Give Women the Right to Defend Themselves

Nederlands: Geert Wilders op campagne in zwolle

Nederlands: Geert Wilders op campagne in zwolle (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is from Geert Wilders and Machiel de Graaf writing for the Gatestone Institute.

“Cultural enrichment” has brought us a new word: Taharrush. Remember it well, because we are going to have to deal with it a lot. Taharrush is the Arabic word for the phenomenon whereby women are encircled by groups of men and sexually harassed, assaulted, groped, raped. After the Cologne taharrush on New Year’s Eve, many German women bought pepper spray. Who can blame them?

A culture that has a specific word for sexual assaults of women by groups of men is a danger to all women. The existence of the word indicates that the phenomenon is widespread. Frau Merkel, Prime Minister Rutte and all the other open-door politicians could and should have known this.

The Islamic world is steeped in misogyny. The Koran explicitly states that a woman is worth only half a man (Suras 2: 228, 2: 282, 4:11), that women are unclean (5:6), and that a man can have sex with his wife whenever he wants (24:31). The Koran even says that men are allowed to have sex slaves (4:24), and that they have the right to rape women whom they have captured (24:31).

The hadiths, the descriptions of the life of Muhammad, the ideal human being whose example all the Islamic faithful must follow, confirm that women are sex objects, that they are inferior beings like dogs and donkeys, and that there is nothing wrong with sexual slavery and raping female prisoners.

Taharrush is quite common in Islamic countries. Women are frequently surrounded by men and subsequently abused. The Egyptian website Jadaliyya points out that it also happens to veiled women. Women are victims simply because they are women and not because they have provoked the men by their conduct or “provocative” clothing. It can happen in the streets, public transport, supermarkets, or during protest demonstrations. […]

The solution is not that our women keep an arm’s length from the male barbarians, but that the government keeps these men thousands of kilometers away from us. Until that happens, other measures are needed. It is irresponsible to turn our country into a jungle and subsequently send women unarmed into the jungle. They must at least have the right to defend themselves. Contrary to countries such as Germany and France, in our country it is illegal to carry pepper spray. With the Netherlands now being overrun by men who see women as inferior sex tools, it is time to legalize pepper spray in the Netherlands as a weapon against taharrush.

via Give Women the Right to Defend Themselves.

The only real problem that I have with this is this. Women, like men, have an inherent, God-given, right of self-defense, not to mention the duty to defend others. It is simply the right to life. It is illegitimate for any government to think it has any right at all to preemptively remove this right from any member of society. Pepper spray (and tasers and the like) are an OK stopgap. But the only way to stop animals like this is to put them down, and therefore, lethal self-defense is the answer.

Yes, for most of us that means guns. Not for nothing, in the Old American West, was it said that God created men and women, but Colonel Colt made them equal. How else is an 110-pound woman going to defend herself from 2 dozen or so young men? The answer is, she isn’t.

It’s far too late, in Europe certainly, but here as well, for half measures. Either we allow our women (and men, incidentally) to defend themselves, or we allow them to massacred at the will of the insurgents. That is the bottom line decision we have to make.

Clash of Civilizations: Islamic vs. Judeo-Christian

OK, gang, I give up for now, I’m fighting a cold and writing isn’t going well. But here’s a friend of mine. And Dan is right.

Judeo-Christian civilization has nothing in common with, and nothing to gain from, Islamic civilization as it now exists. They have been clashing for centuries. Now, Islamic civilization appears to be winning in much of the European Union and, to a lesser degree, in America. 

Can anything be done to slow and then to halt the spread of fundamentalist Islam? Ayan Hirsi Ali hopes there is and that Muslims will do it. I also hope they will, but am quite dubious that it will happen in the foreseeable future.We need to take other steps promptly. […]

Fundamentalist Islam is a culture of compulsion and hate

Americans should learn far more than we have from the recent experiences of Sweden, Germany, England, France and other European Union countries in welcoming Muslims to Islamise their cultures. I posted a lengthy article on that on December 13th. If you haven’t read it yet, please do so now. It provides very helpful background for an understanding of the clash of Judeo-Christian and Islamic civilizations.

Here is a lengthy video by Walid Shoebat, once an Islamic jihadist and now a Roman Catholic opponent of Islam. Born in “Palestine,” he imbibed the Islamic culture of hate and compulsion as a youth, as did most of his acquaintances. Eventually, he changed from what he was to what he now is.

via Clash of Civilizations: Islamic vs. Judeo-Christian | danmillerinpanama.

And see that’s the thing, whatever you believe, you have a much better chance of NOT dying for your belief under Christianity. But I also know this: If we don’t defend our culture, we will lose, and Islam will win. Not only will we (as Christians) lose, but the relativists, who don’t understand belief in God, will lose even more badly than we will, for unlike them, we are, at least, ‘People of the Book”. and may survive (by submission) if we wish. Them, not so much.

Leading From Behind

I want you to compare and contrast our current so-called leadership with that of the past, say FDR, JFK, George W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan. If this is who we are now, China will soon rule the world, in combination with Putin. That is not a recipe for the advancement of humankind, but that is what is happening. From America Rising.

