The current public dialog includes an interesting statement by the UK government:

Britain’s Home Office would not comment specifically on the ban, but it said it “opposes extremism in all its forms” and would work to “stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country.”

Of course Wilders does not intend to spread “hatred and violent messages.”  His film merely illuminates the religious texts of Islam and critiques the hatred and incitations of violence contained therein, texts and comments that are certainly shouted from street corners, and included in Friday prayers, by many Muslims that are citzens of the UK.

So, if Wilders cannot be reasonably accused of inciting violence, then that leads us to the UK complaint that Wilders is an extremist, and per the stated policy, the UK does not allow extremists within their borders.

I contend that the only extremism that Wilders has displayed is his unwavering dedication to communicate the truth, in the interest in securing western civilization against the violent expansionism of Islam.  Ergo, the UK government is effectively opposed to Wilders’s activity conducted in the interest of defending life and liberty.  Perhaps a more mushy desire for life and liberty is all that is acceptable.

I picked this up over at LibertyStickers.  I do agree with the tongue-in-cheek sentiment of this slogan but I realize that I must be careful so as to not be painted into the complete sentiment of LibertyStickers collection of offerings.

After all, the depth of political discourse these days rarely goes beyond superficial. Here is another of their current, and accurate offerings:

LibertyStickers pretty much toes the complete and exact line along the planks of the Libertarian Party.  Although the Libertarians are right on the mark when it comes to matters of moving the United States back toward a constitutional republic where the purpose of the constitution is to protect the people from the government, there are less fundamental aspects of the Libertarian plank with which I disagree.

Particularly, I disagree with the Libertarian view of, perhaps I should call it “non-support” of Israel.  Non-intervention is a great idea when intervention would be better described as imperialism or meddling.  However, the primary long-term threat to Western Civilization has its origin, and financial backing, in the Middle-East.  The current sovereign state of Israel may have been created with much international intrigue, but no modern state could claim to be completely free of such intigue in their own creation.  The reasonable moral measure for today is how they lead their lives as a nation and as a people.

The current version of the threat can be described to have begun in the 1970’s. We did not really notice it much then due to our preoccupation with the raging Cold War. Nevertheless, the bad guys were already among us, plying their craft. Way back in 1973, one of these bad guys attempted acts of mass murder on US soil. We caught him in 1991 and put him in jail. Now, having “paid his debt to society,” he will soon be released and deported.

There is a very thorough account of the story over at Fox News. Read the whole thing to get an appreciation for the persistence and nature of the treat. Like many of the bad guys that have been released from Gitmo, this fellow is sure to similarly return to his life-ling sworn mission of existence.

I belive that civil law, and our strategy (more accurately our lack of strategy) are characteristically inadequate to counter the threat over the long term. In many cases, success will really depend on the front-line folks, like agent Mike Finnegan to do the right thing while the beauracacy above and behind them wallows in political self-interest and tidal motions of indecision.

Here is an interesting note that should not be missed: Al-Jawary used airline flight training as his cover purpose for being in the United States in the 1970’s.

I came upon a whole bunch of locales that I will categorize as 2nd Amendment blogs. Before linking or highlighting those, I need to do a review to find the ones than most align with the purpose here, and not get things bogged down on the ones that are more hardware oriented.

Through other surfing, I came upon Middle Class Moral Compass. This one I have linked to. Time to accelerate the building of the network that will be critical to saving the world.

The internet didn’t just connect politically like-minded people whose views are under-served. It connected the highly trained and knowledgeable across geographic regions and fields of expertise, enabling them to compare notes and realize “it’s not just us”. That by and large, journalism is perhaps the only profession where the utterly unqualified are given the privilege of writing to a mass audience on topics that they really not ought to.

At one time, the error in basic chemistry or math might only be spotted by a few trained individuals in the field. A messed up report on the Canadian Wheat Board would raise the ire of ag producers but not much more. Misidentifying a weapons system would pass unnoticed by all but the military.

Today the chemists, ag producers and military talk to each other, and the conclusion they’re coming to is that an uncomfortably large percentage of journalists are not merely tainted by political assumptions - they’re lazy, stupid, or both.

To some degree, the “new” connectivity may have been common in the many-decades-ago past when a small town was a micro universe of self sufficiency. Then as small towns grew, became more connected, and small businesses transformed into multinational corporations, we all moved toward specialization.

Over-specialization leads to single-issue politics as individuals perceive their fortunes tied only to their area of specialization. Now that can change back toward the way it ought to be where thoughtful individuals, connected to a diverse collection of other individuals, can move toward decisions that reward success, reinforce healthy values, and build prosperity for those willing to participate in a productive way.