Posts Tagged ‘Barack Hussein Obama’

Obama: America’s Greatest Gun Salesman

June 27, 2016

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” – the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

The Washington Examiner reports that

Gun sales are on a pace to break last year’s record of more than 23 million, a boon to the U.S. industry and gun stores thanks to election-year worries about gun control and recent terror attacks, according to government figures and experts.

Under Obama, background checks for guns reached 141.4 million through the end of May, amounting to sales of about 52,600 a day, according to the FBI. Last year, the FBI conducted more than 23 million background checks, which are generally used to figure sales of new and used weapons.

Domestically, manufacturers have reported producing about 21,000 guns a day, or more than 46 million in Obama’s first six years in office.

And should Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton continue to best Republican Donald Trump in the polls, sales could hit new highs, according to industry experts.

Joining men in buying guns have been women, youths and now members of the LGBT community, especially after the terrorist slaying of 49 at an Orlando, Fla., gay nightclub this month.

Justin Anderson, marketing director for Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation’s biggest gun shops, said Obama has been great for sales.

“The recent surge in gun buying is based on two variables: fear of government intrusion on Second Amendment rights, and, more importantly, people interested in personal protection,” Anderson told Secrets.

“Our sales have doubled across the board, not just in AR-style rifles, but also in small frame handguns and home defense shotguns. We saw this just after the San Bernardino shooting, as well. More and more people are coming to realize that their personal safety is at risk and their government cannot protect them,” he said, adding:

“This is likely the beginning of a long rise in gun sales leading up the election. Should Hillary Clinton take a significant lead, it will only boost these sales.”

No Doubt.

That is what Liberals have never understood, in their continuous quest to take away the Second Amendment rights of average Americans.

Average Americans will never surrender our Constitutional Right to defend ourselves and our families from enemies foreign and domestic.

What part of the words quote “shall not be infringed” do you Liberals not understand?

Let’s have a “serious conversation” about the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, found in the section known as the “Bill of Rights”.

Why did our Founding Fathers, in all their wisdom, include this Amendment?

Dr. Nelson Lund, Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at George Mason University, wrote the following in an article posted at Heritage.org

The Founding generation mistrusted standing armies. Many Americans believed, on the basis of English history and their colonial experience, that central governments are prone to use armies to oppress the people. One way to reduce that danger would be to permit the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or similar emergencies, the government might be restricted to using a militia, consisting of ordinary civilians who supply their own weapons and receive a bit of part-time, unpaid military training.

…Thus, the choice was between a variety of militias controlled by the individual states, which would likely be too weak and divided to protect the nation, and a unified militia under federal control, which almost by definition could not be expected to prevent federal tyranny. This conundrum could not be solved, and the [Constitutional] Convention did not purport to solve it. Instead, the Convention presumed that a militia would exist, but it gave Congress almost unfettered authority to regulate that militia, just as it gave the new federal government almost unfettered authority over the army and navy.

This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that federal control over the militia would take away from the states their principal means of defense against federal oppression and usurpation, and that European history demonstrated how serious the danger was. James Madison, for one, responded that such fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the new federal government was structured differently from European governments. But he also pointed out a decisive difference between America and Europe: the American people were armed and would therefore be almost impossible to subdue through military force, even if one assumed that the federal government would try to use an army to do so. In The Federalist No. 46, he wrote:

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”

Implicit in the debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions: first, that the proposed new constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and the militia; and second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. The disagreement between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was only over the narrower question of how effective an armed population could be in protecting liberty.

My purpose in reviewing history is quite simple:

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

Make no mistake, if President Barack Hussein Obama had his way, we would live in a country comprised of restrictive gun laws, which would be modeled after those in Europe.

And, as recent events have plainly shown, those restrictive gun laws have allowed Islamic Terrorists to kill innocent people unchallenged, because none of those innocent people were allowed to carry a weapon with which to defend themselves.

In fact, in some cases, even the police officers, who first arrived on the scene, were unarmed, and had to call for additional forces, thus giving the perpetrators more time to murder and maim the innocent.

One of our Founding Fathers, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, once wrote,

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Like Dr. Franklin and the rest of those who have fought for our freedom, average Americans realize what Modern American Liberals, including the President, do not.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Orlando Massacre: Feds Change “Allah” to “God” in Transcript of Omar Mateen’s 911 Call…Deliberately

June 21, 2016

Bigot-Alert-LI-600Evil is a real thing. Morality is not relative and ethics are not situational. Mental illness is a real thing, also, but too often it is used as an excuse to avoid confronting the harsh reality of evil. – kingsjester, 6/21/16

Breitbart.com reports that

Monday’s release of the text of Orlando terrorist shooter Omar Mateen’s 9-1-1 call is not the first time the Obama administration purportedly scrubbed “Allah” from a transcript.

