In late breaking news, Frazier Glenn Miller (aka Glenn Cross) , who failed to properly “(b)e certain of his target, and what lies beyond it.” * has been convicted of of Murder, Attempted Murder, and various other charges, stemming from the Kansas City Jewish Center shootings last year.
The trial now moves into the “Penalty Phase”, where Mr. Miller may receive the death penalty.
Miller was most disappointed in the results of his trial, especially being effectively denied the venerable and effective ” Shape-Shifting Reptiloid, International Bankster, Talmudist, Christ-Killers had it coming” defense.
He punctuated his displeasure at the verdict with a Nazi salute.
* Millers hapless victims; William Corporon, 69, Corporon’s 14-year-old grandson, Reat Griffin Underwood, and Terri LaManno, 53, were all … <sigh> gentiles.
Rototom Sunspash is a huge concert event for European fans of reggae music, and is hosted in Spain. The event organizers recently became embroiled in controversy after demanding, as a condition of his performing, what amounted to a BDS loyalty oath from American musician, Matthew Paul Miller, who performs under the stage name Matisyahu:
“The festival organizers contacted me because they were getting pressure from the BDS movement. They wanted me to write a letter, or make a video, stating my positions on Zionism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to pacify the BDS people. I support peace and compassion for all people. My music speaks for itself, and I do not insert politics into my music. Music has the power to transcend the intellect, ideas, and politics, and it can unite people in the process. The festival kept insisting that I clarify my personal views; which felt like clear pressure to agree with the BDS political agenda. Honestly it was appalling and offensive, that as the one publicly Jewish-American artist scheduled for the festival they were trying to coerce me into political statements. Were any of the other artists scheduled to perform asked to make political statements in order to perform? No artist deserves to be put in such a situation simply to perform his or her art. Regardless of race, creed, country, cultural background, etc, my goal is to play music for all people. As musicians that is what we seek. – Blessed Love, Matis”
Miller, who is Jewish, but decidedly apolitical in his public persona, refused. The organizers then barred him from the event. The actions of the event organizers were so blatant, and so clearly singled out the “Jew”, that it drew comparisons of some more unsavory chapters in Spanish history towards the Jews.
In the face of international criticism, Rototom Sunsplash eventually relented, issuing a slippery non-apology, wherein they pointed the finger elsewhere:
“…Rototom Sunplash admits that it made a mistake, due to the boycott and the campaign of pressure, coercion and threats employed by the BDS País Valencià because it was perceived that the normal functioning of the festival could be threatened…”
Re-invited, Matisyahu went onstage and suddenly, first one, and soon nearly twenty “Palestinian” flags appeared in the audience before him. People were on each others shoulders and flipping him off.
Jerusalem, if I forget you,
fire not gonna come from me tongue.
Jerusalem, if I forget you,
let my right hand forget what it’s supposed to do.
In the ancient days, we will return with no delay
Picking up the bounty and the spoils on our way
We’ve been traveling from state to state
And them don’t understand what they say
3,000 years with no place to be
And they want me to give up my milk and honey
Don’t you see, it’s not about the land or the sea
Not the country but the dwelling of his majesty
Rebuild the temple and the crown of glory
Years gone by, about sixty
Burn in the oven in this century
And the gas tried to choke, but it couldn’t choke me
I will not lie down, I will not fall asleep
They come overseas, yes they’re trying to be free
Erase the demons out of our memory
Change your name and your identity
Afraid of the truth and our dark history
Why is everybody always chasing we
Cut off the roots of your family tree
Don’t you know that’s not the way to be
Caught up in these ways, and the worlds gone craze
Don’t you know it’s just a phase
Case of the Simon says
If I forget the truth then my words won’t penetrate
Babylon burning in the place, can’t see through the haze
Chop down all of them dirty ways,
That’s the price that you pay for selling lies to the youth
No way, not ok, oh no way, not ok, hey
Aint no one gonna break my stride
Aint no one gonna pull me down
Oh no, I got to keep on moving
A few days later, Matisyahu, still fighting the darkness by “bringing light”, doubled down: He performed at the tiny “Chevra Lomdei Mishnayot” synagogue in the Polish town of .Oświęcim.
The Iran nuclear deal “will make America and the world safer and more secure”, President Barack Obama said on Saturday.The 159-page agreement between six world powers and Iran was finalized this week in Vienna, after extensive talks. On Saturday, Obama used his weekly address to seek support among voters, prior to the congressional vote on the deal and against a backdrop of Republican-led opposition.“This deal will make America and the world safer and more secure,” Obama said.“Still, you’re going to hear a lot of overheated and often dishonest arguments about it in the weeks ahead.”
He has for 3 years referred to any opposition to giving nuclear capability and money to a country that hates America and Israel as “noise”.
But now we have the John Kerry brokered deal. And it will keep us and Israel safer.
There’s been a little squabbling over it. President Sotero assures the Jewish community that oppose giving a country determined to wipe the one Jewish state in the world off the map nuclear capabilities that they need to put their “emotions” aside. He then assured everyone that he was pro-Israel. I suppose this was necessary since he is in favor of allowing a country determined to wipe Israel off the map to have a nuclear weapon. But he also feels that once the agreement has been signed sealed and sold out by Congress that Israeli-American relations will improve. Since the deal also involves giving Iran the technology to defeat any attempts Israel might make to defend herself by pre-emptive strikes I find this delusion astonishing.
As he has in previous speeches and interviews, Obama sought to refute criticism of the accord point by point. He disputed the notion that Iran would funnel the bulk of the money it receives from the sanctions relief into terrorism, saying Iranian leaders are more likely to try to bolster their weak economy. He also said the agreement wasn’t built on trusting Iran’s government, which frequently spouts anti-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric.
Keep that bit in mind.
Last month, National Security Adviser Susan Rice admitted that some of the money due to be released as part of the deal negotiated by the U.S. led P5+1 “would go to the Iranian military and could potentially be used for the kinds of bad behavior that we have seen in the region.”
Ok, first this is the woman that makes the round of Sunday Talk shows telling America the reason for the attack and resulting deaths in Benghazi was a youtube video. Second, Susan Rice and the word “Security” should never been in the same sentence, let alone job description. Beyond that her idea of “bad behavior” defies understanding. Bad behavior is a two year old stamping it’s feet and yelling “NO” at it’s mother, it’s a teen-ager speeding or your horse kicking, nipping or bucking. But I guess if you are part of the Sotero regime then terrorism is “bad behavior”, you know, just part of the “noise”.
Aside from the soon-to-be-released billions, Iran’s finances will also be strengthened by the easing of trade embargoes that have seen a horde of major international business – many from P5+1 countries – rushing to sign lucrative deals with the ayatollahs. Earlier this week, British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond scoffed at the fears of Israel and many Arab countries in the Middle East, saying the deal would “slowly rebuild their sense that Iran is not a threat to them.” Less than 24 hours later, the spokesman for Iran’s top parliament member said, “Our positions against [Israel] have not changed at all; Israel should be annihilated.”
Last week I was pretty much away from the computer, but the first part of last week I found out that rockets has been fired into the Golan by Iran. So I wonder if Barry, Phil & Susie will suggest that Iran go into a time out?
But wait there’s more. Iran is wisely and peacefully spending your taxpayer money every bit as carefully as the obamas on one of their many vacations.
How silly to think American tax money would ever be spent to harm Israel. They’re probably just cranky and need to go for a nap, right Susie?
Wonder if barry is making the rounds at cocktail parties saying “Well butter my butt and call me a biscuit! I really thought they’d put that money into their economy! That was why the people voted for the current regime”.
Then there are the various and sundry terrorist organizations now competing for funding from Iran & it’s unfrozen assets. They do this by committing terrorist acts against Israel to show Iran they can produce results for the money. So Susie, is that “bad behavior” or just “acting out”?
If you want to consider that often what happens in Israel becomes mirrored in America I shudder. Or as I hear a radio talk show host from Israel say often “Coming soon to a theater near you” when talking about what America is creating for herself.
All this has been about nuclear weapons, and putting America, Israel and the rest of the world at risk. And Barry is willing to do that as he assures America it will keep “us” safer. Despite evidence to the contrary, he says it will keep “us” safer.
So next time you hear Barry talking about how “common sense gun control will keep us safer” and that most gun owners want it, remember a couple things. He lies like a rug and two he ignores all evidence to the contrary to further his agenda.
If he is willing to put the world at risk with a nuclear weapon in Iran’s hands, why would you even wonder if the safety of you or your family is really his concern? I suppose though, if we ask ourselves who the “us” is that he wants to keep safer, his statements would make sense if it is the muslim terrorists and thugs. Because his plans and ideology certainly will keep them safer. Perhaps he identifies more with them, thus it will keep “us” safer.
There is a certain anti-gun meme making the rounds on the Internet – and in some broad sense, it no doubt predates the Internet. You have no doubt heard it before: “Why can’t we license guns like cars?” It doesn’t necessarily have to refer to cars – the most modern iteration, put out by left-wing media darling John Oliver, refers to airplanes: “One failed attempt at a shoe bomb and we all take off our shoes at the airport. Thirty-one school shootings since Columbine and no change in our regulation of guns.” Other versions of this meme refer to various consumer products – even teddy bears have been invoked – that are ostensibly regulated tighter than firearms. The point is the same: “We have accepted extensive government oversight of this aspect of our lives, but why not guns then?”
Of course, it’s possible – and quite reasonable – to make references to Constitutional law. One can point out, for instance, that driving a car on public roads is not considered a Constitutional right, unlike the right to bear arms. One can point out – reasonably enough – that in many ways cars are actually regulated far less than gun controllers would like us to regulate guns. One can point out that cars are far harder to use safely than guns. These will all be true. One can make many of the same points about air travel as well – that air travel is a privilege, for instance. And those will all be salient and possibly even be technically true. However they will all be missing the main point – and it is the wit of John Oliver that has finally brought home that main fallacy of those approaches.
The thing is, taking off shoes at the airport is actually an example of the worst in political decisionmaking. It is the epitome in the sort of worst-first thinking that has plagued the Western body politic for decades now – take a scary, freakish, rare occurrence (such as the shoe bombing), freak out about it beyond all measure, and then make decisions that both invade people’s freedom and take away their basic dignity based on that. It’s exactly this sort of decisionmaking that has turned the automobile from a wondrous invention that had made people freer, gave them both privacy and mobility, into an endless milking cow for police state intrusions – rolling “checkpoints” that easily turn a ‘seatbelt inspection’ into a search of your car, drunk-driving laws that set the BAC limits for ‘drunknenness’ so low they are below the margin of error of police breathalyzers, mandatory GPS devices in cars, and so forth.
Yet – we are told – we are to adopt the same kind of thinking in terms of guns. Why? Has forcing people to take their shoes off at airports stopped a single terrorist? This is the same sort of thinking that has led to the destruction of Buckyballs because several children ingested them (and apparently one child has died). John Oliver knows – and hopefully his fans know – that this thinking is flawed as applied to shoes and airports. It is flawed when it is applied to cars, or buckyballs. American gun owners are wise to not want the same sort of thinking applied to their guns.
Maybe the next time there’s a freak accident, or a terrorist attack, the American public will be able to react to it as wisely as the gun rights movement reacts to a school shooting. But I won’t be holding my breath.
For many years, gun rights advocacy groups in the US – and, to some extent, elsewhere – built their fundraising and outreach efforts, and their entire public stance, on combatting threats to gun rights. On a regular basis, money would be requested, and activists roused from their slumber, on the idea that the anti-gun lobby had contrived a new threat to rights and liberties – a handgun ban, an “assault weapons” ban, a gun registration scheme or a gun buyback. For many years the tone of gun rights advocacy was the tone of alarm.
But, even as the rhetoric of fear has still been used effectively time and time again, gun rights in America (and to some extent, in Canada and some other nations) have gradually started taking back lost ground, and even capturing ground that had never before been held by the freedom movement. By now there are seven states within the Union that do not require a permit of any kind to carry a concealed weapon (and many more states allow one to carry a weapons without a permit if one does so openly). Public attitudes in America have swung wildly towards the pro-gun worldview, and gun rights groups have sprung up around the world – in Russia, Australia, the Czech Republic, Israel, and so on – places that have ten years ago not even had a gun rights movement at all.
