he’s on the board of others and serves as virtual puppet-master of yet more. Here’s just one example of how Gottlieb’s system works.

Many years ago, in the 1990s when it looked as if the antis were going to trample us all into the mud, I sat in on a legislative coordinating meeting of supposedly independent gun-rights groups in Washington state. The meeting was (no surprise) at Gottlieb’s headquarters and it was my first glimpse of what was going on.

There was no independence. There was one overriding mindset — don’t rock the boat. The one activist (a newcomer) who offered ideas that actually could have advanced gun rights (rather than merely holding the line) was repeatedly shot down. Not only shot down, but shot down with words I found mind-boggling and unforgettable: “Oh, we can’t ask the legislature for that. They’d never give us that.”

What kind of bargaining position can that be? Where would negotiators ever get if they started out only by asking for what their opponents are already known to be willing to give? That’s surrendering before the first battle!

But that was the state of Washington gun rights groups 20 years ago, designed and dominated by Alan Gottlieb. Matters appear to be worse now. After that, I always marveled that the state managed to have fairly decent gun laws, despite such wimpy “leadership.”

Well, I marvel no more. Since November — and thanks in large part to Gottlieb’s inexplicable “divide to lose” strategy — Washington has one of the most terrible state anti-gun laws. And the Billionaire Brigade is using I-594 as a battle plan to rampage through other states.

—–

I-594 might have passed anyway since it was the product of an enormous, multi-billionaire propaganda campaign. But Gottlieb initially made matters worse by throwing all his efforts not against I-594, but into a competing initiative, I-591. That went down in flames (and $1 million+ that could have been used against I-594 went down with it). But now Gottlieb, via his many puppet organizations, is trying to set himself up as the leader of the anti-I-594 forces.

He has filed a lawsuit against the new law while explicitly stating that he’s not trying to stop background checks. Even as state Rep. Matthew Shea prepared a bill to completely repeal 594, Gottlieb ally/partner/front group WAFLAG was focusing on getting gun owners merely to ask for fixes. As activist Kit Lange observed, “[Shea’s repeal] bill has not even been submitted yet, and they have already given up.”

You can’t “fix” a law that’s evil from its inception. And you can’t win if you already side with Michael Bloomberg on the most important points.

—–

Gun owners who are really aware of the issues and who understand that you can’t have freedom without standing firm on principles want nothing to do with Gottlieb or any of his front organizations. This means that some of the most angry, adamant, in-your-face activists have stepped forward. Gavin Seim’s armed, non-permitted “I Will Not Comply” rally in December outdrew Gottlieb’s January “legislative rally” by as much as 10-to-1. But when quite a few people with the “I will not comply” mindset also showed up at Gottlieb’s event, long-guns in hand, and carried their firearms into the House visitors’ chamber, it gave Gottlieb’s allies — and many inherently moderate gun-rights people — the excuse to call them all crazies and crowd closer to the false “safety” represented by Gottlieb.

Gottlieb has set things up so it’s either “side with me or side with the crazies” when it really just ought to be about getting I-594 declared dead. And getting the horrid monster buried at the crossroads with a stake through its heart so it can never rise again.

My heart and mind are with the “crazies.” But at the same time, I see how their tactics scare some activists away — and drive some activists right into the arms of Alan Gottlieb, despite his obvious, well-publicized sellout.

But as one activist from Graham, Washington, observes, the “crazies” are using those tactics as much to defy Gottlieb as to defy I-594. They are saying, “We will never allow you to ‘lead’ this battle. We won’t be polite and deferential as you sell us out. To hell with you.”

If Gottlieb had a clue about the rights of gun owners or the mindset of gun-rights activists, he would step out of the spotlight (and not just via the pretense that one of his puppets is really in charge). Being completely discredited on anything to do with background checks, he would recognize that he has no ability to lead (even from behind) on this issue. He would let somebody more principled unite the state’s gun owners. Instead, there he is, dividing — once again — so that our enemies can conquer.

Because Gottlieb stands in the way of any calm, strong, and principled leadership on gun rights in Washington state, he is helping Bloomberg win (just as he hoped to help Manchin, Toomey, and Schumer win at the federal level a year ago). Heartened by their victory in this first state, and strengthened by the lack of effective pro-gun leadership, the Bloombergians will rampage onward to the next state, which appears to be Nevada.

Good luck, Nevada. Good luck to us all. Except Mr. Gottlieb. May he choke on his own duplicity. May the power he so craves, the power he’ll stop at nothing to get, destroy him — before it destroys the rest of us.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

When Seconds Count…..

The Police are just minutes away, just minutes away. How long have we been told by people control via gun control politicians and advocates that firearms owned by private citizen/subjects make U.S. “less civilized” less “safe” as a country? It seems to me that such statements usually come from people with a plethora of body guards. Either paid for with our tax dollars or their own fine salaries often earned by the movies they make. Paid for by us, the great unwashed masses.