To this day, the official White House transcript of a Rose Garden ceremony with the father of released soldier Bowe Bergdahl transcribes every word besides Robert Bergdahl’s Arabic declaration of “Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim.”  That means “In the name of Allah, the merciful, the compassionate.”

The White House website provides a video of the ceremony, at which the controversial prisoner swap for Berghdahl in exchange for five Taliban members who were being held at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay was announced.

In the video, Robert Bergdahl can clearly be heard making the declaration to Allah.

Yet, here is the relevant portion of the official transcript, as provided by the White House:

I’d like to say to Bowe right now, who is having trouble speaking English — (speaks in Pashto) — I’m your father, Bowe.

The “Pashto” is actually Arabic.

Afterwards, the Daily Mail cited a report that the Taliban were “thrilled” at the declaration to Allah.

The newspaper reported:

The Arabic phrase bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim appears prominently in the Koran and means ‘In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful’.

Sara Carter, senior Washington correspondent for conservative news network TheBlaze, said her Taliban sources were ‘thrilled’ at the phrase being used.

At the time, former CIA officer Clare Lopez explained of the Arabic declaration, “These are the opening words of every chapter of the Qur’an except one (the chapter of the sword – the 9th).”

“By uttering these words on the grounds of the WH, Bergdahl (the father) sanctified the WH and claimed it for Islam,” Lopez charged.

Brigitte Gabriel of Act for America told Fox News that the expression declares the greatness of Allah, and she called it a “war cry of Allah.”

Zuhdi Jasser, an advocate for moderate Islam, told Fox News that he uses the phrase daily in his prayers and that the expression is not necessarily radical.

On Monday, the FBI finally released what it said was a full transcript of Mateen’s 50-second call with a 911 operator while he was perpetrating the deadly attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. After first releasing a redacted transcript that deleted references to the Islamic State, the FBI released the full transcript, which included an English translation changing the word “Allah” to “God.”

So, why is this noteworthy…and wrong?

Every time a Radical Islamist commits a mass murder in the name of Allah, whether overseas or on American Soil, I continue to hear and read from Modern American Liberals, “The Smartest People in the Room”, that there is not any difference between American Christianity and Radical Islam.

Quite frankly, that’s like saying that there’s no difference between Mister Rogers and Ted Bundy (look them up, children).

In Islam, the way to “walk with God and escape his judgement on that final day of judgment” is through ‘falah’, which means self-effort or positive achievement. The faithful must submit to God and follow all of his laws as found in the Koran. Judgment day in Islam involves some sort of measurement of what the believer has done wrong and what they have done right. And, even then, you might not be let into heaven if Allah decides you’re not good enough.

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

According to the Bible, no man can ever be good enough to deserve God’s favor, to win God’s heaven, because from birth we have Free Will. This Free Will may cause us to reject God and live our lives our own way. That’s why it was necessary for Jesus Christ to die for our sins, covering us in His blood of the New Covenant.

God’s Word tells us that what we need is not ‘falah,’ but faith. To have faith in, to trust, to rely on Jesus and his death as as “the expiation for our sins”. Those who have been Saved by Jesus Christ can be sure that in the future God will welcome them into heaven with wide open arms, because they have been washed by His blood.

Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 76% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

Now, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”.

However…

When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American Citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to kill the Infidels in the Name of Allah the Merciful”.

And, the thing is, The Quran tells them to do it.

What does the Islamic Book of Faith, the Koran (Quran) say about “killing in the Name of the Prophet (Mohammed)”?

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”
Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-” This passage criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that “Jihad” doesn’t mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man’s protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).
Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…” Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?
Quran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”
Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
While I have met some very nice American Muslims, I have also been inside a mosque where I was looked at as if they wanted to take a scimitar to my neck.

Gosh. I have no idea how Americans could have ever associated Islam with Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After all, those were Southern Baptists who killed over 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001, weren’t they?

If Moderate Muslims are not behind their radical brethren’s eternal jihad against us infidels, they need to get their mugs in front of the cable news networks’ TV cameras and say so…like Dr. Jasser does on Fox News.

Unfortunately, the good doctor is an aberration.

All one usually sees representing “Moderate Muslims” on the news programs, are the abrasive members of CAIR, blaming America for all the world’s troubles.

Finally, as exemplified by Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the Department of , and Professional and self-Proclaimed Political Pundits all over the World Wide Web, including the Social Media, why are American Liberals so naively defending these barbarians and desperately trying to equate a Political Ideology disguised as a religion to Christianity, the faith of 75% of America’s Population?

Are they so contrary, as to not realize that Radical Islam punishes every single social issue that American Liberals so “righteously” defend in this nation?

The maddening thing is that every time you challenge Lon this fact, they incessantly trot out the false equivalency that I just referenced.

For Liberals to deny that monsters like the Mass Murderer Omar Mateen were devout Muslims, and to refuse to identify Islamic Terrorism, and to provide cover for it, whether to false equivalencies, or proclaiming the Terrorist to be “mentally ill”, when Islamic Terrorism rears its ugly head, is disingenuous at best, and just plain out-and-out lying at worst.

