It is easier to bring people down to the level of those who have less and are less than it is to do the work necessary to bring up the less fortunate. There are two ways to have the best house on the block. One, you work to beautify your own home or two, you burn down everyone else's. Obama wants to burn down them all. It is easier. It is the way of the thug and the brute. It is the Chicago way. It is the Obama way.
And until and unless the American people rise up and become a voice that cannot be ignored by pet media outlets and politicians with their hands over their ears, we will continue to be victimized for our beliefs, our uniqueness, our strengths as he and his motley crew try to spread the misery around. We will continue to be told that we are all the same, we deserve the same bank balance whether or not we work to build it, we all deserve the big house and fancy car even if we cannot pay for it. We are told that some salaries are obscene and need to be taken by the government and put to better use. They’ll take from those who work and give to those who can’t get off the couch because Jerry Springer is on unless it is to open a fresh bag of Doritos. The plan is for us to become less so that those who have less will not get their feelings hurt.
That was the message of Communism – make everyone equal. Erase the class differences. Only the elite leaders will be different, after all, they are called by God to ride roughshod over the ignorant masses because the people are basically too stupid to know what is good for them. Communism has not worked as a valid form of government anywhere in the world and a socialism that seeks to displace capitalism will not work here.
We in America cling to their “religions and guns” and liberal progressives cannot stomach that because they are the signs of a free people. There is a remarkable difference between slaves and freemen, and we choose freedom from the tyranny of an oppressive government. It is why we crossed the ocean and started over here to create this country. We refuse to return to those days of oppression ever again. We wish to remain free and not to have to fight that battle again. Hear that Washington? (I said that we preferred not fight that battle again, I did not say we won’t.)
The only portion of the country that is expanding is the government and that is their goal. Once the government controls all the jobs, the banks, the car manufactures, the unions, the salaries, the insurance companies, the health care benefits, they control us and we will not longer be free people. Slavery is never out of style for those in power who corruptly wield their iron fist over people they see as unimportant and cattle to be herded, sheep to be sheared, and fowl to be slaughtered for sake of a fancy meal. Sacrifices must be made and in their eyes, we are the sacrificial lambs.
We are told that the era of American supremacy is over and that we need to ask permission of third world countries what temperature we can set our thermostats on, what car we should drive, whether or not we have the right to live as free men and women and even if we have the right to defend ourselves against the force of a criminal.
Terrorist who seek our demise fervently are given rights and coddled. Our leader even could not find it in his heart to call the Fort Hood terrorist what he was- a Muslim terrorist. See was that so hard to do? In fact even before the truth got out that he had not been killed in the attack but was alive in the hospital, our government had already determined that it was not a terrorist act. How foolish, misguided and arrogant.
The devout purpose of terrorist is strengthened by a government that hasn’t the backbone to call them for what they are and to sound the alarm to the danger. We are led by a man who claims that the sound of the Imam’s call to prayer is one of the most beautiful sounds in all the earth while we see those same people cheer as our buildings fall in a cloud of dust choking out lives and futures forever.
We are led by a man who watches an evil government in its race to become a nuclear power and he refuses to stand with that country’s own people who oppose the oppressive regime that steals its way into control. He still believes that his silver-tongued rhetoric still thinks he can crumble their will into a sobbing heap apologizing for having ever wanted to hurt us.
Was anyone really surprised that it took days of killing in the streets of Iran before our president found the backbone to even speak up about the Iranian government forces that were doing the killing? He validated the election Iran’s people refused to acknowledge. Our leader cowered from the fray because he didn’t want to be seen as interfering.
Yet this same leader seeks to interfere into every aspect of our lives without even losing a minute of sleep over it, as he tells us what to eat, how much money we can make, and how we should live our lives. He takes millions of dollars from us and lies about where it goes and what good it does. He boasts of bolstering the economy but fails to explain that it is the economy of China that he has strengthened. He spends money he does not have, borrowing to shackle our future. When the debt is called one day because they lose faith in our government, we will be slaves once again to an oppressive force – China.
President Obama hides from the responsibility that comes with the job he tricked so many into giving him. I say tricked because basically every reason he gave for people to vote for him, he has negated by his actions since taking office. If the people had known the truth they tried so hard not to see, he would not have had a chance for the nomination, much less to be sworn into office.
There is an uprising coming to this country fueled by the arrogance of a twisted Chicago minded politician even if he thinks we will eventually see things his way and feebly bow at his altar and surrender our souls. In seeking to control it all and all of us, he will lose it all. I pray “hasten the day”.
Only then can America have a chance to upright itself and return to her former glory. With a leader who has surrendered to world opinion and believes his own press clippings, America will always suffer and suffer badly. We need a true American to lead us in character, honesty, truth and humbleness and leaders can only lead where they have themselves been. Obama has not even visited the places of character, honesty, truth or humbleness, much less lived there. I doubt he has the ability to lead us into such territory so unfamiliar to him.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
Our Prisons- Islamic Jihad Training Grounds
Speaking to a captive audience is a dream of many speakers. Radical Islam is speaking a captive audience everyday, literally.
Feeding on the discontent felt by prisoners incarcerated in our prison system, Islam is converting about 1/5 of those prisoners. What will happen when they get out, no one knows. It cannot be ignored however that they had a penchant toward crime and anti-social behavior when they went in so how can it be any better to have been recruited by hate-filled imams while there?
We incarcerate prisoners and forget about them. They are lost to society, but not to Islam and that appeals to these forgotten men and women, making them easy targets of radicals.
I found it curious that the current administration released a report a year ago citing their concern about disgruntled Vets and their being easily radicalized when the Department of Corrections is virtually handing over to radical Islamic advocates our prison population for their next line of soldiers.
We are concerned about our next door neighbor becoming a home-grown terrorist when the government is aiding in the process by allowing prisoners to be subjected to extremism when they’re looking for someone to blame for their "unjust" treatment.
Most all of these, but not all, are black prisoners. Islam uses whatever tool it can to wage jihad on its own behalf and here is a ready and willing population to fill the bill. In the 70's there was concern and still today one occasionally hears of a coming "race war" in the United States.
Racism is still promoted and fed today. Inequality and class differences bring it to the forefront and now an army of radicals is being formed to level the playing field.
Interestingly enough, Islam has never been kind to the Black race. In Arabic the same word, abed, that is used to describe the color black is the same word used to describe a black slave. Slavery of the Black men and women of the past has always been practiced by Islam, even to the supplying of those slaves to America.
Slavery is so ingrained into the Islamic culture that there are 40 words in Arabic to describe one kind of slave or another. There is the white slave, the black slave, the child slave, and the runaway slave, among them. Muhammad boasted of having slaves and gave instruction as to how to obtain and treat slaves, right down to the rules governing the acceptable rape of slaves. Our society demonizes the “white man” for his role in slavery when the very slaves that were brought to our shores in the 17 and 1800’s were provided by Muslim slave traders.
Muhammad passed around slaves for the sexual pleasure of his commanders and even today Islamic clerics promote the notion that a “kafir”, a non-Muslim, is there for the taking and no different than a cow walking down the street.
Muhammad’s favorite sexual partner was a white slave woman and even today a white woman is thought of as the most valued slave for sexual pleasure and brings the highest price on the market. Information on Islamic slave practices would and indeed has filled volumes.
While Islamic participation does not excuse the practice here in our early years as a country, it certainly also does not excuse the role Islam has played in the practice. Today it is estimated that 400,000 Muslim-held slaves exist in Africa, but rarely is that mentioned because it is so Politically Incorrect to criticize Islam.
To address the problem is deemed Islamophobic and even the mentioning of it is frowned upon. The United Nations considers it "hate speech" against the religion of Islam to even bring it up. It is acceptable to cite the involvement of the white men who engaged in the practice, but to mention the suppliers that kept millions captive is unacceptable, even though it still exists today.
Because slavery is mentioned in the Koran and the Hadith and because Muhammad himself set the example, slavery cannot be eradicated from Islam. It will always be a part of the "Religion of Peace" to own human beings as property.
As a senator running for the office of president, Barack Hussein Obama, himself with a Muslim background he proudly claimed in speeches given around the world after the election, said that the practice of human trafficking would be a “top priority” of his as president. This promise is as forgotten as the other platitudes he spewed to pander to voters in order to gain his unqualified term in office.
Now that he is in president, he is more concerned about the control of your life and mine than he is of effectively hindering the slave trade. He admitted publicly to Pastor Rick Warren in his televised interview that it is a problem right here in America concerning thousands held against their will, but even that doesn’t seem enough of a motivation for him to address the challenge. Indeed he might be more concerned about the slave traders having health insurance than the business they are in. I say that with my tongue only partly in my cheek.
