Ediblog.com

Editor's Blog for January 2013

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

January 30, 2013

"To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men." ~Abraham Lincoln 

If you were waiting with baited breath for the Benghazi hearings on Capital Hill for truth to be revealed...you're about to pass out...

The House and Senate Hearings were a grandiose display of the spinelessness of the former Grand Old Party.

The revolting display of fawning fools from the GOP was enough to be a mass emetic! With the exception of Sen. Rand Paul...and Senators Johnson and McCain (in a minor way), you would have thought it was the Hillary 2016 campaign committee. There were so many tongues licking her boots, her foot looked like a Medusa...

The interminable accolades emanating from the mouths of the GOP members looked more like a DNC convention than a fact-finding mission. 

Besides a few legit questions, which were sandwiched in-between kisses, the House Hearing was not worth the time. The few that showed some moxie were in the Senate. 

The first credit (and a minor one) goes to Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), who began to directly grill Sec. of State Hillary Clinton with this exchange:

Sen. Johnson: "We were misled that there were supposedly protests and then something sprang out of that, and assaults sprang out of that. And that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact. The American people could have known that within days, and they didn't know that."

Clinton: “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest, or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference, at this point, does it make?” 

Sen. Johnson did not respond, tragically.

The second credit goes to Senator John McCain, who is good friends with Clinton...so you know it was a wee bit softball, but nonetheless he held her feet to the fire. He did ask one poignant question: "Were you aware of the classified cable from Chris Stevens that the US Consulate in Benghazi could not survive a sustained assault?"

She wasn't...how convenient....

Undoubtedly, the only one who spoke truth to power was Sen. Rand Paul: "One of the things that disappointed me most about the original 9/11 is that no one was fired. We spent trillions of dollars, but there were a lot of human errors. These are judgment errors and the people who make judgment errors need to be replaced, fired, and no longer in the position of making these judgment calls. So, we have a review board -- review board finds 64 different things that we can change. A lot of them are common sense and should be done, but the question is it's a failure of leadership that they weren't done in advance. And four lives were cost because of this. I'm glad that you're accepting responsibility. I think that, ultimately, with your leaving, you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that. Had I been president at the time, and I found that you did not read the cables from Benghazi, you did not read the cables from Ambassador [Chris] Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it's inexcusable. 

"Not to know of the request for securities, really, I think, cost these people their lives," he added. "Their lives could have been saved had someone been more available. Had someone been aware of these things -- more on top of the job."

One Senator unequivocally cared enough about these 4 lives, to tell the truth, demand real answers...and to hold Clinton accountable. One Senator. ONE! Is this what we all hauled our tired tukises over to the polls, to receive?

Mickey Mantle once said, "A team is where a boy can prove his courage on his own. A gang is where a coward goes to hide."

Welcome to the NEW GOP: The 'gang' on the Hill!

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

I love naive people...they approach the world in such a childlike manner. The only problem occurs when they are in a position of authority...and we, and our friends, receive the consequences of their actions. 

Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi said in 2010: "No reasonable person can expect progress on this track. Either (you accept) the Zionists and everything they want, or else there is war. This is what the occupiers of the land of Palestine know – these blood suckers who attack the Palestinians, these warmongers, these descendants of apes and pigs." 

This statement has never voluntarily been renounced or retracted by Morsi. Sadly, it took the NY Times to bring attention to Morsi's statements before he became president, for the State Dept. to address this issue.

Egyptian authorities subsequently issued two statements, the first of which said the comments were taken out of context, but stressed Morsi's commitment to full respect for religions and freedom of belief and worship. Their second statement said the Egyptian government rejects "all forms of discrimination and incitement to violence or hostility on the basis of religion."

Hmm...72% of the Egyptian government are extreme supporters of Sharia Law which does NOT permit religious tolerance of any religion except Islam, so their second statement is moot. But some segments of our government have more faith in their words...

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters: "That statement was an important first step to make clear that the type of offensive rhetoric that we saw in 2010 is not acceptable, not productive, and shouldn't be part of a democratic Egypt."  

Really, Ms. Nuland? "An important first step?" 

First, these statements did NOT come from Morsi. Second, they engaged in paltering. The comments were NOT taken out of context. In what context would they have been appropriate? This is what Morsi believes and that's precisely why he made those comments.  

Nuland continued: "That said, we look to President Morsi and Egyptian leaders to demonstrate in both word and in deed their commitment to religious tolerance and to upholding all of Egypt's international obligations."

That statement clearly demonstrates that the State Dept. is utterly clueless to the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, their history or their commitment to their creed: "Allah is our objective; the Quran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations."

To Ms. Nuland and her low-info comrades: Your naiveté may be quaint to your colleagues, but it is highly pernicious to the US and our only Middle Eastern ally, Israel. Diplomatically admonishing a Muslim terrorist is like spitting in the wind...and your faces have unequivocally been drenched.

Shalom through strength...

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

January 25, 2013

By now, most people have heard of the fairytale cyber-romance of the Notre Dame Star and his Stanford sweetheart. And thanks to Deadspin.com, we know it was a ruse. 

Putting aside whether Manti Te'o was part of this scam or was duped...or, as the 'nobody ever sins, they're just sick' crowd is putting it, he probably has delusional disease...one must wonder: How, in an age of the greatest access to information, did major media outlets end up with egg on their faces?

Were these journalists so mesmerized by this athlete that they forgot how to type or do a simple search?  Or was it a case of pre-senile dementia?

Or, perhaps, it was something more pervasive and crippling that kept these fearless reporters from fighting for "truth, justice and the American way"?

I believe it was the latter...a paralysis created by individuals riddled with guilt. A type of guilt felt by some white people for the racist treatment of people of color by some whites historically. Today we refer to this as 'White Guilt'.

White Guilt is the only rational explanation why professional and well-respected news organizations such as ESPN and Sports Illustrated would report repeatedly on a story...following it for months/years...and never bother to discover whether ANY of the story or characters were real.

Would this have happened if Tim Tebow had done this?  Um...no freakin' way!! They would be digging so deep, we'd know his BMs since he was 5 years old. Why? Because Tebow is white. Why wasn't an investigation done on Te'o? Because Te'o is NOT white.

Ahhh...welcome to the NEW America, where they cure and recompense historical racism WITH racism. Nice...

Of course, all these Sports Networks are scrambling now...looking for a skirt to hide under. Someone will pay for duping these geniuses. They may not even realize why they did what they did with Te'o, having been conditioned by progressives in the media all their lives...but a lesson must be learned here:

Nothing fruitful ever comes from acting out of guilt...no matter your hue.

REELTalk: Jihad & Christian Persecution with Raymond Ibrahim

Joining Audrey Russo for this week's REELTalk edition of Changing Worldviews is Author and Middle East Expert RAYMOND IBRAHIM. The media has stopped talking about Jihad, but our enemies are not finished. Raymond, author of The Al Qaeda Reader, will give us insights into the Islamic world's continues Jihad against the West. And, we'll discuss his upcoming book, Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians. Don't miss this critical update. PLUS, what happened at the Benghazi Terror Hearings? Will there be justice? I'll be taking your calls!! 

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

The Feel Good + The Steal Good = Captivity

January 22, 2013

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." 

                                                                                   ~Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

In the wake of the Newtown, CT shooting, leaders across the nation (specifically Democrat) have focused on the Constitution. Not to uphold it, but rather to find a way to violate it without the knowledge of the electorate (present company excepted). 

Now, allow me to preface my opinion with this: All crime that destroys innocent life is wrong. I'm using comparisons to make a point. And, due to the axiomatic lingo, I'm forced to refer to people here as black or white. That said...

Chicago, IL, Obama's adopted hometown, had the highest murder rate in the nation last year. The 2012 number was 513. Higher than any other State in the Union. The majority of those murders were black-on-black. Black thugs, with illegal guns, killing unarmed, law-abiding black citizens.

So, here's a question: Why the hue and cry for whites murdering white people, but not a mention of black-on-black crime? 

It seems that mass murderers are always white. But, if someone of African descent committed the crime in Newtown, would we even be talking about this right now? The answer is unequivocally NO. 

Why? Because the Liberal media is permanently plagued with a fatal case of White Guilt, which never has an equitable result. Anything done out of guilt never has a profitable outcome, but rather ends up exacerbating the problem.

The MSM won't mention black-on-black crime out of fear of being labeled racist (something they often employ on their opposition). Yet, thousands of innocent Americans of darker skin hue who...thanks to a combination of those with a penchant for the Ruling Class (Marxists) and those who live by emotion (Liberals)...are prevented from protecting themselves from these miscreants. And this, as in all things liberal, emboldens the criminals. 

With no fingerprints, they are able to keep blacks killing blacks at an alarming rate...and assure thugs that they can rape, pillage and kill because the law-abiding are defenseless. Then whip the masses into a cry for even more restrictions on their rights. And...

We have a winner!!. The joining of these too forces: Liberals (the 'Feel Good' crowd) and Marxists (the 'Steal Good' crowd), are both targeting the 2nd Amendment. And putting all other rights aside: Without the right of self-defense, all other rights are moot!

The empirical evidence, when factored into the discourse, always bolsters the right of the citizen to bear arms. Not for hunting...as Libs love to parrot...but rather for self-defense, as the Framers intended. 

The rush to legislation (or Executive Orders) that is now taking place, will further UNDERMINE liberty and embolden the nefarious, now strutting like peacocks. The Feel Good crowd has succeeded in making citizens feel bad about the only thing that stands between them and tyrants/criminals: Guns. 

Noah Webster once said, in An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787): 

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

Disarming the citizens is ALWAYS done piecemeal. It's how Creeping T (creeping tyranny) occurs. Law by law. Precept by precept. Fiat by fiat. Decree by decree. Until we begin to reflect the very captivity our forefathers died to prevent.

Protecting the 2nd Amendment, protects your freedom. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition...

REELTalk: Guns & Money with Michael Walsh, Andrew Malcolm & John Lott Jr.

Joining Audrey Russo for this week's REELTalk edition of Changing Worldviews is Authors & Columnists MICHAEL WALSH (NY Post, National Review) & ANDREW MALCOLM (Investors.com). The Debt Ceiling saved a $1T coin? The Inauguration plans, are all Americans included? New Gun Control laws by Executive Order? And Author JOHN LOTT JR. will join us to talk guns and what the anti-gun extremists hope to gain now! And I'll be taking your calls, don't miss a minute!!

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

2nd Amendment Debate: Rights vs. Creeping T

January 16, 2013

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." ~George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

Our Founders were perspicacious men. What they established 237 years ago has brought peace and freedom to millions, to the chagrin of Tyrants, Ruling Class wannabes and their ilk of every stripe.

These prescient designers based the founding of the world's greatest experiment upon immutable principles...not amorphous ideas that change with the shifting winds of man's whimsy. These precepts, based upon inalienable rights, set the solid, unshakeable foundation that has served our republic well for more than 2 centuries. This is not to say that these principles have not been challenged...they have...and have stood the test of time and nimrods, since our inception.

The difference between those challenges and today's is the people. Today they bully their way to grab the narrative...and pretend to use facts, but rather use half truths or lies cloaked as truth, in order to reason with the citizenry. 

Clearly, if you've ever encountered those on the wrong side of this debate (and the wrong side is that which is against the Constitution), you'll find that not everyone in the anti-gun movement realizes that creeping tyranny (Creeping T) is the impetus behind their view...but it is indeed the big money Marxists, like Soros and his ilk, that are masquerading as the civilized, concerned community.

Those of us who love our Constitution, would be glad to debate opponents of the 2nd Amendment. But there's a problem: We come to the contest ready to lay out our arguments, with empirical evidence. They, on the other hand, are unable to come with integrity...because they refuse to reveal their true agenda: To ban all guns. Period. So they often bring intimidation via slander to the table...

And, as Socrates once said, "When the debate is lost, slander is the tool of the loser."

I'm simply going to deal with the most misused and abused clause, by those afflicted by Hoplophobia (the morbid, irrational fear of guns): Militia.

Here is the Second Amendment of our Bill of Rights:

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

But it was NOT left to interpretation by those who live in a Silly Putty nebulous world...

Many in the anti-gun movement interpret "Militia" to mean the military or national guard. EAAAAAAAHHHH!!! (Buzzer sound) I'm sorry, that answer is incorrect. 

According to the Federalist Papers, written by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton...what the Founding Fathers (authors of the 2nd Amendment) considered a "Militia" to be was "All able bodied men" not a government power or agency. 

Not a good enough answer for the 'only Cops and the Military should have guns' crowd? 

Okee Dokee...how about another brainiac by the name of St. George Tucker, a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia officer, legal scholar, and later a U.S. District Court judge (appointed by James Madison in 1813), who wrote of the Second Amendment in his popular edition of Blackstone's Commentaries of the Laws of England (with Notes of Reference to The Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia [1803]):

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government."

And in the Appendix: 

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty... The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty."

(Did you catch the part the earth-embracers should love: "The right of self-defense is the first law of nature." That's pretty organic...) 

Tucker's evidence is unequivocal: The 'militia' clause was NOT intended to restrict the right to keep arms to active militia members, but he speaks of a broader right: The right to self-defense.

The facts, ad nauseum (but apparently not enough to penetrate the heads of Hoplophobics), have been presented by far greater people than I...but the point is clear for those who are mentally capable of comprehension:

Concerning the 2nd Amendment, the Founders and I agree: This is MY right to stop Creeping T.

God Bless the US Constitution!

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

January 14, 2013

"The political reality is that... the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here.... I've always argued against some of the dumb things they do, because I don't think it's in the interest of Israel.... I'm not an Israeli senator." ~Sen. Chuck Hagel

Dictionary.com defines an Anti-Semite as a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews. Throughout history, those who have disdained the Jewish people, have always found ways to express their hate using terminology that is ambiguous enough to cover their true feelings of hate, and yet express that emotion to their fellow fiends.

Chuck Hagel is an artist in this medium...

Terms/phrases like "the Jews", "The Jewish Lobby", to name a few...seem to roll off Hagel's forked tongue. His dismissive attitude toward the Jewish community while Senator in Nebraska is duly noted by the Jewish Community in the state. But here are a few more bits of evidence that undergirds Hagel's disdain:

• Hagel, who served as president and CEO of the World USO from 1987 to 1990, expressed intense opposition to the USO Haifa Center during a tumultuous 1989 meeting with Jewish leaders, according to multiple sources involved in the fight to keep the post open. “He said to me, ‘Let the Jews pay for it’,” said Marsha Halteman, director for military and law enforcement programs at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).

• In 2006, CAIR wrote in praise of Hagel: "Potential presidential candidates for 2008, like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Joe Biden and Newt Gingrich, were falling all over themselves to express their support for Israel. The only exception to that rule was Senator Chuck Hagel …" [Council on American-Islamic Relations, 8/28/06]

• In 2007, the NJDC (National Jewish Democratic Council) questioned Hagel's then bid for the White House by citing the following: 

  • In October 2000, Hagel was one of only 4 Senators who refused to sign a Senate letter in support of Israel.

  • In November 2001, Hagel was one of only 11 Senators who refused to sign a letter urging President Bush not to meet with the late Yassir Arafat until his forces ended the violence against Israel.

  • National Review wrote about Hagel's stance on Israel in 2002: "There's nothing Hagel likes less than talking about right and wrong in the context of foreign policy. Pro-Israeli groups view him almost uniformly as a problem. "He doesn't always cast bad votes, but he always says the wrong thing, "comments an Israel supporter who watches Congress. An April speech is a case in point. "We will need a wider lens to grasp the complex nature and consequences of terrorism," said Hagel. He went on to cite a few examples of terrorism: FARC in Colombia, Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, and the Palestinian suicide bombers. Then he continued, "Arabs and Palestinians view the civilian casualties resulting from Israeli military occupation as terrorism." He didn't exactly say he shares this view — but he also failed to reject it." 

  • In June 2004, Hagel refused to sign a letter urging President Bush to highlight Iran’s nuclear program at the G-8 summit.

  • In December 2005, Hagel was one of only 27 who refused to sign a letter to President Bush to pressure the Palestinian Authority to ban terrorist groups from participating in Palestinian legislative elections. 

  • In August 2006, Hagel was one of only 12 Senators who refused to write the EU asking them to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.

Now, Hagel is either ostensibly a moron, since he appears to be so misunderstood in his communications concerning Jews...which is impossible since he heroically rose to the rank of Sergeant in the US Army during the Vietnam War. Or he is a furtive Jew-hater reminiscent of some of his ancestors in Germany, who already held his dismissive disdain for the Jews which allowed for the rise of Hitler to power...and the eradication of 6 million Jews from the earth.

Either way...he is too troubling to be leading the Pentagon. Service in our Armed Forces does not automatically qualify one for the political appointment of Secretary of Defense. As a supporter of our Military, I say there are many veterans who are brilliant leaders and patriots. But one who can serve under a President with Obama's abhorrence for our Military and his long-held disdain for the Jewish people (J Street doesn't count), should not be honored with such a position.

Our Military, and our country, deserves better.

Joining Audrey Russo for this week's REELTalk edition of Changing Worldviews is singer, songwriter, recording engineer and Cakeman: CHRIS CASSONE. A man who's 'I'm with the band' became 'Cake for the band', and took it on a Musical journey bringing him back to the values of a Patriot! PLUS, we'll be talking about Benghazi, Jew-Hater Chuck Hagel for Sec. of Defense, and When does Art cross the line from expression to assault? I'll be taking your calls, so join us! 

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

Hamas: How Cowards Fight

January 8, 2013

"Hamas and other terror organizations are guilty of committing two crimes: hiding behind civilians [in Gaza] while firing on civilians in Israel." ~Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli PM

The dictionary defines 'coward' as a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition or pain. Sadly, in our culture today, we have too many examples of this term. But there are clearly two levels of cowards: One stays away from confrontation altogether...never joining the fight. The other targets the innocent, from behind the innocent.

The later describes Hamas, the majority party of the Palestinian Authority (PA): The government chosen by the 'palestinian' people.

The coward has many tools...but here are three in Hamas' stash:

1. Terrorism is the tool of cowards. It is utilized by weenie males who are afraid to meet real men on the battlefield. This is one of the weapons in Hamas' arsenal. They perpetrate homicide bombings, targeting innocent Israeli men, women and children in order to kill or wound some...and inflict fear upon the remainder of the Jewish population.

2. Human-shields is another tool of the coward. Hamas fire rockets from within densely populated areas (like schoolyards, neighborhoods and hospitals) of the Gaza Strip, provoking Israel to target the launchers. But as soon as the terrorists launch the rockets, they run for cover into underground bunkers, leaving innocent 'palestinian' civilians vulnerable. Their hopes are that Israel will accidentally kill these innocents so they can claim that Israelis target civilians.

3. A liberal, Jew-hating Media is a tool of the coward. Every time Hamas (or their ilk) carries out a terrorist attack on innocent Israelis, the media is silent. But as soon as the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) defends its people by trying to target the perpetrators, the media suddenly finds its cameras and reports it to a low-info world...that is already tainted with an anti-Semitic mindset. The fact that Israel was attacked by Hamas gets OOPSIE lost in their news stories and it appears that Israel is the perp.

Gandhi once said, "A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the prerogative of the brave."

If the world is looking for Hamas, and the people who put them in power, to ever be loving neighbors to Israel...don't look in Gaza: You'll be gravely disappointed.

Shalom through strength...

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

January 7, 2013

"Our nation honors her sons and daughters who answered a call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met". ~Plaque of the Korean War Veterans Memorial

For the first time, in the 124-year-old New Year's Day Parade, the Pentagon put a float in Pasadena's Tournament of Roses to commemorate the veterans of what has become known as "The Forgotten War."

Well, it's about freakin' time...

Joining Audrey Russo for tonight's REELTalk edition of Changing Worldviews is Columnist, Commentator and Author, ERIK RUSH. Former Presidential Candidate, Author and Radio Talk Show Host, RUTH WHITE. President of the Frederick Douglass Society and Speaker for Project 21, STACY SWIMP. This is one 'Bring It Bureau' who will assess the Fiscal Cliff, John Kerry for Sec. of State, Iran's Nuclear pause, Gun Control in wake of Newtown. We've got a full menu...and we'll be taking your calls! 

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog)

January 2, 2013

"Have the courage to say no. Have the courage to face the truth. Do the right thing because it is right. These are the magic keys to living your life with integrity." ~W. Clement Stone

The beauty of the world's greatest experiment is the freedom based upon inalienable rights...given by the Creator, not the State, which makes them so. Among those being freedom of speech. But even in this great freedom, there are limitations. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, for one.

But what is too often overlooked is the fact that with freedom comes responsibility. The responsibility to know when something is legal and when it's ethical...and the wisdom to know the difference.

Sadly, many in the arts (and as a performing artist and as a former illustrator, I know)...there is a tendency to abuse this form of expression by avoiding responsibility for behavior.

Case in point...a controversial Italian artist's new exhibit has a statue depicting Hitler kneeling in prayer placed at the center of what was the  largest Jewish ghetto in Nazi-controlled Europe. The artwork by Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan is titled 'Him'.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center's Israel director, Efraim Zuroff, called it "a senseless provocation which insults the memory of the Nazis' Jewish victims". He continued, "As far as the Jews were concerned, Hitler's only 'prayer' was that they be wiped off the face of the earth."

I concur with Mr. Zuroff.  And I believe it's beyond cruel and inhumane.

Portraying the leader of the barbaric, anti-Semitic Germanic movement...who exterminated 6 million Jews (and 5 million non-Jews)...kneeling in prayer, is disparaging enough. But to place this villain right in the middle of what was once a Jewish ghetto from which many Jews were transported to death camps, crosses the line between expression and intent to inflict injury. To depict this maniacal monster as a saintly, merciful and humble being is to spit upon the graves of those he exterminated...and to mock those who barely survived the Shoah.

This behavior is not freedom of expression but rather utilizing the rich communication of art as a weapon to diss the dead and eviscerate the hearts and minds of the wounded...victimizing them yet again.

We are not islands unto ourselves. What we do and say does indeed affect others. And where most things are legal...they are not necessarily ethical, compassionate, humane or responsible. 

Mark Twain once said:

"It is curious - curious that physical courage should be so common in the world, and moral courage so rare."

It's sad that Mr. Cattelan could utilize his God-given gifts to communicate...yet failed to have the courage to do what was morally right...and responsible.

An artist journeys deep within to touch the souls of his viewers/audience. One might reasonably assume Mr. Cattelan was actually sharing his own inner affection for a fiend and his Final Solution. Because to conclude otherwise...would be irresponsible.

Shalom through strength...