Legal but Dangerous


By Bernie on 11 Jul 2006


Dr Seuss anti-appeasement cartoons
Photo Credit: UC San Diego

Before World War Two, there were many in America that did not see the coming threat of Nazi Germany. Appeasement was, of course, legal. If the appeasers had won control of Congress would we all be speaking German now? Probably. Were they a threat to the survival of our country? Obviously in hindsight yes. And yes that's a Dr. Seuss cartoon.

I wrote: "We are in America. One can certainly legally be a Cindy Sheehan."

One commenter concluded from this:

See, I thought that was the real reason she wasn't arrested and tried for any crime. They were your own words, and I'm still confused by how you can classify any law-abiding leftist American citizen an "enemy of the state" if you they can also "legally be a Cindy Sheehan". Its not logical. Leftists might be your own ideological "enemies" (and even then I think the correct word is "opponents"), but if they haven't broken any laws, they are not "enemies of the state".

Of course it is perfectly legal for one to smoke cigarettes in one's home. Does that mean one is not a danger to himself or since smoking is one of the leading causes of house fires (at least in Denmark), a danger to the rest of Society?

There are many examples of legal activities which are a direct threat to a nation's continued existence. Let me give as an example the situation in Europe.

In Europe it is perfectly legal to be a Muslim. But if you can get your brain out of your ass and actually consider what is happening in the rest of the world and do some reading other than the MSM than you will find:

the gates of vienna, “Let Them Eat Kebab” — The New Marie Antoinettes

Admiral Horatio Nelson may have guided the British naval fleet to a famous victory at the Battle of Trafalgar, but he faced a far tougher foe during celebrations to mark its 200th anniversary. Organizers of a re-enactment of the sea battle in 2005 decided to bill it as between a "Red Fleet” and a "Blue Fleet”, rather than Britain and its French and Spanish adversaries, describing it as a re-enactment of "an early 19th century sea battle.”


Leftists and their political correctness agenda are re-writing European history. In another generation, there may be no trace of the history of the western world.

Again:

Ibid

In the European Parliament, the German Christian Democrat Hans-Gert Pöttering stated that school textbooks should be reviewed for intolerant depictions of Islam by experts overseen by the European Union and Islamic leaders. He said textbooks should be checked to ensure they promoted European values without propagating religious stereotypes or prejudice. He also suggested that the EU could co-operate with the 56-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference to create a textbook review committee.


More:

Ibid

Jonathan Friedman, an American living in Sweden, mentions that the so-called Integration Act of 1997 proclaimed that "Sweden is a Multicultural society.” Notes to the Act also stated that "Since a large group of people have their origins in another country, the Swedish population lacks a common history. The relationship to Sweden and the support given to the fundamental values of society thus carry greater significance for integration than a common historical origin.”The Act thus implicitly states that the country of Sweden doesn’t have a history, only the various ethnic groups that live there. Native Swedes, who have shaped the country for centuries, have thus been reduced to just another ethnic group in Sweden, with no more claim to the country than the Kurds or the Somalis who arrived there last Thursday. The political authorities of the country have thus erased their own people’s history, without staging any public debate about this. I have read that Muslim immigrants in Sweden say that Sweden doesn’t have a common cultural or religious heritage; it’s just made up of different groups tied together by the use of a common language. It is thus "racist” to even talk about how "we” should integrate "them,” since there is no "we” to begin with.


And here:

Ibid

Following threats from Muslim hardliners, some of the largest companies in England were afraid to display the English national flag during the football World Cup. In Sweden, a man was attacked and nearly killed for the crime of wearing clothes with his own national flag while Sweden was participating in the World Cup. Sweden, of course, has the same Christian cross in its flag as does England, and apparently, some "Multicultural youths” found this to be an intolerable provocation. The 24-year-old man was run down by a car in the city of Malmö. According to the police, he was wearing some clothes with Swedish national symbols on them, and this "provoked some emotions.”

Malmö, Sweden’s third largest city, is set to become the first major Scandinavian city with a Muslim majority. The wave of robberies the city has witnessed is part of a "war against Swedes.” This is the explanation given by young robbers with immigrant backgrounds on why they are only robbing native Swedes. "When we are in the city and robbing, we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” "Power for me means that Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.”


European leftists and Muslim immigrants are on a tear to destroy the old culture and institute Islam throughout Eurabia.

What's happening in Europe will soon happen here. My only hope is that Europe wakes up and bans Islam and throws all their lefties out as well. Being a Muslim and a leftist is indeed legal in Europe, but there is no doubt by most who live there that they are enemies of their nations.


Related blog articles:

gateway pundit, No Surprise! Sick Leftists Support Al Qaeda Soldier Slaughter!

Sadly the Left gobbled up the Al Qaeda lies by the media today. It is still disgusting but not a surprise anymore that the American Left can agree with our enemy terrorists even when it involves the slaughter of US soldiers.


Every day in every way, Islamists remind us that we are in a WORLD WAR:

cigar intelligence agency [now defunct], 11th of the month

It looks like India now has their 7/11 to go along with Madrid’s 3/11 and our 9/11 as a series of deadly explosions rocked train stations there today. Stop the ACLU has a good roundup of coverage as this story unfolds.


But of course leftists do not think there is any immediate threat:

point five, 7/11 Bombing Provides Backdrop For Aggressive Global Warming-Based Anti-Terror Measures

Even as the dead remain uncounted in bombed- out commuter trains in India, Democratic strategists prepared to release their planned "Phase Two” rollout of the thunderously effective "New Direction” campaign theme, that has Republicans nationwide fearing not just for their jobs, but their viability as a national party.

While Phase One focused on domestic issues, Phase Two will bring the Democrats’ creative application of progressive theory to the realm of international terrorism. While calling terror "not really as important as far- right scaremongers would have us believe,” Dems nevertheless promised to tear into international terror rings "like Mother Sheehan with a fifty dollar gift card at Jamba Juice.”

Summoning the power of almighty Gaia, the new Democrat plan will harness the fearsome power of fractional degree shifts in global temperature to rend Islamist networks asunder.


A tip of the turban Hat Tip to Gates of Vienna for the Dr. Seuss cartoon.



[Click on image(s) for larger view]



For more of my articles like this see Politics, - Liberal View, Global Warming Hoax, Islam, Politics




Comments



Say what you want, as long as it's on topic, I can take it. My Comment Policy can be read HERE.

To upload a new avatar click on the default avatar.

To add your blog URL click on the FROM button.

subscribe to comment feedSubscribe to comments feed







TrackBacks from Old System
  • Improper Media from Blue Star Chronicles
    You dont have to be a member of the Pajama Media to be part of the Improper Blogging Media Network. Join now! It would be improper not to. [Read More]

    Tracked on July 11, 2006 01:31 PM

  • Possible Terror Attack in India Possibly from Islamic Rebels from Conservative Cat
    At least 145 people are dead and 300 wounded in a coordinated series of train bombings in Mumbai (Bombay), India. The bombings are believed to be the work of Kashmiri rebels, though we do not yet know if they are... [Read More]

    Tracked on July 11, 2006 03:19 PM

  • Barbarsim from Woman Honor Thyself
    A group led by al Qa-eda in Iraq released gruesome footage of two corpses it said were U.S. soldiers killed in June, and dedicated the video to an Iraqi girl who U.S. soldiers are accused of raping and killing. [Read More]

    Tracked on July 11, 2006 04:45 PM

  • Islamic crescent forced on flight 93 from Mark My Words
    If you though the controversy over having the appearance of an Islamic crescent at the flight 93 memorial, had produced much needed change in the design, think again. [Read More]

    Tracked on July 11, 2006 11:39 PM



Comments from Old Comment System
  • Hiya Bernie, I Haloscaned the TB this time...I linked to ya. Hope u get it sheesh..lol..:)
  • Comment by: Angel [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 11, 2006 04:46 PM

  • I'm still not buying it. Every example you mentioned is one of an opponent to your own personal ideology, not an "enemy of the state". To be an enemy of the state you have to break the laws of said state in the very least. Also, you have once again used a bad analogy. We didn't declare war on the Germans because of some politcal win over a block of appeasers who refused to recognize a threat. We entered WWII, appropriately, because of the attack on Pearl Harbor. See, that's what used to make America better than everyone else, that with all our might, we had a reputation for only attacking in self-defense (and wining). The Dr. Suess cartoon you posted was published in September 1941 before the Pearl Harbor attack, and was swiftly rendered irrelevant the following December 7th. If someone actually attacks us, appeasement always vaporizes (i.e. Afghanistan). On the other hand, in support of your point, I think we should have declared war on Afghanistan after the first world trade center bombing in 1991.
  • Comment by: caz [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 11, 2006 07:31 PM

  • "the first world trade center bombing in 1991." I meant 1993 of course. *knocks self on head*
  • Comment by: caz [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 11, 2006 07:38 PM

