When two terrorists in body armor and carrying assault rifles came for a roomful of cartoonists and fans of freedom of speech in Texas, the media took the side of the terrorists.
CAIR, a Muslim Brotherhood front group with ties to terrorists, spun the attack by claiming that the contest had been intended to “bait” the terrorists. The media quickly picked up the “bait” meme.
The New York Times, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, the Dallas Morning News, CNN and even FOX News all accused the cartoonists of “baiting” the poor Muslim terrorists into attacking them. The actual attempt at mass slaughter was dismissed as the terrorists “taking the bait” from the cartoonists who had been fiendishly plotting to be mass slaughtered by them for the publicity.
The Washington Post not only stated that the contest was “bait”, but its headline huffed, “Event organizer offers no apology after thwarted attack in Texas.” And why won’t the 9/11 dead apologize?
Journalists often tell us that a free press is the best defense for a free society. Every major newspaper and news network once again proved them wrong. The best defense for freedom of speech came not from the journalists or the civil rights groups, from the speechmakers or the activists. It came from an off-duty traffic cop working security outside the event targeted by Muslim terrorists. His partner, an older guard, didn’t even have a gun, and took a bullet to the leg.
He could have pulled back and let the terrorists have a clear path. No doubt he had a family and plenty of reasons to live. Like so much of the media, he could have disguised this cowardice by blaming the cartoonists for bringing the attack on themselves. Instead he held the line. The traffic cop with a pistol took on two terrorists in body armor, armed with assault rifles and extra ammo. And when it was over, two Muslim terrorists were dead and freedom of speech was alive.
"He had two people shooting at him, plus he's trying to take out two targets. And if he had to make headshots," Mark Sligar, a firearms instructor, said, "That's awesome shooting. And look at the people's lives he saved, just because he was able to take care of that."
Like Kevin Vickers, the retired 58-year-old Sergeant-at-Arms, who armed with a 9mm handgun stopped Muslim terrorist Zehaf-Bibeau from carrying out a massacre of Canadian parliamentarians, the unnamed older police officer did more to protect freedom than all the self-styled defenders of freedom ever have.
And he did it with the tool that many of those defenders of freedom want to outlaw; a gun.
The left promises us collective security through civil rights while taking away our freedom. Their idea of collective security is disarming the citizenry, then disarming the police and then appeasing the killers. There will be more murders than ever, but at least those carrying them out will be representatives of oppressed groups, such as inner city drug dealers and ISIS terrorists, ‘punching up’ at the privileged.
We’ve already seen how worthless collective security is. In Baltimore, the Democratic mayor turned over the city to rioters and looters. Every Democrat who was at all involved in fighting crime, from Bill Clinton on down, is frantically apologizing to the social justice mobs for daring to protect Americans. The media is busy explaining why the looters were right and the lootees were in the wrong.
After the Texas shootings, the media popped up to blame the attacks, not on the attackers, but on those who came under attack. CAIR’s “bait” meme, adopted by the media, reverses responsibility. It contends that anyone shot at by a Muslim terrorist has to prove that he didn’t intend to provoke the terrorists.
Despite the impeccable left-wing credentials of Charlie Hebdo, the PEN gala came under fire from authors denouncing the French cartoonists for provoking their disenfranchised and oppressed minority ISIS killers. And when the ISIS killers came for the Hebdo cartoonists, unarmed police officers ran for it.
A wounded French cop raised his hands and begged for his life, before the terrorist finished him off with a shot to the head. It’s not the first time that a disarmed West has been helpless in the face of Muslim terrorism.
During the Munich Olympics, German police provided security by handing out candy and flowers. An informant had passed along word that an attack was being planned, but nothing was done. The resulting massacre of Israeli athletes by Muslim terrorists was partially covered up by the German government which released three of the captured terrorists a month later and whose foreign minister met with the planners of the massacre to “rebuild trust”.
Just like Argentina and Iran, after the bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, a dirty deal was struck behind the scenes and the terrorists got what they wanted.
When Israel independently targeted the terrorists, the German ambassador to Lebanon blasted Israel for killing the most "rational and responsible" members of the PLO.
