In a January 24, 2017 column for National Review magazine, conservative columnist Dennis Prager wrote: “with the obvious and enormous exception of attitudes toward slavery, Americans are more divided morally, ideologically, and politically today than they were during the Civil War. For that reason, just as the Great War came to be known as the First World War, once there was a Second World War, the Civil War will become known as the First Civil War when more Americans come to regard the current battle as the Second Civil War.”
He went on to say, “This Second Civil War, fortunately, differs in one other critically important way: It has thus far been largely non-violent. But given the increasing leftwing violence such as riots, the violent taking over of college presidents’ offices, and the illegal occupation of state capitols, non-violence is not guaranteed to be a permanent characteristic of the Second Civil War.” The problem with Prager’s premise is that, since the close of the First Civil War, only one side… the political left… has been fighting, while conservatives and Republicans have decided to simply “take it on the chin.”
One wonders where Prager has been hiding for the past sixty or seventy years. Is he not aware of the non-stop reign of terror carried out by pro-slavery Democrats such as the night riders of the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camellia, and other Democrat terror groups founded at the close of the First Civil War, or the violent tactics of organized labor during the 20th century?
To say that we live in troubled times is a vast understatement. Here in the United States we find congressional Democrats and other party leaders nearly foaming at the mouth, unable to come to grips with the fact that, on November 8, the American people sent them a very strong message.
In mid-November 2016, Rutgers University professor Kevin Allred, was taken to Bellevue Hospital in New York for psychiatric evaluation after burning an American flag and tweeting that it was time to start killing white people.
Upon retiring, liberal Massachusetts college professor, Noel Ignatiev, gave a ranting tirade in which he lambasted white males as the “cancer of the world.” He ranted: “If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world! They only murder, exploit, and oppress non-whites! At least a white woman can have sex with a black man and make a brown baby but what can a white male do? He’s good for nothing. Obviously, all whites need to be destroyed, but why not start with white males? If you are a thoughtful person with a social consciousness who considers himself white, you will consider suicide.”
Professor Ignatiev is, himself, a white male. However, his obituary has not as yet appeared in the Boston Globe, along with the text of his suicide note, and probably never will.
In a Seattle street demonstration, a woman wearing a Black Lives Matter jacket took over the microphone and screamed that “it’s time we killed some people.”
For Democrats, this is nothing new. Tuskegee Institute records tell us that, between 1882 and 1964, years during which the KKK served as the principal paramilitary arm of the Democratic Party, Democrats murdered some 4,742 people. Of those, 3,445 victims were black and 1,297 were white, nearly all white Republicans. No one knows how many people were murdered by Democrats in the 17-year period between Christmas Eve 1865, when the KKK was founded, and 1882, a period during which lynching statistics were not kept.
I have seen the violent nature of Democrats first hand. For example, in October 1964, when it was announced that the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, Sen. Hubert Humphrey (D-MN), would visit our city for a campaign speech, I joined a group of eleven other Republicans in a peaceful demonstration at the Tulsa International Airport, welcoming the senator to our city. As we did, we were attacked and severely beaten by a mob of some 300 Democrats. Not only was I kicked and beaten, left lying unconscious on the airport tarmac, I received several painful burns when my attackers stubbed out their cigars and cigarettes on my bare skin.
In 1966, as I organized and led a statew, de election reform campaign in Oklahoma, a campaign designed to provide voting booths in 44 of the state’s 77 counties for the first time since statehood, my associates and I received word through third parties that, if we tried to come into some heavily Democratic counties with voting booths they’d be waiting for us with shotguns and rifles and we’d all go back to Tulsa in pine boxes. Ultimately, it became necessary to have National Guard troops and trucks deliver voting booths to county courthouses across the state.
Since that time, I have been victimized by Democratic violence and threats of violence on other occasions, so much so that I am all but convinced that fraud, violence, and intimidation come as naturally to Democrats as night following day. It is in their DNA.
Now, in the days following President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change, it appears we have entered the “Chicken Little Era” of world history. If one were to believe the pained rhetoric of American liberals, Democrats, and assorted environmental extremists, one could easily conclude that the sky really is falling.
What is most interesting is that, if we analyze the ultimate impact of the public policies that liberals and Democrats support, whether political, social, or economic, we are forced to conclude that, if they have their way in the political world, the United States will be an unfit place in which to live within a generation or two. North America may be just as unlivable as the hellholes of those who now risk life and limb to enter our country.
But all is not lost… yet… because there exists a far more deadly and far more imminent threat that may ultimately cause Democrats to conclude that the survival of their country and its culture is far more important than their party fortunes. I refer to the threat posed by the increased number of Muslim immigrants and refugees who now demand access to our country.
Muslim immigrants represent a clash of cultures that no amount of “feel-good” multiculturalism and diversity-worship can ever resolve. And while Americans are generally welcoming and generous people, happy to share the blessings of liberty with all who share our love of freedom, we must demand that all those who come here must share our values, learn our language, and assimilate socially, politically, and economically. That has been true of every ethnic minority that has come to America in more than 250 years… until now.
Muslim immigrants have demonstrated little or no desire to become “Americanized.” Instead, as their numbers grow, we find an ever-increasing number of Muslims who insist upon maintaining their ethnic identity, even to the extent of forming “no-go” zones, communities which exclude all non-Muslims. In doing so, they insist upon living under a separate legal code… Sharia Law… that is, in many respects, totally incompatible with American law and constitutional principles.
We could find no clearer example of the deadly consequences of this clash of cultures than the recent murder of a beautiful Australian woman, Justine Ruszczyk, by a black Muslim police officer, a Somali immigrant named Mohamed Noor. Muslims are taught from childhood that women and girls are not allowed to venture outside their homes unless their bodies are fully covered and they are accompanied by a male member of their family. Western women, on the other hand, have great latitude in their dress and in their personal conduct, so long as their bodies are covered in all the appropriate places.
In Minneapolis, on Saturday evening, July 15, just before midnight, Ms. Ruszczyk dialed 911 to report what she thought was a sexual assault in progress near her home. When Noor and his partner, Matthew Harrity, arrived at the scene, Ms. Ruszczyk ran to the driver’s side window of the patrol car dressed only in her pajamas. Officer Harrity was behind the wheel, but as he prepared to lower the window to speak with Ms. Ruszczyk, Officer Noor unholstered his weapon and fired past Officer Harrity’s head, through the driver’s side window, striking Ms. Ruszczyk in the abdomen and killing her.
Officer Noor is refusing to cooperate with department investigators as they attempt to learn what possible motive he may have had to fire his handgun under those circumstances. Could it be that he does not have a motive that he can share with investigators because his motive is rooted in his religious beliefs? Although news reports have totally avoided mention of the religious issue it is entirely possible, perhaps likely, that when Officer Noor was surprised to see a beautiful young woman, dressed only in pajamas, approaching the driver’s side window of his patrol car, her flowing blond hair fully exposed, his Muslim training and beliefs came to the fore and he simply executed her.
In the Judeo-Christian world we are all taught from childhood that “Thou shalt not kill,” while Muslims are taught from childhood that “Thou shalt kill” all those who do not believe as Muslims believe. Those who believe, foolishly, that those two cultures can ever coexist side-by-side, sharing the same piece of real estate, are kidding themselves. They are also risking the lives of all those of us who are realistic about the threat of radical Islam.
As Dennis Prager reminds us, we in the United States are now more divided than at any time since the First Civil War. We are, in fact, coming apart at the seams and it’s time we all figured out, before it’s too late, exactly who our natural allies are and who we can count upon to watch our backs.
Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College. He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.