The only way to successfully fight EVIL…is to identify it as such.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Censorship in the Name of the Prophet: References to Islamic Terrorism to be Expunged by DOJ From Orlando Massacre Transcript

June 20, 2016

Deflecting-600-CINow let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. It was formerly al-Qaida’s affiliate in Iraq and has taken advantage of sectarian strife and Syria’s civil war to gain territory on both sides of the Iraq-Syrian border. It is recognized by no government nor by the people it subjugates. ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way. – President Barack Hussein Obama, September 10, 2014, transcript courtesy of Washingtonpost.com

Realclearpolitics.com reports that

In an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, Attorney General Loretta Lynch says that on Monday, the FBI will release edited transcripts of the 911 calls made by the Orlando nightclub shooter to the police during his rampage.

“What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda,” Lynch said. “We are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance [to the Islamic State].”

The Washington Post reported last week that the gunman made multiple phone calls while holding hostages: “The gunman who opened fire inside a nightclub here said he carried out the attack because he wanted ‘Americans to stop bombing his country,’ according to a witness who survived the rampage.”

Salon reported that: “Everybody who was in the bathroom who survived could hear him talking to 911, saying the reason why he’s doing this is because he wanted America to stop bombing his country.”

The Washington Post also noted that during his 911 call from the club, the gunman referenced the Boston Marathon bombers and claimed “that he carried out the shooting to prevent bombings, [echoing] a message the younger Boston attacker had scrawled in a note before he was taken into custody by police.”

FBI Director James Comey said at a press conference that the shooter’s past comments about Islamist groups were “inflammatory and contradictory.”

“We see no clear evidence that he was directed externally,” the president added. “It does appear that at the last minute, he announced allegiance to ISIL. But there is no evidence so far that he was in fact directed by ISIL, and at this stage there’s no direct evidence that he was part of a larger plot.” ISIL is another name for ISIS, or the Islamic State.

Loretta Lynch says the FBI will release: “A printed transcript [that] will begin to capture the back and forth between him and the negotiators.”

“We’re trying to get as much information about this investigation out as possible,” she said.

Transcript:
LORETTA LYNCH: What we’re announcing tomorrow is that the FBI is releasing a partial transcript of the killer’s calls with law enforcement, from inside the club. These are the calls with the Orlando PD negotiating team, who he was, where he was… that will be coming out tomorrow and I’ll be headed to Orlando on Tuesday.

CHUCK TODD: Including the hostage negotiation part of this?

LYNCH: Yes, it will be primarily a partial transcript of his calls with the hostage negotiators.

CHUCK TODD: You say partial, what’s being left out?

LYNCH: What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda.

CHUCK TODD: We’re not going to hear him talk about those things?

LYNCH: We will hear him talk about some of those things, but we are not going to hear him make his assertions of allegiance and that. It will not be audio, it will be a printed transcript. But it will begin to capture the back and forth between him and the negotiators, we’re trying to get as much information about this investigation out as possible. As you know, because the killer is dead, we have a bit more leeway there and we will be producing that information tomorrow.

On September 25, 2012, United States President Barack Hussein Obama, appeared before the United Nations General Assembly, to address the circumstances of the massacre of four Americans on the grounds of the US Embassy Compound at Benghazi, Libya by Radical Islamists.

Here are the words he spoke, before representatives of the entire world:

…At times, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe; and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well – for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion – we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

Ever since the massacre in Orlando, which happened a week ago last Saturday , Modern American Liberals, including the Obama Administration, have been experiencing a cognitive dissidence between the actual facts of the massacre which killed 49 Gay Americans and wounded 53 others.

On one hand, they have been outspoken advocates for the cause of “Gay Rights”, and, on the other hand, they have been relentless in their ill-fated attempts to somehow equivocate or compare Radical Islam with American Christianity, a false equivalency that the overwhelming majority of Americans have rejected.

Obama and attorney general Lynch’s excuse for the censorship of the facts in this horrible Massacre is their insistence that Afghani-American Omar Mateen was nothing but a madman, and the followers of the Prophet Muhammad had nothing to do with the horrible events of last Saturday night.

The problem with that, it’s the fact that the Killer’s father is a radical Muslim, himself, as reported by CBS News.

The Orlando gay club gunman’s father has well-known anti-American views and is an ideological supporter of the Afghan Taliban. A new message posted by the father on Facebook early Monday morning also makes it clear he could have passed anti-homosexual views onto his son.

With this fact being public knowledge, that makes the Obama Administration’s censorship of Omar Mateen’s ties to Radical Islam, spurious at best.

And, aiding and abetting the enemy at worst.

Obamas immediate response to the massacre was to blame Americans’ guns, instead of the Radical Islamist who pulled the trigger.

In football, that is called a misdirection play.

Among con men, Obama’s initial response would be called “a set-up”.