Muslim Chaplains continue their quest for recruits and the government, the press and the penal system not only turn a blind eye to it, they encourage and even fund it. Yes, our government is funding the recruitment and training of terrorists in the United States Bureau of Prisons. How are they doing this? This is accomplished by the shameless appointment of Islamic Chaplains in the prison system.
Imam Warith-Deen Umar was one of the first Muslim chaplains to be hired to lead prayer in prisons. Responsible for the hiring and firing of chaplains he created a force of 56 Muslim chaplains in the state of New York alone. His radical views and pro-9/11 mentality was widely known by the government but not challenged for years.
The government report entitled the “Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Selection of Muslim Religious Service Providers” stated that Umar, himself a Black Muslim convert and ex-con, believed that “black inmates who converted to Islam in prison were logical recruits for committing future terrorist attacks against the United States”.
Yet our government has the audacity to tell us to be on the lookout for such “right-wing” radicals that are signified by their views against illegal immigration, who believe in the end time Biblical prophesies, returning vets, and pro-life advocates as the real terrorist threats to the country.
Our prisons are the brewing pot getting read to boil over and the mess it will make will not be pretty. A small spark has historically been all that was needed to ignite race riots, looting, destruction of personal property and even killings. When the spark is lit that will ignite the coming race crisis in this country, the ranks filled by Black Muslim prison converts will reek more havoc that we can imagine. It will be their time to “get even”.
Destroying America from the inside has always been an easier task to accomplish than doing it from without. It is more feasible today than it was in the past. The best time to stop such a tragedy is to squelch it before it happens but no one is paying attention to the gathering forces.
The inflamed rhetoric is going forth. The kindling is being piled up in the form of discontented prisoners and the blaze will reach the heavens when the spark is added to the mix. Neighbor will be turned against neighbor when the color of ones skin and the ideology of ones thinking will be all it takes to define the “enemy”. America’s second Civil War is not that far in the future, though wishful thinkers would rather ignore the smoke beginning to rise than stamp it out.
We cannot afford such a conflict. The economic, financial and human toll it will bring will be insurmountable. America has many enemies seeking here destruction. The most dangerous ones are those right inside our gates. It’s the enemy we ignore that will refuse to be ignored any longer and our governmental agencies are gathering the fuel and stoking the flame and no one yet sees the small plume of smoke that already is rising on the horizon.
To stop it, a drastic shift must occur in the thinking of the leadership and the individual citizen of this country. And although it will rail against the promise of President Barack Obama that we are not and never will be at war with Islam, that shift must include the naming of our greatest enemy, political Islam.
The Political Correctness that shelters our enemies is a hindrance that must be expunged from our society if we are to be effective in the preservation of America as a free land. Name the enemy America for until you do you’ll be powerless to wage an effective campaign against it, and we will most assuredly lose the war of a lifetime.
Feeding on the discontent felt by prisoners incarcerated in our prison system, Islam is converting about 1/5 of those prisoners. What will happen when they get out, no one knows. It cannot be ignored however that they had a penchant toward crime and anti-social behavior when they went in so how can it be any better to have been recruited by hate-filled imams while there?
We incarcerate prisoners and forget about them. They are lost to society, but not to Islam and that appeals to these forgotten men and women, making them easy targets of radicals.
I found it curious that the current administration released a report a year ago citing their concern about disgruntled Vets and their being easily radicalized when the Department of Corrections is virtually handing over to radical Islamic advocates our prison population for their next line of soldiers.
We are concerned about our next door neighbor becoming a home-grown terrorist when the government is aiding in the process by allowing prisoners to be subjected to extremism when they’re looking for someone to blame for their "unjust" treatment.
Most all of these, but not all, are black prisoners. Islam uses whatever tool it can to wage jihad on its own behalf and here is a ready and willing population to fill the bill. In the 70's there was concern and still today one occasionally hears of a coming "race war" in the United States.
Racism is still promoted and fed today. Inequality and class differences bring it to the forefront and now an army of radicals is being formed to level the playing field.
Interestingly enough, Islam has never been kind to the Black race. In Arabic the same word, abed, that is used to describe the color black is the same word used to describe a black slave. Slavery of the Black men and women of the past has always been practiced by Islam, even to the supplying of those slaves to America.
Slavery is so ingrained into the Islamic culture that there are 40 words in Arabic to describe one kind of slave or another. There is the white slave, the black slave, the child slave, and the runaway slave, among them. Muhammad boasted of having slaves and gave instruction as to how to obtain and treat slaves, right down to the rules governing the acceptable rape of slaves. Our society demonizes the “white man” for his role in slavery when the very slaves that were brought to our shores in the 17 and 1800’s were provided by Muslim slave traders.
Muhammad passed around slaves for the sexual pleasure of his commanders and even today Islamic clerics promote the notion that a “kafir”, a non-Muslim, is there for the taking and no different than a cow walking down the street.
Muhammad’s favorite sexual partner was a white slave woman and even today a white woman is thought of as the most valued slave for sexual pleasure and brings the highest price on the market. Information on Islamic slave practices would and indeed has filled volumes.
While Islamic participation does not excuse the practice here in our early years as a country, it certainly also does not excuse the role Islam has played in the practice. Today it is estimated that 400,000 Muslim-held slaves exist in Africa, but rarely is that mentioned because it is so Politically Incorrect to criticize Islam.
To address the problem is deemed Islamophobic and even the mentioning of it is frowned upon. The United Nations considers it "hate speech" against the religion of Islam to even bring it up. It is acceptable to cite the involvement of the white men who engaged in the practice, but to mention the suppliers that kept millions captive is unacceptable, even though it still exists today.
Because slavery is mentioned in the Koran and the Hadith and because Muhammad himself set the example, slavery cannot be eradicated from Islam. It will always be a part of the "Religion of Peace" to own human beings as property.
As a senator running for the office of president, Barack Hussein Obama, himself with a Muslim background he proudly claimed in speeches given around the world after the election, said that the practice of human trafficking would be a “top priority” of his as president. This promise is as forgotten as the other platitudes he spewed to pander to voters in order to gain his unqualified term in office.
Now that he is in president, he is more concerned about the control of your life and mine than he is of effectively hindering the slave trade. He admitted publicly to Pastor Rick Warren in his televised interview that it is a problem right here in America concerning thousands held against their will, but even that doesn’t seem enough of a motivation for him to address the challenge. Indeed he might be more concerned about the slave traders having health insurance than the business they are in. I say that with my tongue only partly in my cheek.
Muslim Chaplains continue their quest for recruits and the government, the press and the penal system not only turn a blind eye to it, they encourage and even fund it. Yes, our government is funding the recruitment and training of terrorists in the United States Bureau of Prisons. How are they doing this? This is accomplished by the shameless appointment of Islamic Chaplains in the prison system.
Imam Warith-Deen Umar was one of the first Muslim chaplains to be hired to lead prayer in prisons. Responsible for the hiring and firing of chaplains he created a force of 56 Muslim chaplains in the state of New York alone. His radical views and pro-9/11 mentality was widely known by the government but not challenged for years.
The government report entitled the “Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Selection of Muslim Religious Service Providers” stated that Umar, himself a Black Muslim convert and ex-con, believed that “black inmates who converted to Islam in prison were logical recruits for committing future terrorist attacks against the United States”.
Yet our government has the audacity to tell us to be on the lookout for such “right-wing” radicals that are signified by their views against illegal immigration, who believe in the end time Biblical prophesies, returning vets, and pro-life advocates as the real terrorist threats to the country.
Our prisons are the brewing pot getting read to boil over and the mess it will make will not be pretty. A small spark has historically been all that was needed to ignite race riots, looting, destruction of personal property and even killings. When the spark is lit that will ignite the coming race crisis in this country, the ranks filled by Black Muslim prison converts will reek more havoc that we can imagine. It will be their time to “get even”.
Destroying America from the inside has always been an easier task to accomplish than doing it from without. It is more feasible today than it was in the past. The best time to stop such a tragedy is to squelch it before it happens but no one is paying attention to the gathering forces.
The inflamed rhetoric is going forth. The kindling is being piled up in the form of discontented prisoners and the blaze will reach the heavens when the spark is added to the mix. Neighbor will be turned against neighbor when the color of ones skin and the ideology of ones thinking will be all it takes to define the “enemy”. America’s second Civil War is not that far in the future, though wishful thinkers would rather ignore the smoke beginning to rise than stamp it out.
