Sunday, June 26, 2016
Christians are Just as Violent and God Awful as Muslims; No they are not
It is amazing the depths the left will go trying to legitimize their flawed world view; in this case it is the demonization of Christianity, it is classic Saul Alinky: never argue the liberal world view on it's merits, rather demonize your opponents to try and silence them.
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Hitler was a murderous, narcissistic psychopath that talked of his Christianity in a primarily Christian Germany, until he was elected Chancellor, and then immediately renounced Christianity. In it's place he created a new religion based on the worship of him and the state, the left says the horrors of WWII is somehow the result of his Christianity. Do you know that Hitler put thousands of priests and pastors in the Dachau concentration camp?
"Hitler wanted not only to conquer all of Europe, but Hitler also wanted to create a new religion and to replace Jesus Christ as a person to be worshipped. Hitler expected his followers to worship the Nazi ideology. Since Catholic priests and Christian pastors were often influential leaders in their community, they were sought out by the Nazis very early. Thousands of Catholic priests and Christian pastors were forced into concentration camps. A special barracks was set up at Dachau, the camp near Munich, Germany, for clergymen. A few survived; some were executed, but most were allowed to die slowly of starvation or disease.http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/NonJewishVictims.html"
As far as the KKK, in the post Civil War America, over 95% of the citizenry was christian; from the North anti-slavery citizens to the south pro-slavery/ Jim Crow citizens, even most the newly freed previous slaves were converted to Christianity. The KKK was originally created by Southern Democrats to terrorize blacks, not becasue they were Christians, but becasue the Southern Democrats were racists.
Labels:
Christian faith,
Hitler,
Jim Crow,
KKK,
Southern Democrats
Sunday, June 19, 2016
Weaons Bans? Do the Math
There are those that really believe that a ban on the future sales of
semi-auto mag fed rifles. would suddenly cause Islamic terrorist to
stop their killing, or at least mitigate their killing, but they can't
explain how that would work. First SAMFR account for less deaths than
any other weapon, so even if all these SAMFR suddenly disappeared from
the US, it would have practically no affect on gun crimes. However, that
is not the plan, as the ban would only affect future sales, leaving 3-4
million of these rifles available. It is simply a war on reality that
such a ban would save any lives for a very long time to come; if ever;
and this not just my opinion, it is an opinion that is universally
accepted by anyone the can look at these issues objectively, Following
this ban there are usually laws that would require those with SAMFR to
register them, but since the sole purpose of this registration is for
later confiscation, the compliance level where it has been tried is less
than 5%. My question is simple, I ask anyone that is for a banning
SAMFR, to explain how it would stop any criminal from acquiring one. And
it is not so simple as a ban would limit the number of SAMFR available
to criminals and terrorist. In the US there has been 14 deadly Islamic
terrorists attacks, some of which didn't even involve a SAMFR, however
even if one assumes that that each attack SAMFRs, that would mean that
over 6 years, 28 assault rifles used. Even if one accepts that the
number of Islamic terrorists attacks will will increase to double the
current rate, a ban would need to stop 10 SAMFR @ year (or 100 over the
next 10 years) out of the 3-4 million available, to fall into criminal
Islamic Terrorists hands; that doesn't include the estimated 1000's of
SAMFRs (specifically Russian AK-47's since Obama's ban) smuggled into
the US. We also know that with relatively free/open borders, if
Americans want something and are willing to pay the price, someone will
make them available (look at alcohol use during the Prohibition, and the
failure of stopping illegal drug use).