 

Let’s start with England. In an effort to prove that sometimes the slowest zebra does in fact survive and multiply rather than being eaten by the lion, they are in a worse self-defense condition than they were in WWII.

 

After WWI England enacted the Firearms Act of 1920. Its restrictions on the private ownership of firearms was partly accomplished by screeching about a surge in crime that might occur because of the large number of firearms available following the war, well and due to fears of working class unrest. And then there was the previous version of the modern U.N. Gun Control treaty, the 1919 Paris Arms Convention, they needed to be able to control the overseas arms trade and they had to comply with that, right?

 

So when WWII rolled around, and after the Battle of Dunkirk when the British retreated and left behind a large amount of very useful hardware, which we would call weapons, they were in a very vulnerable state to fend off the killing machine known as nazis headed their way. What to do? Well, they appealed to their American (and well armed) brethren for help. A program called “American Committee for Defense of British Homes” established in 1940 by a group of Americans (well armed people) and headed by C. Suydam Cutting. They appealed for shotguns, rifles, ammo, steel helmets, binoculars from American Citizens (a well armed people) Since  the people protecting the home front had pitchforks. Kid you not. Makes me think of the line in the movie “The Patriot” where Cornwallis called the militia “farmers with pitchforks”. And yet, fast forward a few hundred years and it’s the Americans (well armed people) helping out their English brethren (home front with pitchforks) in defense of their country. Here’s a really good column about this. The Hession Rifle. Admittedly we could have just sent Chuck Norris, but he was born in 1940. Well, then again, he IS Chuck Norris.

 

So, after having found out that a disarmed nation is a vulnerable nation, the British vowed never to let that happen again! Just kidding. Nope, they are in a far worse state now. Even the British Olympic pistol shooters can’t train in England, Scotland or Wales. England is a country covered with cameras, they carefully record every crime and give a good idea of what and who the perpetrators are. Very useful for prosecuting crime! Stopping crime? Huh? SQUIRREL! Never mind England is thinking “knife ban” now. I mean what with crime being down and al, uh, oh, never mind! SQUIRREL!

I’m pretty sure they were thinking about it before 25 year old Fusilier Lee Rigby was murdered on 22 May 2013.

Rigby was off duty and walking along Wellington Street when he was attacked. Two men ran him down with a car, then used knives and a cleaver to stab and hack him to death. The men dragged Rigby’s body into the road and remained at the scene until police arrived. They told passers-by that they had killed a soldier to avenge the killing of Muslims by the British armed forces. Unarmed police arrived at the scene nine minutes after an emergency call was received and set up a cordon. Armed police officers arrived five minutes later. The assailants, armed with a gun and cleaver, charged at the police, who fired shots that wounded them both. They were apprehended and taken to separate hospitals. Both are British of Nigerian descent, raised as Christians, who converted to Islam.Immediately after the attack, several passers-by stood over Rigby’s body to protect him from further injury.

On lookers were powerless to stop the attack, though one helpfully filmed it. You’re talking about almost a quarter of an hour response time.

 

Fast forward to France, 7 January 2015. Masked muslims showed up at Charlie Hebdo, a magazine that was apparently in business to see how many people and religions they could offend. They went after Jews, Christians, Buddhists, and muslims equally. It’s called “Free Speech”. The magazine office were firebombed in 2011 after publishing a satirical cartoon about Islam. They didn’t let up. And on 7 January, 2 masked muslims showed up with AK-47s and a rocket launcher. Seriously? How the heck did they get a permit in France for that? France has very strict gun control! Oh look! A SQUIRREL!

 

Naturally, the Police were called. But we’re talking France. So two officers showed up on bicycles…unarmed. And found it necessary to flee. Then, as in Britain, a “special” Police unit that is responsible enough to be armed showed up. Of course, by then, 10 people wounded and 12 people were reported dead. Including another police officer, there’s video of him wounded and pleading for his life before he is shot in the head, by a representative of the “Religion of Peace”. Not sure if that was the representative that yelled “the Prophet has been avenged” and “Allahu akbar” as he walked the halls of Charlie Hebdo. Little side note here, “Allahu akbar” does not mean “G-d is Great”. It means “Allah is Greater”. Meaning greater than the whimpy loving G-d of the Jews and Christians, which are “People of the Book”. Oh look, a SQUIRREL!

 

So, back to the unarmed officers that arrived first. The murderers completed their job and left. And proceeded to go on to a printing house in the small town of Dammartin-en-Goele. Where they took people hostage. They told police they wanted to die as martyrs, so they rushed out at the police who obliged them. My thought would be “Ok, bury their bodies at a pig farm” But maybe that’s just me?

 

In a similar incident another representative of the “Religion of Peace” and his girl friend killed a police woman, who was probably unarmed and then holed up at a Kosher Grocery Store. The representative told a French TV station he had “coordinated” with the suspected Charlie Hebdo attackers and he belonged to the Islamic State group. He killed four of the hostages and threatened more unless the police let the Hebdo killers go.

 

What does it say about a country when the frequent refrain of “You don’t need a gun, just call the Police” is pointless. They are as helpless as the unarmed victims are. They die just as quick. SQUIRREL!

 

But the ever astute MSLSD had a Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson on who explained how much worse this would have been had it occurred in the United States.

“Just to keep it in perspective,” Robinson told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, “I don’t think we should imagine that the conditions and the threat are exactly the same in the United States as they are in France. They are different.”“In fact, one thing that’s different here is that weapons are universally available and so it is actually a very good thing that the tensions are not exactly the same because we would expect to have a lot more of that sort of carnage.”

Yeah, howdy! Was I ever shocked! #1 That armed citizens and armed police would just stand there and let themselves be shot. #2 Someone reads the WaPo? I thought it was just used for parrot cages and house training puppies, who knew? Somebody read it, because they had the columnist on TV to follow up. #3 MSLSD is still on the air? WOW, that is a devoted 12 bunch of people that are keeping them on the air! Oh look! A SQUIRREL!

But, to end on a positive note, since I’m so frustrated with the stupidity of countries that not only accept this kind of carnage, but enable it, I will share this tidbit of good news. Not all New York millionaires are idiots. Donald Trump made a statements that the gun control policies of France were enabling these types of massacres. WHAT? Gun control enables massacres? Oh look a SQUIRREL!

 

Running With The Squirrels

 

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

Since Hanukkah I’ve been nursing a little gripe about the lack of respect given to Jews, compared with members of some other religions. Fellow Zelman Partisan Y.B ben Avraham had sent me a link to an article about restaurants contributing pork latkes, yes PORK latkes, to a Haunkkah contest.

If they’d contributed pork to any traditional Muslim festival, editorial writers the world over would be indignant about it. If they’d contributed watermelon to a Martin Luther King Day celebration, we’d have been treated to endless rants about how racist we all are (even we who had nothing to do with it). But pork to a Jewish festival? No problem. Even if it’s a festival commemorating a rebellion against oppressors who, among other things, tried to force pork on the ancient Jews.

While I thought about what to say, I collected other examples of thoughtlessness toward Jews, like Hallmark’s horrible Hanukkah wrapping paper (which could have been a mistake, but still) and Zara’s kiddie concentration camp shirt complete with yellow star. No way could that have been a mistake, just a slap in the face to the six million dead and all who care about the horrors inflicted by the Nazis.

ZelmanPartisans_ZaraNaziShirt

I was feeling indignant. I wanted to say something about how dangerous it is to casually disrespect Jews and Judaism in a world that’s increasingly antisemitic.

Then Islamic terrorists murdered 12 people because an irreverent French magazine didn’t give them and their religion the respect they thought they should have. That put a whole new aspect on things.

Charlie Hebdo didn’t respect any religion. They pilloried Judaism, Christianity, and Islam with equal crudity and disrespect. One cartoon they published showed Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, and the Buddha in bed together after an orgy. But these days only Muslims feel entitled to kill anybody who doesn’t agree with them or who won’t give them artificial, fear-driven “respect.” Other religions take mockery and criticism in stride. There have already been a lot of powerful comments on the slaughter, with people seeing it rightly as an attack on everyone’s freedom of speech and western freedoms in general. Others have dared to point out that these murders are on a spectrum with the new grievance culture. I couldn’t say it better.

But I’ll say right now that if you think your religion can’t be mocked, that’s a sure sign it deserves and needs to be mocked.

If you think people who don’t respect your religion deserve to die, then your religion isn’t worthy of respect, and neither are you. Respect has to be earned.

I’m supposed to interrupt myself here and say that Islamic terrorists don’t represent all Muslims, which is true. They are, however, a growing and increasingly powerful strain within Islam, and there seems to be far too little serious opposition to them within the Muslim world. This is scary, and combined with the increasing insults to Jews, even scarier.

On the other hand, there’s also a positive side to the lack of respect for Jews. I’m not saying there are positives to real violence or real antisemitism, just positives to some of the casual disregard we sometimes see. It means that Jews are accepted as people who can “take it,” people who can roll with life, people who don’t have to be handled with kid gloves, who aren’t going to go nuts if everybody doesn’t kowtow all the time.

In fact, while so many young Muslim men feel entitled to murder anybody who mocks their beliefs, Jews have long been noted for mocking themselves. About 75 percent of America’s stand-up comedians have historically been Jewish, and modern stand-up comedy was nurtured in the Borscht Belt resorts of the Catskills, where dozens of comedians who were soon to be nationally famous told jokes to Jews and about Jews. From the satiric songs of Allan Sherman to the quips of Billy Crystal and Jerry Seinfeld, self-mockery has always been part of Jewish culture. Jews have to be wary of many, and increasing, real threats. But one thing’s for sure; Jews don’t have to fear humor.

Perhaps a lot of young Islamic men would do well to take a lesson from that. You can’t earn respect by cutting somebody’s head off or shooting them in cold blood. You might get farther by accepting that respect comes to those who earn it and acceptance comes to those who understand that world doesn’t owe them anything.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail