HOME - all posts interviews speaker
THINKING SMALL, THINKING BIG: BIG QUESTIONS, AND PRAISE FOR EVERYDAY CARING
I'm writing to you today because I've heard way too much about "if you're going to think, you might as well think big." I want to start with praise for "small living." Then I'll get back to big questions:
Like, how do we figure out, who are the good guys and who are the wolves in sheep's clothing?
Like, how do we stop the show trials throughout the West, the show trials of those who dare to speak the truth about Islam?
And then, someone has published Tommy Robinson's home address online. The person knew full well about the death threats against Tommy. My question: what do we do?
I'll be coming back to the big questions. But first, a few words on how important it is to "think small," to live the "small stuff." I've been taking care of a small, very sick cat. During the day, I've been giving her medication every 3 hours. I could have said: I have bigger things to do. Instead, it's been my choice to take care of the little Princess.
So many pleasures in life - and hard things too - are from "living small." Today there's been something to savor - one amazingly warm sunny day just before, according to the forecast, 2 weeks of cold and more cold.
Anyway, I thought it was time to take a small pause from focusing on big stuff.
The problem, in my experience, is that many people stop at the small stuff. They don't want to look further. My response to that: we won't be able to keep having good "small living" if we don't also take care of the big things, like the big threats posed by the politically correct and Islam.
So now, big stuff. First, wolves in sheep's clothing. How do we find out who is who?
When we look at the past, the good guys and bad guys are sometimes well known. Nazis. Bad guys. Okay - but they didn't define themselves as bad buys. They weren't written about, in the Nazi media, as bad guys. I'm assuming that most Nazis believed they had right on their side - believed they were the heroes, the good guys - believed the lies being disseminated about Jews, gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, and on.
It isn't always easy, even with hindsight, figuring out who's who. Often lies continue to be presented at The Truth. I remember being gripped by Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time. Richard III - not a villain! Right now I'm even more gripped by Diana West's American Betrayal. It's convinced me that I, along with most people, have swallowed massive monstrous lies about the history of the past century.
And what about now? What about, for instance, all those Christians and Jews in interfaith groups, sure they're protecting Islam and Islamics from nasties?
I have one suggestion for affirming those I see as the good guys. It comes from a visit to
Israel. I was moved when I walked in the Grove of the Righteous - a grove with trees dedicated to non-Jews who, during World War II, protected Jews, risking and sometimes losing their own lives.
My suggestion: that we
establish a new Grove of the Righteous - for people now speaking up for freedom of speech, for truth. I'm imagining a place where people can gather, in spirit anyway, and share their pride in being part of this new group of righteous.
It's possible to set up such a place online. It's something, in fact, I could do.
For now, feel free to nominate people, to have a tree dedicated to them. Include why you're nominating them.
The next big question: how do we stop the "show trials"?
The easy thing - to find ever more outrageous examples. For instance, Oleg Atbashian, an artist, has been threatened with 5 years in jail for posting anti-terror posters. His experience: things are way worse in the supposedly free West than they were in the Soviet Union:
Back in my Soviet dissident days, when I was collecting signatures in defense of Andrei Sakharov, I was screamed at, threatened, and lectured by the KGB and Communist functionaries. What I never imagined was that in the United States, the land of the free, I would not only be subjected to similar treatment, but go to jail.
So how do we stop such "show trials"? I asked that last time as well - and got a number of answers:
Here's another suggestion: pick one instance - perhaps one per country - and create a campaign (perhaps especially via social media) to make the issue as visible as possible, highlighting how this has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with attacking dissidents and instilling fear. Comments welcome.
And now, the last big question. How do we respond when someone publishes Tommy Robinson's home address online? The person: Ian McLoone, solicitor. Ian McLoone's justification: he disagreed with Tommy. The outcome: Tommy's children have spent the past few nights in a hotel. We all know why: Tommy has received many death threats and he cares to keep his children safe.
Below, my response and 2 email addresses, in case you would also like to respond.
First, for more information, here are several videos and articles.
Tommy goes to Ian's house, and Ian does not come out:
Tommy confronts Ian at his workplace:
Tommy arrested outside Ian's workplace:
Ian McLoone Has Crossed a Line:
Tommy Robinson Arrested Again:
If you'd like to respond, here are 2 email addresses:
- Ian McLoone:
- the company where he works:
Now, 3 responses, starting with mine:
The subject line:
This Is Not a Death Threat
Ian McLoone, solicitor.
This Is Not a Death Threat. You know it isn't. You know you don't have to fear death threats - or any threats of violence - as a consequence of your endangering the lives of Tommy Robinson's family.
You claim to disagree with Tommy's opinions.
It seems you do not disagree with the death threats against him - with people who use death threats to try to silence people. Instead you know of the threats, and have published Tommy's home address online. I can see only one reason for doing this: to give the information to those who would do violence to Tommy and his family.
You know Tommy's opinions well enough to know there will be no death threats against you. You seem, in fact, to take it for granted, that you are not risking death threats, or actual violence, directed at yourself and/or your family. Otherwise, it is highly likely that you would have been much more careful before doing what you did.
Do you know what it is to live with death threats? I don't think you have ever experienced that.
Tommy does know. And he cares to do all he can to protect his family.
You, on the other hand, have done all you can to expose them to danger.
You know that his
children are utterly innocent of anything to do with Tommy's opinions.
But you don't care. Quite the reverse.
In The Wizard of Oz, the Cowardly Lion wants a heart, and gets one. I don't think it is possible to get you a heart - your action is worse than heartless. You have deliberately endangered the lives of children who have a father whose opinions you disagree with.
Still, I am reiterating that This Is Not a Death Threat.
I am against death threats and against violence, even against people like you.
However, as you are keen to endanger Tommy's family because you disagree with Tommy's opinions, to be consistent, you must likewise believe that you have justified your family being endangered by those who disagree with you.
Thank goodness other people are far better human beings than you are.
I have one question: you have recklessly endangered the lives of Tommy Robinson and his family. Isn't that a criminal offense in Britain?
Elsa Schieder, PhD
And here are 2 further responses:
To jeopardize the lives of the innocent children of Tommy Robinson by publishing their address is beneath contempt. If you do not like what he stands for and disagree with his beliefs, that is your right as a fundamental part of living in a democracy. You hide in your house like a coward when confronted by him and call the police instead and then make sure that he is arrested for "disturbing the peace". If anything happens to his children, the blood will be on your hands.
As a solicitor, you do NOT have the right to divulge private information and I would certainly never think to hire such a duplicitous person as you when you so obviously cannot trusted. Your actions are despicable and should be either fired by your Firm or brought before the Bar.
I was shocked to learn that a member of your firm has put the lives of Tommy Robinson’s family in danger because he disagrees with Robinson’s politics. I am sure you are hearing from people all over the free world who feel similarly revulsed by this act of revenge. I am sure many other people will have told you that if anything happens to these innocent people, their blood will be on McCloone’s hands.
But it will also be on your hands. Is that something you want to wait passively by and allow to happen? This man should not be an associate of any responsible firm. Indeed, he should not be practicing law at all if he does not know the difference between democratic protest and an invitation to criminal behaviour.
Something else to consider: Robinson has many loyal supporters. It may occur to one or two of them that if Robinson’s family are fair game for low-lifes on McCloone’s side of the political spectrum who will stop at nothing to intimidate him, perhaps Mr McCloone’s relatives might serve the same purpose for low-lifes on the other side. If someone were to post his family's information in a public forum, how would he feel? This is not something I would encourage because it is a despicable form of political activism no matter how passionately one feels on a subject. But I am a responsible citizen and would not give irresponsible citizens any ideas. Mr McCloone is the one who has put the suggestion out there, hasn't he.
I look forward to hearing that you have taken steps to clear the name of your firm.
What next? I'm nominating two people for the new Grove of the Righteous:
Diana West, author of the amazing book I'm reading, American Betrayal.
I can think of many others. But what about you? Whom do you want to see in the new Grove?
As always, all the best to all who care and dare,
Nov 20, 2016
NOMINATIONS FOR THE NEW GROVE OF THE RIGHTEOUS
Nomination from Australia to your Grove of the Righteous.
Person: Pauline Hanson, Senator in the Senate of the Commonwealth of Australia
CITATION – PAULINE HANSON
Senator Pauline Hanson walks the walk and talks the talk.
Pauline Hanson - Wikipedia
Pauline Lee Hanson (née Seccombe, formerly Zagorski; born 27 May 1954) is an Australian politician. Hanson first entered politics as a member of Ipswich City Council ...
Pauline Hanson was falsely gaoled and hounded by the politicians of both major parties in Australia and by the media. Ridiculed by all but the wise few in the early days, she has consistently stuck to her guns and made a comeback in the 2016 federal election gaining four seats in the upper house of federal parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Others talk. Pauline Hanson achieves results against all odds and is now an experienced politician with the capacity to rise to leadership positions within Australian politics in the 21st century until her compulsory retirement through age. With suitable successors to its leadership, her One Nation :Party has the opportunity to lead politics in Australia into the new “age of awareness” regarding the multiple threats to the continued existence of humanity as we know it and eventually form a government supported by a broad spectrum of the people.
Her maiden speech in 1996 may be found here:
Pauline Hanson - Party Leader | Pauline Hanson's One Nation
On the 2nd of July, 2016, Pauline Hanson was elected to the Federal Senate as a Queensland Senator. She had returned to Parliament after 18 years.
as may also her second maiden speech in 2016 in the federal senate of Australia.
Her 2016 speech prompted the immediate walkout from the Senate by the entire Greens Party members present in the chamber. Within minutes the Greens were lambasted in social media for their hypocritical actions and childish behaviour. This reinforced the reality of the breadth of grass-roots support she enjoys, especially in Queensland.
A quote from the above link:
Those who have read David Ettridges’ or Pauline Hanson’s books know the details of one (of) the most disgraceful chapters in the short history of Australian justice. Hundreds of thousands know that Tony Abbott (prior to his rise to serve as Prime Minister of Australia) played a key role in developing the trumped up charges that saw Hanson sentenced for three years gaol. Her subsequent complete exoneration by Queensland’s Chief Justice after she had served three months (some of it in solitary confinement) was less publicly broadcast. Recent media treatment of Pauline Hanson has continued the persecution.
In Pauline's own words, “I'm back.” Quote. It has taken numerous elections, countless legal battles and doing a stint in maximum security on trumped-up charges - of which former speaker Bronwyn Bishop stated I was Australia's first political prisoner - to find myself here. Some call it persistence and tenacity. My daughter describes it as a Johnny Farnham comeback. I call it standing up and fighting for what you believe in and not allowing the bastards to grind you down. So, to all my peers in this place and those from the past, I have two words for you: I'm back - but not alone. Unquote.
Pauline remains steadfast in her fight for what she and we all know is RIGHT and so she is nominated for consideration and inclusion in the Grove of the Righteous in the global fight for the continued survival of humanity – the most righteous cause there can ever be.
W. F. BOWSER, OAM
Sunday, 20 November 2016
posted Nov 20, 2016
Thinking Small and
Asking Big Questions.
Small: a tiny cat.
How to Stop the Show Trials?
How to Identify Who is Good?
top of page
copyright © Elsa, 2012-2017 - all rights reserved
copyright © ElsasBlog.com, 2012-2017 - all rights reserved
All content of this website is copyrighted.
To republish, you must include the link to the webpage.
For any further information, please contact.