Sunday, September 16, 2012

Can Someone Explain It All To Me?

I am at a loss to understand events of this past week. Several American Embassies around the world were attacked. Four people, including an Ambassador, an Ambassador, were murdered.

 Until 1979, during the term of the second worst President in U.S. history, such actions would have been considered an act of war. Today, however, the perpetrators of those acts are considered poor innocent victims of having their feelings hurt. Everyone knows you are justified in committing murder if your feelings are hurt.

 I know such an irrational view from the current administration is to be expected, but such a view seems to be the norm from the denizens of Hollywood and the news media – those who purportedly are the most concerned with the freedom of speech. Christiane Amanpour said, “There is also 100-year law by the United States Supreme Court which says you can't cry fire in a crowded theater.”

 Is there such a law? No, that statement is attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes as part of the Supreme Courts decision in the case Schenk vs. United States in 1919. Charles Schenck distributed leaflets arguing against the draft during World War I. For his actions Schenck was charged with violating espionage laws. He argued that his actions were protected by free speech. Holmes stated that in times of clear and present danger certain restrictions can be imposed. Such a restriction could be described as someone falsely yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. Note that the word falsely is often left out of the quotation. If there was a fire in a theater, shouting “fire” could be considered appropriate.

What is the danger of falsely yelling fire? It could cause panic by making people be in immediate fear for their lives resulting in injury and death for no justifiable reason. That would be a clear and present danger.

Does this apply to the video and the attacks on the embassies? Is it reasonable to assume that mature adults will go on a rampage and commit murder because their feelings are hurt?

President Obama stated, “We stand for religious freedom. And we reject the denigration of any religion — including Islam.” Does the United States reject the denigration of religion?” No, if someone denigrates Christianity the government gives that person money. 

What happens if a conservative Christian objects to government grants paying for “art” such a crucifix in a jar of urine or a painting of the Virgin Mary smeared with dung? Those people are accused of trying to deny others their right of freedom of speech. The arguments I heard against those grants asked, “Why can we not use government funds for something that supports religion but it is acceptable to use government funds to insult it?” When it comes to Judeo-Christian values, the liberal mind sees an unwillingness to pay someone else for speaking against those values as denying that person the right to speak out against those values. 

How can it be that liberals say, among other things, that the producer of an anti-Mohamed video should be charged with murder? Did that producer tell those people to attack the embassy and commit those murders? Did he tell those people to go out and act like uncivilized animals? No, he made some insulting comments that hurt the people’s feelings. However, how many leftists in the U.S. have flat-out called for the deaths of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan? Oh, but that is acceptable political discourse (but disagreeing with Obama policies is inciting violence against the President).

I personally do not believe in insulting another’s religion for the sake of insulting another’s religion. However, it makes no sense to avoid calling a group of people a gang of murderous thugs because that might hurt their feelings and make that group of people act like a gang of murderous thugs. There comes a time that the truth must be told.

Using the logic of the left, if abortions cause shootings and bombings at abortion clinics then abortion clinics should be illegal. I am sure the left will get behind that idea in a hurry. What is the left’s reaction to those crimes? They hold anyone and everyone who speaks out against abortion responsible – even though the reaction of conservative political and religious leaders is almost exclusively that such actions are crimes that should not be tolerated and those responsible should be punished to the fullest extend of the law.

Now I realize that those on the left who are selectively outraged will be among the first to fall if a totalitarian society comes to the United States. I will be laughing at them from beyond the grave, as I am sure that I will go down during the fight.

 It is just so saddening that western society, the greatest society in the history of the world, the society that has given freedom and prosperity in greater amounts to more people is being washed away to protect the tender feelings of those who want subjugate the world.

And those who always seem to bemoan the denial of rights are leading the cheers for it all to happen.


  1. I don't think anyone needs to explain it to you Matt, you understand it all too well.

    What we need are leaders who recognise the threat we are under and who have the courage and fortitude to eliminate the threat before it grows OUT OF CONTROL.

    Oh for the leaders of steel and iron that used to grace the governments on both sides of the "pond."

    "One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!"
    Winston Churchill

    "The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or the next. It was the deep knowledge — and pray God we have not lost it — that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest."
    Ronald Reagan

    "If you just set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing."

    "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't."
    Margaret Thatcher

    "The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life."
    Theodore Roosevelt

  2. That TR quote is one of the quotes that inspire me most.

  3. Great post, Matt. But as Fay intimated, logic has nothing to do with this.

    Obviously we are teaching the Islamists how to behave. They will learn the full extent of their power over time.

    The stable equilibrium is one where the jihadi rage bois have a veto over anything any American ever says. For the current regime and it's many enablers and supporters, this is either too much for them to figure out, or a feature, and not a problem.

    Weird... or maybe not so weird... but Jenna Jameson understands a few things about the situation.

    1. ...the jihadi rage bois have a veto over anything any American ever says.

      They also, more importantly, have veto power over anything their own people might say, or even think. The threat to their own is real and the fear among them palpable. We are just now, maybe, perhaps, or not, getting tuned in....and still being lied to by our government about it all.

  4. Update / local angle about Chris Stevens, our ambassador who was murdered in Benghazi...

    Turns out, unlike some other political frauds, Stevens has a clear and close connection with an American Indian tribe, in his case the Chinook:

    Stevens’ mother, Mary Commanday, is the first cousin of Chinook tribal elders Catherine Herrold Troeh and Charlotte Davis, both of whom are well known in Pacific County, the historic homeland of the tribe that met Lewis and Clark at the mouth of the Columbia River

    Does anyone who reads MSM (man I can barely read the NYT anymore) recall this being mentioned?

    From what I read about Stevens today it seems he had a big heart. Our government has failed him on many levels - not his concern now.

    Namaste, brother. Namaste.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. I am so weary of this past week...again, a literal example of how the US government itself can be captured by fantasy and fiction. Then send out its advocates to boldface lie about it all.

    I will say it once here: The alleged offensive video trailer on Youtube had absolutely nothing to do with the Jihadist eruptions on 11 Sep 2012 in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere. The video has been around for several months, only recently translated and dubbed in to Arabic...expressly to use as dupe bait for the western governments to gloom on to as the casus belli. The violence itself was all pre-planned and set up, even the leader of Libya says precisely that. He's nto using a crude video as an excuse. Why is our government using it?

    Why do I believe what I do about the video and its non-connection to the violence and death of 4+ Americans? Very simply....I live smack dab in the middle of the largest population of Arab Muslims in the Western Hemisphere. My individual neighborhood, of thousands, is 95% Muslim. I know far more Arab Muslims and their families than UN hack Susan Rice, or Obama for that matter, has ever passed by casually on the street in their entire lives. Their hypocrisy really pisses me off....they know nothing, are blatantly ignorant, but insistent that their purview is correct. What a bag of squalid shit.

    Not once this week, by any of a few hundred Arab Muslims I've spoken with, has anyone, repeat, Anyone, suggested even remotely that the violence was caused by the video. The know who instigated it and carried it out...the same fanatics that they have fled here to be free of themselves.

    There has been no protest parade, no bug eyed screamers, no violence, or even threat of it, here. CAIR speaks only for the self interest of CAIR...and virtually no one I know pays any attention to them.

    My neighbors wonder, in some awe, how the US government can be so fricking stupid.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Agreed in toto with all of the above.

      And can only add: the Islamists knew Stevens would not be in Tripoli on 11/9; the Islamists knew Stevens would be in Benghazi on 11/9; the Islamists knew the layout of the consulate compound; the Islamists knew that Stevens was travelling effectively without protection; the Islamists knew to drive him and his detail into a small, segregated building; the Islamists arrived in a 400 man cohort with RPGs and mortars.

      Almost a metaphor for Obama's "foreign policy": leaky; naive; ill-prepared; reliant on vapid hopes. And still Susan Rice bangs on with her pathetic irrelevancies...

      Four more years of Obama as POTUS, and you Yanks will have to begin learning Arabic. Or Mandarin. /some hyperbole

    2. I found Rice's quote:

      “What sparked the recent violence was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful, very offensive video that has offended many people around the world,” explained Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, on a Sunday talk show.

      "Explained". Yup, in Obama's WH, this level of thinking is exactly what "explains" both world events and American FP.

    3. Yeah, a video published 6 months ago coincidently caused simultaneous violent events all on 11 Sep 2012 and thereafter.

      Hey buddy, I have this great 419 investment for you. Trust me.

    4. Correction: Video "trailer" published in July 2012 (2months before 11 Sep 2012) for a purported movie produced 6 months ago that has been seen by no more than a dozen people, none in the middle east.

  8. Can we please not have that picture here?

    1. Out of respect for you I have deleted the comment with the photograph that seemed to disturb you.

      I don't agree with any rationale for removing it, and you've not given any reason for your distress. I presume you have reasons other than pure emotional upset.

      I intended for it to be emotionally disturbing, just as photos of the Holocaust are disturbing....though they weren't published until after the war ended. Some people knew of the atrocities, my parents among them, but a great many didn't want to know until they had to know, post facto.

      This war is still going on and it is much more than Muslims per se against Western Civilization. Provocative images are necessary to Americans as we are well known for timidity if not provoked severely. I suggest more provocation early can potentially reduce atrocity down the road.

      In fact, it is NOT at all about Muslims per se against the Western values. It IS all about a minority of Muslims who seek to suppress knowledge as a means to control first their own people, by imposing ignorance, then the world at large if they can. Pol Pot gave it shot in Cambodia and that didn't turn out too well.

      In short, ordinary Muslims everywhere today are victims as much as anyone in the non-Muslim world. And in my case, thousands of them are my immediate neighbors. Frankly I know I know them better than Hillary or Barack or any of the other wobbly apologists in Washington DC.

      We often ask why "moderate" Muslims do not protest their own tyrants. Stupid question, when we as Americans represented by our government do not challenge them until disaster has already struck. Who has the most to lose first?

      I read all manner of utter bullshit, much of it published by my government, about how the viral video caused or was a major part of the cause of the violence on 11 September 2012 and thereafter. Yet, I live among 50,000 odd Muslim souls and have not heard one, not a single damn one, mention the video as casual...rather they cite radicals planning the events in advance specifically for 9/11. They are puzzled by our official insistence otherwise. We appear stupid.

      Going further, our government and State Department, by acquiescence to the ill informed, appear to think that any portrayal or imagery of Allah is "haram" ...when that is a 20th century revisionist concept by the fanatic Islamic idolitors who would impose such ignorance, disregarding several hundred years of their own texts with images portraying Allah in several forms. There IS a reason the fanatic Islamists seek to destroy ancient monuments and texts.

      We need more images that poke us in the eye harshly, of the Daniel Pearls, of the Nickolas Bergs, of the Ambassadors Stevens, graphic and horrible. It just might make us stop acting like fools.
      We continue to think we can negotiate with those who actively subjugate their own people.

    2. Aridog - I shouldn't have asked for the picture's removal and I apologize. It was purely an emotional reaction on my part, as the Ambassador was a very close friend of a couple who are near and dear to me. Seeing them in such pain, it affected me as well.

    3. No apology is necessary. I understand the impact and the emotions involved. You know me...I trend to be aggressive in making a point, especially when I, too, am severely emotionally impacted, as was and am with the death of Ambassador Stevens. I've watched the coverage and heard my government's "move on now" attitude. It infuriates me. More than that, if given an outlet my rage would be homicidal.

      For reasons I needn't go in to, I am very aware of the risks and dangers Foreign Service Officers face in certain postings, and in my opinion they willingly sign that same blank check payable to the US of A that soldiers do. From what I know, a Chief of Mission/Ambassador is usually a Senior Foreign Service (SFS) rank from Foreign Service list....and that carries military flag rank equivalence.

      When such a man is deployed, essentially without security or defense, it is the ultimate taking for granted of a valuable service person by the government. Just as in the military, frequently the cake eaters within the SFS and the secretariat of the State Department make such decisions....for purely purported *realpolitik* reasons unrelated to any rational mission.

      So yeah, I want several US big wigs to pay for Ambassador Stevens' death, for the method of his death, and for their cavalier attitude about his death. I want them to pay in pain for their inactions, and public humiliation.

      The fact that I know the de facto murderers won't be called to account only makes my anger more intense. It is also embarrassing, personally, where I live, among 50,000 Muslims, who about now are questioning our resolve to defeat the tyranny of fanatic faith and slavery they fled. We have a few nut cases, some wife beaters, etc., but the majority are not rampaging in the street in bug eyed fist waving fire starting lunacy. But they do ask questions...and I HAVE NO ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS.

  9. Jourdan, I have been thinking about you a lot during these events and wondering if you can comment without compromising your position.

  10. Yes, I have wondered too. Please do, Jourdan, if you can...

  11. At what point do we show these images? When the U.N. nullifies the Constitution of the United States? When Sharia law is the law of the land?

    Descriptions, though graphic, are abstract. The enemy is a bunch of barbarians. If it hadn't been a video (which it wasn't), it would have been something else. They are long on excuses and short on decency.

    Did we kill anybody and drag bodies through the street after the video of the murder of Daniel Pearl? Why do people act like every atrocity committed by these cavemen is the first? All we have to do is make one (more) concession and all will be right in the world.

    No, damn it. This is not one event too many. That event happened years ago. If the government of the United State thinks it is more important to castrate its citizens than to protect them, then it is time for a new government.

    1. I'm highly frustrated too Matt. The media and our government are a joke. They lie. They cover up facts that might be harmful to the JEM's reelection. The details of the brutal murder of Stevens and his compatriots during the terrorist attack on our embassy should be the lead story on EVERY newscast, including pictures and videos. Our prezzy should be outraged.

      All of this appeasement to muslim sensibilities makes me sick.

  12. Bravo, Matt.

    What you said put a lump in my throat.

  13. Excellent observations Matt. I often wonder exactly what it will take for western idjits to wake up to reality. Tonight on my rush hour drive home from the airport I was stuck (in a long slow highway crawl) behind a BC (Canada) registered vehicle, on a Canadian road, in Canada, with an Obama 12 bumper sticker..WTFF? I wanted to ram into him soooo badly....

    1. I saw an Obama bumper sticker where I live.

      no joke, I took a picture.

    2. Well, he *is* Kenyan.


      afw, does your email addy I have still work? I've been wanting to reply to your last letter but am not sure how. I no longer have FB and your author page has no contact info...

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    4. Girl on the took a picture. Of an Obama bumper sticker. In Africa ... send it to Professor William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection, he runs a regular series of bumper stickers, from the odder places the better.

      email to :


      Use the "Tip Line" at [it's on the upper right side bar]

      Or find him on Facebook

  14. It occurs to me that Jourdan's request regarding this graphic photograph is personal in nature.

    Jourdan, was Chris a friend of yours? If so, I'm very sorry for your loss.

    I too would like to hear your thoughts on recent events.

  15. Excellent post Matt. I sure can't explain it; the twisted ideology of the far left is beyond explaining.

    I've been waiting for the teachster union goons to take over city hall in Chicago after the mayor stuck his thumb in their collective eye. I guess it's okay to riot and act like school yard crybabies when it's Walker telling teachsters to go jump in the lake; when it's Rahm, there isn't a peep to be heard. Hypocrisy at its finest.