As I type those words, bills and lawsuits are winding their way through the legislatures and courts of the United States to expand gun rights in the United States in ways in which our movement could not have been considered possible only ten years ago. In Australia, a recent attempt at panic-induced gun control has just gotten derailed by a small group of liberty-minded legislators. Canada’s legislature is moving another bill to protect gun owners from its overreaching bureaucracy and take back some fraction of the freedoms that have been lost in the moral panics of the 90s.
At least in America – and arguably in several other countries – the gun rights movement no longer inhabits that era where the slightest lapse could lead to an extinction of liberty. Instead, an era has come where a serious and well-planned effort can lead to an expansion of liberty. It is time for us to come for a recognition that it is not gun rights that are under threat by now – it is gun control that is under threat.
And with this recognition, we should move to have a more truthful discussion with the freedom-loving public. Our message should now be a post-pessimist one – one when we rouse our friends and supporters not to fight a last-ditch, defensive fight against a collapse into the dark ages, but rather to fight an advance. We are winning, and we should act like it. We are now in a position of strength, and we should talk like it. Our tone should be now not one of fear – it should now, both in the legislatures, the gun periodicals, and the fundraising mailers, be one of optimism and strength.
Should we do so, we would be able to talk less and less about stopping anti-gun measures, and talk more – and take more haste in – implementing pro-gun ones. To speak from a position strength will reflect reality – and help us progress faster towards liberty.
There was a shooting in Virginia today. The shooter, a former WDBJ journalist pulled a gun on two of the station’s reporters and killed them both. He also wounded the woman being interviewed on the air. She is thankfully listed in stable condition. He then proceeded to drive north on I-81 and east on I-66 with police in pursuit before shooting himself in the head.
“There are too many guns in the hands of people that shouldn’t have guns,” McAuliffe said during an interview with WTOP. “There is too much gun violence in America,” he said, adding that he has long advocated for strengthening gun background checks and that it should be made a priority.
The only problem with Fast Terry’s contention is that no background check would have stopped Vester Lee Flanagan from purchasing a gun.
Let’s for a moment ignore the fact that he could quickly and easily have gotten a firearm through illegal means.
Let’s for a moment forget that Vester Lee Flanagan did not have a criminal record, and the only crime he had ever been charged with was driving with an altered or revoked licence and having no registration on his vehicle in Pitt County, North Carolina in 2004, which certainly would not have made him ineligible to purchase a firearm. And he had no history of mental illness either. In other words, he would have passed any background check any time.
How about making him ineligible to purchase a firearm because he was black? Or gay?
Or how about taking away his rights because he was upset about being fired and refused to leave, forcing the station to call the police to physically remove him from the premises? Would Terry have infringed on his right to keep and bear arms, because he was a jerk to his co-workers?
I’ve always said that the gun grabbers’ goal was not to reduce violence or save lives, but to disarm those of us who committed no crime whatsoever all for the sake of political expediency.
Fast Terry knows perfectly well that no new law would have stopped this shooting. Flanagan would have passed every background check in the world, so the only option left is for Fast Terry to start working to deny others their rights. Others who may be odd… or gay… or black… or difficult to work with…
UPDATE: In an interview with Megyn Kelly last night, Alison Parker’s father pledged to do everything in his power to keep guns out of the hands of people he called “crazy.”
I grieve along with Mr. Parker. I cannot imagine the unbearable grief of losing a child! I understand the emotion behind that pledge to shame “legislators into doing something about closing loopholes and background checks.”
However, I also understand the following as a rational person: There was no loophole, and no background check that could have prevented Flanagan from getting a firearm! He was not even seeing a psychiatrist! He was not a prohibited person. There is no background check he would not have passed. The fact that he was an entitled jerk, a bad employee, and a crappy co-worker does not make him mentally ill or ineligible to own a firearm.
There is literally no loophole and no law that allowed him – a law abiding citizen, until he pulled that trigger yesterday – to purchase a gun when he should not have been allowed to do so. None.
And yet, in the heat of grief, the push for more ineffective laws that will do nothing but disarm those who have committed no crime continues, with the likes of Fast Terry and Hillary Clinton leading the charge.
Several days ago a French high-speed train was zooming across the lowlands from Amsterdam, through Belgium, and on to Paris carrying hundreds of passengers.
Among them was a young man, originally from Morocco, studiously, but quietly listening to jihadist videos. After Liege, but before crossing intro France, he took a rather large bag and went to the restroom.