Gerry Grimes stated; "Now, would banning them stop all future mass murders — absolutely not. Would it significantly reduce their death/injury toll — absolutely". However the poster doesn't explain how this "absolutely" would happen. To even mitigate the killings done by Islamic terrorists, would necessitate, 10 of the remaining millions SAMFRs left in circulation from falling into the wrong hands; it's ludicrous. Since Islamic terrorists and mass killers usually have very well planned attacks, the fact they may have to spend a little more time finding the right weapon, will certainly not mitigate the lethalology. Once it becomes obvious that ban on future sales accomplished nothing, the next push will be to confiscate SAMFRs, as it is the only reason the government would wants to register these rifles in the first place) rifles still in civilian hands (which also explains the historic near zero compliance), However, regardless of the oppressive nature of anti-gun zealots, it is pretty much accepted that any gun confiscated program would cause such civil unrest, that the deaths resulting from Islamic terrorism in the US, would be dwarfed by a factor of a 1000 or 10,000, making the saving of lives by banning SAMFRs, a moot point.
We know now that US intelligence had identified the last two Islamic terrorist attacks, but due to political correctness, they ignored them, instead their pushing for gun bans that have no past record of of working. It's almost like the Administration is simply waiting for these Islamic terrorist attacks, so they can use them for fodder to ban guns, As Maureen Dowd would say, Sick Sick Sick!
Gerry Grimes stated; "Now, would banning them stop all future mass murders — absolutely not. Would it significantly reduce their death/injury toll — absolutely". However the poster doesn't explain how this "absolutely" would happen. To even mitigate the killings done by Islamic terrorists, would necessitate, 10 of the remaining millions SAMFRs left in circulation from falling into the wrong hands; it's ludicrous. Since Islamic terrorists and mass killers usually have very well planned attacks, the fact they may have to spend a little more time finding the right weapon, will certainly not mitigate the lethalology. Once it becomes obvious that ban on future sales accomplished nothing, the next push will be to confiscate SAMFRs, as it is the only reason the government would wants to register these rifles in the first place) rifles still in civilian hands (which also explains the historic near zero compliance), However, regardless of the oppressive nature of anti-gun zealots, it is pretty much accepted that any gun confiscated program would cause such civil unrest, that the deaths resulting from Islamic terrorism in the US, would be dwarfed by a factor of a 1000 or 10,000, making the saving of lives by banning SAMFRs, a moot point.
We know now that US intelligence had identified the last two Islamic terrorist attacks, but due to political correctness, they ignored them, instead their pushing for gun bans that have no past record of of working. It's almost like the Administration is simply waiting for these Islamic terrorist attacks, so they can use them for fodder to ban guns, As Maureen Dowd would say, Sick Sick Sick!
Saturday, June 18, 2016
When the People Ignore the Law
A ban on the future sale of Semi-Automatic Mag Fed Rifles (SAMFR),
would have no affect on public safety; even if it actually stopped the
citizenry from accruing these rifles, and a terrorist was locked into
using only a SAMFR, there would still be 3-4 million SAMFR available to
buy, beg, borrow or steal. Further thousands of these rifles are bought
by law enforcement every year, and as we have seen in Salinas, stealing
weapons from the police continues to be a big problem; and of course the
elephant in the room is the 2nd Amendment. If we want to stop the
violence we need to concentrate on the criminals and terrorists, not
guns. As mention France has strict assault rifle possession bands, but
that didn't stop the massacres on French soil. The Administration needs
to get serious about protecting the us from Islamic Terrorism. Instead
DHS has orders not to concentrate on Muslims and a prohibition of
investigating mosques, unless a member ask them to. The result is the
the US did a good job of identifying suspected terrorist, but were
stopped from maintaining their investigation becasue of political
correctness.
But there is a larger issue; and that is current owners of SAMFR and magazines that carry more than 10 rounds have simply decided not to comply with these anti-gun laws. Connecticut instituted mandatory registration for SAMFR, compliance was less than 5% and it was also discovered law enforcement officers were the main culprit. Los Angeles and Colorado instituted a law that forbid hi-capacity magazine ownership, compliance in Colorado was less than 5 % and in Los Angeles it was 0%. In a Democracy, the vast majority of the people need to voluntarily comply with the laws (punishment is only meant for the less 1% that are sociopaths). If not, a large section of the population will ignore the law, the result of which is devastating to a representative government.
So what are we fighting for? Let our country's investigative agencies do their job! Don't tie their hands with rules of engagement based on political correctness! The anti-gun zealots tell us he have a gun violence epidemic, when gun violence has been on a decline since the 1970 (50%). The fact that SAMFR continue to be the least used firearm in criminal activity should be a clue that those calling for their ban are not doing so to increase public safety.
But there is a larger issue; and that is current owners of SAMFR and magazines that carry more than 10 rounds have simply decided not to comply with these anti-gun laws. Connecticut instituted mandatory registration for SAMFR, compliance was less than 5% and it was also discovered law enforcement officers were the main culprit. Los Angeles and Colorado instituted a law that forbid hi-capacity magazine ownership, compliance in Colorado was less than 5 % and in Los Angeles it was 0%. In a Democracy, the vast majority of the people need to voluntarily comply with the laws (punishment is only meant for the less 1% that are sociopaths). If not, a large section of the population will ignore the law, the result of which is devastating to a representative government.
So what are we fighting for? Let our country's investigative agencies do their job! Don't tie their hands with rules of engagement based on political correctness! The anti-gun zealots tell us he have a gun violence epidemic, when gun violence has been on a decline since the 1970 (50%). The fact that SAMFR continue to be the least used firearm in criminal activity should be a clue that those calling for their ban are not doing so to increase public safety.
Friday, June 10, 2016
Trump and the Post Alinksy Era
The fact is both Democrats and Washington Republicans don't have a
clue why Trump keeps picking up voters (a new poll now shows 37% of
voting Latinos plan to vote for Trump). The reality is, if you don't
view Trump through a politically correct prism, he is more comical than
anything else; it has been rightly said that political correctness
has eliminated humor. The left has been pushing this self censoring BS. For
40 years, since the left embraced the Saul Alinsky, the left no
longer treats conservatives as the party with a different world view,
instead the evil, xenophobic, racists, bullies, liars (etc). "RULE 12:
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off
the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after
people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This
is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and
ridicule works.") And never admit that you opponent has any positive
traits, “Can you imagine in the arena of conflict charging that
so-and-so is a racist bastard and then diluting the impact of the attack
with qualifying remarks such as “He is a good churchgoing man, generous
to charity, and a good husband”? This becomes political idiocy".
But the narrative has gotten too long in the tooth, and is now simply ignored by a majority of Americans (the left apparently forgot about RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.). Further the end result has been a government that ignores controls placed on government by the US Constitution, individual rights and wants of the electorate; all in the name as the need of the greater good; a euphemism for the oppression of collectivism. Further the main stream media pretty much ignores the torrent of lies that have come from both Obama and Hillary Clinton all the while demonizing Donald Trump. What you see is a very angry electorate that rabidly distrust politicians and the main stream media. The result is the more criticisms and personal attacks Trump gets, the more voters he garners. The end result is the left is at wits end becasue they have no plan "B", as all they have is lies ("Never admit to a lie or to having been wrong about something"), demonization and personal attacks, but we are now entering a post Alinsky era where the people have stopped listening to politicians and the media (in other words the people are no longer letting the left define their reality), and are looking for a candidate that has a worldview more sligned with their own, based on American exceptionalism and love of country.
But the narrative has gotten too long in the tooth, and is now simply ignored by a majority of Americans (the left apparently forgot about RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.). Further the end result has been a government that ignores controls placed on government by the US Constitution, individual rights and wants of the electorate; all in the name as the need of the greater good; a euphemism for the oppression of collectivism. Further the main stream media pretty much ignores the torrent of lies that have come from both Obama and Hillary Clinton all the while demonizing Donald Trump. What you see is a very angry electorate that rabidly distrust politicians and the main stream media. The result is the more criticisms and personal attacks Trump gets, the more voters he garners. The end result is the left is at wits end becasue they have no plan "B", as all they have is lies ("Never admit to a lie or to having been wrong about something"), demonization and personal attacks, but we are now entering a post Alinsky era where the people have stopped listening to politicians and the media (in other words the people are no longer letting the left define their reality), and are looking for a candidate that has a worldview more sligned with their own, based on American exceptionalism and love of country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)