We cannot afford such a conflict. The economic, financial and human toll it will bring will be insurmountable. America has many enemies seeking here destruction. The most dangerous ones are those right inside our gates. It’s the enemy we ignore that will refuse to be ignored any longer and our governmental agencies are gathering the fuel and stoking the flame and no one yet sees the small plume of smoke that already is rising on the horizon.
To stop it, a drastic shift must occur in the thinking of the leadership and the individual citizen of this country. And although it will rail against the promise of President Barack Obama that we are not and never will be at war with Islam, that shift must include the naming of our greatest enemy, political Islam.
The Political Correctness that shelters our enemies is a hindrance that must be expunged from our society if we are to be effective in the preservation of America as a free land. Name the enemy America for until you do you’ll be powerless to wage an effective campaign against it, and we will most assuredly lose the war of a lifetime.
Friday, May 7, 2010
There Are No "Lone-wolf" Terrorists
How many failed attempts will we endure before the inept terrorist get lucky and pull another 9/11 off? And how long before our government officials grow a backbone and find the courage to admit to the truth that we are at war with Islam, the political philosophy, not the religion?
In truth the religion of Islam is of no consequence. It is an intolerant faith that doesn’t even logically fit into the category of a valid religion. It is the political aspect of Islam that threatens the world’s peace.
The much thrown around phrase “lone wolf” is one that turns my stomach, as ignorance usually does when it is so blatantly and proudly exhibited.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, quick to ease the hearts and minds of New Yorkers and Americans everywhere, was confident in his statement that the failed attack was probably from some “homegrown, or maybe a mentally deranged person, or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health-care bill or something.”
Sounds like a backdoor way into laying the groundwork for the “rightwing extremist” theory that is so much more palatable to those in power today than the truth.
So when Faisal Shahzad was arrested on a plane about to leave for Pakistan was it a lucky guess, or did the powers at be already have some indication that it was not an isolated act? They narrowed it down pretty quickly.
Apparently he was on the list of people to keep an eye on but slipped through the cracks. His failed attempt at detonating his SUV full of explosives makes him seem too inept to outsmart the Feds and slip through the cracks. Perhaps they were more inept than he was brilliant and innovative.
Of course, we need to consider the incapability of this administration to call a terrorist a terrorist with the absence of a note from the terrorist saying so, and I suppose many would still find cause to not believe it. Even with Nidal Hasan shouting “Allahu Ackbar” as he shot up Fort Hood the White House was all to quick to dismiss terrorism as a motive at the very beginning of the investigation. Cowardice is unbecoming in a leader, especially of the United States of America.
As long as this administration fails to stand up straight and name our enemy, we will continue to flail around in the dark never understanding why we are not making the strides against Islamic radicalism that must be made.
President Obama has praise the questionable and even contrived “contributions of Islam” to the United States than he has to show any signs of leadership in this war for our survival.
What will tomorrow’s Americans believe about their country if things continue to progress as they are going? If the Islamic written textbooks being used in some of our schools are any indication, our children’s children will herald Muslims for their great achievement in discovering the Americas. Sorry Christopher, but you are becoming a part of America re-written fable-like history as we continue in our quest of appeasement and deferring to Islam. Dhimmitude is alive and well in America.
Is this simply Islamophobia? Does Islamophobia even exist in America today? Certainly it does, but it is not those you might think based on the way the term is flung callously. The fear of Islam has this White House cowering in the corner so afraid to “offend” this “great religion”. That is where the true Islamophobia manifests itself, in those so afraid of offending the offensive that they defer to Islam in all matters pertaining to it. And I guess that bowing in their presence is par for the course as well. And isn’t our president getting so comfortable and good at doing just that?
He is more comfortable at criticizing America for its past than calling the present-day terrorists of Islam what they unmistakably are, terrorist bent on global domination and currently engaged in negating our Constitution and replacing it with Sharia Law.
“Oh, that can’t happen here”, you respond in dismay. Tell that to Afghanistan which is now 97.89% Muslim. And consider these other places where Christianity and other religions were dominate before the creation of intolerant Islam: Algeria, Azerbaijan (part of the former Soviet Union), Bahrain (along the edge of Saudi Arabia), Bangladesh, Brunei, Comoros (an island off the coast of Africa), Egypt, Gaza and the West Bank, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan (of the former Soviet Union), Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan (near China), Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives (islands in the Indian Ocean), Mauritania (West Africa), Morocco, Oman (Near Saudi Arabia), Pakistan, Qatar (Eastern edge of Saudi Arabia), Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union), Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union), United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. They all thought their culture was secure as well.
Conquering of these cultures did not come after powerful sermons preached by Muhammad in his day or by some other Islamic cleric down through history but by jihad of the sword, the pen and by financial jihad.
That goal has many times been boasted of and I for one think they mean what they say. There is however one exception, that being taqiyya, the practice of Muhammad-endorsed sacred deception, characterized by the practice of lying to kafirs (non-Muslims, unbelievers) to advance the cause of Islam. Lying to another Muslim is forbidden while lying to unbelievers is encouraged and applauded today as it has been throughout the centuries.
In the religion and philosophy of Islam that claims to be so tolerant, the very fact of the existence in the Islamic mind of the “kafir” promotes the most basic form of racism. It is an ethnic slur. A kafir can be lied to, can never be a Muslim’s friend, can be deceived, owned as a slave, and even killed. The kafir does not even deserve the title of a real human being. Only Muslims are real human beings. The only value they can be is if they are used to promote Islam and nothing else.
When governments try and deal with Islamic nations without understanding this unalterable truth, they are dealing from a position of not only weakness but also one of ignorance. Concessions and compromises cannot be made with kafirs. Dhimmitude begins in and exists only due to ignorance of which this administration seems ever willing to provide.
So what advantage does labeling an act of terrorist provide? Simply an out for the government so they are not forced into taking a stand against the most formidable enemy this world has ever seen, that of political Islam.
We are in a fight for our existence, our future and our very soul. Sadly, it seems that with America playing the dhimmi it is giving Islam the advantage that it needs to creep across the landscape of this great country destined to one day lay in ruins brought about by covert and even overt operation of Islamic conquest. We are aiding an enemy that wants only our submission, as the name “Islam” unashamedly declares.
There are no “lone-wolf” Islamic terrorists. They are all connected in their ideology and determination to strive for a common goal. Our reluctance to admit that will make us less than effective in our attempt to survive as a nation.
In truth the religion of Islam is of no consequence. It is an intolerant faith that doesn’t even logically fit into the category of a valid religion. It is the political aspect of Islam that threatens the world’s peace.
The much thrown around phrase “lone wolf” is one that turns my stomach, as ignorance usually does when it is so blatantly and proudly exhibited.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, quick to ease the hearts and minds of New Yorkers and Americans everywhere, was confident in his statement that the failed attack was probably from some “homegrown, or maybe a mentally deranged person, or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health-care bill or something.”
Sounds like a backdoor way into laying the groundwork for the “rightwing extremist” theory that is so much more palatable to those in power today than the truth.
So when Faisal Shahzad was arrested on a plane about to leave for Pakistan was it a lucky guess, or did the powers at be already have some indication that it was not an isolated act? They narrowed it down pretty quickly.
Apparently he was on the list of people to keep an eye on but slipped through the cracks. His failed attempt at detonating his SUV full of explosives makes him seem too inept to outsmart the Feds and slip through the cracks. Perhaps they were more inept than he was brilliant and innovative.
Of course, we need to consider the incapability of this administration to call a terrorist a terrorist with the absence of a note from the terrorist saying so, and I suppose many would still find cause to not believe it. Even with Nidal Hasan shouting “Allahu Ackbar” as he shot up Fort Hood the White House was all to quick to dismiss terrorism as a motive at the very beginning of the investigation. Cowardice is unbecoming in a leader, especially of the United States of America.
As long as this administration fails to stand up straight and name our enemy, we will continue to flail around in the dark never understanding why we are not making the strides against Islamic radicalism that must be made.
President Obama has praise the questionable and even contrived “contributions of Islam” to the United States than he has to show any signs of leadership in this war for our survival.
What will tomorrow’s Americans believe about their country if things continue to progress as they are going? If the Islamic written textbooks being used in some of our schools are any indication, our children’s children will herald Muslims for their great achievement in discovering the Americas. Sorry Christopher, but you are becoming a part of America re-written fable-like history as we continue in our quest of appeasement and deferring to Islam. Dhimmitude is alive and well in America.
