We are tirelessly dedicated to the Obama Administration’s campaign to stop the fighting between oppressors and oppressed and convince them to accept their present status instead of disturbing the peace and making frightening noises on the streets. This goes not only for our own Ferguson, Mo., but by odd coincidence, in Gaza as well. Funny, but its like both events are taking place in the West Bank.
We’re about to investigate an aspect of these wars. That’s the pros and cons of the decision made by the Ferguson Police Dept. to don the garb, the weapons and other accouterments of warfare given them by the Pentagon in a program strongly backed by President Obama. The purpose, in effect if not stated, is to militarize the police in order to keep the homeland safe from terrorists.
But first we must provide some context for both battlefields, beginning with Ferguson.
It’s true that a young man was killed in Ferguson after he engaged in shoplifting, and then disobeyed a hardworking peace officer’s request to enter an official vehicle for a chat. The officer, a patriotic U.S. military veteran with a clean record during his eight years of service in the police force, had no choice but to fire warning shots to get the suspect to stop. The escaping man — a black perpetrator, it turns out — responded by changing course, and turning to face the officer with his arms spread menacingly in the air. He walked directly into the warning shots and was accidently killed. Those things happen.
The police department was very upset about it, although comforted when they remembered from the Good Book, “The wages of sin is death.” The department’s Protestant minister, the inerrant Pastor Knowsall, ruled that if the Bible said it, it’s true. And the force’s Roman Catholic adviser, Father Whiteman, ruled that robbing a convenience store is a major sin. Whiteman, considered a virtual saint in more peaceful and, frankly, attractive neighborhoods in the St. Louis area, has never sinned, of course, but he learned all about it at his church’s summer camp for boys, which he visited frequently as a young priest and still manages to show up from time to time for what he calls “special occasions.”
Then, all of a sudden, raucous mobs took over the streets of this peaceful community, threatening everyone in sight, including peace officers seeking to keep the rioters calm. There was a case of looting and some people cursed the police, and someone threw a “Molotov Cocktail,” a terror weapon named after a Communist. This continued for days. Needless to say, most of the mobs were made up of people with dark skins, just like those rioters down South in the 1960s. What do those people want?
We do not welcome these mobs in fair Ferguson! I’m sure this majority black town’s three African American officers join their 50 white brothers in arms in feeling this way. There should be no more looting, and demonstrators must refrain from discourtesy toward our heroic boys blue and camo as they try to restore peace and tranquility in our best of all possible democracies.
Eyeless in Gaza
A different, but relatively similar terrorist outbreak has been bedeviling the State of Israel, started by Palestinian terrorists from Gaza, a part of Greater Israel. We say, along with the president of the United States, “Hamas! Stop firing those rockets against innocent Israelis! Monster! Aren’t you sated yet? Your bloodbath has already killed three civilians.”
There will be retribution. According to the “Law of An Eye for an Eye,” as amended by the Knesset in 1949, this means 666 terrorist eyes for one innocent Israeli civilian eye. Scores will be settled!
Here is how it all started: Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu (may his tribe increase) awoke one night from a deep dream of peace, and saw, within the moonlight in his room, the glare of terrorist Hamas rockets threatening the Jewish State. Terror rockets!
With deep reluctance and against his own passionately held peaceful and humanitarian principles, Bibi had no choice but to save his people by deploying the Most Moral Army in the World to defend the very land God Himself personally transferred to the prime minister’s direct ancestors — His gift of “land to the landless.”
When, God forbid, Bibi passes to his generous eternal reward, the heavenly real estate deed to all the former Palestinian lands will be posted in an elaborate shrine next to the public display of a magnificent glass enclosed coffin containing the embalmed remains of the fallen Bibi. After 60 days of being viewed by a weeping nation, this modest man will be buried. In his honor, when the time comes, the Israeli government plans to imprint Bibi’s favorite selfie and a copy of the deed on all Israel’s flags. We thank President Obama for agreeing to rename the storied War Room in the White House basement, Bibi’s Hideaway.
So far the Most Moral Army has harvested some 2,000 eyes, and counting.
Now back to Ferguson.
The Pentagon’s program of militarizing domestic police forces is controversial. We will tell you what we think of the Pros and Cons below after you decide without any hints from us.
By the way, President Obama has recently entered the fray by declaring that the domestic police shouldn’t behave like soldiers, but, of course, his Pentagon distribution scheme serves the national interest so the program will remain in place. (We gave him a peek at the Pros and Cons beforehand to help him think it all out.) We will reveal our view just after this listing:.
What we will do now is present both sides, as usual, so that you, the reader, make up your own mind. Here is the list, courtesy of The Onion:
PROS:
- Same tactics used successfully in Afghanistan, Iraq
- Modern law enforcement simply cannot do their job properly by relying on handguns, tasers, and tear gas alone
- A real shot in arm for nation’s ailing weapons industry
- Look on driver’s face when tank pulls up beside Mini Cooper always fun
- Local photojournalists now able to capture fog of war at home
- Nice surprise treat for veterans to see weapons they used in war pop up on their hometown streets
- Never a bad idea to put a more powerful gun in someone’s hand
- Actually going to seem pretty quaint when compared with police armaments 20 years from now
CONS
Most police officers have proven fully capable of violently subduing protesters without any military-grade weapons
- It is actually very hard to recite Miranda rights while holding a 40-pound grenade launcher
- There no longer any middle ground between community watch and military
- Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles only get 5 miles per gallon
- Jesus, just look at this shit
- Military-style helmets limit peripheral vision while firing indiscriminately into crowd
- Could potentially be abused if put in lesser hands other than America’s historically honest and virtuous police departments
- Takes away that personal touch of beating a suspect to death with bare hands
What do you think? Get back to us later. We’re still working on our opinion. Bibi hasn’t called yet.
Action proposal
Visit your top local political and corporate decision makers. Tell them you support their call to restore calm and healing between oppressed and oppressor, and that you agree there should be no monkeying around with our existing social and income structure, housing patterns and free markets because it is part of God’s plan.
And remember, as we part, when you go out at night, and there is not much light, and you happen to be white, and there is a shadow in sight, man up and do right. Above all, go armed and stand your ground. You never know who is lurking in the bushes, waiting to rob your cigars.
— J.A.S. The Onion created the pro and con points, but not the article. And when we wrote “Netanyahu awoke one night from a deep dream of peace, and saw…” we were using words from the famous poem Abou Ben Adhem (may his tribe increase). One or two readers may be offended by some of our comments, but keep in mind our only intention is to identify the real killers and their accomplices.