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.

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!

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.

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.

Transgenderism is Likely a Mental Disorder

It is difficult to fathom why our President is expending so much political will in trying to mainstream cross dressers. The fact remain that not only is transgenderism deviant behavior it is believed to be closely related another dysphoric condition called 'body integrity identity disorder' where an otherwise healthy person one or more limbs of one's body do not belong to them or a person suffering anorexia that has a much distorted view of their own body. Dr Paul McHugh who holds the position of Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry for John Hopkins University identifies transgenderism as mental disorder,“’sex change’ is biologically impossible,” said (Dr Paul) McHugh. “People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women..for those who had sexual reassignment surgery, most said they were “satisfied” with the operation “but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery.”  Transgenderism is a Mental Disorder A 2003 Study from Sweden "...suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism. In other words, even when transsexual sexual reassignment surgery, the dysmorphic feeling that they were born the wrong gender had little affect on their general well being, still pathological preoccupied with their gender.

 Dr McHugh has good reason for his beliefs, the truth is there should be no argument that transsexualism is a mental disorder as it is defined as such in the Psychiatric DSM-IV ( Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition: DSM-5). 302.85 Gender Identity Disorder in Adolescents or Adults

Gender Incongruence (in Adolescents or Adults) [1] A marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, of at least 6 months duration, as manifested by 2 or more of the following indicators: [2, 3, 4]

1. a marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and primary and/or secondary sex characteristics (or, in young adolescents, the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [13, 16]

2. a strong desire to be rid of one’s primary and/or secondary sex characteristics because of a marked incongruence with one’s experienced/expressed gender (or, in young adolescents, a desire to prevent the development of the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [17]

3. a strong desire for the primary and/or secondary sex characteristics of the other gender

4. a strong desire to be of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

5. a strong desire to be treated as the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

6. a strong conviction that one has the typical feelings and reactions of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)

http://www.ifge.org/302.85_Gender_Identity_Disorder_in_Adolescents_or_Adults

The sad part of this is the real victims of this push to make transgenderism main stream are the young boys who's parents are pushing them into pushing transgenderism. It is well known that children tend to be gender neutral, ie boys dressing up like mom. However they normally out grow this stage spontaneously if left alone, and it is child abuse to promote anything otherwise. What is also just under the surface is how patriarchal transgenderism is. The primary victims are women and young girls. These is the gender that is being put upon, forcing them to endure sharing a locker room and showering with men with men genitalia; something that is not only unwelcome but can be dangerous if these man are predators. 

Let is also be known that there is no country that allows such things. Yes, there are unisex bathrooms but they are not the norm and have a warning displayed. Further the transsexual's have also stated they do not want separate bathrooms, they want to use what ever gender bathroom they identify with; they do not want accommodation they want full acceptance. It should also be noted that this has nothing in common with homosexuality, where gays and lesbians have no desire to share bathroom and locker rooms with the opposite sex;  as Dr McHgh said "Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder."

So why is the left and President Obama so intent on pushing this. The answer is simple, the collectivist must be able to change and define social norms and values at will. 

This is allowed when we let progressives set the standard for right and wrong and allow for such social engineering, for fear of being called a racist or phobic. In reality the left created these values, when they created political correctness, and then they use political correctness to justify these perverted standards; standards that run counter to the legitimate values that define a cultural. The end result is the governments legitimizing deviant and criminal behavior under a false banner of individual rights. 

 Once this is done, the powers that be can route out all differential cultures and values to create the world governance being pushed so hard by President Obama. Hopefully President Obama has finally over reached,  so there finally be cultural and values push back rather blind acceptance and obedience to the social engineering of the left; and the action taken will portend our future for decades to come.

Historically Fascism was Derived from the Left and Socialism

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Totalitarianism, all fall under the heading of collectivism; big government viewing the citizenry as a single entity and providing for the collective with what the Intelligentsia decides their common wants and needs without any consideration for the individual, and whereby taking care of the collective by controlling everything in their lives. This is opposed to a government of the people, by the people and for the people; remembering by definition the protection of individual rights is a protection from government. The concept of fascism was developed by Benito Mussolini, considered by historians as being one of the most influential socialists of the 20th Century. Fascism was designed to address what he saw as the weaknesses in socialism, and that when the socialists nationalize businesses, the socialists in charge actually know very little about running them. So fascism is the government pairing with business, kept in government control by overseers and strict regulations, to maintain the production rates prior to government nationalization. Further like socialism, there is no one kind of fascism, it is a robust system as was seen in it's various in Spain under Franco, Italy and Germany; one thing they all share is the abolition of Democracy. The point being that the left champions collectivism, which is based on the belief that individual rights need to be done away with in the name of saving and preserving the collective; that the government needs to control the citizenry for their own good..

The US Constitution and the Bill of Rights were designed to mitigate collectivism by protecting individual rights, but even our founding fathers recognized, that no matter what restrictions are put on government, it was doubtful their new country would last more than 200 years as the progression of government tyranny is just to difficult to to withstand.

Islam; the truth is inescapable

Recently ISIS released a video, which contained the quote,  "Every Muslim who is well aware of the history of Islam, knows that the holy war against infidels is an integral part of Islam, and those who read history would know." Regardless of the source, this truth is still inescapable.

Islam is a very compartmentalized religion. The vast majority of Muslims, like most people in the world simply want to live a peaceful life and raise a family; this being accomplished through the five Pillars of Islam. Another part is Islam comes with it's own criminal justice system that is pretty much inconsistent with any sovereign country not ruled by Sharia law (the vast majority of Muslims support Sharia law over other criminal justice systems regardless of the country where they live). Then there is the jihadist; the holy warriors that police the world for those that defame the Prophet Mohamed and/or Allah and promote the forced spread of radical Islam. "If the person who defames him (the Prophet Mohamed) is a non-Muslim living under a treaty with the Muslim state, then this is a violation of the treaty and he must be executed." While the peaceful Muslim does not necessarily condone the jihadist (some 25% when polled actually do) most are of the belief, that while they disagree with the violence of radical jihadists, one should not criticize their religion in front of unbelievers (and make no mistake, radical jihadism has always been a recognized part of Islam). I also find it remarkable if not naive when the left asked what the West has done/ is doing to anger, when the answer is the very existence of the West and it's promotion Democracy, individual rights, liberty and a liberal education; all of which are viewed as a direct assault against Islam.