Is this simply Islamophobia? Does Islamophobia even exist in America today? Certainly it does, but it is not those you might think based on the way the term is flung callously. The fear of Islam has this White House cowering in the corner so afraid to “offend” this “great religion”. That is where the true Islamophobia manifests itself, in those so afraid of offending the offensive that they defer to Islam in all matters pertaining to it. And I guess that bowing in their presence is par for the course as well. And isn’t our president getting so comfortable and good at doing just that?
He is more comfortable at criticizing America for its past than calling the present-day terrorists of Islam what they unmistakably are, terrorist bent on global domination and currently engaged in negating our Constitution and replacing it with Sharia Law.
“Oh, that can’t happen here”, you respond in dismay. Tell that to Afghanistan which is now 97.89% Muslim. And consider these other places where Christianity and other religions were dominate before the creation of intolerant Islam: Algeria, Azerbaijan (part of the former Soviet Union), Bahrain (along the edge of Saudi Arabia), Bangladesh, Brunei, Comoros (an island off the coast of Africa), Egypt, Gaza and the West Bank, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan (of the former Soviet Union), Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan (near China), Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives (islands in the Indian Ocean), Mauritania (West Africa), Morocco, Oman (Near Saudi Arabia), Pakistan, Qatar (Eastern edge of Saudi Arabia), Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union), Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union), United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. They all thought their culture was secure as well.
Conquering of these cultures did not come after powerful sermons preached by Muhammad in his day or by some other Islamic cleric down through history but by jihad of the sword, the pen and by financial jihad.
That goal has many times been boasted of and I for one think they mean what they say. There is however one exception, that being taqiyya, the practice of Muhammad-endorsed sacred deception, characterized by the practice of lying to kafirs (non-Muslims, unbelievers) to advance the cause of Islam. Lying to another Muslim is forbidden while lying to unbelievers is encouraged and applauded today as it has been throughout the centuries.
In the religion and philosophy of Islam that claims to be so tolerant, the very fact of the existence in the Islamic mind of the “kafir” promotes the most basic form of racism. It is an ethnic slur. A kafir can be lied to, can never be a Muslim’s friend, can be deceived, owned as a slave, and even killed. The kafir does not even deserve the title of a real human being. Only Muslims are real human beings. The only value they can be is if they are used to promote Islam and nothing else.
When governments try and deal with Islamic nations without understanding this unalterable truth, they are dealing from a position of not only weakness but also one of ignorance. Concessions and compromises cannot be made with kafirs. Dhimmitude begins in and exists only due to ignorance of which this administration seems ever willing to provide.
So what advantage does labeling an act of terrorist provide? Simply an out for the government so they are not forced into taking a stand against the most formidable enemy this world has ever seen, that of political Islam.
We are in a fight for our existence, our future and our very soul. Sadly, it seems that with America playing the dhimmi it is giving Islam the advantage that it needs to creep across the landscape of this great country destined to one day lay in ruins brought about by covert and even overt operation of Islamic conquest. We are aiding an enemy that wants only our submission, as the name “Islam” unashamedly declares.
There are no “lone-wolf” Islamic terrorists. They are all connected in their ideology and determination to strive for a common goal. Our reluctance to admit that will make us less than effective in our attempt to survive as a nation.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
The Simple Pleasures of Life in Danger
The liberal mindset, in its attempt to regulate every area of our lives, has gone power-hungry, or maybe just plain nuts. Admittedly it was a short trip, but their incisive desire to undermine even the simple pleasures of life is getting too extreme for those who think we should enjoy life. You know, the pursuit of happiness and all that.
Have you ever played kick ball, dodge ball, tag, touch football, musical chairs or ever hung from a Jungle Jim or the monkey bars as a kid? Sure we all did and it was fun. Childhood is supposed to be fun. These and other playful exercises are now considered too dangerous and emotionally crippling for children to bear. And don’t even think about playing tetherball. Why, one could get hit in the face with the ball! With the more active games they might run into each other and get hurt. And more importantly, they might have their personalities warped by being eliminated from the game as in kick ball, dodge ball or musical chairs.
It seems the little pleasures we enjoyed as children may be a thing of the past and not enjoyed by our kids as they are being labeled as too dangerous. Even games having a winner and a loser are frowned upon. Now every child, not matter how badly they play, should get a trophy. There is no need to be the best you can be any longer. Everyone gets a trophy.
The line between winners and losers is getting blurred. What is next, the elimination of the practice of keeping score so no one will look bad for having fewer points at the end of the game? What about eliminating the three-strike rule or the fowl ball so kids can swing until they hit it and get on base? And when you shoot the basketball and miss, you’ll get a do-over until you score. And perhaps at county fairs when they do the cakewalk, everyone could get a cake. That only seems fair, doesn’t it?
Some activist group now is calling for the retirement of Ronald McDonald because he sends the “wrong” message to kids, you know, that hamburgers and chicken nuggets are actually good to eat. It apparently isn’t enough that McDonald’s also serves salads, fruit and their fruit yogurt sprinkled with granola is wonderful and worth more than the dollar they charge for it.
Trans-fats are being banned in some cities and there is talk of banning salt shakers from the tables and even the use of salt in the preparation of the food they serve in restaurants. Are we becoming a society too dumb to make our own decisions as to what we should and should not eat? Isn’t that a part of living in a free society? Choice and being able to make the ones we want is what freedom is all about. Even the right to make the wrong choice is important to the growth and progress of a free society. Piling on more and more restrictions until those choices are eliminated is not.
Added taxes on tanning bed usage, necessary medical devices and possibly even the sodas we drink may cost more to subsidize the government take-over of our lifestyle choices.
It is all too crazy, this victimized world-view the liberal mindset is creating. They see the whole world as full of victims and they don the capes of the protectors of mankind. Must we be protected from ever little thing that could go wrong? Yes, it seems so.
What woman who desires the attention of a particular man, would not cherish the idea that he might be inclined to flirt with her, to see if she likes him, to test the water? How else do people get to know each other except through interaction which may include complimenting each other or even harmless flirting. The rule seems to be that if the woman likes the idea of getting attention from a particular man, it is OK and even desirable. If she is not attracted to him, look out fellow. Maybe we should use lawyers to make preliminary contact for us when we want to meet someone new.
Interaction between human beings is becoming more of a risk with unforeseen consequences. When I was growing up, a guy might be snubbed, embarrassed in front of his buddies or be told to buzz off by an uninterested girl. Today he can have a permanent blotch on his job performance record, lose his job, or be sued for sexual harassment instead simply for trying to meet someone or let them know he is interested. He may be instructed to undergo sensitivity training so as to remove this inclination for such “shameful” behavior. (And so as not to neglect the different world we live in, man on man and woman on woman sexual harassment cases are instigated as well.)
I am not advocating abuse, stalking or such recognized unacceptable behaviors but as civilized people we usually know where the lines are in social interactions and this air of super-sensitivity really doesn’t solve as many problems as it creates.
With all the tiptoeing that must go on now, where has the right to experience the simple pleasures of life gone?
The more the government gets into our daily business, the crazier things become. (And don’t even get me started on Obama’s health care bill!)
Once in America, “a man’s home was his castle”, as the saying goes. I suppose that should apply to a woman also. With ever-increasing demands being made in that area as well, we are losing control of the last little piece of the planet that we once could hold sacred, our homes.
Some communities restrict the number of cars you can have parked in the driveway and if you don’t mow your yard enough to suit them, the city will do it and bill you for the service you did not ask for. In some cases this might seem justified but it still is simply more government intervention into our lives.
It used to not matter what type of light bulb I used in my home or how much wattage it drained from the grid. Now it is a cause for national debate. With the nonsense of global climate initiatives and environmental concerns, the government wants to switch us all to CFL bulbs, which contain mercury thus making them dangerous when broken. They give some people headaches, provide less than suitable light in my opinion, and cost more. Should one break you almost have to call the Haz-Mat team to clean it up properly to rid yourself of the mercury which the EPA classifies as dangerous even in land fills. So why should we want that danger over our heads at home?
Disposing of CFL’s in the regular way we get rid of waste or trash is even unlawful in California, Minnesota, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin adding to the nuisance of using them. Breaking one over a carpeted area will put particles of mercury in the fibers that cannot be removed and will be re-introduced into the atmosphere, the air you breathe, when walked upon.
Hundreds of Chinese workers have been hospitalized due to mercury exposure in plants where CFL bulbs are manufactured and yet our government wants them in our homes. Oh, the joy of government nonsense.
The EPA’s instructions as to what you need to do when breaks in your home is a 16-step procedure which includes removing all humans and pets from the area and opening the windows, even if there is snow on the ground outside for a period of time. Who wants to live with such a dangerous item in the house that could expose them to poison at any time?
