I have been concentrating on ideological bias in the media. I did not THINK about anything else.
But writing about the suitcase bomb, another major difficulty occurred to me. They are trying to reeducate and entertain, so anything that is important develops without their noticing it. That is the reason I seem boringly repetitious about certain incidents. I have to remind you of them because, in the midst of all the with-it news, the few important incidents are forgotten.
I must have told you twenty times about the incident when my boss John Ashbrook demanded that looters after a hurricane in Florida be shot. The local newspaper screamed that that was ruthless fanaticism, and was totally overruled by their readers. They took a poll and found that 83% agreed with Ashbrook that looters should be shot on sight.
This is a critical question in the case of super terrorism. A country that can’t shoot looters in a riot can’t deal with a superterrorist incident.
The last I heard on this subject was a documentary which simply said that “Modern society will not accept such summary punishment” as shooting looters on sight. Of course, a rational person knows this has nothing to do with punishment. You don’t kill people for stealing TV sets, you shoot them because they are out of control where one cannot afford for people to be out of control.
Traditionally you shot looters so society could defend itself
The problem is that, like the USSR under Communism, we have no SOCIETY. The documentary naturally speaks in terms of law courts and Political Correctness. In a totally out of control situation, one must depend on SOCIETY to protect itself.
In the Florida incident John was talking about, the secret the press kept was that the only reason any order was restored was because private citizens had guns.
And USED them.
But Government would have punished them if it had had the chance. In a superterrorism situation, safety will be provided illegally or not at all. Those doing the job will realize that once the situation is over, the Government will be coming after them the way it goes after 90-year-old ex-Nazi prison guards.
Once the shooting starts, it is not likely to stop.
#1 by backbaygrouch4 on 04/19/2010 - 6:53 am
In a superterrorism situation where there is society order will be restored. About the time of Katrina the Whites of the upper Midwest responded to massive flooding rationally. In the 1992 Los Angeles riots the Korean society defended itself after the police shirked their duty and abandoned Koreatown. The Koreans had guns and they used them. It was televised and the shamed public officials manned up. If widespread shooting were to start after a superterrorism event it could get very bloody and very brutal.
In areas of high diversity Asians will quickly ally with Whites and, with less alacrity, so will the bulk of Hispanics. This is. of course, pure conjecture. But it is clear that what the Asians and Hispanics want, they associate with Whites; what they fear, they associate with Blacks. If only we could get them to vote that way. In a crunch, however, they will ally with us to restore order. The Asians may even be our best shock troops.
#2 by Dave on 04/19/2010 - 9:48 am
The Internet promises a means for us to end our descent into several generations of suffering from deception. And allowing rioters and looters run amok is pure deception on the public.
Ashbrook was up against the same issue of heresy that bedevils Nick Griffen today. But Ashbrook in those days could not possibly have had the grasp of it that Griffen has today. In contrast, people like David Duke were crushed and the trauma was permanent.
In the Internet era, you don’t even have to seek a profile to get crushed. If you don’t understand this, you are ignoring the sheer magnitude of lives that have been ruined by email and texting. Indelible, it exists forever. For Duke, it was mostly short pieces of pre-Internet audio and video.
But the exploiters of the new encompassing opportunities for bullying don’t really have a handle on the deed they are forging. What they are doing is forcing us into greater discipline. This is not to excuse their rules. It’s just that it is not our job to ignore the enemy’s methods.
Similarly, the matter of accountability is why the issue of how major politicians respond to riots and looting is so telling. I have carefully studied this issue. I am telling you, the smart ones hide out. They just leave town and don’t come back until it is all over. They then keep their mouths shut and don’t talk about it, forever.
What does that tell you about their commitment to protect society and the real state of social order?