That's a very early piece.
Ayers probably deserves another one.

Any of the "Happy Birthday, O Dear Leader" series which I faithfully post on Obama's purported birthday each year of his terms in the office.

Definitely "Aeneas", everything about that piece from the subject matter, to the allegory, to the intention, down to the meter used was intended to be a gauntlet thrown down.

"Foreign and Domestic" for obvious reasons.

Any of the pieces which point out the growing tyranny such as "Leviathan", "Historia Dea Stili", "Stick and Stones", and "Black Hat Realtors".

Any of the pieces which illustrate the divide between ruling class and country class, but especially "Radio Free America", "Breaking Bread", "The Basement Shelf", and "Rice".

So, as you can guess, I go to my wife quite often with the "knock on the door" concern. ;)

to illustrate radical left wing terrorists:
Little Billy Pipebomb

A commentary on the life and times
of a friend of The New Regime,
Mr. Bill Ayers.


Little Billy Pipebomb

had a very misspent youth,

forecasting Weather Underground,

a terrorist for “Truth”.


He and his buddies set their sights

to take the system down,

then bombed the cops and then

The Congress and The Pentagon.


Billy never went to prison

'cause he took it on the lam,

and while he hid the things he did

he hatched some other plans,


like teaching Marx to kids,

launching political careers,

a fuzzy “reformed” terrorist

with a bunch of crazy years.


But on the day The Towers fell,

there in The New York Times,

was Little Billy Pipebomb's wish

he had done further crimes.


His policies are in our schools,

he's launched a President,

yet no one talks of Billy Pipebomb

and his very youth misspent.

Little Billy Pipebomb, Copyright © 2009 Papa Possum

do you mind mentioning a few? I know which ones I would say...

1a) "[Leftists] Shooting you in the street, is probably not likely."
Agreed, blacklisting and vilification are more their speed.
Although, in the 70's, leftists here and in Europe were not opposed to terrorist "direct action", just ask Obama's buddy Ayers.

1b) "Would that at all affect how and what you wrote?"
That's hard to say: I would like to think that I would be brave and noble.
Looking objectively at my past and my previous reactions to aggression, I would probably respond with a scorched earth piece on whoever threatened me.


2a) "your satire hits a nerve with a large group of people and a powerful government"
If the specific nerve you refer to is "indifference", I would have to agree with you.
Seriously, I doubt very many people read my satire.
But, I write because I have to.
As Juvenal wrote: "It is difficult not to write satire. For who is so tolerant of the wicked city, so steeled, that he can restrain himself."

2b) "Do you ever worry you could be targeted, even indirectly ... by the US government?"
There have been many pieces about which, right before posting, I have confessed to my wife - this is the one that's going to prompt the "knock on the door".
To date - nothing, and I'm sure, just as I'm sure that they really don't care, that it will remain that way.
However, if I ever do get that "knock on the door", I will try very hard to concentrate on the benefit of having gained what little "street cred" there is to gain.

Euda,
1. Let's say some far-left group saw your satires and were offended enough to let you know how they felt. Shooting you in the street, is probably not likely. But let's say you started receiving threats from an enviro-terrorist group or the Occupy Wall street bunch for example. Would that at all affect how and what you wrote?

2. To that point, your satire hits a nerve with a large group of people and a powerful government. Do you ever worry you could be targeted, even indirectly (the man who shoulders the blame to this day for the Benghazi attack) by the US government?

Sure you can interview me.

Here are my initial thoughts on the Charlie Hebdo attack.

---

A first point: personal context.

I did not find out about the Charlie Hebdo attack until a full day after it had happened.
I have been very busy, to the exclusion of many other things, with two major projects.

The first is a contract I'm working on.
This is taking the majority of my time.

The second is a new satire I will be posting early next month.

These two projects have allowed me to take in only a surface understanding of the attack: I still have not looked into anything of yesterday's hostage stand-off.
However, I think that I have enough of an understanding to enter the discussion.

---

A second point: my current satire project.

I currently have thirty-eight satires posted at http://papapossum.com
It has really started to bother me that all but a few of them are written in the same meter.
There is something to be said for developing a style, but there is also something to be said about not letting that style become a crutch and then a prison.

This new piece intentionally breaks from that usual style - I have one other piece written in the same manner.
I consider this new piece, at the risk of sounding pompous, to be very important.
I want it written.
I want it written correctly.
And I want it written on time (it has a very specific post-by date).

Because of the technical demands and the due date of the piece, any consideration of a beginning a new satire, even one on the Charlie Hebdo attack, must be put on the back burner,
I do, however, plan to write something about the Charlie Hebdo attack.

---

A third point: "Je suis Charlie Hebdo".

I want to state this carefully so that it is not misunderstood.
I personally am "drawing the line" at declaring "I am Charlie Hebdo".
I am not: I am a satirist.

Logically stated: Squares and rectangles are quadrilaterals, but rectangles are not squares.
It is my understanding that Charlie Hebdo was a far left publication.

Do I support their right to satirize: absolutely.
Do I support their right to publish leftist pap: conditionally - as long as they support my right not to read it or agree with it.
Am I outraged at the attack - as a satirist, yes... but not as a far left satirist.
I am more comfortable in declaring, "Je suis une satiriste."

---

A fourth point: my satire and islam

I only have one piece which mentions islam, "Ten Years Gone" (http://papapossum.blogspot.com/2011/09/t...).
It is an ode for marking the tenth year since the World Trade Center attacks.
The thrust of the piece is not islam, but rather how our ruling class whitewash islam - much how the globalist leadership all over the world do the same.

In my opinion, islam is a know quantity: anyone who can't see it for what it is (an ultra-violent manifest-destiny theology) is being willingly naive and, for survival reasons, is to be dismissed.

So, to me, there is no point in satirizing islam: it is what it is.
There is, however, a point in satirizing the whitewashers and the willingly naive.
When I get to writing a piece on the Charlie Hebdo attack, that's the approach I will be taking,

---

A fifth point: my satire and islamists.

My Papa Possum twitter account (https://twitter.com/papapossum) does not have that many followers (currently 33).
One, possibly two of those followers are recent and both appear to be islamists.

I think that it's a safe assumption that he/they have read the "Ten Years Gone" piece and is/are "monitoring" my account.
I didn't bother to block he/them because that too would be pointless.

---

A final point: the cartoon you posted.

I have not seen the cartoons which Charlie Hebdo published, so I can't determine the "offense level" of them.
However, to me this particular cartoon is an apologist piece, and a bit absurdist: blacks did not sit in trees with bananas,
jews did not count money while wallowing in entrails.
Islamists, however, are ultra-violent.

To me, the cartoonist is one of the willingly naive to be dismissed for the sake of survival.

---

I am open to other further questions.
I will get to them when I can throughout the day (see point 1)

Thanks, K, for starting this thread.