Chris Matthews: Support Gun Control or an American President Could Be Murdered | NewsBusters http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2013/02/27/chris-matthews-support-gun-control-or-american-president-could-be-mu .....”He lobbied, "Check the shooters of John F. Kennedy and Jerry Ford, who got shot at twice. Look at the men that shot Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Malcolm X and George Wallace. They all had political motives and they all had guns." In the very next sentence, Matthews sneered, "And if you're not against this movement, you're with it.".... RRD: Indeed let us check the motives of the shooters: JFK: Shot by Lee Harvey Oswald--a self-declared Marxist--with a Carcano bolt-action rifle. Gerald Ford shot at by two women. The first Lynette Alice "Squeaky" Fromme was a member of the Manson Family. She tried to shoot Ford with a 1911 semi-automatic 45ACP pistol but she never chambered a round ,this meant that she could not shoot Ford unless she racked the slide. She either did not know this basic fact about semi-automatic handguns or (as she claimed later) she did not actually intend to shoot Ford. Subsequently the self-described radical leftist Sara Jane Moore actually shot at Ford with a 38 special revolver, narrowly missing him. Robert Kennedy: shot by Sirhan Sirhan a Christian Palestinian who reportedly shot RFK because of Kennedy's support for Israel. He shot him with a 22 caliber revolver. Martin Luther King Jr. : shot by white supremacist James Earl Ray with a Remington 760 pump action rifle chambered in 30-06. Malcolm X was shot multiple times by members of the Nation of Islam with a sawed off shotgun & semi-automatic pistols. George Wallace was shot with a 38 special revolver by Arthur Bremer. Bremer's self-declared motive was NOT political it was a desire for fame. So if we go through this list :one of the shooters whom Matthews lists as being politically motivated ( Bremer) wasn't. Malcolm X 's shooters were presumably carrying out some vendetta in defense of the Nation of Islam's ”honor” & are therefore arguably apolitical. Sara Jane Moore & Oswald were self-avowed leftists. Fromme was a adherent of Manson's bizarre ”Helter Skelter” ”philosophy” which was a weird melange of ideas taken from the hippies,white supremacists,the Beatles & the Book of Revelations & which defies easy categorization. Sirhan Sirhan was a anti-Israel fanatic & James Earl Ray was a racist. With the exception of Ray none could be clearly classified as being ”right-wing” & Sirhan Sirhan probably counts as a leftist. Nonetheless THIS is the group that Matthews points to, so as to ”illustrate” the alleged threat of ”right-wing extremists”. One other thing: with the twin exceptions of Malcolm X's assassins (who also used a shotgun) ,& the inept assassination attempt on Ford by Fromme none of these assassinations were carried out by ”assault weapons” or semi-automatic pistols. The murders of JFK,RFK & MLK were carried out with a bolt action rifle,a revolver & a non-semi-automatic pump rifle. Yet the weapons that are being attacked today are the ”evil” semi-automatic handguns & rifles.
Chris Matthews: Support Gun Control or an American President Could Be Murdered | NewsBusters http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2013/02/27/chris-matthews-support-gun-control-or-american-president-could-be-mu .....”He lobbied, "Check the shooters of John F. Kennedy and Jerry Ford, who got shot at twice. Look at the men that shot Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Malcolm X and George Wallace. They all had political motives and they all had guns." In the very next sentence, Matthews sneered, "And if you're not against this movement, you're with it.".... RRD: Indeed let us check the motives of the shooters: JFK: Shot by Lee Harvey Oswald--a self-declared Marxist--with a Carcano bolt-action rifle. Gerald Ford shot at by two women. The first Lynette Alice "Squeaky" Fromme was a member of the Manson Family. She tried to shoot Ford with a 1911 semi-automatic 45ACP pistol but she never chambered a round ,this meant that she could not shoot Ford unless she racked the slide. She either did not know this basic fact about semi-automatic handguns or (as she claimed later) she did not actually intend to shoot Ford. Subsequently the self-described radical leftist Sara Jane Moore actually shot at Ford with a 38 special revolver, narrowly missing him. Robert Kennedy: shot by Sirhan Sirhan a Christian Palestinian who reportedly shot RFK because of Kennedy's support for Israel. He shot him with a 22 caliber revolver. Martin Luther King Jr. : shot by white supremacist James Earl Ray with a Remington 760 pump action rifle chambered in 30-06. Malcolm X was shot multiple times by members of the Nation of Islam with a sawed off shotgun & semi-automatic pistols. George Wallace was shot with a 38 special revolver by Arthur Bremer. Bremer's self-declared motive was NOT political it was a desire for fame. So if we go through this list :one of the shooters whom Matthews lists as being politically motivated ( Bremer) wasn't. Malcolm X 's shooters were presumably carrying out some vendetta in defense of the Nation of Islam's ”honor” & are therefore arguably apolitical. Sara Jane Moore & Oswald were self-avowed leftists. Fromme was a adherent of Manson's bizarre ”Helter Skelter” ”philosophy” which was a weird melange of ideas taken from the hippies,white supremacists,the Beatles & the Book of Revelations & which defies easy categorization. Sirhan Sirhan was a anti-Israel fanatic & James Earl Ray was a racist. With the exception of Ray none could be clearly classified as being ”right-wing” & Sirhan Sirhan probably counts as a leftist. Nonetheless THIS is the group that Matthews points to, so as to ”illustrate” the alleged threat of ”right-wing extremists”. One other thing: with the twin exceptions of Malcolm X's assassins (who also used a shotgun) ,& the inept assassination attempt on Ford by Fromme none of these assassinations were carried out by ”assault weapons” or semi-automatic pistols. The murders of JFK,RFK & MLK were carried out with a bolt action rifle,a revolver & a non-semi-automatic pump rifle. Yet the weapons that are being attacked today are the ”evil” semi-automatic handguns & rifles.