Hattip: Leading From Behind | Power Line

In Memory Of My Brother, Who Died In The San Bernardino Attack

I really hope you will read this. Sometimes we all speak off the cuff, and sometimes when we do we malign people carelessly, not because we mean to but because our beliefs differ. This is an outstanding remembrance of a man who was quite a lot different from me, and likely many of you. But he was at least as valuable as any of us, and now he’s lost to us all, and especially to those who loved him, in as senseless a way as is possible.

The top picture is of Daniel Kaufman. Nobody ever called him Larry. He was named after the Elton John song. And he was my brother. Adopted, that’s why his name is different; he was my cousin by birth. My parents adopted him when he was 10 and I was 7. He taught me how to tie my shoelaces. He taught me how to shave. The one at left was the last picture he texted me, on November 7. He’s giving the Vulcan salute because he was at a place in Van Nuys which was used as a filming location in Star Trek.

He was killed by Muslim terrorists in San Bernardino on December 2, along with 13 other people. He was 42. He was laid to rest earlier today.

Danny, as I always called him, was a deeply kind and gentle man. He had a soft spot all his life for sick plants or animals. He was always rescuing some injured cat or bird, or keeping a potato in a cup of water so it would grow. He brought home an injured duck once, and we let it live in our pool. Everything you’ve heard about what a cheerful and gregarious person he was is true. He also loved horror movies and Comic Con and Clive Barker novels and George Takei Facebook posts. He especially loved the Renaissance Faire. His life basically revolved around it and his boyfriend, Ryan.

You might only imagine my parents’ sorrow. I would recommend against trying to.

For myself, I’ve often thought since that day of a passage from Mark Twain, in which he tells how he reacted when he learned that his favorite daughter, Susy, had died. “It is one of the mysteries of our nature that a man, all unprepared, can receive a thunder-stroke like that and live,” he writes.

There is but one reasonable explanation of it. The intellect is stunned by the shock, and but gropingly gathers the meaning of the words. The power to realize their full import is mercifully wanting. The mind has a dumb sense of vast loss—that is all. It will take mind and memory months, and possibly years, to gather together the details, and thus learn and know the whole extent of the loss. A man’s house burns down. The smoking wreckage represents only a ruined home that was dear through years of use and pleasant associations. By and by, as the days and weeks go on, first he misses this, then that, then the other thing. And, when he casts about for it, he finds that it was in that house. Always it is an essential—there was but one of its kind. It cannot be replaced. It was in that house. It is irrevocably lost. He did not realize that it was an essential when he had it; he only discovers it now when he finds himself balked, hampered, by its absence. It will be years before the tale of lost essentials is complete, and not till then can he truly know the magnitude of his disaster.

Our own disaster is worsened by the fact that this is such a big news story. We’ve chosen not to speak to the press, or attend any public memorial services. We hope this is not taken as a sign of disrespect. We loved Danny, and always will, and are exceedingly grateful to his many friends for their kindness. We are grateful, too, for the many police, sheriff, and fire officials of the city and county of San Bernardino, and the FBI, who’ve tried to help. Different people grieve in different ways.

There Are a Few Things I Would Like to Clarify.

First, although Danny was gay, he was not killed for that reason. The jihadists certainly didn’t stop to ask. Danny was an human being capable of thought and love. That was enough to make him dear to us—and to make him a target for jihad. There are rumors he was Jewish. He was not.

Source: In Memory Of My Brother, Who Died In The San Bernardino Attack

My condolences to his family, and I wish I had known him.

The Constitution Is Not Incidental

signing-constitutionLast Monday Ben Domenech, the publisher and founder of The Federalist published an article of his own that you need to read. It dealt with why there is such a disparity between what are ‘elites’ think, say, and do and what the rest of us know in our bones. In many ways, it sums up what we’ve been writing about this week, and in truth for the three and a half years of this blog’s existence. Here’s some of it, but do follow the link below.

[…] The problem is that the elite modern left thinks all these things which are essential to the American experience are just incidental. They see no connection between Constitutional freedoms and the character of the people; between religious liberty and church attendance and family breakdown; between gun ownership and self-reliance and respect for property; between crushing free speech and destroying our capacity for free thought and creativity; between the loss of American stoicism and the all-encompassing welfare state. They see these originating factors as irritants or unimportant, and think they can all be gotten rid of without fundamentally altering the nature of who we are as a nation.

The liberal elites do this in part because such things are incidental to their own daily lives. Casting aside the Bill of Rights won’t fundamentally change who they are, at least not in any near term. […]

The first priority of the United States government and the president is to secure our liberties – it always has been, and always ought to be.

There is one other point President Obama made – that as commander in chief, he has no greater responsibility than the security of the American people. It is the sort of thing lots of presidents have said. It also happens to be false. […] The first priority of the United States government and the president is to secure our liberties – it always has been, and always ought to be.

Elite liberals like Obama and the New York Times editorialists do not understand that when they argue the American citizenry no longer has the capacity to bear arms, they are arguing that we have lost the capacity for self-government. They are not just saying you only have the right to self-defense as the Attorney General deems you fit; they are saying the inalienable rights of American individuals are subordinate to the will of high-minded politicians. Their interest is in keeping you safe and secure. Whether you are free is, in the grand scheme of things, incidental.

