Hey! You Peed in My Cognitive Dissonance! PC Things We Aren’t Supposed to Talk About
Survival Saturday is a round-up of the week’s news and resources for folks who are interested in being prepared.
This Week in the News
This week, the Survival Saturday round-up focuses on the comforting delusions that keep people feeling safer than they actually are, despite the potential for devastating violence. Reality has become politically incorrect if it crosses certain boundaries. The insistence with which people cling to those delusions and keep their heads stubbornly buried in the sand is absolutely astonishing to those of us who are awake. They react with rage, fear, and a complete denial of reality. They refuse to even entertain the possibility of anything that threatens their perfect little image of the world.
You can’t say things like “violent protests” or suggest that an area might best be avoided if Black Lives Matters is involved, even though violent protests have occurred for several years now. (Baltimore or Ferguson, anyone?) You can’t say anything in support of the police officers who were shot during a Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas. You can’t say “radical Islam” nor can you point out that a person yelling “Allah Akbar” is most probably a Muslim. If you say certain things to those in denial, it’s like you just squatted and peed in their great big bowl of cognitive dissonance,”triggering” paroxysms of guilt, anger, and cognitive dissonance.
Say “jihad” in a room full of liberals. Go ahead. I double dog dare you.
Radical Muslims Don’t Kill People, TRUCKS Kill People
By now, everyone has heard about the awful terror attack that took place on July 15th, when a jihadi drove a truck for a mile through crowds of pedestrians in Nice, France. Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, a Tunisian killed 84 people and wounded 202. A report from the UK said:
The truck driver, who was known to police, was said to have shouted ‘Allah Akbar’ – God is great in Arabic – before being killed in a clear suicide mission. Pro-ISIS groups have been celebrating the attack, orchestrated to coincide with France’s most important national holiday.
In an astounding routine of mental gymnastics usually reserved for those seeking a gun ban, the horrific Bastille Day massacre was not blamed on terrorism or radical Islam or the person driving. It was blamed on….the truck. Even though the Islamic State has proudly claimed responsibility for the event, seems that no one wants to publicly blame radical Islam for yet another terror attack. Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars summed up the headlines of some of the most popular news outlets in America.
CBC reported, “Children feared killed in Nice as truck attacks family event”. Presumably, the truck was somehow able to manifest artificial intelligence and plough itself through dozens of victims.
Not to be outdone, CNN reported “Truck rams crowd; 84 dead in Nice,” again providing a convenient way of avoiding any mention of the ideology that inspired the driver.
The New York Times went with “Truck attack on French crowd; Scores die,” again pinning the blame on the vehicle rather than the Islamist inside it. (source)
The media seems much more interested in pointing out that the guy who yelled Allah Akbar didn’t really act like a Muslim, since he beat his wife, ate pork, and drank alcohol. As well, he had previously been charged with road rage (you know, that’s always a precursor to mowing down hundreds of innocent people). So just stop saying things like “radical Islam” and “Muslim”. You’re just a racist. (Even though those are religions and philosophies, you’re still a racist.)
Shortly after the attack, Facebook was caught censoring the phrase “Muslim terrorist.”
And it isn’t just the media. Democratic leaders all seem to be averse to using the phrase “radical Islam” in relation to acts of terror, even when the one taking the action yells “Allah Akbar” in the middle of committing the act. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama uttered those words about the attack in Nice, instead vaguely referring to “terror.” Obama condemned the attack in a vague statement with no mention of Muslims, Islam, radical, or jihad.
Hillary Clinton has outright said she won’t use the term. Last November, (after the r******l I***m terror attack in Paris) she explained why.
Hillary Clinton explained on Sunday that she won’t use the term “radical Islam” because it “sounds like we are declaring war against a religion.”
“It doesn’t do justice to the vast number of Muslims in our country and around the world who are peaceful people,” Clinton said in an appearance on ABC’s “This Week.”
Disappointingly, even the Libertarian party candidate Gary Johnson flatly refused to consider radical Islam a problem. How can we possibly fight an enemy that we refuse to name or identify?
Clinton’s and Johnson’s opponent, Donald Trump, has no such qualms. In fact, he criticized Obama for not using the phrase:
“People would sigh with relief if he would say it but he doesn’t want to say it… if it is indeed again like in Orlando, like in San Bernardino, like in Paris and like in the World Trade Center, like so many other places, if it’s radical Islamic terrorism, he ought to say it.”
After the shooting at The Pulse in Orlando, Trump called for President Obama to resign because of his refusal to use the label “radical Islam” even after the Muslim shooter made a call pledging his allegiance to the Islamic State. Obama responded:
“For a while now, the main contribution of some of my friends on the other side of the aisle have made in the fight against ISIL is to criticize this administration and me for not using the phrase ‘radical Islam.’ Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. This is a political distraction.”
It should be noted that Trump refused to denounce the truck or call for tougher laws to end to truck violence.
Friday Protests Across the Nation Were Mostly Peaceful
Apparently, bloggers weren’t the only ones warning people about planned protests for Friday, the 15th. Even the Department of Defense cautioned employees about going near the White House and the Army warned personnel about the possibility of violence in 37 cities. After the concerns of this week with calls for a “Day of Rage,” everyone breathed a sigh of relief when anti-brutality protests across the nation were largely uneventful with fairly low turnouts and not very rage-y at all.
NYC, Chicago, Reno, Austin, and Charleston, South Carolina all reported peaceful protests. In Phoenix, things got a bit rowdier, when multiple protests shut down traffic on some major thoroughfares, however, no violence erupted. There were also traffic disruptions in Portland due to protests, and things got a bit tense with 18 people arrested. In Oakland, protesters were headed toward a major highway when they were blocked by police. In San Francisco, there was some violence when protesters marched on the police station. Arrests were made but it is unclear how many people were arrested.
Protests are planned for Saturday in Cleveland and Las Vegas. Professional poo-disturber Al Sharpton led a march in Brooklyn this morning, where he “criticized efforts to mute the Black Lives Matter movement Saturday, saying a sustained protest is the only way to force change.”
Do I feel silly, being one of the people warning folks about the possibility of danger that didn’t actually occur?
Nope. No more silly than I would if I saw a rockslide start at the top of the hill and I told people to get out of the way, but then the rockslide lost momentum and never reached the bottom. I believe that if you see the potential for harm, you’re obligated to warn others so that they can do everything in their power to remain safe.
In fact, I’m glad that there was such a big hubbub about the potential for violence. Perhaps the discussion helped dispel some of the pressure to act. Perhaps it allowed for a cooling off period. I think that it’s entirely possible that the debate which occurred regarding the plans for violent protests may have de-fanged the entire situation.
The thing that I found most alarming this week was the response to my report that protests were planned and that they could become violent. Based on the recent history of Black Lives Matter protests (by recent, I mean the past couple of years) there is absolutely the potential for violence, rioting, looting, and destruction. But when I wrote that folks should be aware of this potential and should avoid the areas where rallies were planned, the outcry was a bleating of the sheep the likes of which I’ve rarely seen.
When the post got shared on Facebook by others who were concerned, their shares were met with outrage. People with rose-colored glasses were somehow shocked and angry that others would expect that these protests had the potential to become violent – DESPITE everything we’ve seen over the past two years. Instead of being angry with the people picking off police officers around the country or destroying property or shutting down traffic, they were angry with the folks who simply said, “Hey, stay out of this area to avoid the potential for trouble.” It’s been quite a while since I was called so many names or reported to Facebook so many times. (And to their credit, Facebook did not remove my post.) One woman even called the police to report my article, which was (I thought) quite innocuous with only a video claiming to organize the rallies and a list of locations. Heck, I hardly even editorialized.The cognitive dissonance has resulted in a denial so strong that people refuse to believe
But cognitive dissonance has resulted in a denial so strong that people refuse to believe live video or recent history, instead dwelling in a world full of frolicking puppies, rainbow-dappled meadows, and talking unicorns. Any effort to shake them out of their imaginary worlds is met with extreme hostility and outraged butthurt. When we can’t talk about reality without being censored and chastised, we know we are really on the precipice of an awakening so rude that the fragile cupcakes out there will collapse into a messy puddle of frosting, still denying the event while it actually happens around them.
Moving on, though…today, I was happy to report this excellent news. Nothing bad happened.
Doesn’t it make you proud that this week, despite their anger, people in America decided that violence wasn’t the answer? They refused to be manipulated. I sincerely hope this trend continues. We don’t need another Baltimore or Ferguson.
There are concerns that all hell will break loose at the Democratic and Republican national conventions.
And by concerns, I mean that the Black Panther Party (which adamantly claims not to be racist or violent) has flat-out warned that they’re coming to the RNC and that they will be armed. Homeland Security is taking the threat very seriously, it seems. Zero Hedge reported:
“…we were curious how long it would take the various US authorities to admit that the upcoming Republican and Democratic conventions will be ground zero for the next round in escalating US violence. The answer, it turned out, was just about 24 hours.
Earlier today, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers, that they are preparing their agencies for the “possibility of violence, both from unruly demonstrators and terrorists”, at the upcoming Republican and Democratic nominating conventions.”
According to a report by Michael Snyder, both conventions have been designated as “National Special Security Events” which means that the Secret Service will be handling security. At this point, plans are to have 3000 agents at each event, according to Jeh Johnson.
ZH made another very valid point relating to this heated presidential election:
It goes without saying, that if anyone wished to discredit Donald Trump at what will be the most watched Republican political event of the year, an act of “domestic terrorism”, ad hoc or scripted, would be precisely the way to achieve that.
Of course, if we said that the Black Panther Party members were anti-white, we, ourselves, would be…racist. If something bad and race-related does happen, you can bet your britches that somehow, the media will come up with a convoluted way to report on it that doesn’t include any of the forbidden words or ideas.
It’s difficult to say exactly when the veneer of civilization in the US will completely crumble, but I think we’ve established that unless things change dramatically, it’s definitely going to happen. Make sure that you’re prepared for it when it comes.
Also check out…
This Week in Preparedness…
As the situation in the United States devolves, how prepared are you really? If you had to go into lockdown mode and keep your family safely at home, how long would you last with the supplies you have on hand? If the answer is “a few days” or “a couple of weeks” you need to work on that. Immediately.
Whether the next few weeks lead to pandemonium due to violent protests provoking some type of martial law, a prepared mindset, a defense plan, and a well-stocked home can help to keep you and your family out of harm’s way.
Anything to add to Survival Saturday?
Do you have any news links you want to share? Now’s the time! You are absolutely welcome to post your links in the comments below. Do you have any thoughts on the PC police? (Keep them PG-13, of course!) And are you concerned about the potential for civil unrest in America?
Join the discussion!
About the Author
Please feel free to share any information from this site in part or in full, leaving all links intact, giving credit to the author and including a link to this website and the following bio. Daisy is a coffee-swigging, gun-toting, homeschooling blogger who writes about current events, preparedness, frugality, and the pursuit of liberty on her websites, The Organic Prepper and DaisyLuther.com She is the author of 4 books and the co-founder of Preppers University, where she teaches intensive preparedness courses in a live online classroom setting. You can follow her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter,.