Iran. Pastor Saeed Abedini continues to face life-threatening abuse and torture in prison. | RescueChristians.org
http://www.rescuechristians.org/2013/02/25/iran-pastor-saeed-abedini-continues-to-face-life-threatening-abuse-and-torture-in-prison/ ......” The 32-year-old reports conditions are “so very difficult that my eyes get blurry, my body does not have the strength to walk, and my steps become very weak and shaky.” He said he constantly is under pressure to abandon Christianity. “ They are trying to put me under such horrific pressures (that are sometimes unbearable) so that they can show me that my faith is empty & not real. … They are only waiting for one thing … for me to deny Christ,” he wrote.”.....
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/341626/no-cpac-invite-christie-because-limited-future-republican-party-eliana-johnson .....” Christie, the source adds, is simply not a conservative in the eyes of organizers. The New Jersey governor, who has expressed concern about “an abundance of guns out there,”has said he backs the gun-control legislation currently on the books in his state, some of the nation’s most restrictive. Christie has also not been afraid to speak out against the National Rifle Association, calling an ad the group ran in the wake of the Newtown shooting “reprehensible” and “awful.” In another move that may distance him from conservatives, Christie, who boasts a 74 percent approval rating in New Jersey, is set to announce this afternoon that he will accept Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. His reversal follows those of other GOP governors including Florida’s Rick Scott and Ohio’s Jon Kasich who, like Christie, have been vocal in their criticism of the Affordable Care Act.”.....
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/341626/no-cpac-invite-christie-because-limited-future-republican-party-eliana-johnson .....” Christie, the source adds, is simply not a conservative in the eyes of organizers. The New Jersey governor, who has expressed concern about “an abundance of guns out there,”has said he backs the gun-control legislation currently on the books in his state, some of the nation’s most restrictive. Christie has also not been afraid to speak out against the National Rifle Association, calling an ad the group ran in the wake of the Newtown shooting “reprehensible” and “awful.” In another move that may distance him from conservatives, Christie, who boasts a 74 percent approval rating in New Jersey, is set to announce this afternoon that he will accept Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. His reversal follows those of other GOP governors including Florida’s Rick Scott and Ohio’s Jon Kasich who, like Christie, have been vocal in their criticism of the Affordable Care Act.”.....
Iran. Pastor Saeed Abedini continues to face life-threatening abuse and torture in prison. | RescueChristians.org
http://www.rescuechristians.org/2013/02/25/iran-pastor-saeed-abedini-continues-to-face-life-threatening-abuse-and-torture-in-prison/ ......” The 32-year-old reports conditions are “so very difficult that my eyes get blurry, my body does not have the strength to walk, and my steps become very weak and shaky.” He said he constantly is under pressure to abandon Christianity. “ They are trying to put me under such horrific pressures (that are sometimes unbearable) so that they can show me that my faith is empty & not real. … They are only waiting for one thing … for me to deny Christ,” he wrote.”.....
ABCs News Edits First Lady’s “Automatic Weapons” Comment – Patriot Update http://patriotupdate.com/2013/02/abc-news-edits-first-ladys-automatic-weapons-comment/ ...... “She was standing out in a park with her friends in a neighborhood blocks away from where my kids…grew up, where our house is. She had just taken a chemistry test. And she was caught in the line of fire because some kids had some automatic weapons they didn’t need,” she said. “I just don’t want to keep disappointing our kids in this country. I want them to know that we put them first.”...... RRD: If they had real automatic weapons .i.e. select-fire weapons than they almost certainly had them illegally since all legal fully automatic weapons are class 3 weapons & are subject to rigorous controls. There are roughly 175,000 class three permit holders in the U.S. and so far as I know the number of crimes committed with their weapons are zero. Nor is it true that semi-automatic weapons can be readily converted to fully automatic weapons ,the ATF has been fanatical about that . The weapons that Michelle Obama is probably referring to are semi-automatic weapons. Either she does not know the difference or the conflating of the two serves her purposes. Note that Michelle Obama says that the girl was killed because ”some kids had some automatic weapons they didn’t need ” when in fact the girl is dead because some hoodlums murdered her. Note that there is no anger at ”the kids” that is at the murderers. How could there be? In her world no one other than smokers,Conservatives or innocent gun owners bear any responsibility for their actions. No there is no anger the murderers. Just at the ”automatic weapons”. (presumably had the girl been stabbed to death that would not have merited a ”national conversation”). So the murderers are ”kids” & the millions of innocent people who refuse to sacrifice their constitutional rights are the villains. Such is our insane world.
http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/02/21/4637983/uani-calls-on-austrias-palfinger.html ....” Today, United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) continued its Cranes Campaign by calling on Austria’s Palfinger AG to immediately end its business in Iran, where the Iranian regime is using its cranes to stage public executions. Recently, photos have been published of Palfinger cranes being used by the Iranian regime for public executions. Palfinger partners with Iranian companies such as Pasargad Petrogas, and Palfinger apparently attended the International Maritime Exhibition held in Tehran last month.”.....
http://www.heraldonline.com/2013/02/21/4637983/uani-calls-on-austrias-palfinger.html ....” Today, United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) continued its Cranes Campaign by calling on Austria’s Palfinger AG to immediately end its business in Iran, where the Iranian regime is using its cranes to stage public executions. Recently, photos have been published of Palfinger cranes being used by the Iranian regime for public executions. Palfinger partners with Iranian companies such as Pasargad Petrogas, and Palfinger apparently attended the International Maritime Exhibition held in Tehran last month.”.....