Outside of the home, the cars that may be available to us to drive in the future may be very restricted as to body type, power, and fuel usage. We are going to be taxed for choosing to drive to work because the environmental alarmists would much rather you ride a bicycle or jog. If they can make it expensive enough, you’ll change your habits.
Of course, liberal politicians jetting back and forth across the nation doesn’t apply to this logic. And too are gone the glorious days of the muscle cars of the 70’s and to drive one makes you an enemy of the environment, according to liberal theology. (I say “theology” because liberals practice it with the fervency of a religion.)
So will life ever be as simple as having fun as a child or simply being human and enjoying life again? Perhaps not, if the government continues to subscribe to the levying of its ever-expanding list of ridiculous rules upon us. No one is adverse to true progress but somehow the limitation placed upon the simple pleasures of life doesn’t feel like progress to me.
Have you ever played kick ball, dodge ball, tag, touch football, musical chairs or ever hung from a Jungle Jim or the monkey bars as a kid? Sure we all did and it was fun. Childhood is supposed to be fun. These and other playful exercises are now considered too dangerous and emotionally crippling for children to bear. And don’t even think about playing tetherball. Why, one could get hit in the face with the ball! With the more active games they might run into each other and get hurt. And more importantly, they might have their personalities warped by being eliminated from the game as in kick ball, dodge ball or musical chairs.
It seems the little pleasures we enjoyed as children may be a thing of the past and not enjoyed by our kids as they are being labeled as too dangerous. Even games having a winner and a loser are frowned upon. Now every child, not matter how badly they play, should get a trophy. There is no need to be the best you can be any longer. Everyone gets a trophy.
The line between winners and losers is getting blurred. What is next, the elimination of the practice of keeping score so no one will look bad for having fewer points at the end of the game? What about eliminating the three-strike rule or the fowl ball so kids can swing until they hit it and get on base? And when you shoot the basketball and miss, you’ll get a do-over until you score. And perhaps at county fairs when they do the cakewalk, everyone could get a cake. That only seems fair, doesn’t it?
Some activist group now is calling for the retirement of Ronald McDonald because he sends the “wrong” message to kids, you know, that hamburgers and chicken nuggets are actually good to eat. It apparently isn’t enough that McDonald’s also serves salads, fruit and their fruit yogurt sprinkled with granola is wonderful and worth more than the dollar they charge for it.
Trans-fats are being banned in some cities and there is talk of banning salt shakers from the tables and even the use of salt in the preparation of the food they serve in restaurants. Are we becoming a society too dumb to make our own decisions as to what we should and should not eat? Isn’t that a part of living in a free society? Choice and being able to make the ones we want is what freedom is all about. Even the right to make the wrong choice is important to the growth and progress of a free society. Piling on more and more restrictions until those choices are eliminated is not.
Added taxes on tanning bed usage, necessary medical devices and possibly even the sodas we drink may cost more to subsidize the government take-over of our lifestyle choices.
It is all too crazy, this victimized world-view the liberal mindset is creating. They see the whole world as full of victims and they don the capes of the protectors of mankind. Must we be protected from ever little thing that could go wrong? Yes, it seems so.
What woman who desires the attention of a particular man, would not cherish the idea that he might be inclined to flirt with her, to see if she likes him, to test the water? How else do people get to know each other except through interaction which may include complimenting each other or even harmless flirting. The rule seems to be that if the woman likes the idea of getting attention from a particular man, it is OK and even desirable. If she is not attracted to him, look out fellow. Maybe we should use lawyers to make preliminary contact for us when we want to meet someone new.
Interaction between human beings is becoming more of a risk with unforeseen consequences. When I was growing up, a guy might be snubbed, embarrassed in front of his buddies or be told to buzz off by an uninterested girl. Today he can have a permanent blotch on his job performance record, lose his job, or be sued for sexual harassment instead simply for trying to meet someone or let them know he is interested. He may be instructed to undergo sensitivity training so as to remove this inclination for such “shameful” behavior. (And so as not to neglect the different world we live in, man on man and woman on woman sexual harassment cases are instigated as well.)
I am not advocating abuse, stalking or such recognized unacceptable behaviors but as civilized people we usually know where the lines are in social interactions and this air of super-sensitivity really doesn’t solve as many problems as it creates.
With all the tiptoeing that must go on now, where has the right to experience the simple pleasures of life gone?
The more the government gets into our daily business, the crazier things become. (And don’t even get me started on Obama’s health care bill!)
Once in America, “a man’s home was his castle”, as the saying goes. I suppose that should apply to a woman also. With ever-increasing demands being made in that area as well, we are losing control of the last little piece of the planet that we once could hold sacred, our homes.
Some communities restrict the number of cars you can have parked in the driveway and if you don’t mow your yard enough to suit them, the city will do it and bill you for the service you did not ask for. In some cases this might seem justified but it still is simply more government intervention into our lives.
It used to not matter what type of light bulb I used in my home or how much wattage it drained from the grid. Now it is a cause for national debate. With the nonsense of global climate initiatives and environmental concerns, the government wants to switch us all to CFL bulbs, which contain mercury thus making them dangerous when broken. They give some people headaches, provide less than suitable light in my opinion, and cost more. Should one break you almost have to call the Haz-Mat team to clean it up properly to rid yourself of the mercury which the EPA classifies as dangerous even in land fills. So why should we want that danger over our heads at home?
Disposing of CFL’s in the regular way we get rid of waste or trash is even unlawful in California, Minnesota, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin adding to the nuisance of using them. Breaking one over a carpeted area will put particles of mercury in the fibers that cannot be removed and will be re-introduced into the atmosphere, the air you breathe, when walked upon.
Hundreds of Chinese workers have been hospitalized due to mercury exposure in plants where CFL bulbs are manufactured and yet our government wants them in our homes. Oh, the joy of government nonsense.
The EPA’s instructions as to what you need to do when breaks in your home is a 16-step procedure which includes removing all humans and pets from the area and opening the windows, even if there is snow on the ground outside for a period of time. Who wants to live with such a dangerous item in the house that could expose them to poison at any time?
Outside of the home, the cars that may be available to us to drive in the future may be very restricted as to body type, power, and fuel usage. We are going to be taxed for choosing to drive to work because the environmental alarmists would much rather you ride a bicycle or jog. If they can make it expensive enough, you’ll change your habits.
Of course, liberal politicians jetting back and forth across the nation doesn’t apply to this logic. And too are gone the glorious days of the muscle cars of the 70’s and to drive one makes you an enemy of the environment, according to liberal theology. (I say “theology” because liberals practice it with the fervency of a religion.)
So will life ever be as simple as having fun as a child or simply being human and enjoying life again? Perhaps not, if the government continues to subscribe to the levying of its ever-expanding list of ridiculous rules upon us. No one is adverse to true progress but somehow the limitation placed upon the simple pleasures of life doesn’t feel like progress to me.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Gun Control Began As A Racist Initiative
I never thought of gun control being a racist policy but considering the history of gun law reform dating all the way back to post slavery America, it seems that it is. Following the Civil War, twenty-one lashes was prescribed to any Negro who presumed to carry a weapon whether he/she was a slave or a freed slave. I am not trying to be politically incorrect here but am using the term of the day.) Gun ownership by Blacks was certainly frowned upon.
The actual gun act that allowed the Nazis in 1938 to restrict access to firearms for “certain undesirable members of the population”, was obtained by our own law-makers and used as a pattern, sometimes quoting it directly, to draft the 1968 Gun Control Act. Do you understand what that means? It means that the gun control agenda in this country was fashioned after Nazi policy. How can our legislators seek to enforce gun control over the American citizens with a straight face?
Even before 1968, Supreme Court Justice Buford stated in Florida in 1941 that the Act of 1893 was “passed for the purpose of disarming Negro laborers.” He added “the statue was NEVER intended to be applied to the White population”, basically making it a racist law. Read that sentence again. It was NEVER intended to be enforced in the ways it is being enforced today upon the majority of the American populace.
Even today, it is often believed that the issuing of gun carry permits is not completely balanced and leans toward the preference of Whites over Blacks as owners of handguns.
Gun control in this country, so it seems, has always been a means by which to keep a certain portion of the population in line and in the upcoming years it will be also be used in the same manner. This time it will be a tool of the anti-gun Obama Administration to keep EVERY law-abiding citizen in a place where we will be easy targets of gun-toting criminals and their likely victims because the means by which to defend ones self will be taken from us.
Gun-free zones have proven themselves to be breeding grounds for gun-related crimes because the criminals will be the only ones to have guns except for the police and we all know where they are when the crimes go down – no where to be seen. These zones are supposed to make the average citizen safer when in fact it only identifies areas for the criminal where they can find easy targets. This is proved time and time again, but politicians still don't get it.