  • I understand Japan, but what did Germany do to the US for us to go to war with them? And don't bring up the Tripartite Treaty, I mean what did Germany actually do to the US? Remind me. It sounds an awful lot like Iraq. We invade a country that never directly fired a shot at us. I see we disagree on the definitions of enemy of the state. You think by enemy of the state you have to break the laws of said state. An interesting academic theory. Suppose I discover free hydrogen fusion but because I work for the New York Times I declare that the device will not be sold in the United States. There is of course no law that says I must sell my inventions within the US or for use by Americans. Within ten years every nation, with zero energy costs, runs circles around us economically. Cars in Japan will cost 60% less to produce than in this country along with every other product. Our standard of living would dive. We would descend into a depression unimaginable to any living today. The country would collapse into chaos and anarchy. But you say I am no enemy of the US even though I destroyed the country because according to you, I have broken no laws. Give me a break. North Korea has broken no US laws, but I suppose we have to stick to your definition and say North Korea is not an enemy of this country. Perhaps you'd like to modify your definition to include entities that pose a threat to our country despite no US laws being broken? Come on - you can give a little. We did it in WWII when we perceived Germany a potential threat despite no US laws being broken. Or are you one of those who still insist that the Nazies were no enemies of the state? So, buy it now?
  • Comment by: planck's constant [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 11, 2006 08:26 PM

  • Uh actually you've got your history wrong. We declared war only on Japan the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, December 8, 1941. In response, Germany and Italy declared war on us on December 11, 1941. As you alluded, Germany and Italy were under no obligation to declare war with the US under the terms of Tripartite Pact, but they did it anyway to show solidarity with Japan. It wasn't until three weeks later, when the Declaration by United Nations was signed on January 1, 1942 that the United States was publically at war with Germany. So to directly answer your question, "what did Germany do to the US directly?" - while Germany may not have shot at us first, they still declared war first, and in so doing declared an alliance with those who did strike first (the Japanese). So no, its not like Iraq at all. Iraq had never declared any alliance with Al Quaeda or the Taliban (or vice versa). The secular sunni muslims that were ruling Iraq at the time despised the shia and wahabbi theocrats of the Taliban and Al Quaeda (and still do). Note that this was the whole reason why Reagan wisely gave them all those weapons, equipment and money and partly also why George Bush Sr. didn't follow Saddam to Baghdad after Gulf War I. While it's true that Iraq was at war with the United Nations (to which the US was the main contributor). We had them well under our control with nothing but air power. Nazi Germany and Japan's combined forces actually had a chance of defeating us (again, unlike Iraq). Invading Iraq was unecessary and likely helped and galvanized the Iranians to further thier nuclear technology development. Now don't get me wrong. I hope beyond hope that Iraq will eventually be transformed into a peaceful democracy full of western tourists and I think it's made the first few steps on the way to getting there. Time will tell wether or not the invasion of Iraq was the greatest decision or the biggest blunder. Lots of things could happen. Iraq could get its economy roaring, dropping world oil prices to record lows. Iraq could become a stronger ally with Iran than with the US. Iraq could become a model of good governmnet in the middle east. Iraq could fall apart into civil war. Speculating about the future will get us nowhere though, so for now I can only judge the decision to invade Iraq by the history we have so far, and so far, the invasion of Iraq does not appear to have been worthwhile or justified. But we have to deal with it anyway and try as hard as possible to improve the situation towards an Iraqi secular democray. I think the Libertarian plan (and others just like it) is the best one for this end. Politics aside, good constructive criticism of the current situtation can only improve things if heeded. You see? We have the same goal in mind but two different ideas about how to meet it. How does characterizing we who support a certain plan as "defeatists" and "enemies of the state" help us to meet our shared goals? "Suppose I discover free hydrogen fusion" And you accuse me of insane straw-man arguments? I think no actual response beyond that is warranted. (PS: No time for proofreading, sorry for typos)
  • Comment by: caz [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 12, 2006 05:47 AM

  • I've blogged my response in http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2006/07/even_libertarians_ca.html However, just because you oppose the war in Iraq does not mean you are defeatist. If Murtha merely said he was opposed to the war in Iraq I would not have called him a defeatist. However, there is a difference between disagreement and aid and comfort to the enemy. I notice we never formally charged Hanoi Jane with treason, but is there anyone that has any doubt that she was in fact a traitor? Just because America is more tolerant of dissent than any other country in the World does not mean that no laws were broken. It is well known that 99% of all illegal activies are never prosecuted. You have to pick your battles. If the department of Justice arrested every law-breaker in this country there would only be 6 people not in jail.
  • Comment by: planck's constant [TypeKey Profile Page] on July 12, 2006 05:16 PM




You may republish any content from Planck's Constant and use it for any non-commercial purpose without needing my permission as long as you link back to the original article.
Read my License.



Sphere: Related Content





Social bookmark this Post






HOME



Info




FAQ

subscribe to my feedSubscribe to this blog's feed

Search/Archives

Blogrolls

Site Policies

Testimonials





Site Statistics (From Jan 2006)




Page Hits
View My Stats

More Site Stats

Comments RSS



Buttons & Widgets


Politics Blogs - Blog Top SitesPolitics blogsPolitics Blogs - Blog Top SitesBlogRankers.com


Locations of visitors to this page

Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics






Referrals (last 90 days)