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/raymond-ibrahim/death-for-preaching-christ-in-liberated-libya/ .....” Four foreign Christians including one who holds American-Swedish citizenship were arrested days ago in Libya. According to the Guardian,their crime is arousing “suspicion of being missionaries& distributing Christian literature, a charge that could carry the death penalty.” Apparently the four Christians had “contracted a local printer to produce pamphlets explaining Christianity.” Proselytizing to Muslims—that is,preaching to them another religion was banned even under the late Col. Muammar Gaddafi.”.....
ROBERT JAMES BIDINOTTO: A Manifesto for "Coercive Paternalism" .....” Well, comes now a $95 tome titled--are you ready?-- Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. http://bidinotto.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-manifesto-for-coercive-paternalism.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+RobertJamesBidinotto+(ROBERT+JAMES+BIDINOTTO)&m=1 ...” The book's product description on Amazon notes that, in America, to respect autonomy is often understood to be the chief way to bear witness to the intrinsic value of persons. In this book, Sarah Conly rejects the idea of autonomy as inviolable.... Thus in many cases it would advance our ["our"? ] goals more effectively if government were to prevent us ["us"? ] from acting in accordance with our ["our"? ] decisions. Her argument challenges widely held views of moral agency, democratic values and the public/private distinction. Quoth the author from her own faculty page listing: I argue that autonomy, or the freedom to act in accordance with your ["your"? ] own decisions, is overrated—that the common high evaluation of the importance of autonomy is based on a belief that we [including her? ] are much more rational than we actually are. We now have lots of evidence from psychology and behavioral economics that we [her too? ] are often very bad at choosing effective means to our ends. In such cases, we [her too? ] need the help of others—and in particular, of government regulation—to keep us [ditto ] from going wrong. ”.....
ROBERT JAMES BIDINOTTO: A Manifesto for "Coercive Paternalism" .....” Well, comes now a $95 tome titled--are you ready?-- Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. http://bidinotto.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-manifesto-for-coercive-paternalism.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+RobertJamesBidinotto+(ROBERT+JAMES+BIDINOTTO)&m=1 ...” The book's product description on Amazon notes that, in America, to respect autonomy is often understood to be the chief way to bear witness to the intrinsic value of persons. In this book, Sarah Conly rejects the idea of autonomy as inviolable.... Thus in many cases it would advance our ["our"? ] goals more effectively if government were to prevent us ["us"? ] from acting in accordance with our ["our"? ] decisions. Her argument challenges widely held views of moral agency, democratic values and the public/private distinction. Quoth the author from her own faculty page listing: I argue that autonomy, or the freedom to act in accordance with your ["your"? ] own decisions, is overrated—that the common high evaluation of the importance of autonomy is based on a belief that we [including her? ] are much more rational than we actually are. We now have lots of evidence from psychology and behavioral economics that we [her too? ] are often very bad at choosing effective means to our ends. In such cases, we [her too? ] need the help of others—and in particular, of government regulation—to keep us [ditto ] from going wrong. ”.....
Holder in 1995: ‘Really brainwash people’ to be anti-gun | The Daily Caller http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/holder-in-1995-really-brainwash-people-to-be-anti-gun/ Raising Adam Lanza | FRONTLINE | PBS http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/raising-adam-lanza/ After Newtown | PBS http://www.pbs.org/wnet/after-newtown/ RRD: Given that Madison & Jefferson opposed proposals in Virginia to fund churches with tax dollars--even if people had the option of choosing which church their money went to--why do we permit our government to compel us to fund ideas which we regard as being evil? I continue to be perplexed that more people do not see the obvious dangers in having the government subsidize ”news” & ”educational programming” which is often thinly veiled propaganda. It makes no difference whether I agree with a particular program or not,and the situation would not be ”solved” by having the government promote conservative ideas instead of liberal ideas or having it promote them both equally. Nor is this ”just another violation of rights” this directly impinges on free speech rights. Yet I continue to encounter this attitude of ”its no big deal” or ”PBS has good programming” . Who cares? We have a set of government subsidized television channels. The danger tha t that poses cannot be exaggerated.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV?id={3E4CF6E4-1657-4603-ABF1-CE9905DAF940}&title=CO-Legislator-On-Gun-Feel-Like-Youre-Going-To-Be-Raped-You-May-Not-Be ......”From Revealing Politics: Late into the gun debate Friday, February 15th, Representative Joe Salazar talked about concerns that women could have about self defense on college campuses. "There are some gender inequities on college campuses, it is true. And universities have been faces with that situation for a long time. It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop [pause] pop around at somebody.” .... RRD: Well no, you can't go around ”popping” anyone whenever you feel threatened. You must have a rational fear of grievous bodily harm. That includes a reasonable fear of rape, kidnapping,assault etc. as determined by the ”reasonable man” standard . That standard is well developed in case law & it includes the context of the encounter; such as the difference in size & physical strength between the two people (e.g. an elderly woman would have a greater need to use a firearm to defend herself against a unarmed adult male attacker than a adult male would have to defend himself against a unarmed elderly female attacker). Reading statements like Salazar's I wonder if people like him are being disingenuous or whether they really think that self-defense is some new & outlandish concept dreamed up by the NRA ,instead of being part of the legal code of nation states going all the way back to at least biblical times. As for whistles,call-boxes etc, yes these things are certainly useful as part of a series of defensive measures but they are no more substitutes for guns than guns are for calling the police: if they fail what then? Do you let yourself be raped? What if the attacker is coming at you in the here & now? Do you call the police while he is stabbing you with a knife? Or do you take out your gun & then call the police if he stops or flees, & shoot if he continues to attack you? I sometimes wonder if these people who say things like ”just call the police” understand that most sane people will do exactly that when they can:they carry a gun for when they can't. An attack can take place in seconds,if you are outside & cannot get to safety it is absurd to talk of ”just calling the police” while you are being strangled or stabbed by someone on PCP. ( Something