Study after study has proved that where citizen have the opportunity to be armed, gun-related crimes go down. When citizens do not have the means of this form of self-defense, crime rates go up. These studies, some even by the government agency Center for Disease Control, tell a different story than the anti-gun politicians spout and these studies are ignored completely in favor of blindly heading down the dangerous course of gun bans.
When considering the real facts about gun owners, the bias against gun ownership makes no sense. What is the real agenda behind such a misuse of power? Is government merely continuing to follow the course set by racist in the past to restrict gun ownership only to expand it to include all members of the population? It is worthy of consideration.
The actual gun act that allowed the Nazis in 1938 to restrict access to firearms for “certain undesirable members of the population”, was obtained by our own law-makers and used as a pattern, sometimes quoting it directly, to draft the 1968 Gun Control Act. Do you understand what that means? It means that the gun control agenda in this country was fashioned after Nazi policy. How can our legislators seek to enforce gun control over the American citizens with a straight face?
Even before 1968, Supreme Court Justice Buford stated in Florida in 1941 that the Act of 1893 was “passed for the purpose of disarming Negro laborers.” He added “the statue was NEVER intended to be applied to the White population”, basically making it a racist law. Read that sentence again. It was NEVER intended to be enforced in the ways it is being enforced today upon the majority of the American populace.
Even today, it is often believed that the issuing of gun carry permits is not completely balanced and leans toward the preference of Whites over Blacks as owners of handguns.
Gun control in this country, so it seems, has always been a means by which to keep a certain portion of the population in line and in the upcoming years it will be also be used in the same manner. This time it will be a tool of the anti-gun Obama Administration to keep EVERY law-abiding citizen in a place where we will be easy targets of gun-toting criminals and their likely victims because the means by which to defend ones self will be taken from us.
Gun-free zones have proven themselves to be breeding grounds for gun-related crimes because the criminals will be the only ones to have guns except for the police and we all know where they are when the crimes go down – no where to be seen. These zones are supposed to make the average citizen safer when in fact it only identifies areas for the criminal where they can find easy targets. This is proved time and time again, but politicians still don't get it.
Study after study has proved that where citizen have the opportunity to be armed, gun-related crimes go down. When citizens do not have the means of this form of self-defense, crime rates go up. These studies, some even by the government agency Center for Disease Control, tell a different story than the anti-gun politicians spout and these studies are ignored completely in favor of blindly heading down the dangerous course of gun bans.
When considering the real facts about gun owners, the bias against gun ownership makes no sense. What is the real agenda behind such a misuse of power? Is government merely continuing to follow the course set by racist in the past to restrict gun ownership only to expand it to include all members of the population? It is worthy of consideration.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Attack of Second Amendment Troublesome At Best, Criminal At Worst
Those who seek to take away our Constitutional rights whether it be during a robbery, mugging, car-jacking, home-invasion or any other means, or by taking control of a country, must be preceded by a removal of arms from the populace. It cannot happen any other way. Our Second Amendment right to bear arms keeps that from happening even if we never fire our weapons. Their very presence is a deterrent. Once they are taken, we are helpless victims.
The United Nations has long been a thorn in the side of America and rails consistently against our sovereignty, security, use of energy, position of power and laws which do not reflect the rest of the world’s views or privileges. Based in New York, the United Nations enjoys its prestigious location and takes advantage of the fact. We have nothing in common.
A statue, located outside the UN headquarters reflects their extreme anti-gun stance. It is a work of art depicting a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. Their stand on self-defense is appalling and is reflected in the United Nations Human Rights Council Subcommittee on Human Rights’ declaration that “no human has the right to self-defense”. (That should raise a few eyebrows!) It also states that there is however a “mandatory international human right to extremely restrictive gun control”.
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Second Amendment much to the United Nation’s dismay. I consider the statue of a pistol with the barrel twisted into a knot which stands in front of the UN offensive as it seeks to debase and reject one of the pillars of our Constitution upon which this country was built.
To make matters worse, Obama has appointed Harold Koh legal adviser to the Department of State. A legal adviser should be a strong defender of America rights and liberties and should stand against any foreign interference with those rights. Koh’s purpose as he sees it is exactly the opposing view.
In the climate where so many politicians are seeking out international opinion in establishing legal opinion for us here in America, it is troublesome that a man in his position leans towards the United Nations to determine his conscience.
Koh considers the honoring of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms a stand against a proposed “global ban on illicit transfer of small arms and light weapons”. He stated in a speech published in the “Fordham Law Review” in 2003 that, “If we really do care about human rights, we have to do something about the guns”. He obviously supports a global system of effective controls on small arms, thus allowing the global opinion to set the course for America.
He reinforced this belief when he stated, “too much work left undone. After a few sleepless nights, I wrote myself a list of issues on which I needed to do more in the years ahead. One of those issues was global regulation of small arms”. He apparently isn't content in the regulation of guns here at home but wishes to regulate handguns across the entire globe.
The Second Amendment is under attack as never before by narrow-minded liberals who haven’t a clue as to its importance or necessity. They ignore study after study that reinforces the fact that communities and states with legal carry permits have few gun-related crimes, fewer gun-related suicides and even fewer children harmed in handgun accidents. The facts simply do not bear out their twisted paranoia.
According to the FBI during the first six months of 2008 nationwide violent crime fell 3.5%. In fact, since 1991, the violent crime rate fell more than 40% proving that in spite of alarmists and anti-gun advocates, the rise in gun sales has not increased gun-related or even violent crime over all.
While school shootings and gun-related violence is always a tragedy, it is far from the norm. With over 110 million households being the registered owners of at least one firearm and being law-abiding citizens, the few that use guns violently are by far the minority. In fact, most criminals who use guns in their “trade” are not registered gun owners anyway. New gun restrictions and laws will not affect them in the least but will only impair honest citizens in the exercise of their constitutional right to bear arms.
The number of instances of crimes being stopped and lives saved because a trained person with a legal carry permit was on the scene and acted appropriately is rarely reported by the basically anti-gun press. Of course every misuse of a firearm signals another chance for them to rally around the “Take the guns away” sentiment and those stories are reported over and over.
Even former President Jimmy Carter is getting into the act once again. Unsuccessful in passing his gun control legislation while president, he is pushing for it again. He recently said that anyone who owner a semi-automatic weapon was a “killer in waiting”. He says that the reason people own such weapons is because of their desire to shoot up schools or a workplace or to murder policemen seeing how many bodies we can pile up before ending the spree with our own suicide. His lack of knowledge is astounding, and his accusations insulting.
Speaking of the National Rifle Associations efforts to fight gun control legislation, Carter tried to side step the move to outlaw guns when he said, “The NRA would be justified in its efforts if there was a real threat to our constitutional right to bear arms. But that is not the case”. In all actually, his drive to ban “assault weapons” and the labeling which guns are to be considered such at the whim of politicians, is a real threat.
Although President Obama says he isn’t considering taking our guns, proposed legislation and restrictions by numerous politicians are making it difficult to find certain popular firearms, reloading materials and tools, and ammunition. As ammo becomes much more scarce owing a gun will be of little practical use. After all, what is the value of a handgun for self-defense if it cannot be loaded because bullets cannot be purchased or cost so much that no one can afford to buy them? Such efforts are simply back-door attempts to do what they say they aren’t doing, removing our right to defend ourselves.
Every country that has enacted gun bans against private ownership has experienced sky-rocketing gun-related crimes. And rightly so because the criminals who seek to use their guns illegally don’t register guns and don’t turn them in. Such bans only adversely affect law-abiding citizens who wish to be responsible for the safety of themselves and the ones they love.
The threat is being multiplied with Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court as she has long been anti gun ownership. She believes that the Second Amendment does not entitle states to establish gun laws of their own but should rely upon the federal government to do as it wills on this issue.
I remember reading a Supreme Court decision in a case where the police of a town were being sued because they did not show up fast enough when called to stop a crime in which someone was killed. The Court ruled that we have no constitutional right to expect to be protected by the police department which is basically there to react to the crime and follow-up. Self-defense is actually on us.
The debate on this issue is far from over but every politician should be made aware of our belief that constitutional rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights must be defended vehemently by those who are swore to represent the people of the United States. If they don’t understand that, or refuse to act accordingly, the voting booth is a powerful persuader and we will use it to replace them with someone that understands our determination to have our rights protected by those we put into office.
This issue obviously means little to the elite but to common folks, especially in the South, it is very important. However, anytime a fundamental right such as given to us in the Second Amendment is threatened by misguided and ill-informed politicians, every American should stand up and take notice.
