I watched the documentary Claire told us about, Defying the nazis: The Sharps’ War. Fascinating show and fascinating couple! At first glance, they would seem to be a rather ordinary couple, but they were far from it. They had smarts, intuition, courage and could think on the move. Those attributes saved their lives and the lives of many others. I would say that they were rare people. Interestingly, to me, they did not think they were rare at all, and that anyone in their position would have done the same things, according to their daughter Martha. They are now listed in Yad Vashem as Righteous Among the Nations.
And Claire also pointed out that the NY Slimes article article is an attempt to get people to see the refusal of Americans to embrace those fleeing the middle East as the same situation as the refusal of many nations to accept Jews fleeing the holocaust.
It is not.
It is not at all. The mindset is the critical factor here. Actually the mindset of different groups.
In this video talking about Zionism and Theodor Herzl, about 11 minutes, 30 seconds in the lecturer talks about how Jews handle attacks against them, first is the fee or flee, they attempt to pay off the officials persecuting the communities. If that is unsuccessful they flee. At this point he talking mainly about the Jews of Russia and the persecution they faced under different Czars. But the part I want to bring out comes at 14:08 in, the difference between immigrants and refugees. The first of the Russian Jews to come were the immigrants. Yes, they were fleeing the pogroms of Russia, but some fleeing went to South America, some to Europe, some to Canada and some to the U.S. Those chose to come here, and they wanted to assimilate to some degree. They wanted to understand and fit into the culture of the U.S. Some of those chose not to speak Yiddish, to not teach it to their children. They said we’re Americans now, we will speak English and we will learn how they live and do things in America. Not to say they gave up their Judaism, but just that they chose to make a place for themselves in American society. The refugees on the other hand, those that came after WWII had a different mindset. They did not so much chose to come here as flee the devastation after WWII. I resent coming to America, it’s a safe haven for me, but I didn’t want to come here. They believed I won’t change for America, America is going to have to change for me. The lecturer said he was painting with a broad brush, but in general, that was the difference in attitudes and mindset. It only goes to about 16 minutes in, so it’s not a long part, but I do think it’s crucial to realize that there is quite possibly a different mindset in the “refugees” coming to America than what you would think.
Another difference is, when the Jews came to America whether as immigrants or refugees, their aim was not to force Americans to accept their religion or pay jizya and live as dhimmis but to live and practice their religion in safety. This is a whole different mindset. I am not saying every muslim that comes into this country has that goal in mind, only the devout ones as that is what the Koran commands.
The European countries are seeing quite an increase in sexual violence towards women and children, they think it can be stopped with wristbands and posters that say “Don’t touch me”. And that is working out about as well as one would expect. I wanted to get a bullet company to engrave “Don’t touch me” on the bottom of a bullet because I thought that would be more effective than the wristband. But I digress, the mindset and the way muslims are raised is that women are property and if they aren’t dressed modestly according to muslim standards they are fair game because they are sluts and asking for it. Daniel Greenfield does an excellent job of explaining how this works in this article. Your mindset and what you’ve been taught all your life doesn’t change because you are now living in Baltimore and not Baghdad. The leftists dangerously misunderstand that mindset.
Denial reigns supreme. After the latest round of bombing on the East Coast headlines from the defunct media read things like “motive a mystery”. To who? Only the American media, not anyone else.
A letter signed by 43 rabbis in Texas called on the state’s governor to remain in the U.S. refugee resettlement program.
“At this moment, with the number of refugees and displaced persons at its highest in recorded history, it is more important than ever for Texas to protect and welcome refugees,” read the letter sent Wednesday, hours after Gov. Greg Abbot announced that he was withdrawing his state from the program over concerns about the lack of effective security screening of the refugees.
And that is a very dangerous miscalculation of the mindset. Because it is entirely possible, if not likely that the mindset of those “refugees” is very different than what the Rabbis think it is.
Alejandro Mayorkas, the Deputy Homeland Security Secretary, speaking Wednesday to the Orthodox Union’s annual leadership mission to Washington, said rising extremism in the United States and its threat to the Jewish community keeps him awake at night.
Now while he is talking about people becoming radicalized, he does also talk about incoming threats.
And the incoming may be more than you think. While obama’s goal for this year was 10,000 “refugees” he has already exceeded that, and the year isn’t over.
It also might be worth considering the effect of their mindset on the American voting outcome. The New American program of barry’s has been in effect for a almost a year now. Neither of these articles are long, but both are worth reading.
I realize the concept is kindness for those in need, to help the less fortunate. But in a April 2016 column by Dr. Tsvi Sadan in Israel Today titled “Love Your Enemy?” he points out the flaw in this.
And yet, nowhere does it suggest that one is supposed to aid an enemy whose intention is to kill you. The reason behind G-d’s order to to kill the Midianites (Numbers Bəmidbar, 25:17) is found in their desire to annihilate Israel. In this case, loving these people, or helping them in any way, would have amounted to collective suicide for Israel.
He then points out that while Syria is a sworn enemy of Israel, Israel provides free medical care to wounded Syrians. This is “loving your enemy”. But it is only possible because Syria no longer proposes a significant threat to Israel. He states
“The same kind of help could not be given if Syria was killing Israelis on a daily basis. In such a case, Israel would be obligated to kill those who were attempting to kill her. This is the basic human right of self-defense. “
There are a lot of different mindsets in play here. Those that just want to help the “poor refugees” may be dangerously naïve thinking that they will be grateful and assimilate into American society. That has not proven to be the case in Europe or Great Britain at all. That’s the “it can’t happen to me” or “it can’t happen here”. Yeah, it can. Then there’s the political mindset, of not caring what it does to the country as long as it helps my party no matter who it hurts. Not in terms of finances, crime, culture, living conditions, or unemployment. Companies get tax breaks I understand, to hire immigrants instead of US workers. Just import them and register them to vote.
When the Sharps brought and sent the Jews from Prague to America they had a system in place. They matched those they smuggled out with people and jobs in the US. They knew the people they were dealing with and the people they were sending here. This in no way can be compared to barry’s massive invasion of people for which there is no effective vetting process. But in the mindset of the liberal NY Slimes reporter, it is the same.
This is one of those things like the handing over of the internet that is irreversible. The toothpaste ain’t going back in the tube, the bell can’t be un-rung. And for the record? My mindset is I am not wearing a burka, hijab or niqab! Isn’t it interesting that at this time the democratic party is increasing their howls for gun control? I wonder what their mindset could be?
Last week I posted about a new Ken Burns documentary, Defying the Nazis: The Sharps’ War. I linked to a New York Times article by Nicholas Kristof, who rightly praised the courage of the Sharps and other “righteous Gentiles” who risked their lives to save Jews from Hitler’s beastiality. He spoke of how world governments rejected Jewish refugees, dooming many of them to death, while individuals (including a few “rogue” individuals within government bureaucracies) saved Jewish lives.
Unfortunately, Kristof also used his NYT pulpit to try to guilt-trip contemporary readers and leaders into being more liberal in acceptance of today’s headline refugees, Muslims from the chaotic Middle East.
Now comes another article on the documentary, this time from the Washington Post, which is less agenda-driven, but still quotes a White House official who uses a screening of the film to promote more U.S. acceptance of Muslim refugees:
“The Sharps are the better angels of America,” said Deputy Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken last week at a White House screening for scholars, diplomats, Holocaust survivors and other dignitaries. (The Obamas did not attend.) The film, Blinken said, humanizes relief work at a time when the world needs to do far more to aid refugees from war-torn Syria and elsewhere.
In the NYT, Kristof wrote: “As today’s leaders gather for their summit sessions, they should remember that history eventually sides with those who help refugees, not with those who vilify them.”
And generally, that’s true. Generally.
I’ve lived among immigrants all my life, including spending a couple of years in a neighborhood of resettled Southeast Asian war refugees. Although the first members of my mother’s family arrived in the American colonies before the Revolution, on my father’s side I’m not far removed from starving Irish peasants who arrived in “coffin ships” and were caricatured by the natives as dumb apes. I’ve seen first-hand how immigrants have been stereotyped. And I know how refugees have enriched, and continue to enrich, our culture.
I am also an individualist who believes that every person deserves to be considered on his or her own merits. So it pains me on two counts to say this. But urging acceptance of Muslim refugees based on the fact that other refugees, in other times, have enriched our culture — or based on guilt because “we” didn’t aid WWII-era Jewish refugees who deserved rescue — is bogus.
From Paris to Minnesota, wherever in the West communities of Middle Eastern or African Muslims have been settled, terrorism has followed. Free speech becomes a capital offense. Women suffer. And Jews are in particular peril. Just ask the Jewish population of France — formerly of France, now fleeing the country.
Elitists, from their WaPost or Gray Lady perches, urge toleration for those who won’t tolerate us, acceptance for those who won’t accept us, and peace toward those who bring with them random violence in the name Allah. But of course Nicholas Kristof and his kind aren’t going to have to live in the Muslim neighborhoods where even police dare not go. They’re not going to be shopping in the malls or attending the schools that will be attacked. They’re going to be comfortable in their gated communities. When horrors happen, they can continue pontificating about tolerance — and oh by the way, the need for fewer guns in the hands of We the Peasants, more surveillance, more “security,” and less of that nasty, messy freedom.
Some Jews, whose ancestors were granted life in the West when they were desperate refugees from Nazism, now join the call for embracing Muslim refugees. Maybe it’s a generous, kind-hearted, and decent impulse.
But these remind me of the Jews who meaninglessly cry, “Never again!” while actively working to disarm all innocents, leaving us at the mercy of anyone with few scruples and evil intentions.
I remember when Barack Obama was first elected. Ammo was flying off the shelves. I had gotten my hands on a few boxes, but most stores in my area were limiting customers to a couple, and prices were nuts.
In March 2009, USA Today reported that concerns about the Obama administration imposing a new ban on some semiautomatic weapons drove gun owners to stockpile ammunition and cartridge reloading components at such a rate, that manufacturers were having problems meeting demand.
In Wyoming, the run on bullets and reloading components reached such a frenzy that Cheyenne retailer Frontier Arms recently began rationing sales, said Becky Holtz, co-owner of the shop. Holtz said she’s also been selling semiautomatic rifles as fast as she can put them on the shelves.
“You know there’s something wrong when I’ve got little old ladies coming in buying 5,000 rounds of .22 shells,” Holtz said.
I remember the guy I was dating at the time was a reloader. We would go to the range, and then we’d police all the brass others had left behind. The brass seemed to be what he lacked most. (Although that may have been because he had an actual armory in his house filled with dozens of various rifles.)
It does seem like people are preparing yet again as Election 2016 approaches. Much like any other critical supplies ( think milk and bread lines at the grocery store before every severe storm warning or plywood and nails in coastal areas when hurricane warnings occur), reloading supplies are a must when we are expecting a societal storm.
So, for you reloaders out there – what components are most critical to you? Reply below. Explain in comments. Think.
It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
Ban guns. All guns. Get rid of guns in homes, and on the streets, and, as much as possible, on police. Not just because of San Bernardino, or whichever mass shooting may pop up next, but also not not because of those. Don’t sort the population into those who might do something evil or foolish or self-destructive with a gun and those who surely will not. As if this could be known—as if it could be assessed without massively violating civil liberties and stigmatizing the mentally ill. Ban guns! Not just gun violence. Not just certain guns. Not just already-technically-illegal guns. All of them.
Is Ms. Bovy volunteering to come down from Kanuckistan to kick in doors and steal the weapons?
Maybe she’s just a radicalized human extinction proponent who favors genocide over voluntarism.
I digress. Her motivations aside, back to the original question.
A remarkably silly, non-peer reviewed “study” asserts that there are a mere 55 million American gun owners in possession of just 265 million firearms. Oddly, as much as twenty years ago, the CDC put those numbers — very conservatively — at 66 million and 250 million respectively. Others, with a more more realistic understanding of firearms lifespan, estimated 80-100 million gun owners in possession of as many as 750 million firearms.
Consider the past 16 months of record breaking gun sales, on top of two decades of occasionally more sedate sales.
My guess is north of 120 million gun owners, and in the neighborhood of three quarters of a billion guns. More than a third of the country armed. Trained.
When California started getting rabid about “assault weapons” back the ‘900s, I predicted the world’s largest outbreak of “blue flu” if the outright ban passed and the police were ordered to enforce it. Shortly after — purely by coincidence — a police union spokesman made the same prediction. And the victim-disarming legislators changed tactics to slower, incremental restrictions.
So… 55 million, 66 million, 80-100 million, or 120+ million…
We all think we would. But the reality of WWII tells us that defying deadly power, especially for the sake of those we’ve been taught to think of as “other,” is an act of rare and admirable courage.
The linked article has an agenda. That agenda is not about helping Jews. That agenda is, in fact, a bait-and-switch. The article tells the tales of brave, principled individuals who saved hunted Jews from death. Then it shames us over the issue of what today’s governments should do about Islamic refugees.
My main reason for linking that article is the stories of individual courage and an upcoming Ken Burns documentary you may want to watch: Defying the Nazis: The Sharps’ War. Who were the Sharps?
Unto the breach stepped a 33-year-old woman from Massachusetts named Martha Sharp.
With steely nerve, she led one anti-Nazi journalist through police checkpoints in Nazi-occupied Prague to safety by pretending that he was her husband.
Another time, she smuggled prominent Jewish opponents of Naziism, including a leading surgeon and two journalists, by train through Germany, by pretending that they were her household workers.
“If the Gestapo should charge us with assisting the refugees to escape, prison would be a light sentence,” she later wrote in an unpublished memoir. “Torture and death were the usual punishments.”
Sharp was in Europe because the Unitarian Church had asked her and her husband, Waitstill Sharp, a Unitarian minister, if they would assist Jewish refugees. Seventeen others had refused the mission, but the Sharps agreed — and left their two small children behind in Wellesley, Mass.
The documentary about the Sharps comes out this Tuesday.
This weekend wasn’t a good one for the home team. Three separate violent attacks that left roughly 40 people injured in three different locations have people rightfully on edge. There are more questions than answers, and concerns are on the rise about lone wolf, unsophisticated attacks that are easier to perpetrate, and yet still leave bloodshed in their wake.
Police said a man dressed as a security guard injured nine people in knife attacks late Saturday at a shopping mall in St. Cloud, Minn. He was shot and killed by an off-duty police officer.
Authorities said they were investigating it as a possible terrorist incident.
In New York, authorities were searching for a bomb maker who set off a blast near a large trash container on a Manhattan street Saturday evening that left 29 people injured from flying debris, including shrapnel.
Police subsequently found an unexploded bomb four blocks away. Authorities said they had identified a “person of interest” in the bombing they would like to speak to.
And in New Jersey, officials said they didn’t yet know whether a pipe bomb that went off before a charity run at a seashore resort Saturday morning was linked to any terror group. Officials were also trying to determine if the Manhattan bombs and the New Jersey device were made by the same individual or group.
No injuries were reported from the blast at Seaside Park as thousands of runners were set to participate in the benefit for Marines and sailors.
In the aftermath of such attacks, we always see calls for those in power to “do something.” What, is unclear, but even incidents that do not involve guns generally need to calls for more gun control.
Will it happen again? What will be the reactions in the aftermath of this weekend’s attacks? Will there be calls for more gun restrictions, despite the fact that not a single gun was used in these acts of terror? Will there be calls for knife control? Increased surveillance?
The usual fine Zippo quality dressed up with a stylish laser-etched TZP logo. A must-have for smokers and nonsmokers alike, as a reliable source of fire can be a handy thing to have around. Includes a six-pack of spare flints. Just $29.95.
The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund on Tuesday endorsed Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee.
In its endorsement, the group praised Koster’s position on Second Amendment rights.
“On behalf of the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund, I am pleased to announce your ‘A’ rating and endorsement for Governor in the 2016 Missouri General Election,” wrote the super-PAC’s chairman, Chris Cox.
“I thank you for never wavering from your Second Amendment beliefs. As you know, your long and distinguished Second Amendment record is greatly appreciated by your fellow NRA members in Missouri and the United States of America,” he added.
Koster welcomed the endorsement and further pledged to defend the Second Amendment as governor.
“I am pleased to receive the endorsement of the NRA,” he wrote in a statement.
“As a rural prosecutor, State Senator, and now as Attorney General, I have long defended Missouri’s hunting heritage and Second Amendment rights. As Governor, I pledge to continue to protect the traditions and values of people across Missouri.”
Koster leads his Republican opponent, retired Navy SEAL Eric Greitens by an average of 6.3 points, according to RealClearPolitics.
Let’s just chat about this, shall we? Backstory is good, backstory and Israeli coffee are always good. And since I’ve have both, I’ll share, at least the backstory part.
The first item up is the Department of Revenue scandal, it broke first. The Missouri Department of Revenue was illegally complying with the REAL ID act by sending the private data of Missourians to a company out of state called Morpho-Trust, they were illegally collection biometric data on Missourians using a Department of Homeland Security grant to do these things. They lied about it to the legislature telling them they used the grant to purchase hole punches and similar office equipment. Yeah, you can tell the department was headed up by a Gov. Jay Nixon-D appointee. But the woman behind a bunch of this, ala Valerie Jarrett was Jackie Bemboom. Who knew better, but instead of following Missouri law, she complied illegally with REAL ID and sold out Missourians to the Federal Government. But her betrayal didn’t end there. The Missouri Department of Revenue gave ALL the information on Missouri’s concealed carry holders to the federal government. Via the Missouri Highway Patrol. The Governor Jay Nixon-D denied their was a database of CCW holders turned over. But there was. They Highway patrol admitted they had done it. At first they said it was a Social Security request for a list of Missouri’s CCW holders. Then it became a joint request, social security AND the ATF. And they gave it to them. How, you ask, did they deliver the data on Missouri’s concealed carry holders? Why, they sent it in an Excel file. On a disc. With a password. Which was included in the cover letter sent WITH the disc. Sent via regular US mail. Lots and lots of mis-doing here, illegal actions, betrayal of ALL Missourians with the data base of info sent to Morpho-Trust, a French company. Missouri law prohibits data on Missourians from being sent out of state, I believe. And so did Chris “Flipper” Koster-D SPRING into action to go after those that broke the law? Um, no, not so much. In fact, not at all. Oh? The “Flipper” part you ask? Flipper used to be a Republican, till 2008 I believe when he sensed the political winds would go with the barry sotero in his bid for the Presidency and changed to a Dimocrat. Then he got the nickname “Flipper”. Backstory IS good, isn’t it. So no, Flipper that great NRA endorsed candidate did zip, zilch, nada about this one.
You can listen to Sen. Kurt Schaefer talk about it on the Dana show to know just how bad this really was.
So let’s move forward to September 2013. Missouri had a beautiful piece of legislation that was going to become law. The Second Amendment Protection act. Nullifying federal gun control laws that were in conflict with the Missouri Constitution, preventing newspapers from publishing the names and addresses of gun owners like some newspapers in other states have done, good stuff, things like that. Predictably Gov. Jay Nixon-D vetoed it. Anything that protects or restores gun rights is an anathema to Gov. Nixon-D. But, the Missouri legislature has overridden Anti-gun governors before. As they did “One Term” Bob Holden-D when he vetoed Missouri’s Concealed Carry law. One Term Bob is probably wishing the people of Missouri had given him a Attorney General as duplicitous as Flipper. The veto override should have been a done deal. It was passed with a veto proof majority. But that didn’t happen. For the first time Missouri’s GRASSROOTS Second Amendment groups held TWO rallies in one year. The purpose of the second rally was just to encourage the veto override of The Second Amendment Protection Act.
Why you ask would this be necessary? Well, I’ll let Sen. Brian Nieves tell you about it. From the second rally on September 11, 2013.
Yeah, boy howdy. That Flipper sure is a stalwart of gun rights isn’t he?
And now a word about the NRA, and their “pro-gun” help in the state of Missouri.
The NRA is a BIG part of the reason it took Missourians an additional 13 years to get concealed carry. But that’s another story. Let’s just look at 2014. Missouri tried again for a Second Amendment Protection act. Sen. Brian Nieves the bill’s sponsor accepted a fairly inoffensive amendment from Sen. Nasheed-D, a rabid anti-gun liberal. It was about one sentence.
“Section 2. Upon becoming aware that a firearm has been stolen, a person shall have seventy-two hours to report such theft.”
The “offending” sentence was stripped out of the bill, and as she promised Nasheed-D filibustered the bill. The point of accepting the one sentence amendment was she wouldn’t filibuster.
The unlikely pair of Senators even had a press conference about it.
The NRA lied. They tried to sink the SAPA, again. Missouri is not the only state that has had problems with the NRA trying to stop state sovereignty legislation. Florida has I know, as has Wyoming around the same time period.
So, Missourians have already suffered greatly due to the NRA’s “help” and the “pro-gun stalwart” Flipper Koster-D. And the NRA is proudly endorsing Flipper-Dfor Governor, perfect.
Let me make a couple of things clear here though. I am NOT endorsing Eric Greitens, and this column is not about pointing out what a piece of shcr work Koster-D is, though he is. The point is those little orange NRA cards are fixing to flood mailboxes soon, very soon. And people will believe them. The NRA does have some good programs, Eddie Eagle and some of their women’s programs are good. But when it comes to politics and legislation? I have yet to see them be of much, if any, help in Missouri, and I have really good sources there.
So, when it comes to elections this year, I’m going to ask you to consider something. IF you get one of those orange cards or NRA endorsements, PLEASE, don’t just say “ok” and do it. Double check the information with a Second Amendment Rights group like Gun Owners of America. They do good candidate ratings. For local races, if you are not part of a local grassroots Second Amendment rights group, join one or at least check with them on their web site to see who they are endorsing. When you do that, you might double check to make sure they are independent of the NRA and not just towing the party line.
This is only ONE race taking place in the US, in ONE state and look what I was able to come up with on the NRA endorsed candidate. A man who has cost Missourians state sovereignty legislation. So before you believe that little orange card, or let your friends believe that little orange card when you hear “endorsed by” ask SEZ WHO? Are THEY credible? While we can never depend on politicians to save us, we don’t have to make it harder on ourselves either.
I remember precisely where I was the day those planes hit the World Trade Center. It had been three years since I left active duty Army, and I was part of an Army Reserve unit here in Virginia. I did my reserve duty at the Public Affairs office of the Chief of the Army Reserve once per week for several hours. The office was located in Crystal City, and we did a lot of work at the Pentagon.
It was my son’s fourth birthday, and we were looking forward to a birthday dinner for the munchkin, who demanded we go to a Chinese buffet place in town, because it had pizza. (No one said four year old boys had to make sense, right?) I was at the office, working my civilian job and chatting with a friend via instant messenger.
And then all hell broke loose.
We stopped work. We gathered in our conference room. We turned the TV on and watched in horror as the news replayed the scene over and over again.
I tried my military supervisor at Crystal City, but all cell service was down.
I tried my husband. Nothing.
I couldn’t take it after a while, so I left my office and went to pick up my son, whose kindergarten only lasted half the day.
It was hard to explain to that little boy what happened. He knew bad people had attacked us and flew planes into buildings. He knew a lot of people died. He knew his daddy was a federal police officer and was called away. He knew we would not be having a family birthday dinner at the Chinese buffet place.
For years after that birthday, he became hypervigilant. He would demand I help him “clear” his room of monsters. I’d have my gun, and he’d have his little toy guns, and together we would clear his room before bed.
I started training more, and I think I became hypervigilant myself. I was terrified something would happen to my kids. I started writing more about civil rights and joined several gun rights organizations.
So now, on the 15th anniversary of that horrible day, think back. How were you affected by the attacks? Were you affected at all?
You can choose as many answers as appropriate, or add one of your own.
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.