less rare than you may think). Of course you should not limit yourself to the use of lethal weapons,you should also carry non-lethal devices such as a taser and pepper spray as part of a ”continuum of force ladder” *,but sometimes lethal force is necessary. At its root the attack on lawful firearm ownership is a attack on the rights of the innocent to defend themselves against attackers ,the same arguments made against lawful firearm ownership can just as easily be made against the use of any weapon or any martial art that may have lethal results. ( Since people can die from tasers or from asthma attacks brought on by pepper spray). It is not a coincidence that most of those who call for victim disarmament also favor a more ”humane” penal code. By ”humane” I do not mean that they oppose the death penalty for minors or favor preventing prison rape,I mean that they favor releasing murderers onto the streets instead of ”just locking people up”. They are then shocked that the innocent will not simply let themselves be murdered for the sake of their--the reformers-- selective ”humanitarianism”. * Continuum of Force for Police and Civilians http://www.turtlepress.com/articles/continuum_of_force.aspx The Use-of-Force Continuum | National Institute of Justice http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/continuum.htm
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV?id={3E4CF6E4-1657-4603-ABF1-CE9905DAF940}&title=CO-Legislator-On-Gun-Feel-Like-Youre-Going-To-Be-Raped-You-May-Not-Be ......”From Revealing Politics: Late into the gun debate Friday, February 15th, Representative Joe Salazar talked about concerns that women could have about self defense on college campuses. "There are some gender inequities on college campuses, it is true. And universities have been faces with that situation for a long time. It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop [pause] pop around at somebody.” .... RRD: Well no, you can't go around ”popping” anyone whenever you feel threatened. You must have a rational fear of grievous bodily harm. That includes a reasonable fear of rape, kidnapping,assault etc. as determined by the ”reasonable man” standard . That standard is well developed in case law & it includes the context of the encounter; such as the difference in size & physical strength between the two people (e.g. an elderly woman would have a greater need to use a firearm to defend herself against a unarmed adult male attacker than a adult male would have to defend himself against a unarmed elderly female attacker). Reading statements like Salazar's I wonder if people like him are being disingenuous or whether they really think that self-defense is some new & outlandish concept dreamed up by the NRA ,instead of being part of the legal code of nation states going all the way back to at least biblical times. As for whistles,call-boxes etc, yes these things are certainly useful as part of a series of defensive measures but they are no more substitutes for guns than guns are for calling the police: if they fail what then? Do you let yourself be raped? What if the attacker is coming at you in the here & now? Do you call the police while he is stabbing you with a knife? Or do you take out your gun & then call the police if he stops or flees, & shoot if he continues to attack you? I sometimes wonder if these people who say things like ”just call the police” understand that most sane people will do exactly that when they can:they carry a gun for when they can't. An attack can take place in seconds,if you are outside & cannot get to safety it is absurd to talk of ”just calling the police” while you are being strangled or stabbed by someone on PCP. ( Something less rare than you may think). Of course you should not limit yourself to the use of lethal weapons,you should also carry non-lethal devices such as a taser and pepper spray as part of a ”continuum of force ladder” *,but sometimes lethal force is necessary. At its root the attack on lawful firearm ownership is a attack on the rights of the innocent to defend themselves against attackers ,the same arguments made against lawful firearm ownership can just as easily be made against the use of any weapon or any martial art that may have lethal results. ( Since people can die from tasers or from asthma attacks brought on by pepper spray). It is not a coincidence that most of those who call for victim disarmament also favor a more ”humane” penal code. By ”humane” I do not mean that they oppose the death penalty for minors or favor preventing prison rape,I mean that they favor releasing murderers onto the streets instead of ”just locking people up”. They are then shocked that the innocent will not simply let themselves be murdered for the sake of their--the reformers-- selective ”humanitarianism”. * Continuum of Force for Police and Civilians http://www.turtlepress.com/articles/continuum_of_force.aspx The Use-of-Force Continuum | National Institute of Justice http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/continuum.htm
RRD: Whether true or not --Llaneza has not been convicted-- this is not a hoax. According to the FBI Matthew Aaron Llaneza sought to provoke a second American civil war by blowing up a bank & framing ”right-wing militias” for it. Llaneza allegedly believed that this would lead to government crackdown on conservatives which would provoke a counter-reaction which would ultimately lead to a civil war. FBI arrest one Matthew Aaron Llaneza for trying to blow up San Francisco bank. | RedState http://www.redstate.com/2013/02/09/fbi-matthew-aaron-llaneza-san-francisco/ ....” According to the affidavit filed in support of the criminal complaint, on November 30, 2012, Llaneza met with a man who led him to believe he was connected with the Taliban and the mujahidin in Afghanistan. In reality, this man was an undercover FBI agent. At this initial meeting, Llaneza proposed conducting a car-bomb attack against a bank in the San Francisco Bay Area. He proposed structuring the attack to make it appear that the responsible party was an umbrella organization for a loose collection of anti-government militias & their sympathizers. Llaneza’s stated goal was to trigger a governmental crackdown, which he expected would trigger a right-wing counter-response against the government followed by, he hoped, civil war”
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/6981.htm ......” Ahead of his historic visit to Cairo (February 5-6, 2013) to attend an Organization of the Islamic Conference summit, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave an interview to 'Abd Al-Nasser Salama, editor of the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram. In the interview, which was conducted in Tehran, Ahmadinejad reiterated the positions of the Iranian regime on various issues, and stressed that Iran had become a nuclear state despite Western pressures aimed at stopping it from doing so. He also spoke about Iran-Egypt relations, saying that they were gradually developing. He stressed that cooperation between the two countries could be expanded in many areas, and that rapprochement between them would lead to a solution to the Palestinian problem and to other complex problems in the region. He emphasized that Iran had no intention of attacking "the Zionist entity," and clarified that his country had high defense capabilities.”......