The Israelis had killed the terrorists, he accused, because they did not want peace.
But a bunch of good guys with guns had settled the issue of whether Israeli athletes should be able to compete in the Olympics even though the UN Security Council passed a resolution condemning the Israeli “act of aggression” and the “loss of human life”; particularly that of terrorist boss Abu Jihad.
The Israelis, not the Muslim terrorists or the collaborationist German government, were the villains for forcing the terrorists to do what they did. If only Israel had surrendered to the PLO, the attacks would not have happened. Once Israel did surrender in the 90s and the attacks escalated, then it was Israel’s fault for not surrendering enough. It’s never the fault of the terrorists or their collaborators.
The accusations are all familiar. Bosch Fawstin, Charb, Pamela Geller, Theo van Gogh, Mark Basseley Youssef, Salman Rushdie, Molly Norris and a hundred others are at fault for provoking the terrorists.
There are lectures on “responsible speech”. The targets are accused of “hiding” behind freedom of speech and of deliberately planning to be killed for the publicity.
During WW2, Gandhi urged the Jews and the British to surrender to the Nazis.
“This manslaughter must be stopped. You are losing; if you persist, it will only result in greater bloodshed. Hitler is not a bad man. If you call it off today, he will follow suit,” he whined to the Brits.
"I want you to fight Nazis without arms or... with non-violent arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity,” he suggested in another missive.
He also had some advice for the Jews. “If only the Jews of Germany had the good sense to offer their throats willingly to the Nazi butchers' knives,” he mused.
That is where the insane mantra of non-violence and appeasement, the exploration of root causes and winning hearts finally leads, to mass graves and victorious mass murderers.
And everyone who refuses to take their suicidal advice is blamed for provoking the killers.
We can either live in a paranoid politically correct world frantically trying not to offend the Hitlers
and Mohammeds, and blaming their victims when they kill, or we can be free men and women who have chosen to take the power to defend our rights into our own hands. While a thousand organizations use the Holocaust as a platform for speeches about tolerance, Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors is conducting firearms training. While Big Media attacks a free press in the name of the free press, a small group gathered in Garland and an off-duty cop helped keep it free.
The unnamed traffic cop who stood up to two offended killers did not follow Gandhi’s advice; he refused to lay down his arms or try to fight them with non-violent arms. His heroism reminds us that freedom is not defended with empty idealism easily perverted into appeasement of evil, but with the force of arms.
Gandhi and his Western disciples were wrong. The soldiers who fought Hitler did far more to save humanity than Gandhi ever did. A single traffic cop with a gun has had more of a positive impact on freedom of speech in this country than all the journalists of the free press fighting against freedom.
It takes a good guy with a gun to defend freedom of speech.
CAIR, a Muslim Brotherhood front group with ties to terrorists, spun the attack by claiming that the contest had been intended to “bait” the terrorists. The media quickly picked up the “bait” meme.The New York Times, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, the Dallas Morning News, CNN and even FOX News all accused the cartoonists of “baiting” the poor Muslim terrorists into attacking them. The actual attempt at mass slaughter was dismissed as the terrorists “taking the bait” from the cartoonists who had been fiendishly plotting to be mass slaughtered by them for the publicity.
The Washington Post not only stated that the contest was “bait”, but its headline huffed, “Event organizer offers no apology after thwarted attack in Texas.” And why won’t the 9/11 dead apologize?
Journalists often tell us that a free press is the best defense for a free society. Every major newspaper and news network once again proved them wrong. The best defense for freedom of speech came not from the journalists or the civil rights groups, from the speechmakers or the activists. It came from an off-duty traffic cop working security outside the event targeted by Muslim terrorists. His partner, an older guard, didn’t even have a gun, and took a bullet to the leg.
He could have pulled back and let the terrorists have a clear path. No doubt he had a family and plenty of reasons to live. Like so much of the media, he could have disguised this cowardice by blaming the cartoonists for bringing the attack on themselves. Instead he held the line. The traffic cop with a pistol took on two terrorists in body armor, armed with assault rifles and extra ammo. And when it was over, two Muslim terrorists were dead and freedom of speech was alive.
"He had two people shooting at him, plus he's trying to take out two targets. And if he had to make headshots," Mark Sligar, a firearms instructor, said, "That's awesome shooting. And look at the people's lives he saved, just because he was able to take care of that."
Like Kevin Vickers, the retired 58-year-old Sergeant-at-Arms, who armed with a 9mm handgun stopped Muslim terrorist Zehaf-Bibeau from carrying out a massacre of Canadian parliamentarians, the unnamed older police officer did more to protect freedom than all the self-styled defenders of freedom ever have.
And he did it with the tool that many of those defenders of freedom want to outlaw; a gun.
The left promises us collective security through civil rights while taking away our freedom. Their idea of collective security is disarming the citizenry, then disarming the police and then appeasing the killers. There will be more murders than ever, but at least those carrying them out will be representatives of oppressed groups, such as inner city drug dealers and ISIS terrorists, ‘punching up’ at the privileged.
We’ve already seen how worthless collective security is. In Baltimore, the Democratic mayor turned over the city to rioters and looters. Every Democrat who was at all involved in fighting crime, from Bill Clinton on down, is frantically apologizing to the social justice mobs for daring to protect Americans. The media is busy explaining why the looters were right and the lootees were in the wrong.
After the Texas shootings, the media popped up to blame the attacks, not on the attackers, but on those who came under attack. CAIR’s “bait” meme, adopted by the media, reverses responsibility. It contends that anyone shot at by a Muslim terrorist has to prove that he didn’t intend to provoke the terrorists.
A wounded French cop raised his hands and begged for his life, before the terrorist finished him off with a shot to the head. It’s not the first time that a disarmed West has been helpless in the face of Muslim terrorism.
During the Munich Olympics, German police provided security by handing out candy and flowers. An informant had passed along word that an attack was being planned, but nothing was done. The resulting massacre of Israeli athletes by Muslim terrorists was partially covered up by the German government which released three of the captured terrorists a month later and whose foreign minister met with the planners of the massacre to “rebuild trust”.
Just like Argentina and Iran, after the bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, a dirty deal was struck behind the scenes and the terrorists got what they wanted.
When Israel independently targeted the terrorists, the German ambassador to Lebanon blasted Israel for killing the most "rational and responsible" members of the PLO.
The Israelis had killed the terrorists, he accused, because they did not want peace.
But a bunch of good guys with guns had settled the issue of whether Israeli athletes should be able to compete in the Olympics even though the UN Security Council passed a resolution condemning the Israeli “act of aggression” and the “loss of human life”; particularly that of terrorist boss Abu Jihad.
The Israelis, not the Muslim terrorists or the collaborationist German government, were the villains for forcing the terrorists to do what they did. If only Israel had surrendered to the PLO, the attacks would not have happened. Once Israel did surrender in the 90s and the attacks escalated, then it was Israel’s fault for not surrendering enough. It’s never the fault of the terrorists or their collaborators.
The accusations are all familiar. Bosch Fawstin, Charb, Pamela Geller, Theo van Gogh, Mark Basseley Youssef, Salman Rushdie, Molly Norris and a hundred others are at fault for provoking the terrorists.
There are lectures on “responsible speech”. The targets are accused of “hiding” behind freedom of speech and of deliberately planning to be killed for the publicity.
During WW2, Gandhi urged the Jews and the British to surrender to the Nazis.
“This manslaughter must be stopped. You are losing; if you persist, it will only result in greater bloodshed. Hitler is not a bad man. If you call it off today, he will follow suit,” he whined to the Brits.
"I want you to fight Nazis without arms or... with non-violent arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity,” he suggested in another missive.
He also had some advice for the Jews. “If only the Jews of Germany had the good sense to offer their throats willingly to the Nazi butchers' knives,” he mused.
That is where the insane mantra of non-violence and appeasement, the exploration of root causes and winning hearts finally leads, to mass graves and victorious mass murderers.
And everyone who refuses to take their suicidal advice is blamed for provoking the killers.