Even if you choose not to keep and bear arms, which is also your right, the liberties you personally hold dear may be next on the “Endangered Rights List”.
The United Nations has long been a thorn in the side of America and rails consistently against our sovereignty, security, use of energy, position of power and laws which do not reflect the rest of the world’s views or privileges. Based in New York, the United Nations enjoys its prestigious location and takes advantage of the fact. We have nothing in common.
A statue, located outside the UN headquarters reflects their extreme anti-gun stance. It is a work of art depicting a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. Their stand on self-defense is appalling and is reflected in the United Nations Human Rights Council Subcommittee on Human Rights’ declaration that “no human has the right to self-defense”. (That should raise a few eyebrows!) It also states that there is however a “mandatory international human right to extremely restrictive gun control”.
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Second Amendment much to the United Nation’s dismay. I consider the statue of a pistol with the barrel twisted into a knot which stands in front of the UN offensive as it seeks to debase and reject one of the pillars of our Constitution upon which this country was built.
To make matters worse, Obama has appointed Harold Koh legal adviser to the Department of State. A legal adviser should be a strong defender of America rights and liberties and should stand against any foreign interference with those rights. Koh’s purpose as he sees it is exactly the opposing view.
In the climate where so many politicians are seeking out international opinion in establishing legal opinion for us here in America, it is troublesome that a man in his position leans towards the United Nations to determine his conscience.
Koh considers the honoring of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms a stand against a proposed “global ban on illicit transfer of small arms and light weapons”. He stated in a speech published in the “Fordham Law Review” in 2003 that, “If we really do care about human rights, we have to do something about the guns”. He obviously supports a global system of effective controls on small arms, thus allowing the global opinion to set the course for America.
He reinforced this belief when he stated, “too much work left undone. After a few sleepless nights, I wrote myself a list of issues on which I needed to do more in the years ahead. One of those issues was global regulation of small arms”. He apparently isn't content in the regulation of guns here at home but wishes to regulate handguns across the entire globe.
The Second Amendment is under attack as never before by narrow-minded liberals who haven’t a clue as to its importance or necessity. They ignore study after study that reinforces the fact that communities and states with legal carry permits have few gun-related crimes, fewer gun-related suicides and even fewer children harmed in handgun accidents. The facts simply do not bear out their twisted paranoia.
According to the FBI during the first six months of 2008 nationwide violent crime fell 3.5%. In fact, since 1991, the violent crime rate fell more than 40% proving that in spite of alarmists and anti-gun advocates, the rise in gun sales has not increased gun-related or even violent crime over all.
While school shootings and gun-related violence is always a tragedy, it is far from the norm. With over 110 million households being the registered owners of at least one firearm and being law-abiding citizens, the few that use guns violently are by far the minority. In fact, most criminals who use guns in their “trade” are not registered gun owners anyway. New gun restrictions and laws will not affect them in the least but will only impair honest citizens in the exercise of their constitutional right to bear arms.
The number of instances of crimes being stopped and lives saved because a trained person with a legal carry permit was on the scene and acted appropriately is rarely reported by the basically anti-gun press. Of course every misuse of a firearm signals another chance for them to rally around the “Take the guns away” sentiment and those stories are reported over and over.
Even former President Jimmy Carter is getting into the act once again. Unsuccessful in passing his gun control legislation while president, he is pushing for it again. He recently said that anyone who owner a semi-automatic weapon was a “killer in waiting”. He says that the reason people own such weapons is because of their desire to shoot up schools or a workplace or to murder policemen seeing how many bodies we can pile up before ending the spree with our own suicide. His lack of knowledge is astounding, and his accusations insulting.
Speaking of the National Rifle Associations efforts to fight gun control legislation, Carter tried to side step the move to outlaw guns when he said, “The NRA would be justified in its efforts if there was a real threat to our constitutional right to bear arms. But that is not the case”. In all actually, his drive to ban “assault weapons” and the labeling which guns are to be considered such at the whim of politicians, is a real threat.
Although President Obama says he isn’t considering taking our guns, proposed legislation and restrictions by numerous politicians are making it difficult to find certain popular firearms, reloading materials and tools, and ammunition. As ammo becomes much more scarce owing a gun will be of little practical use. After all, what is the value of a handgun for self-defense if it cannot be loaded because bullets cannot be purchased or cost so much that no one can afford to buy them? Such efforts are simply back-door attempts to do what they say they aren’t doing, removing our right to defend ourselves.
Every country that has enacted gun bans against private ownership has experienced sky-rocketing gun-related crimes. And rightly so because the criminals who seek to use their guns illegally don’t register guns and don’t turn them in. Such bans only adversely affect law-abiding citizens who wish to be responsible for the safety of themselves and the ones they love.
The threat is being multiplied with Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court as she has long been anti gun ownership. She believes that the Second Amendment does not entitle states to establish gun laws of their own but should rely upon the federal government to do as it wills on this issue.
I remember reading a Supreme Court decision in a case where the police of a town were being sued because they did not show up fast enough when called to stop a crime in which someone was killed. The Court ruled that we have no constitutional right to expect to be protected by the police department which is basically there to react to the crime and follow-up. Self-defense is actually on us.
The debate on this issue is far from over but every politician should be made aware of our belief that constitutional rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights must be defended vehemently by those who are swore to represent the people of the United States. If they don’t understand that, or refuse to act accordingly, the voting booth is a powerful persuader and we will use it to replace them with someone that understands our determination to have our rights protected by those we put into office.
This issue obviously means little to the elite but to common folks, especially in the South, it is very important. However, anytime a fundamental right such as given to us in the Second Amendment is threatened by misguided and ill-informed politicians, every American should stand up and take notice.
Even if you choose not to keep and bear arms, which is also your right, the liberties you personally hold dear may be next on the “Endangered Rights List”.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Inconvenient Gun Facts
The United Nations has long been a thorn in the side of America and rails consistently against our sovereignty, security, use of energy, position of power and laws which do not reflect the rest of the world’s views or privileges. Based in New York, the United Nations enjoys its prestigious location and takes advantage of the fact. We have nothing in common.
A statue, located outside the UN headquarters reflects their extreme anti-gun stance. It is a work of art depicting a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. Their stand on self-defense is appalling and is reflected in the United Nations Human Rights Council Subcommittee on Human Rights’ declaration that “no human has the right to self-defense”. (That should raise a few eyebrows!) It also states that there is however a “mandatory international human right to extremely restrictive gun control”.
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Second Amendment much to the United Nation’s dismay. I consider the statue of a pistol with the barrel twisted into a knot which stands in front of the UN offensive as it seeks to debase and reject one of the pillars of our Constitution upon which this country was built.
To make matters worse, Obama has appointed Harold Koh legal adviser to the Department of State. A legal adviser should be a strong defender of America rights and liberties and should stand against any foreign interference with those rights. Koh’s purpose as he sees it is exactly the opposing view.
In the climate where so many politicians are seeking to seek out international opinion in establishing legal opinion for us here in America, it is troublesome that a man in his position leans towards the United Nations to determine his conscience.
Koh considers the honoring of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms a stand against a proposed “global ban on illicit transfer of small arms and light weapons”. He stated in a speech published in the “Fordham Law Review” in 2003 that, “If we really do care about human rights, we have to do something about the guns”. He obviously supports a global system of effective controls on small arms, thus allowing the global opinion to set the course for America.
He reinforced this belief when he stated, “too much work left undone. After a few sleepless nights, I wrote myself a list of issues on which I needed to do more in the years ahead. One of those issues was global regulation of small arms”. He apparently isn’t content in the regulation of guns here at home but wishes to regulate handguns across the entire globe.
The Second Amendment is under attack as never before by narrow-minded liberals who haven’t a clue as to its importance or necessity. They ignore study after study that reinforces the fact that communities and states with legal carry permits have few gun-related crimes, fewer gun-related suicides and even fewer children harmed in handgun accidents. The facts simply do not bear out their twisted paranoia.
According to the FBI during the first six months of 2008 nationwide violent crime fell 3.5%. In fact, since 1991, the violent crime rate fell more than 40% proving that in spite of alarmists and anti-gun advocates, the rise in gun sales has not increased gun-related or even violent crime over all.
While school shootings and gun-related violence is always a tragedy, it is far from the norm. With over 110 million households being the registered owners of at least one firearm and being law-abiding citizens, the few that use guns violently are by far the minority. In fact, most criminals who use guns in their “trade” are not registered gun owners anyway. New gun restrictions and laws will not affect them in the least but will only impair honest citizens in the exercise of their constitutional right to bear arms.