Nearby a young American artist and teacher and his wife, then residing in France, noted his odd behavior and protracted visit to the bathroom. Then he heard the man struggling therein with something mechanical.
The moment the man exited, this American’s fears were confirmed. The young Muslim jihadi had an AK-47 rifle, a Luger handgun, copious spare ammunition, and a Stanley-type utility knife.
The American and a nearby French gentleman immediately lunged at the jihadi to stop the impending slaughter. The American took two bullets (one through his neck) but fought on and got the rifle away from the Jihadi.
By that time, three American servicemen (lifelong friends), an a Briton, seeing the same thing from some thirty yards away had run to the scene and together with many passengers disarmed the jihadi, beat him senseless, and hog-tied him with their undershirts. There they attended to the wounded passengers, and only then to their own wounds, and held the culprit until the next stop.
Reportedly, and by contrast, the crew nearest the incident fled to cover, securing themselves in a room accessible only by their “special key”. The passengers, carefully denied effective self-defense, excepting their wits, their bare hands, by the Railroad and the State, nonetheless prevailed against certain death and mayhem.
To their credit, the Police, the Anti-Terror squads, and the upper echelons of the French Government saw fit as to regard these men as the true heroes they are. Awards ceremonies followed.
The jihadi appears to be associated with a very violent group who had a deadly firefight in Belgium only a few months back, directly in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo & Hyper Cacher murders.
Contrary to the assertions of his attorney, he is no mere homeless “lost child”. Neither did he happen upon the weapons, and decide in a moment of race-victimhood driven desperation and weakness, to commit a robbery.
He was carrying on a proud, 1300 year old tradition.
I will admit I’m a fan of crime dramas. I will watch episodes of Law & Order endlessly, and my latest interest is Criminal Minds – a show about the FBI’s behavioral analysis unit. I tend not to look at the politics of a show. If I did, the writing, plot, and characterization would be sullied for me in most cases. I also try not to pay attention to the politics of the actors, unless they become so unbearable and preachy, that I am unable to separate the screeching lunacy from the character, in which case, the actor’s talent can be called into question.
The reason I bring this up is because as you may know, the majority of Hollywood is leftist, and most actors are sworn enemies of the Second Amendment – from their gated communities and guarded mansions, of course.
One, however, stands out from the pile of mindless, sheltered, spoiled celebrities – Joe Mantegna one of the stars of the aforementioned Criminal Minds.
A recent Ammoland article shows Mantegna as not just friend to the Second Amendment, but also friend to Israel – a combination you won’t often find in Hollywood.
IWI US, Inc., a subsidiary of Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) Ltd., announces it will be donating two TAVOR® rifles to be auctioned off at the next “Bullets & Bagels” event to be held Aug. 23, 2015 at the Raahauges Range in Corona, California. Joe Mantegna, best known for playing Special Agent David Rossi in the acclaimed TV show “Criminal Minds” and for portraying Joey Zasa in “The Godfather Part III” will be conducting the auction. Proceeds from the auction will be going to Friends of the IDF, an organization dedicated to supporting the men and women soldiers of the Israeli Defense Forces who defend the state of Israel and to the families of fallen IDF soldiers.
As you can imagine, some Middle Eastern media outlets aren’t all that happy about Mr. Mantegna proudly showing his support for Israel.
Hollywood actors have been long supporting Israeli aggression against Palestinians through various means, such as direct fund-raising events or making movies backing Israeli interpretation and catalyzation of the ongoing unrest in the middle-east.
The obvious lunacy of that claim aside, keep crying those bitter tears, Pakistani media. They taste like WINNING!
And another article points out that many black lives are also Jewish lives — but that some Black Lives Matter activists have hijacked the BLM movement by also making it anti-Israel.
Finally, black Zionist Chloe Simone Valdary asserts (in the most nuanced piece I’m linking) that Jewish lives matter, and so do those of Palestinians, including Christians, women, and homosexuals who suffer at the hands of (or with the assent of) Palestinian political leadership.
Judge the value of such articles for yourself (as you will, anyway). Including them here doesn’t mean I endorse or agree with them all. I just thought it was interesting that “Jewish lives matter” was a meme in its own right, and fascinating what a variety of thought has gone into this.
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.