Who are Domestic Terrorists?

NSC spokesman John Kirby was asked at a recent press conference, point blank, by Fox News‘ Peter Doocy,

The people in this country making violent antisemitic threats. Are they domestic terrorists?

Kirby’s answer was stark:

I don’t know that we’re classifying people as domestic terrorists for that. I mean, that’s really a question better left to law enforcement. I’m not aware that there’s been such a characterization of that[.]

Apparently, such people aren’t even extremists. When Doocy asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre that question at another presser, she answered,

I have been very, very clear.  We are calling out any form of hate, any form of hate. It is not acceptable. It should not be acceptable here. And we are going to continue to call that out[.]

But apparently such folks aren’t even extremists, just deserving of opprobrium for their rude talk.

Mothers zealously, loudly, objecting to school board policies while at school board meetings, though, are domestic terrorists, according to AG Merrick Garland.

Go figure.

“The humanitarian situation…is dire”

That’s the Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly’s “clarification” after Canada so timidly refused to take a stand on a UN resolution calling for a “humanitarian” ceasefire truce in Gaza.

She added,

What is unfolding in Gaza is also a human tragedy.

It certainly is. But any sort of ceasefire would only give the Hamas terrorist gang time to reset its defenses, move it terrorists and weapons and ammunition around, and relocate the hostages the terrorists have seized. Any ceasefire now, of any duration, would only tell the terrorists and their Iranian overlords that what they’re doing works, and the terrorists will continue, if not presently, then some time in the future. Thinking any sort of agreement with terrorists can have civilized results is dangerously naïve.

No.

The optimal way—the only long-term way—to protect and recover those hostages that the terrorists haven’t already murdered is for Israel’s allies—us and Great Britain—to step up arms and ammunition aid to Israel, and for Israel’s pretend allies—e.g., Canada, and France, which actually voted for the UN “ceasefire”—to remain where they are now, in their safety on the sidelines, but do so quietly.

Israel must be able to completely destroy Hamas and its ability to commit further terrorism. When that’s done, terrorist hostage-taking in the future will be greatly reduced, as well as those current hostages still alive rescued.

How About Unauthorized Entry?

Maybe California’s Progressive-Democratic Party politicians are beginning to recognize the failure of their soft-on-crime policies. Or at least they’re beginning to pay lip service to the problem, if not its correction. In particular, they’re starting to talk about maybe tightening their law regarding auto burglary.

Under current law, prosecutors must prove a vehicle was locked to convict a suspect of auto burglary, and a window being broken is not sufficient evidence. This new proposed legislation from [State] Senator Scott Wiener (D, San Francisco) would end that requirement and allow forcible entry to be sufficient evidence for a conviction.

Some of the loophole exploitations are truly foolish.

  • someone broke a car window, completed a theft, and left the door open or unlocked
  • victim returns to the car and opens the door before police can take a report to establish the car was locked
  • victim forgets whether they locked their doors
  • victim is not available to testify in court that their doors were locked

Here’s a thought. Work with me on this; it’s a complex matter. Neither is it limited to a single party. How about adjusting the law to recognize that burglary is burglary, regardless of the means by which it’s carried out, even if it’s done with no damage at all. Any damage that is done, whatever that damage might be, should serve as sentencing enhancement.

Maybe broaden the concept and stop overcomplexifying criminal laws in general. The fillips that currently distinguish burglary from theft from breaking and entering from… and that discriminate the various forms of homicide, and that overparse other forms of crime, all should become sentencing enhancements for the underlying crime: theft, killing, etc. Such decomplexification, especially done nationwide, would well serve us all.

Intrinsically Inferior

The Oregon State Board of Education has waived, essentially, all high school graduation requirements—demonstrated competency in reading, writing or math—and is allowing anyone and everyone who had the initiative simply to enroll in a high school to graduate with a high school diploma.

Board members said the standards…harmed marginalized students since higher rates of students of color, students with disabilities, and students learning English as a second language ended up having to take the extra step to prove they deserved a diploma, The Oregonian reported.

The OSBE and the Progressive-Democratic Party-run Oregon State legislature and governor can’t be bothered to do the work of taking their own steps to fill those gaps and eliminate the need for the students’ “extra steps.” No, these…persons…have completely written off the minority students, along with those with disabilities and those taking (or not?) ESOL, and have simply eliminated all learning requirements.

Because, apparently those students are intrinsically inferior and unable to learn the material.

This is yet another example of the despicable bigotry of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

Canceling Halloween in the Name of “Inclusion”

Dr. Ronald G. Taylor, South Orange & Maplewood School District (New Jersey) Superintendent, has canceled Halloween celebrations and costumery in his schools, all in the name of inclusion and diversity.

On the district’s website, a[] release stated principals were surveyed on whether school-sponsored Halloween celebrations should continue or be replaced with a festival that is focused on autumn. They state the principals’ “overwhelming” response favored in canceling Halloween celebrations in school.

Notice that Taylor didn’t survey the parents or the students. Of course, he didn’t: the kids belong to the district; uppity parents have nothing to say, and the students…well, they’re just kids. Taylor:

Ultimately, it was determined that I know this may make some uncomfortable….

But the discomfort of some doesn’t matter when it’s the discomfort of those who might disagree.

Inclusion. Diversity. Don’t like the nature of Halloween? Don’t participate; no one is making anyone do so.

Yes, that’s the point. Forcing “inclusion” is exclusionary. Forcing “diversity” is exclusionary. Each ignores the views, even the preferences, of those disfavored by the forcers and locks those disfavored ones out of the programs instead of inclusively letting folks decide for themselves whether to participate. And those varying opinions and decisions regarding participation are the essence of diversity.