We can either live in a paranoid politically correct world frantically trying not to offend the Hitlers and Mohammeds, and blaming their victims when they kill, or we can be free men and women who have chosen to take the power to defend our rights into our own hands. While a thousand organizations use the Holocaust as a platform for speeches about tolerance, Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors is conducting firearms training. While Big Media attacks a free press in the name of the free press, a small group gathered in Garland and an off-duty cop helped keep it free.
The unnamed traffic cop who stood up to two offended killers did not follow Gandhi’s advice; he refused to lay down his arms or try to fight them with non-violent arms. His heroism reminds us that freedom is not defended with empty idealism easily perverted into appeasement of evil, but with the force of arms.
Gandhi and his Western disciples were wrong. The soldiers who fought Hitler did far more to save humanity than Gandhi ever did. A single traffic cop with a gun has had more of a positive impact on freedom of speech in this country than all the journalists of the free press fighting against freedom.
It takes a good guy with a gun to defend freedom of speech.
Comments
What is truly disgusting about this blame-the-victim game the traitorous media in our nation is playing is that their response is the true "racism." They are saying that we cannot speak freely because these muslims cannot control their responses. They are saying that the muslims do not have the capacity as human beings to control their behavior in our free society. They cannot keep from raping women, they cannot keep from killing infidels, and they cannot keep from causing mass destruction. This is the sickness of the West. To allow others to destroy lives in the West because non-Westerners cannot control themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt is illegal to bait bears. It is perfectly leagal to bait psychopaths. The officer shot well. Two head shots under perssure... Damn good.
ReplyDeleteI hope the next time they pull off one of these attacks they get into the NYT news floor.
Freedom of speech is all absolute to 'free thought'. Just as the right to self defense is a basic natural right that grows out of the right to life. Neither one may be infringed upon in a free society.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing worse than leftists who hate liberty are the so-called conservatives (in name only) who say they believe in liberty but attach a big BUT to it, thus confirming they really do not believe in liberty.
ReplyDeleteYour articles on Texas has not resonated. You've reached conclusions that doesn't match your analysis. Hiding behind the word liberty does not replace real analysis and seems cheap way of convincing with your hollow conclusions. In my mind you've cheapened the forefathers intent. While I see you as our greatest social commentator day in and day out once in awhile there are certain positions you take that, while you make a great effort when finished its just hot air.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair and honest, if honesty is still worth anything nowadays, the media have little choice in the matter.
ReplyDeleteIt is simple not feasible for a media house to protect several of its premises and thousands of individual workers from the peacelovers. Then consider the logistics of a government trying to protect thousands of premises and millions of its workers, from the same peaceful guys. Now it becomes easier to figure why Western leaders have dumbed themselves down.
As a matter of survival, it makes sense for the media and our craven Western leaders to at least pretend to side with Islam and Jihad, against nasty people like Pam, Robert, and our Sultan.
Well, then, if Daniel's cat is still up to it, it looks as though they are what is left of the free press.
Delete--malca
"...Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors is conducting firearms training." I am glad to read of this. The sense I've been getting in many of the recent stories (last several years) has been more of a hopeless collapse in any willingness to defend oneself.
ReplyDeleteIt's weird, in general, the much of society seems to think you need a permission slip to defend yourself. How much worse could things ever get than that?!!! - djr
Some say Gandhi's actions led to the mass ethnic cleansing of Buddhists, Hindus, Jains and Sikhs from Pakistan and later, Bangladesh. The population of non-muslims in Pakistan and Bangladesh before the partition in '48' was somewhere around 40%, now it's roughly 2% and dropping annually.
ReplyDeleteThe enemedia can't be trusted and should be boycotted along w/all advertisers who buy time on their stations.
Thank you Daniel for another excellent article.
Great Post!
ReplyDelete.... The soldiers who fought Hitler did far more to save Mankind than Gandhi ever did ....
ReplyDeleteAny lingering doubt Gandhi was other a total fraud was surely eliminated by the fact the Indian government bought off Richard Attenborough, who, for a few pieces of silver, turned his to-have-been biography of Gandhi into the entirely fictional Michael-Moore-like mockumentory it ended up being.
A bought and paid for film fraud. An informational.
A Big Lie.
What the left doesn't want to admit is that inoffensive speech doesn't need protection. That's kind of the point of the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteThe future does not belong to those who slander Islam!
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/-luj8Dwkr1A
Thanks Obama
Mistake number one is confusing freedom of speech with freedom of the press. The press wants that mistake to be made. If they can "professionalize" speech they have control of it and immense power. A major attack on a major American newspaper would be met with overwhelming force. The media would shake its head and say that response had to happen. It's only "amateurs" that get the antagonizer label.
ReplyDeleteWhenever I think the world has gone completely mad I like to read your analysis to remind myself that reasoned voices still exist and that some people still are sane. Its a shame that you cannot bottle your wisdom and have each and every university student take a dose. You are just outstanding.
ReplyDeleteLemmings come to mind; the drive to follow the herd, without question, is too powerful for the "faithful" to resist. It is not allowed, and punishable by shunning, What could be worse? The odds favor following the school or herd, but they are only marginally better for the small-brained animal. Pain is the best teacher, and it is coming.
ReplyDeleteBeing stupid about the obvious is a problem for many people who aren't old enough or trained to be skeptically fearful.
Most of these people will suffer as they follow their leaders into the lion's den, and that surely will be a lesson they won't forget, --if they, and their children, survive.
Regards,
In the bigger picture, non violent, law abiding people shouldn't have to live like this.
ReplyDeleteStrangled by the grievance industry on one side, and the nut job terrorists on the other, something's got to give, eventually. But they are the media's darlings and they have the money, so the outcome, god forbid, is nearly predictable. Who will be left to pay for everything ?
sophie
I thought what the officer did was truly heroic. We live in a time when it's fashionable to be cowardly. Thank you for the article and for being admirably out of step.
ReplyDeleteGreat article. There are good people in this world who are willing to die to protect innocents from terrorists. Those two who tried to attack the cartoon gathering will never try to attack anyone again, and that is the upside. If you kill them they are out of the game. The government announced there are thousands of people in America with terrorist ties they are watching, but the spokesperson said they can't watch everyone and those two guys seemed innocent enough. Yet, they keep letting the bad guys stroll into the country. What idiots. They don't even hide their intentions anymore. It should be obvious that we have been compromised at the highest level.
ReplyDeleteNo Doug. Sultan is stepping smartly. It is the loons who have a serious hitch in their giddyup.
ReplyDelete.... The soldiers who fought Hitler did far more to save Mankind than Gandhi ever did ....
ReplyDeleteGandhi...who knew? Learning...I am always learning here.
BarbaCat
Mr Greenfield, we share opinion about the above mentioned facts. Thanks for the so far for us unknown information about Mr Gandhi, the peace-icon: according his letters, the best result of appeasement is the peace of the deaths...
ReplyDeleteClelia&Eric from Eurabia, Italian province
I'm OK with the term "bait". Sure , Pam Geller out out muslim "bait" just like you put out bait for any other vermin you are trying to get rid of. So let this be a bit of advice from Pam Geller to the rest of the civilized world, draw out the islamonazi's so that we may see the enemy and we can deal with them appropriately.
ReplyDeleteDP111 ...
ReplyDeletePam Geller and AFDI did not bait Muslims. It is Muslims, who threaten that they will kill anyone who ridicules Muhammed who are the real baiters.
As long as Muslims issue threats of slaughter for ridiculing Muhammed, they have to be challenged, with force if necessary.
Here ,Here and AMEN! Only half of us American's will not go down without a fight...the rest are stupid Democrats that only believe in Socialism and talking to terrorists...before they are annihilated!
ReplyDeletethe reason i have an ar-15: for when they come to take my ar-15
ReplyDeletethe thing about firepower is when you need it and dont have it, you sing a different tune...
So... I like what I am reading. Nu shoin... is there a Branch Office in Toronto Canada? Bernie
ReplyDeletePost a Comment