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/6981.htm ......” Ahead of his historic visit to Cairo (February 5-6, 2013) to attend an Organization of the Islamic Conference summit, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave an interview to 'Abd Al-Nasser Salama, editor of the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram. In the interview, which was conducted in Tehran, Ahmadinejad reiterated the positions of the Iranian regime on various issues, and stressed that Iran had become a nuclear state despite Western pressures aimed at stopping it from doing so. He also spoke about Iran-Egypt relations, saying that they were gradually developing. He stressed that cooperation between the two countries could be expanded in many areas, and that rapprochement between them would lead to a solution to the Palestinian problem and to other complex problems in the region. He emphasized that Iran had no intention of attacking "the Zionist entity," and clarified that his country had high defense capabilities.”......
RRD: Bill Stevens a parent of a child attending a school one mile away from Sandy Hook made a cogent case for the Second Amendment. Unfortunately despite his own efforts to clear the air he is still being referred to--erroneously--as a ”Sandy Hook dad”. Bill Stevens-Sandy Hook Father: Viral gun-rights defense isn't actually the father of a Sandy Hook student. http://mobile.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/02/07/bill_stevens_sandy_hook_father_viral_gun_rights_defense_isn_t_actually_the.html?original_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fhl%3Den%26gl%3DUS%26ie%3DUTF-8%26source%3Dandroid-browser%26q%3DBill%2Bstevens .....”Stevens is not actually the father of a Sandy Hook student. Victoria is a fifth-grader at Reed Intermediate School, located about a mile or so from the elementary school that was the scene of the tragic mass shooting. In fairness to Stevens, the misinformation was not his doing. While his original remarks were a little ambigious—he said that his daughter "was in lockdown" during the shooting and that "her classmate’s little sister was murdered in Sandy Hook that day"—he's already gone out of his way to correct the error, emailing the Examiner to set the story straight: Newtown* father defies legislators on ‘gun control’ - National gun rights | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/article/sandy-hook-father-defies-legislators-on-gun-control ......”Thank you for the nice article about my testimony in Hartford. Unlike the Liberal media who don't let facts get in the way, I just wanted to let you know that my daughter does not attend Sandy Hook Elementary, but was in "lock down" nonetheless on December 14, 2012 at Reed Intermediate School (5th & 6th grade) about a mile away with her classmates, one of whom lost his little sister that day. ”......
http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/02/08/senators-seek-back-room-deal-on-firearm-background-checks/?subscriber=1 ......” The private discussions involve liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is the No. 3 Senate Democratic leader; West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, an NRA member & one of the chamber's more moderate Democrats; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., another NRA member & one of the more conservative lawmakers in Congress; and moderate GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois.”..... RRD: 1. Universal background checks would have done absolutely nothing to prevent Newtown as the boy stole the guns from his mother who had already passed a background check. 2. Universal Background checks-- certainly in the current situation--risk devolving into gun registration. For my case against Universal Background Checks see here: Why I oppose universal background checks. #tcot #tlot #2ndamendment - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/why-i-oppose-universal-background-checks-tcot
While there is reason to doubt the oft repeated claim that 40% of gun sales do not undergo background checks (fn1) I am extremely skeptical of any proposal to require universal background checks in any event. First though I am not a lawyer,I doubt that the Federal government has any Constitutional authority to regulate the intra-state sale or transfer of firearms ;or any intra-state commerce for that matter. ( I speak of the actual Constitution,not the so-called ”living Constitution” that liberals have concocted to kill the real one) . Some may say that this makes no difference since the Constitution is being violated anyway, but that makes as much sense as saying that two wrongs make a right. However there are two other reasons: 1. I am sympathetic to the idea that background checks themselves may be a form of ”preventive law” & as such I would oppose them as a reversal of the burden of proof;just as drivers licenses are. ( And if someone kills someone else in a accident because they do not know how to drive? Charge them with involuntary manslaughter.) Similiarly if the police find a convict in possession of a firearm, arrest them. If they find that someone is knowingly selling to a criminal, arrest them then, just as we do with private citizens such as a girlfriend who buys a gun for her criminal boyfriend. 2. I fear that this will result in the creation of a illegal national database of guns & gun owners. To understand why ,it is necessary to first understand what the existing gun laws are. At present there is no Federal requirement for background checks for guns sold or traded at gun shows or for background checks for gifts of guns between friends & family members. There is a federal requirement for all sales & transfers that go through a FFL holding gun dealer (essentially all store bought guns) . And many states require that you have a background check for purchases made at gun shows, but there is no federal requirement for this ( at least not for Class 1 guns, a category which basically includes all firearms except for silencers & Fully automatic guns ,& certain short barreled shotguns & rifles). The existing law also states that when a FFL licensed dealer goes bankrupt his records are taken by the ATF. Under the McClure-Volkmer Firearm Owners Protection Act passed in response to abuses carried out by the ATF it is ILLEGAL for the ATF to maintain a dat abase of lawful gun owners.(fn2) Notwithstanding that law, there have been anecdotal reports that the ATF is doing exactly that. (fn3) Gun registration is a necessary pre-condition of gun confiscation,that is why it is opposed so ferociously by American Gun Owners,they have seen what happened in Britain,Australia & Canada. (fn4) What's more we must remember the current context, the ATF ,under instructions from the Justice Dept, pressured gun dealers to sell guns to known straw purchasers,the result being the deaths of at least two & as many as 300 people. (fn5) Given this & given the contempt demonstrated by this administration for the Constitution why should we trust that requiring universal background checks will not simply result in providing the government with a list of all gun owners? Even if one regarded this proposal as being acceptable in some sane society what relevance does that have in our insane world? It is not hypocritical to argue that while some powers should never be entrusted to any government ( e.g. censorship), some might be justifiable in some ideal circumstance but might be too dangerous to entrust to someone who demonstrated a wanton disregard for the rule of law. Suppose Nixon had not resigned & they could not impeach him? Would anyone argue that it was unjust to take Watergate into account before passing laws giving the President additional powers? At a minimum any proposal for universal background checks must adequately address these concerns,if not I will oppose it. Footnotes. fn1 Gun Sales and Background Checks: Obama’s Bogus 40 Percent Stat - By John Fund - The Corner - National Review Online http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/337958/gun-sales-and-background-checks-obamas-bogus-40-percent-stat-john-fund# fn2. Firearm Owners Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act For a example of one of the BATF's abuses--entrapment--see here: Ambush at Ruby Ridge - Reason.comhttp://reason.com/archives/1993/10/01/ambush-at-ruby-ridge fn3. Does the ATF Already Maintain a National Gun Registry? » The Truth About Guns http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/12/robert-farago/does-the-atf-already-have-a-national-gun-registry/ Colorado News & Denver News: The Denver Post http://extras.denverpost.com/news/news0605b.htm fn4. NRA-ILA | Canada: Where Gun Registration Equals Confiscation http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2000/canada-where-gun-registration-equals-c.aspx?s=canada+registration+confiscation&st=&ps= registration leads to confiscation | walls of the city http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2010/12/registration-leads-to-confiscation.html fn5. Fast and Furious: Barack Obama's Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up: Katie Pavlich: 9781596983212: Amazon.com: Books http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358184634&sr=8-1&keywords=katie+pavlich
Previously Krugman spoke of the economic ”benefit” to be derived from the murder of nearly three thousand people on September 11. Then Krugman--evidently suffering from delusions of grandeur-- called himself Ellsworth Toohey. Now Krugman has sneeringly called for death panels.
Liberal Economic Guru: “Death Panels and Middle Class Taxes Are How We Do This” http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberal-economic-guru-death-panels-and-middle-class-taxes-are-how-we-do-this/ ..... ”My vision, how I want it to be done is, we’re going to need more revenue, we’re going to need more and probably in the end, surely in the end will require some middle class taxes . We won’t be able to pay for the kind of government the society will want without some increase in taxes… on the middle class, maybe a value added tax… And we’re also going to have to make decisions about health care, doc pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits . So the snarky version… which I shouldn’t even say because it will get me in trouble is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this. ”..... RRD: I see no need to comment on this other than to note ,as Ayn Rand did, that atrocities are not a means to a end: they are the ends.
Previously Krugman spoke of the economic ”benefit” to be derived from the murder of nearly three thousand people on September 11. Then Krugman--evidently suffering from delusions of grandeur-- called himself Ellsworth Toohey. Now Krugman has sneeringly called for death panels.
Liberal Economic Guru: “Death Panels and Middle Class Taxes Are How We Do This” http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberal-economic-guru-death-panels-and-middle-class-taxes-are-how-we-do-this/ ..... ”My vision, how I want it to be done is, we’re going to need more revenue, we’re going to need more and probably in the end, surely in the end will require some middle class taxes . We won’t be able to pay for the kind of government the society will want without some increase in taxes… on the middle class, maybe a value added tax… And we’re also going to have to make decisions about health care, doc pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits . So the snarky version… which I shouldn’t even say because it will get me in trouble is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this. ”..... RRD: I see no need to comment on this other than to note ,as Ayn Rand did, that atrocities are not a means to a end: they are the ends.
Outrage after McCain tweet compares Ahmadinejad, monkey - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/4/outrage-after-mccain-tweet-compares-ahmadinejad-mo/#.URAjRFhtuz4.facebook RRD: I am hardly a McCain apologist & I do not know whether McCain intended his tweet to be racist, but I am curious as to whether Mr.Amash has been as outspoken in condemning Ahmadinejad's atrocities against the Iranian people & his virulent anti-semitism as he is in attacking McCain's real or imagined ”racism”. I have googled ”Amash” & ”Iran” & ”Iranian dissidents” & I have not found that much to indicate that he has said much on Iran other than to attack McCain over his tweet.. ( If I am mistaken please correct me). Neda Agha Soltan, killed 20.06.2009, Presidential Election Protest, Tehran, IRAN - YouTube
Outrage after McCain tweet compares Ahmadinejad, monkey - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/4/outrage-after-mccain-tweet-compares-ahmadinejad-mo/#.URAjRFhtuz4.facebook RRD: I am hardly a McCain apologist & I do not know whether McCain intended his tweet to be racist, but I am curious as to whether Mr.Amash has been as outspoken in condemning Ahmadinejad's atrocities against the Iranian people & his virulent anti-semitism as he is in attacking McCain's real or imagined ”racism”. I have googled ”Amash” & ”Iran” & ”Iranian dissidents” & I have not found that much to indicate that he has said much on Iran other than to attack McCain over his tweet.. ( If I am mistaken please correct me). Neda Agha Soltan, killed 20.06.2009, Presidential Election Protest, Tehran, IRAN - YouTube
PJ Media » Immigration What? Senate Steers Back to Gun Control http://pjmedia.com/blog/immigration-what-senate-steers-back-to-gun-control/?singlepage=true .... “Mr. LaPierre, that’s the point. The criminals won’t go to purchase the guns because there will be a background check. We’ll stop them from the original purchase. You miss that point completely,” snapped Durbin, sparking a smattering of applause in the hearing room, gavel-banging from Leahy, and an argument with LaPierre. “The biggest problem in Chicago… we are awash in guns,” Durbin argued. “The confiscation of guns per capita in Chicago is six times the number of New York City. We have guns everywhere. And some believe the solution to this is more guns. I disagree.” RRD: If Durbin believes that the problem is that Chicago is ”awash with guns” then maybe he should propose disarming the police? After all do the police really ”need” semi-automatic pistols; (”weapons of war” to use Obama's pet alliterative) . I'm being facetious? So is he, though he will not admit it. Note Durbin's cute little equivocation about ”more guns” or ”less guns” when no one suggests that criminals should have guns at all, the only proposal is that innocent,law-abiding teachers should be permitted to carry their properly secured guns into the school with the consent of the school's management. In Israel that is exactly what is permitted. (see photo) Durbin seeks to imply that there is no difference between guns in the hands of murderers & guns in the hands of innocent people. ”Gun free” school zones are a absurdity. They do not protect students or teachers,quite the opposite, they have caused deaths by disarming the victim. The school board itself should set its own policy. But Durbin has yet more straw men to marshal to his cause: Durbin interrogating LaPierre : "creepy" to fear gov could become a dictatorship - YouTube Partial transcript: ...”Durbin asked LaPierre if he felt Americans needed guns to protect themselves from the government. “Senator, I think without any doubt, if you look at why our founding fathers put it there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny,” LaPierre said. “I also think, though, that what people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government,” he continued. “If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs that they’re gonna be out there alone. And the only way they’re gonna protect themselves in the cold and the dark, when they’re vulnerable, is with a firearm. And I think that indicates how relevant and essential the Second Amendment is in today’s society to fundamental human survival.” Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson, who chairs the National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, called that view “scary, creepy.” “And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” RRD: Note than Durbin does not address Lapierre's point about the Founder's belief in the Second Amendment as a safeguard against tyranny,and note that in the video he distorts Lapierre's position to make it appear that he is advocating violence against the police in circumstances that fall short of resistance to a full-fledged dictatorship. As to whether it is ”creepy” to fear the U.S. Government or to believe that it may one day be at war with its citizens Durbin himself seems to have forgotten that our government has carried out ”Nazi-like” interrogations of prisoners: Durbin U.S. government actions in interrogating prisoners akin to that carried out by : "... - YouTube Durbin Apologizes for Nazi, Gulag, Pol Pot Remarks | Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160275,00.html .......” Durbin said in the course of his remarks on June 14, he raised "legitimate concerns" about U.S. policy toward prisoners and whether their treatment makes America safer. Durbin read from an FBI report that included descriptions of one case at Gitmo in which a detainee was held in such cold temperatures that he shivered, another in which a prisoner was held in heat passing 100 degrees, one in which prisoners were left in isolation so long they fouled themselves and one where a prisoner was chained to the floor and forced to listen to loud rap music. "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings," Durbin said last week. After the uproar that followed those remarks, Durbin said he was not comparing U.S. soldiers to Pol Pot (search ), Nazis or Soviet guards, but was "attributing this form of interrogation to repressive regimes such as those that I note." Durbin attempted to clarify his remarks last Thursday evening and then again Friday, saying that he regretted if people did not understand his historic analogies, and he suggested that he could not verify the accuracy of the FBI document. "If this indeed occurred, it does not represent American values. It does not represent what our country stands for, it is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone ... and that is the point I was making. Now, sadly, we have a situation here where some in the right-wing media have said that I have been insulting men and women in uniform. Nothing could be further from truth," Durbin said. According to his spokesman, Joe Shoemaker, one reason the senator apologized was "this loud, continuous drumbeat of misinformation that was being broadcast and printed."