Source: The Constitution Is Not Incidental

For those of us who are Christian, the US Constitution is what happens when a government is designed to be implemented by men, who are subject to Original Sin.

If you wish to know why Donald Trump is doing so well, there are only two reasons. For all his inconsistency, flip-flopping and all, he seems to understand what Ben, and the rest of us think about these things, and he is not afraid to say so out loud. He’s decidedly not my candidate, he espouses many things that I detest (his immigration policy, as it relates to aliens, is not amongst them), but he states his case loudly (and brashly) and he has moved the debate. For now, God Bless him.

None of this is new, a hundred years ago, Rudyard Kipling told us all we need to know.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.”

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “The Wages of Sin is Death.”

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “If you don’t work you die.”

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

As to what is likely to happen, well, he covered that too

“My son,” said the Norman Baron, “I am dying, and you will
be heir
To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for
share
When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little
handful it is.
But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:–

“The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice
right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow–with his sullen set eyes
on your own,
And grumbles, ‘This isn’t fair dealing,’ my son, leave the Saxon
alone.

“You can horsewhip your Gascony archers, or torture your
Picardy spears;
But don’t try that game on the Saxon; you’ll have the whole
brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained
serf in the field,
They’ll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise,
you will yield.

No wonder the left has driven him from the academy, and tried to supress him!

Of Tar and Feathers, and Smoothbore Muskets

Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) was out in San Bernadino the other day, and he has some things to say.

He’ll get no argument from me on any of that since it’s simple common sense. But since he’s being Nebraska nice, there’s more to it than that. Because the Islamic Jihadis aren’t the only ones who dislike our freedom. Kevin D. Williamson writing at the National Review had this to say.

There are many popular demons in American public life: Barack Obama and his monarchical pretensions, Valerie Jarrett and her two-bit Svengali act, or, if your tastes run in the other direction, the Koch brothers, the NRA, the scheming behind-the-scenes influences of Big Whatever. But take a moment to doff your hat to the long, energetic, and wide-ranging careers of three of our most enduring bad guys: laziness, corruption, and stupidity, which deserve special recognition for their role in the recent debates over gun control, terrorism, and crime. The Democratic party’s dramatic slide into naked authoritarianism — voting in the Senate to repeal the First Amendment, trying to lock up governors for vetoing legislation, and seeking to jail political opponents for holding unpopular views on global warming, etc. — has been both worrisome and dramatic. The Democrats even have a new position on the ancient civil-rights issue of due process, and that position is: “F— you.” The Bill of Rights guarantees Americans (like it or not) the right to keep and bear arms; it also reiterates the legal doctrine of some centuries standing that government may not deprive citizens of their rights without due process. In the case of gun rights, that generally means one of two things: the legal process by which one is convicted of a felony or the legal process by which one is declared mentally incompetent, usually as a prelude to involuntary commitment into a mental facility. The no-fly list and the terrorism watch list contain no such due process. Some bureaucrat somewhere in the executive branch puts a name onto a list, and that’s that. The ACLU has rightly called this “Kafkaesque.” […]

Why do we put all the T. Kennedys on the list instead of the actual sack of it we’re interested in? Because running that information down and systematizing it is hard work. Reviewing that information is a lot of work, too, which is why our friend Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard and Fox News ended up on the terrorist watch list. (Amusingly, he found himself being subjected to heightened scrutiny by a dedicated cable-news viewer who instantly recognized him.) That’s all the stuff of good stories for a Stephen Hayes or a Ted Kennedy, but if you’re a bodega operator in the Bronx without connections and resources, you’re pretty well hosed. […]

The Democrats and their intellectually corrupt apologists at the New York Times and elsewhere are willing to strip Americans of their constitutional rights, to micturate from a great height upon the entire concept of due process, and to treat all of us like criminals — while doing precisely nothing to prevent school shootings, terrorism, or ordinary crime — because they don’t have the guts to tell their political clients in the schools, the mental-health bureaucracies, and the criminal-justice system that eventually they are going to have to do their goddamned jobs in exchange for the hundreds of billions of dollars we lavish upon them.

Do read it all at: Gun-control-debate-government-laziness-stupidity-corruption.

Charles C. W. Cooke adds this, and, boy howdy, do I agree with him.

Traditionally, we have used an old-fashioned tool to sort out who deserves to be punished and who does not: It’s called “the justice system.” If, as the watch list’s proponents insist, there are people among us who are too dangerous to remain at liberty, then those people must be arrested, charged, and tried tout de suite. Until that happens, they must be left the hell alone, lest the pitchforks and smoothbores that subdued the last set of usurpers start to twitch and grow restless in their retirement..

Source: Terrorism-gun-control-advocates-use-fear.


Frankly, it didn’t work out well for the lobsterbacks, and I see no reason to think the leftists are any more capable than say, Lord Cornwallis.

But for plain common sense on the subject, where it matters, let’s go back to Senator Sasse

 

%d bloggers like this: