Well then… I supposed we deserved it.

Report: Israelis Killed In Shooting Allegedly Shopped, Dined First

On a more serious note… there’s this report.

And then, this!

I, for one, do put the blame squarely on the political leadership currently in power (but not for the reasons claimed by MSNBC and their ilk).  I shudder to think of how the Heavenly Court will rule, when they each stand begging for mercy,  soaked up to their armpits in the blood of their brothers and sisters.




But, we’re ‘different’, right?

When I was a kid we often spent Sundays visiting my paternal grandparents. My grandfather had a huge collection of books and several subscriptions to magazines like The National Geographic, going back decades.

One day I spied a set of magazines that were very different from the others. It was called “The Cross and The Flag. The Publisher was one Gerald L.K. Smith.

The original mailing label was to someone whose name I had never heard. “From a former client of your grandfather.” I was told. Not one more word was said about it.

America has largely been free of the most vicious forms of Jew Hatred so common in “Christian” Europe for at least sixteen hundred years, and in the Islamic world, since the days of Mohammad. Mostly confined to exclusion from business, political and social circles, from time to time, or the occasional lynching, the unique character of America, as an idea, has tended to suppress such drives.

But America is made up of people. And, people have cultural baggage. And tribal jealousies. And the ingrained tendency to scapegoat.

But of all these frailties, Jew Hatred has a remarkable tenacity to span time, distance, language, religion (or lack thereof) nearly any other cultural or historic parameter. You don’t even need Jews in your midst to loathe them! It lies there, just under the surface. Like a nest of cockroaches. Until it bursts forth in a frenzy.

It is no secret that the moral paragons of our political leadership have shamelessly stolen our freedoms and run up a tab that is breathtaking in scope. They (and by our acquiescence, we) simply refuse to address this squarely. Nobody wants to be first. Most of us know that it will end very ugly. The more we stall, the uglier still will be the reckoning.

But then, there is that ancient excuse. The always-effective scapegoat resting on the shelf. Even here. Waiting. Waiting to be grasped and swung with ecstatic abandon into a human face.

So, with that in mind, I refer you to a thought provoking article by commentator, Vic Rosenthal, from his Abu Yehuda weblog, entitled, “America Crosses the Line“.  Be sure to follow his links, especially those to Ms. Shrode’s Facebook page and the comments.  Sobering.


Larry Pratt, the media and the “bullet box”

The anti-gun punditry was all aflutter last week with the news that Larry Pratt had stated that in some near-future time, we might have to resort to “the bullet box” to preserve “proper constitutional balance.”

Speaking of November’s election and its possibile consequences, Pratt noted:

The courts do not have the last word on what the Constitution is. They decide particular cases, they don’t make law. Their decisions, unlike the Roe v. Wade usurpation, don’t extend to the whole of society, they’re not supposed to. And we may have to reassert that proper constitutional balance, and it may not be pretty. So, I’d much rather have an election where we solve this matter at the ballot box than have to resort to the bullet box.

Now I differ with Pratt on a number of points, including any poorly supported assumption that the R. candidate will appoint better justices than the D. candidate. And the item he mentions is historic piece of military equipment more properly called a cartridge box, not a bullet box (and you can still buy replicas of it, NFI). But I don’t see anything unusually incendiary in what he said.

Unlike the Usual Suspects in the media.

The Huffington Post (presumably just before writer Ed Mazza swooned into a deep faint) cried that:

Pratt’s organization is considered even more extreme than the National Rifle Association. The Southern Poverty Law Center claims Pratt has “ties to the militia movement, white supremacist organizations and Christian theocrats.”

The SPLC, of course, makes millions by claiming that everybody to the right of Hillary Clinton has similar eeeeeevil “ties.” Specific claims against Pratt have been long debunked, as anyone with 10 fingers and a search engine could discover. And don’t you always laugh at those little squeaks of horror about organizations “more extreme than the National Rifle Association”? After all these years, it’s amazing that hopolphobic journos haven’t realized that, within the gun-rights realm, most organizations (including ours) are “more extreme than the National Rifle Association”?

Oh well.

Ed Kilgore of the New Yorker has a better understanding of Second Amendment supporters and even compliments us (though I suspect he doesn’t consider it a compliment) by calling those of us who are beyond the NRA “Second Amendment ultras” rather than the usual “extremist” cr*p. I’ve never been an “ultra” before and I think I’d rather like being one.

He also makes the absolutely correct point that if conservative politicians and activists like Larry Pratt, Joni Ernst, Mike Huckabee, or Ted Cruz (all of whom have made statements compatible with the “bullet box” remark) heard rhetoric similar to Pratt’s coming from, say, a black-nationalist group, they’d be crying alarm.

But Kilgore seems to have no grasp of the concept of a constitutional republic and seemingly no understanding at all of limited powers, the Bill of Rights, or for that matter the plain truth that individuals have rights that no government or interest group has authority to abolish.

Bottom line, although his language is restrained and high-toned, Kilgore, like Mazza, seems to hold the common hoplophobe view that taking to the bullet box simply means “shooting anybody you disagree with.” Especially if you don’t like particular election results or the views of judges.

Of course, anyone can see by Pratt’s statement that he’d rather do just about anything rather than resort to shooting. And I wonder how many of the fainting pundits understand that Pratt was referring to the famous “four boxes of freedom” — soap, jury, ballot, and cartridge — and that the final item is only the very last resort of people who’ve been so tyrannized that the first three fail utterly to preserve freedom. Not “democracy.” Freedom. Individual rights. The soap box, the jury box, and (at least in theory) the ballot box are all tools of the individual. It’s only when government or perhaps powerful agents working with government take them away that the cartridge box legitimately comes into play.

On the other hand, we know where we stand with the first three boxes now.

The soap box has long been under threat from uppity presidents, self-righteous campus thugs (not to mention campus speech codes), political intolerance on any part of the spectrum, state governments, federal officials, and even petty local tyrants.

Between the over-criminalization of everything, the pressure to force us to incriminate ourselves (pdf), and other forms of courtroom tyranny, the jury box isn’t as free as it was supposed to be, either.

And the ballot box? Oh, please. At a local level, and sometimes even at a state level, voting may occasionally nudge government a little ways in the direction of greater respect for individual rights. But at the federal level, overreach, mission creep, corruption, secrecy, uber-surveillance, funny money, militarization, paranoia, unaccountable bureaucracy, and “stroke of the pen, law of the land” arrogance have gone so far that the ballot box has become nothing but a kind of “opiate of the masses” — a quasi-religious ceremony that encourages us to believe we can influence the far-off “gods” who — no matter whether they’re the gods of the Ds or the gods of the Rs — increasingly rule without regard to any limits on their power.

No, I do not know a single gun owner who believes in “shooting anybody you disagree with.” But then again, maybe those ardent advocates of unlimited “democracy,” those believers in the “anything-goes” power of unelected judges, justices, and bureaucrats really do have something to fear.

Not gun owners. We’re not their enemy. We’re not the enemy of any peaceable people, no matter how much we may dislike their opinions. What they have to fear are the inevitable — and now rapidly growing — consequences of the very policies they so lovingly or stridently or self-servingly or ignorantly support.


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first on TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!


I Believe in Miracles

Yesterday was the 28th of Iyar, the day on the Hebrew calendar celebrating Jerusalem Day.  One of the  results of the Six-Day war, another attempt to wipe Israel and her Jews from the face of the earth. After the Arab attack on the new state of Israel Jerusalem had been divided. Access to holy sites under Jordan was non-existent for Jews.

Upon its capture by the Arab Legion, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City was destroyed and its residents expelled. Fifty-eight synagogues–some hundreds of years old–were destroyed, their contents looted and desecrated. Some Jewish religious sites were turned into chicken coops or animal stalls. The Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, where Jews had been burying their dead for over 2500 years, was ransacked; graves were desecrated; thousands of tombstones were smashed and used as building material, paving stones or for latrines in Arab Legion army camps. The Intercontinental Hotel was built on top of the cemetery and graves were demolished to make way for a highway to the hotel. The Western Wall became a slum area.

In direct contravention of the 1949 armistice agreements, Jordan did not permit Jews access to their holy sites or to the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.

Before the start of the war, Israel sent a message to King Hussein (not barry) of Jordan, that it would not attack Jerusalem or the West Bank if Jordan stayed out of the fight. Jordan believing the false reports from Egypt couldn’t wait to join to be part of the pack ripping Israel to pieces. The result was the reunification of Jerusalem.

Jews once again had control of the holy sites, the strong voice of Motta Gur rang out

“We’re sitting right now on the ridge and we’re seeing the Old City. Shortly we’re going to go in to the Old City of Jerusalem, that all generations have dreamed about. We will be the first to enter the Old City…” and shortly afterwards, “The Temple Mount is in our hands! I repeat, the Temple Mount is in our hands!”

And about 15 minutes later Moshe Dayan gave it….ok, I’ll stop.

But to me, it seems G-d took this attack on Israel and turned it around for good. A miracle. That leads to other miracles. Because of the 1967 victory, people like me can take photos like this last week.

The Western Wall
The Western Wall
Shalom, peace, שלום
Shalom, peace, שלום

I can place a piece of paper in the Kotel with prayers on it. Prayers that include TZP, her team and her members and readers. Prayers that G-d will bless you all, abundantly.

I will not be shot by a Jordanian sniper from a state created by the Palestine Mandate by Great Britain in 1923, which achieved it’s independence in 1946, only two years before Israel. Despite the Falestinian Authority wanting to gain control of the Western Wall as well.

Yes, I believe in miracles.


POLL: Will we have to resort to the “bullet box”?

Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America stirred up controversy last week when he said he feared we might have to resort to the “bullet box,” specifically if this November’s presidential election resulted in Supreme Court justices who think that they, and not the Constitution as written, are the ultimate authority under (and over) U.S. law.

This week’s poll asks whether, and if so when, you think freedomistas in the U.S. might have to resort to that fourth box of liberty.

Although the poll asks only if and when, it would be even more interesting to hear what you think might bring us to the box of last resort — what policies, what catastrophic events, what seemingly small trigger event, what change in law or thinking could provoke armed opposition to tyranny? Or, if you think that can be averted, what would help us regain freedom while steering clear of violence? So please … comment away!