And, the censorship of Mateen’s references to “Radical Islam” is Obama’s “Big Score”.

The problem is whether he is playing “football” or “larceny” the game Obama and his Administration is playing, will continue to cost Americans their lives.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Obama Goes “Pogo” in Orlando: “We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us.”

June 17, 2016

Old-Trick-600-LI

Pogo was a popular 20th-century American comic-strip character. He was a cartoon possum in an often politically-centered daily newspaper strip of the same name.

thGRILZWDFPogo Possum represented Everyman, even though he was a classic comedic straight man living among the denizens of Okefenokee Swamp, a community outside of Waycross, Georgia. Harmless and mild mannered, he could not avoid being drawn into the hare-brained schemes of his cigar-smoking friend, Albert Alligator; the swamp’s self-proclaimed bespectacled intellectual, Dr. Howland Owl; and others.

Most importantly, he was constantly pressured by his friends to run for president of the United States.

Created by cartoonist Walt Kelly, Pogo first appeared in 1941 in the Dell Comics’ anthology. Originally designed  to be clever but gentle “funny animals” storytelling, the newspaper strip eventually became one of political satire from a Liberal point-of-view.

In a slanted editorial, CNN.com “reports” that

In Orlando on Thursday, Obama vowed that the United States would do whatever it took to pursue ISIS abroad, but said it was not just the military that had to be involved. He quickly turned from terrorism to focus on gun control, issuing a fresh demand for Congress to take action to keep the most lethal weapons from being used in mass killings that have occurred over and over during his presidency.

His remarks, betraying his frustration at the failure of lawmakers to act, had more in common with his response to gun massacres than his more intellectual approach to talking about terrorism.

“Our politics have conspired to make it as easy as possible for a terrorist or even just a disturbed individual to buy extraordinarily powerful weapons, and they can do so legally,” Obama said after meeting families of the 49 victims of the shooting.

“Today, once again, as has been true too many times before, I held and hugged grieving family members and parents, and they asked, ‘Why does this keep happening?’ And they pleaded that we do more to stop the carnage. They don’t care about the politics. Neither do I.”

Vice President Joe Biden joined Obama in Orlando, as did Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio in a show of bipartisan unity.

In Obama’s mind, the logical reaction to terrorism is to deprive the terrorists of what they want, to stay firm to American values and not to indulge in theatrical vows for vengeance and bloodthirsty rhetoric.

“We must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us,” Obama said in the seminal speech of his administration about terrorism at the National Defense University in 2013.
Terrorism, as he sees it, is by definition is a tactic designed to create the maximum fear, emotion and panic in the populace, to lure the target into taking irrational responses that highlight the terrorists’ cause, impugn its own values and lead to a spiral of chaos and ruin.

At times, as with Orlando Sunday, after the Paris attacks last year, or after the Boston bombings, Obama has seemed to do a better job explaining the reasons for the attacks and the concept of terrorism itself than empathizing with Americans suddenly confronting the prospect of death and destruction being unleashed on the homeland.

It’s an approach that lacks the cathartic emotion that a politician like Trump can summon among supporters with claims that America is “weak” and needs to start getting “very tough” with terrorists.

And Trump reacted to the roasting he received from Obama Tuesday by noting that the President seemed “more angry at me than he was at the shooter.”

Moreover, his rhetorical style is mirrored by a policy approach that is designed to ensure the United States does not overreact to the terror threat — by waging new foreign ground wars of compromising its own values in balancing liberty and security.

But that has also offered an opening to critics who say he has played down the terror threat and, while still on a victory lap after the killing of Osama bin Laden, failed to anticipate the rise of ISIS.

His comment in 2014 that ISIS was a “JV” team will haunt his legacy, and his frequent comment that ISIS is not an “existential threat to us” — though perhaps factually correct — plays into critiques that he has minimized the group’s reach.

What Stephen Collinson, the author of this unapologetic piece of Presidential Propaganda is saying is that the intelligence of average Americans pales in comparison to that our President Barack Hussein Obama.

We, along with Presumptive Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump, simply do not understand the “Big Picture” like King Barack the First does.

What a crock of …well, you know.

Indeed, we (myself included) do not have access to all of the information regarding ISIS (not ISIL) that Obama does.

However, we do have access to Cable News…24 hours a day.

And, we are able to still learn from history…until Liberals succeed in their quest to rewrite it.

“Peace in Our Time” was delivered by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, in defense of the Munich Agreement, which he made with those infamous barbarians, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party, or as the world came to call them, the Nazis, and Hitler’s good buddy, the Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini.

The following is an excerpt:

…I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

We all know what happened next:  World War II.

That’s what happens when you negotiate with barbarians.

While we are on the subject of history, another Historical Leader said the following:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Back on January 13, 2013 while researching another post on the subject of Gun Control, I found some truth from a very unexpected source: Pravda.