....... RRD: So as recently as seven years ago our government was committing Nazi-like atrocities & yet now we are told that Lapierre's argument that the government may one day become a dictatorship is ”creepy”. That view--that our country may one day descend into dictatorship-- is also shared by the pro-gun control ACLU ,which is constantly warning us about abuses of governmental power. I have noted the hypocrisy of many gun control supporters on this issue here: Second Amendment FAQS : Gun Control argument : ” Why do you fear our troops?” - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/second-amendment-faqs-gun-control-argument-wh Of course gun control advocates are not the only ones contradicting themselves, as many conservatives seemed indifferent to the threat posed to Fourth & Fifth Amendment rights by Bush's policies. But two wrongs don't make a right. This view of the Police & Military as being potential enemies of the people was widely shared by the Founders. To cite only one ”Creepy” quote by Madison in Federalist 41 ( in which he was defending the Congresses power to raise standing armies) .....”How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation? The means of security can only be regulated by the means and the danger of attack. They will, in fact, be ever determined by these rules, and by no others. It is in vain to oppose constitutional barriers to the impulse of self-preservation. It is worse than in vain; because it plants in the Constitution itself necessary usurpations of power, every precedent of which is a germ of unnecessary and multiplied repetitions. If one nation maintains constantly a disciplined army, ready for the service of ambition or revenge, it obliges the most pacific nations who may be within the reach of its enterprises to take corresponding precautions. The fifteenth century was the unhappy epoch of military establishments in the time of peace. They were introduced by Charles VII. of France. All Europe has followed, or been forced into, the example. Had the example not been followed by other nations, all Europe must long ago have worn the chains of a universal monarch. Were every nation except France now to disband its peace establishments, the same event might follow. The veteran legions of Rome were an overmatch for the undisciplined valor of all other nations and rendered her the mistress of the world. Not the less true is it, that the liberties of Rome proved the final victim to her military triumphs; and that the liberties of Europe, as far as they ever existed, have, with few exceptions, been the price of her military establishments. A standing force, therefore, is a dangerous, at the same time that it may be a necessary, provision. On the smallest scale it has its inconveniences. On an extensive scale its consequences may be fatal. On any scale it is an object of laudable circumspection and precaution. A wise nation will combine all these considerations; and, whilst it does not rashly preclude itself from any resource which may become essential to its safety, will exert all its prudence in diminishing both the necessity and the danger of resorting to one which may be inauspicious to its liberties.”..... Madison Federalist 41 For other quotes see also here: Madison on Europe ”the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madison-on-europe-the-governments-are-afraid And here: Madison,Mason,Adams,Coxe,Webster,Patrick Henry etc on the supposedly non-existent right to own guns #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madisonmasonadamscoxewebsterpatrick-henry-etc RRD: But what of the second part of Lapierre's argument ,the part about needing a gun in emergencies? Police chief Johnson said: “And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” Really? Like the LA police department which left Reginald Denny & Korean shop keepers to fend for themselves while they fled? ( See the attached photo,those store owners were armed with AR-15s which they supposedly did not ”need”. ) The Filming of Reginald Denny's Beating - YouTube Koreatown during the 1992 riots - Rough Cuts - YouTube Legally the police are not even obligated to protect us. Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone - New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0 Keep that in mind the next time Obama prattles about the legal right not to be a victim in a school shooting. And what of Hurricane Katrina? In many respects Katrina was even more disturbing & uglier than the breakdown of law after the Rodney King riots. One Katrina survivor described the aftermath as follows: .... “There was no electricity, no police, no nothing,” ..... “We were like sitting ducks. I slept with a butcher knife and a hatchet under my pillow.” (fn1).... In the aftermath of Katrina five police officers killed two unarmed men, James Brisette, 17, & Ronald Madison 40. Madison a mentally disabled man was shot in the back. The five police officers have been convicted.(fn2) Nor were they alone,one ex-police officer: David Warren, shot & killed another unarmed man Henry Glover . Warren's associates Officer Greg McRae & Lt. Travis McCabe helped cover up his crime by burning the body & filing a false police report respectively. (fn3) Reports also surfaced of police officers themselves taking part in the looting. (fn4) Other police-- who were neither killing unarmed civilians or burning their corpses-- were occupied with disarming everyone, guilty & innocent alike of their firearms:this included tackling one elderly woman --Patricia Konie-- to the ground for her refusal to be disarmed. She refused to evacuate so that she could remain with her cats. Hurricane Katrina Firearms Confiscation - YouTube However not all of the alleged wrongdoing was carried out by the police. In the aftermath of Katrina many Louisianans understandably armed themselves to protect themselves in the charnel house that Louisiana had become. One case in point, the neighborhood of Algiers Point, which became a literal cause celebre among defenders of the Second Amendment. But since then disturbing reports have emerged of racial bullying & intimidation by various self-appointed ”militias” & at least one person has been charged in a racially motivated shooting. ( He awaits trial). (fn5) These accusations have been cited as a justification for gun control. (fn6) But whether those individuals committed crimes or not ,the fact remains that the state was permitted to descend into anarchy & people had no choice but to rely upon themselves or to be defenseless. In a natural disaster you may not even be able to call the police. This is not a survivalist fantasy,it is a fact which anyone who has survived a severe hurricane can attest to. That some may have committed crimes as members of a militia no more invalidates the need for lawful gun ownership or for militias that are in the support of the law (fn7) than the killings of innocent men by the police prove that the police should be abolished. The right to keep & bear arms applies to self-defense,hunting & rebellion against a dictatorship, a dictatorship which would,by definition, be in violation of the law,it does not protect lynch mobs anymore than the Constitution protects police who commit murders. Yet today, in the aftermath of the bloodiest atrocities in human history,Stalin's purges,the Holocaust,the Cultural Revolution & the Killing Fields of Pol Pot all committed by governments against disarmed victims we are told that only the police can be entrusted with weapons. Yet these same people are the ones who urge that we ”forgive” violent offenders rather than ”just locking people up”. Footnotes: fn1. Tales of Post-Katrina Violence Go From Rumor to Fact - NYTimes.comhttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/us/27racial.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 fn2. Officers Found Guilty in Hurricane Katrina Bridge Shootings - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/us/06danziger.html?pagewanted=all fn3. Jury Convicts Three, Acquits Two in Post-Katrina Police Shooting | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/157029/jury-convicts-three-acquits-two-post-katrina-police-shooting fn4. CNN.com - Witnesses: New Orleans cops took Rolex watches, jewelry - Sep 30, 2005 http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/30/nopd.looting/index.html fn5. Katrina's Hidden Race War | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/katrinas-hidden-race-war Man can stand trial for Katrina shooting, judge says | NOLA.comhttp://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/07/man_can_stand_trial_for_katrin.html fn6. Josh Horwitz: The Lessons of Algiers Point http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-horwitz/the-lessons-of-algiers-po_b_166083.html fn7. .....” Adams wrote there that "[T]he rule in general is excellent". To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self -defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”..... A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 3:475 (1787 -1788).