The number of instances of crimes being stopped and lives saved because a trained person with a legal carry permit was on the scene and acted appropriately is rarely reported by the basically anti-gun press. Of course every misuse of a firearm signals another chance for them to rally around the “Take the guns away” sentiment and those stories are reported over and over.
Even former President Jimmy Carter is getting into the act once again. Unsuccessful in passing his gun control legislation while president, he is pushing for it again. He recently said that anyone who owner a semi-automatic weapon was a “killer in waiting”. He says that the reason people own such weapons is because of their desire to shoot up schools or a workplace or to murder policemen seeing how many bodies we can pile up before ending the spree with our own suicide. His lack of knowledge is astounding, and his accusations insulting.
Speaking of the National Rifle Associations efforts to fight gun control legislation, Carter tried to side step the move to outlaw guns when he said, “The NRA would be justified in its efforts if there was a real threat to our constitutional right to bear arms. But that is not the case”. In all actually, his drive to ban “assault weapons” and the labeling which guns are to be considered such at the whim of politicians, is a real threat.
Although President Obama says he isn’t considering taking our guns, proposed legislation and restrictions by numerous politicians are making it difficult to find certain popular firearms, reloading materials and tools, and ammunition. As ammo becomes much more scarce, owing a gun will be of little practical use. After all, what is the value of a handgun for self-defense if it cannot be loaded because bullets cannot be purchased or cost so much that no one can afford to buy them? Such efforts are simply backdoor attempts to do what they say they aren’t doing, removing our right to defend ourselves.
Every country that has enacted gun bans against private ownership has experienced sky-rocketing gun-related crimes. And rightly so because the criminals who seek to use their guns illegally don’t register guns and don’t turn them in. Such bans only adversely affect law-abiding citizens who wish to be responsible for the safety of themselves and the ones they love.
The threat is being multiplied with Obama’s nomination and later confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court as she has long been anti gun ownership. She believes that the Second Amendment does not entitle states to establish gun laws of their own but should rely upon the federal government to do as it wills on this issue. This shows a severe lack of understanding of the Constitution or an outright desire to disregard it.
I recall reading of a Supreme Court decision in a case where the police of a town were being sued because they did not show up fast enough when called to stop a crime and as a result someone was killed. The Court ruled that we in the United States have no constitutional right to expect to be protected by the police who are basically there to react to the crime and follow-up with an investigation. Self-defense is actually on us.
The debate on this issue is far from over but every politician should be made aware of our belief that constitutional rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights must be defended vehemently by those who are swore to represent the people of the United States. If they don’t under that, or refuse to act accordingly, the voting booth is a powerful persuader and we will use it to replace them with someone that understands our determination to have our rights protected by those we put into office.
This issue obviously means little to the elite but to common folks, especially in the South, it is very important. However, anytime a fundamental right such as given to us in the Second Amendment is threatened by misguided and ill-informed politicians, every American should stand up and take notice.
Even if you choose not to keep and bear arms, which is also your right, the liberties you personally hold dear may be next on the “Endangered Rights List”.
A statue, located outside the UN headquarters reflects their extreme anti-gun stance. It is a work of art depicting a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. Their stand on self-defense is appalling and is reflected in the United Nations Human Rights Council Subcommittee on Human Rights’ declaration that “no human has the right to self-defense”. (That should raise a few eyebrows!) It also states that there is however a “mandatory international human right to extremely restrictive gun control”.
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Second Amendment much to the United Nation’s dismay. I consider the statue of a pistol with the barrel twisted into a knot which stands in front of the UN offensive as it seeks to debase and reject one of the pillars of our Constitution upon which this country was built.
To make matters worse, Obama has appointed Harold Koh legal adviser to the Department of State. A legal adviser should be a strong defender of America rights and liberties and should stand against any foreign interference with those rights. Koh’s purpose as he sees it is exactly the opposing view.
In the climate where so many politicians are seeking to seek out international opinion in establishing legal opinion for us here in America, it is troublesome that a man in his position leans towards the United Nations to determine his conscience.
Koh considers the honoring of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms a stand against a proposed “global ban on illicit transfer of small arms and light weapons”. He stated in a speech published in the “Fordham Law Review” in 2003 that, “If we really do care about human rights, we have to do something about the guns”. He obviously supports a global system of effective controls on small arms, thus allowing the global opinion to set the course for America.
He reinforced this belief when he stated, “too much work left undone. After a few sleepless nights, I wrote myself a list of issues on which I needed to do more in the years ahead. One of those issues was global regulation of small arms”. He apparently isn’t content in the regulation of guns here at home but wishes to regulate handguns across the entire globe.
The Second Amendment is under attack as never before by narrow-minded liberals who haven’t a clue as to its importance or necessity. They ignore study after study that reinforces the fact that communities and states with legal carry permits have few gun-related crimes, fewer gun-related suicides and even fewer children harmed in handgun accidents. The facts simply do not bear out their twisted paranoia.
According to the FBI during the first six months of 2008 nationwide violent crime fell 3.5%. In fact, since 1991, the violent crime rate fell more than 40% proving that in spite of alarmists and anti-gun advocates, the rise in gun sales has not increased gun-related or even violent crime over all.
While school shootings and gun-related violence is always a tragedy, it is far from the norm. With over 110 million households being the registered owners of at least one firearm and being law-abiding citizens, the few that use guns violently are by far the minority. In fact, most criminals who use guns in their “trade” are not registered gun owners anyway. New gun restrictions and laws will not affect them in the least but will only impair honest citizens in the exercise of their constitutional right to bear arms.
The number of instances of crimes being stopped and lives saved because a trained person with a legal carry permit was on the scene and acted appropriately is rarely reported by the basically anti-gun press. Of course every misuse of a firearm signals another chance for them to rally around the “Take the guns away” sentiment and those stories are reported over and over.
Even former President Jimmy Carter is getting into the act once again. Unsuccessful in passing his gun control legislation while president, he is pushing for it again. He recently said that anyone who owner a semi-automatic weapon was a “killer in waiting”. He says that the reason people own such weapons is because of their desire to shoot up schools or a workplace or to murder policemen seeing how many bodies we can pile up before ending the spree with our own suicide. His lack of knowledge is astounding, and his accusations insulting.
Speaking of the National Rifle Associations efforts to fight gun control legislation, Carter tried to side step the move to outlaw guns when he said, “The NRA would be justified in its efforts if there was a real threat to our constitutional right to bear arms. But that is not the case”. In all actually, his drive to ban “assault weapons” and the labeling which guns are to be considered such at the whim of politicians, is a real threat.
Although President Obama says he isn’t considering taking our guns, proposed legislation and restrictions by numerous politicians are making it difficult to find certain popular firearms, reloading materials and tools, and ammunition. As ammo becomes much more scarce, owing a gun will be of little practical use. After all, what is the value of a handgun for self-defense if it cannot be loaded because bullets cannot be purchased or cost so much that no one can afford to buy them? Such efforts are simply backdoor attempts to do what they say they aren’t doing, removing our right to defend ourselves.
Every country that has enacted gun bans against private ownership has experienced sky-rocketing gun-related crimes. And rightly so because the criminals who seek to use their guns illegally don’t register guns and don’t turn them in. Such bans only adversely affect law-abiding citizens who wish to be responsible for the safety of themselves and the ones they love.
The threat is being multiplied with Obama’s nomination and later confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court as she has long been anti gun ownership. She believes that the Second Amendment does not entitle states to establish gun laws of their own but should rely upon the federal government to do as it wills on this issue. This shows a severe lack of understanding of the Constitution or an outright desire to disregard it.
I recall reading of a Supreme Court decision in a case where the police of a town were being sued because they did not show up fast enough when called to stop a crime and as a result someone was killed. The Court ruled that we in the United States have no constitutional right to expect to be protected by the police who are basically there to react to the crime and follow-up with an investigation. Self-defense is actually on us.
The debate on this issue is far from over but every politician should be made aware of our belief that constitutional rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights must be defended vehemently by those who are swore to represent the people of the United States. If they don’t under that, or refuse to act accordingly, the voting booth is a powerful persuader and we will use it to replace them with someone that understands our determination to have our rights protected by those we put into office.
This issue obviously means little to the elite but to common folks, especially in the South, it is very important. However, anytime a fundamental right such as given to us in the Second Amendment is threatened by misguided and ill-informed politicians, every American should stand up and take notice.
Even if you choose not to keep and bear arms, which is also your right, the liberties you personally hold dear may be next on the “Endangered Rights List”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)