(That’s pretty bad when Pravda is telling the truth and America’s Main Stream Media is not. But, I digress…)h

Before the Revolution in 1918, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on Earth.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

The difference between Trump’s proposal to try to limit Terrorists’ access to military-grade weaponry and Obama’s desire to take away those things which he said that we “bitterly cling to”, our guns, is the difference between prudence and tyranny.

Just as he did in the case of the San Bernadino Massacre, Obama’s first reaction is to blame Americans’ Second Amendment Right to Bare Arms, instead of the Radical Islamic Terrorists who pulled the trigger.

Obama’s quest to take away our guns is not only tyrannical, but a blatant example of hypocritical political expediency.

If you notice, the Secret Service Agents who guard him and his family are always visibly armed as a deterrent to anyone seeking to harm the President and First Family.

And, if you come down to Mississippi, you will find average Americans with their firearms holstered at their sides, thanks to the passage of an Open Carry Law.

Those who would seek to take away our Constitutional Rights and subjugate us through fear and intimidation don’t like Open Carry Laws and the Second Amendment to our nation’s Constitution very much.

In fact, they seek to do away with them.

Why?

It’s a deterrent.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

  

Touching a Nerve: Obama Attacks Trump. Defends His Refusal to Identify Radical Islam as America’s Enemy.

June 15, 2016

untitled (73)This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it. – Admiral Josh Painter (Fred Thompson), “The Hunt For Red October”

Yesterday, America…and the rest of the world, saw a sitting President of the United States of America, attempt to defend his weak leadership, which has led to Radical Islamic Terrorist murdering Americans on our soil.

According to Foxnews.com,

After years of brushing off criticism for avoiding the term “radical Islam,” President Obama fired a point-blank broadside Tuesday at his critics, calling the debate a “political distraction” that will do nothing to combat terrorism.

Speaking from the White House during what was expected to be an update for the public on the fight against the Islamic State, Obama lit into his critics and specifically presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump. Their criticism has mounted in the wake of the Orlando terror attack, which Obama declined to publicly link to radical Islam.

“Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. … There’s no magic to the phrase of radical Islam,” Obama countered Tuesday. “It’s a political talking point.” 

Trump and Capitol Hill Republicans swiftly pushed back on the president’s remarks.

Trump said Obama “claims to know our enemy, and yet he continues to prioritize our enemy over our allies, and for that matter, the American people.”

He also said: “When I am president, it will always be America first.”

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said earlier: “With all due respect Mr. President, you’re wrong. … Telling the truth about violent Islam is a prerequisite to a strategy — a strategy you admitted you don’t have. It is the commander-in-chief’s duty to actually identify our enemies and to help the American people understand the challenge of violent Islam.”

Obama, though, went on to warn of a slippery slope in this debate, citing Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration – a proposal many in Trump’s party do not support, including House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“We don’t have religious tests here,” Obama said, without attacking Trump by name. But answering one of Trump’s most frequent accusations, the president said his reluctance to use the phrase “radical Islam” has “nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism.”

He said groups like ISIS “want to claim that they are the true leaders of over a billion Muslims … who reject their crazy notions,” and a move to single out Muslims in America “betrays the very values America stands for.”

A day earlier, during a speech in New Hampshire, Trump had doubled down on his call for a Muslim immigration ban.

“It we don’t get tough, and we don’t get smart — and fast — we’re not going to have a country anymore. There will be nothing left,” Trump said.

Ryan, however, said Tuesday he does not support that proposal. “I do not think a Muslim ban is in our country’s interest,” Ryan said. “I do not think it is reflective of our principles, not just as a party but as a country.” 

Before tackling the “radical Islam” debate, Obama was speaking at the White House Tuesday to deliver a status report to the public on the fight against the Islamic State, after meeting with his National Security Council.

He claimed that campaign is making gains and ISIS is “on defense.”

A day earlier, presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton also claimed ISIS is losing ground in Iraq and Syria — but addressed other concerns about the group’s reach.

“As ISIS loses actual ground in Iraq and Syria, it will seek to stage more attacks and gain stronger footholds wherever it can, from Afghanistan, to Libya, to Europe,” Clinton said. “The threat is metastasizing.”

Further, Clinton referred openly in a TV interview to the threat from “radical Islamism.”

Obama, though, joined Clinton Tuesday in pushing for gun control measures to thwart terror attacks including renewing the assault-weapons ban.

“Make it harder for terrorists to use these weapons to kill us,” Obama said. 

On that point, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said, “We should not make it harder for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves when radical Islamic terrorists are successfully launching attacks on U.S. soil.”

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under the George W. Bush administration, said Tuesday that Obama’s remarks were like a “lecture” and urged Clinton to break with the president on the terminology issue.

“It shows the president to be a small man,” Bolton told Fox News. 

So, why doesn’t the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, identify our enemy?

When Barack Obama, Jr. was 3-years-old, his parents divorced.  Obama only saw his father one time after that.  Dad moved to Kenya and his mother married an Indonesian man, Lolo Soetoro.  From ages six to 10, Barack Obama, Jr., attended a private school for well-off Islamic families in Jakarta.

Obama once said in a New York Times article posted March 3, 2007:

“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are found on my blog, http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.

Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

On October2. 2008, Rick Moran wrote the following article for americanthinker.org…

Just  how much in donations from foreign countries is pouring into the Obama campaign coffers is a question one FEC auditor would like to have answered. The problem is that evidently, his bosses at the FEC are refusing to move on the charges which would almost certainly require them to ask the Justice Department and the FBI to look into the matter. This would, their reasoning goes, take on the appearance of a “criminal investigation” and would impact the coming election.

The anonymous investigator (who won’t reveal his name for fear of retribution) says that “I can’t get anyone to move. I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system that makes the Clinton and Gore fundraising scandals pale in comparison. And no one here wants to touch it.”

The American Spectator’s Washington Prowler writes:

The analyst, who declines to be identified for fear of retribution, says that on four different occasions in the past three months, he sought to open formal investigations into the Obama campaign’s fundraising techniques, but those investigations have been discouraged. “Without formal approval, I can’t get the resources I need, manpower, that kind of thing. This is a huge undertaking.” And the analyst says that he believes that campaign finance violations have occurred.

The Obama campaign has already had to deal with several FEC complaints about fraudulent donors and illegal foreign contributions, and the FEC says it has no record that those complaints have been resolved or closed. As well, the Obama campaign has been cagey at times about the means by which it has made its historic fundraising hauls, which now total almost $500 million for the election cycle. The Hillary Clinton campaign raised questions about the huge amount of e-retail sales the Obama campaign was making for such things as t-shirts and other campaign paraphernalia, and how such sales were being tracked and used for fundraising purposes. While the profits of those items counted against the $2,300 personal donation limit, there have always been lingering questions about the e-retail system.

“The question has always been, if you buy a $25 t-shirt and you go back to that purchaser eight or nine times with email appeals for $200 or $500 donations, and you have people donating like that all the time, at what point does the campaign bother to check if the FEC limit has been exceeded?” says a former Clinton campaign fundraiser. “There are enough of us from the 1992 and 1996 and 2000 races around to know that many of these kinds of violations never get caught until after the election has been won or lost.

Obama was forced to return $33,500 to a pair of Palestinian brothers who bought T-Shirts on the campaign’s website – a clear violation of FEC rules and the law. The campaign claims to have returned the money but the brothers deny they have received a refund. There have also been numerous questions about other donations that appear to come from the Middle East – not surprising given Obama’s connections to Tony Rezko (whose Middle East connections are mindblowing), Nadhmi Auchi, and other wealthy Arabs who might see an Obama presidency in a favorable light.

Then there was the curious case of a supposedly home grown video that was produced by a PR firm in Los Angeles owned by a huge, left wing, French media conglomerate. The money for the film and for the PR firm evidently came from Europeans.

There is little doubt that foreigners are licking their chops at the prospect of an inexperienced, naive, weak American president who will subsume American interests and cater to the whims of the UN while deferring the big questions to the Europeans. This isn’t even taking into account Obama’s strange policy toward Israel (where he says one thing but all his advisors say exactly the opposite) and the belief among Muslims that because he grew up in Indonesia, he will not be as forceful in prosecuting the war on terror.

There are dozens of reasons foreigners are pulling for Obama to win. There is little doubt that money from overseas is pouring into the Obama campaign.

And it is a dead certainty that the FEC won’t do a damn thing about it until after the election.

They never did.

In September of 2010, pewforum.org, published the following…

A substantial and growing number of Americans say that Barack Obama is a Muslim, while the proportion saying he is a Christian has declined. More than a year and a half into his presidency, a plurality of the public says they do not know what religion Obama follows.

A new national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama’s religion is. The survey was completed in early August, before Obama’s recent comments about the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the former World Trade Center.

The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers. Roughly a third of conservative Republicans (34%) say Obama is a Muslim, as do 30% of those who disapprove of Obama’s job performance. But even among many of his supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is a Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.

The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points). But the number of independents who say Obama is a Muslim has also increased significantly (up eight points). There has been little change in the number of Democrats who say Obama is a Muslim, but fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009).

When asked how they learned about Obama’s religion in an open-ended question, 60% of those who say Obama is a Muslim cite the media. Among specific media sources, television (at 16%) is mentioned most frequently. About one-in-ten (11%) of those who say Obama is a Muslim say they learned of this through Obama’s own words and behavior.

So, why do Liberals, who, unlike, Obama, having not been educated in Islam, still refuse to admit that America is at WAR with Radical Islam?

On April 20, 2013, in the aftermath of the bombing of the Boston Marathon by two Radical Islamic Brothers, who were “Refugees” from  Chechnya, I wrote

“So, why have Liberals, in the MSM, and elsewhere, been so afraid to call Muslim Terrorists, Muslim Terrorists?

Is it because of that heinous practice, known as Political Correctness?

We’ve all been a victim of it. And, it’s not just the Liberals who practice it.

A short time back, a young Libertarian lady, who just happens to be Black, had posted an article in a Facebook Page for Conservatives and Libertarians, featuring Patti Davis, the Liberal (and crazy) daughter of Former President Ronald Reagan. Davis had come out as the moral arbiter of some issue, and I pointed out that she was not fit to be the “moral arbiter” in any situation, as, to torque off her Dad, and make a political statement, she had posed topless for the cover of Playboy in 1994 with a Black guy, standing behind her, cupping her…umm…chest.

Both the young lady and her husband, who happens to be White, jumped on me, like I was some sort of RAAACIIIST, because I stated the obvious.

archiesammyTimes were different, back in ’94. Just as they were different back in the 70s, when Bud Yorkin and Norman Lear created All in the Family, starring the great American actor, Carroll O’Connor. The misadventures of Archie Bunker and his family could not be a hit today. Our tolerant American Liberals (and others) would not allow it. And, the lessons learned from that ground-breaking television series would be lost.

Perhaps, the reticence by the Media to identify the religious/political ideology of the two brothers is something else: loyalty to President Barack Hussein Obama.

They have a lot invested in The Lightbringer. They have campaigned endlessly for him, and the majority of “Broadcast Journalists” share his vision for a Socialist Utopia America. Additionally, the White House has been known to send e-mails and make telephone calls to these bastions of journalistic integrity, when they want something swept under the Oval Office rug.

The fact that these murdering terrorists are Muslims, does not reflect well on our dhimmi President. In fact, it proves that Smart Power! is anything, but.

Additionally, the fact that these two got into our sovereign land in the first place, shows the folly of relaxing our already-porous Immigration Laws (Sorry, Sen. Rubio.).

With the resounding defeat of Obama’s Gun Confiscation Bill, and now, in the aftermath of the New Boston Massacre, the Obama Administration and their Main Stream Media lackeys are bailing, just as fast as they can, in order to save Obama’s sinking Ship of State.

Oh, but, just wait. You ain’t seen nothin’, yet.”

And now, in 2016, I have been proven to be a prophet as we watch the Main Stream Media continue to protect the legacy of Barack Hussein Obama and now, the Candidacy of Hillary Clinton, by their reticence to identify Radical Islamists for who they are.

Dear Lord, I hate it when I’m right.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

They Live Among Us: Mateen, the Irving, Texas “Clockmaker Kid”, and the Rise of Homegrown Radical Islamists

June 14, 2016

untitled (72)Yesterday, Presumptive Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump spoke to the nation about the horrific Saturday Night Massacre at a Gay Club in Orlando, in which 49 Americans were killed and 53 were injured by an Islamic Terrorist.

He said in this Presidential-sounding speech that

…If we don’t get tough, and we don’t get smart – and fast – we’re not going to have a country anymore — there will be nothing left.The killer, whose name I will not use, or ever say, was born to Afghan parents who immigrated to the United States. His father published support for the Afghan Taliban, a regime which murders those who don’t share its radical views. The father even said he was running for President of that country.

The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here.

That is a fact, and it’s a fact we need to talk about.

We have a dysfunctional immigration system which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens.

We have an incompetent administration, and if I am not elected President, that will not change over the next four years — but it must change, and it must change now.

With fifty people dead, and dozens more wounded, we cannot afford to talk around the issue anymore — we have to address it head on.

I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so — and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country.

The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate.

I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.

After a full, impartial and long overdue security assessment, we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America.

We cannot continue to allow thousands upon thousands of people to pour into our country, many of whom have the same thought process as this savage killer.

Again, common sense stuff, coming from a man who would be our President. Very Refreshing.

However, America’s problem is the fact that we have Second Generation Radical Islamists living among us.

According to an article found in The Washington Times,

While immigrants draw much of the attention, it’s their children who are proving to be the most fruitful recruiting ground for radical jihad in the U.S., accounting for at least half of the deadly attacks over the past decade.

The latest instance of the second-generation terrorist syndrome played out in Orlando, Florida, over the weekend when Omar Mateen, son of immigrants from Afghanistan, went on a jihad-inspired rampage, killing 49 people and wounding 53 others in the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.

Authorities said Mateen had flirted with other terrorist groups but declared his allegiance to the Islamic State on Sunday morning as he began his horrific spree.

He follows in the footsteps of Syed Rizwan Farook, one of the San Bernardino, California, terrorists who was the son of Pakistanis; Nadir Soofi, one of two men who attacked a drawing competition in Garland, Texas, last year and whose father was from Pakistan; and then-Maj. Nidal Hassan, the child of Palestinian immigrants whose shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009 set off the modern round of deadly lone-wolf attacks.

In other cases, attackers were immigrants brought to the U.S. as young children. They grew up in the U.S. but were besieged by questions of identity.

“Historically, the ‘high stress’ generation for American immigrants has been second generation,” said former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden. “Mom and Pop can rely on the culture of where they came from. Their grandchildren will be (more or less) thoroughly American. The generation in between, though, is anchored neither in the old or in the new. They often are searching for self or identity beyond self.”

The Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers were all foreigners who gained entry to the U.S. on visas, sparking a heated and still-running debate over the role of borders in trying to keep out would-be attackers.

But the second-generation killers pose a different issue: how to keep children of immigrants from abandoning the precepts of their adopted home.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said Monday that the issues are one and the same.

“The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here. That is a fact, and it’s a fact we need to talk about,” Mr. Trump said in a speech in New Hampshire.

He revised his call for a temporary ban on admitting Muslims to the U.S., saying it would apply only to travelers from regions connected to terrorism. He said the ban would end once the U.S. has a better idea of who is coming and what values they hold.

Mr. Trump said immigrants from Afghanistan — the home of Mateen’s parents — overwhelmingly “support oppressive Sharia law,” which he said is anathema to American values of diversity. Indeed, Mateen’s father suggested that the killer may have been set off by having seen two men kissing. Mateen’s massacre targeted a gay nightclub.

But some researchers suggest the link to religion is less important than the marginalization immigrants and first-generation Americans may feel. In a study last year funded by the Homeland Security Department, researchers said those who felt instances of discrimination, personal shame or humiliation had higher propensity toward radicalization.

Some policymakers bristle at connecting terrorist attacks to immigration, and it’s difficult to know the outlines of the connection.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, and Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, have repeatedly asked the Homeland Security Department for immigration information on those implicated in recent terrorist plots, but they said they have yet to get a “substantive” response.

That leaves the public blind, Mr. Sessions said in a statement Monday.

“While the vast majority of Muslims are law-abiding and peaceful, we must face the uncomfortable reality that not only are immigrants from Muslim-majority countries coming to the United States, radicalizing, and attempting to engage in acts of terrorism, such as in Boston and Chattanooga; but also, their first-generation American children are susceptible to the toxic radicalization of terrorist organizations,” Mr. Sessions said.

If you were watching Saturday morning cartoons in 1977 on ABC, you would have seen this Schoolhouse Rock musical cartoon titled The Great American Melting Pot.  It extolled the unique greatness of  our American Heritage.
For a while now, that heritage has been under attack. And, that attack by enemies foreign and domestic has been aided and abetted by President Barack Hussein Obama, the individual who is responsible for maintaining our nation’s safety, security, and sovereignty.

Remember the celebrated young Muslim kid named Ahmed Mohammed, who received a suspension from a school in Irving, Texas for building a clock, which resembled a bomb?

Liberals all of the nation were up in arms about this perceived “stereotyping”.

In fact, so much notoriety was generated that he and his family were invited to the White House by Obama himself.

Then, the plot sickened.

The young clockmaker’s father turned out to be a Muslim Activist, with a long history of getting his mug in front of the cameras.

Additionally, the fact that Barack Hussein Obama sent his congratulations tweet out before the photo of the actual device made the national headlines, was suspicious at best, and condemning at worst.

This would not be the first stunt like this that Obama had pulled, in order to make the American public more comfortable with Muslims living among us.

This sort of covert White House-sponsored charade has been par for the course during Obama’s tenure as president.

However, thanks to the World Wide Web, it is not as easy for him to pull the wool over Americans eyes as it used to be.

The most current example being his lame, un-presidential reaction to Saturday Night’s Terrorist Attack, in which America’s Dhimmi-in-Chief, blamed our Second Amendment Right to Bare Arms, instead of the Muslim responsible for savagely murdering 49 Americans.

Just like the young “clockmaker”, Mateen was raised to be loyal to Radical Islam, not the United States of America, the nation which graciously took him and his family in.

And, as far as Obama goes, the truth of the matter is, his blatant refusal to identify Radical Islam as our enemy does not make him look open-minded and magnanimous. Rather, it makes the President of the United States of America look close minded and duplicitous.

Americans are a very accepting people, but that acceptance hinges on those coming into our society, pledging their loyalty to our nation, and having respect for our Traditional Values and American Way of life.

Obama’s attempt to turn the Great American Melting Pot into the Tower of Babel, in the name of “diversity”…and Democratic Voters….has not only failed…it has turned the street of America into a “Killing Field”, reminiscent of the Cambodian Massacres under the brutal dictator, Pol Pot.

The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed because America had experienced an overwhelming flood of immigrants, which strained the resources of our nation.
This act allowed all of these immigrants to be assimilated into American Society and to actually become Americans, in thought, word, deed, and LOYALTY.
Later, Liberal President Jimmy Carter stopped Iranians from immigrating, because, just like the situation we faced today with Radical Islam, we were AT WAR.
In fact, Obama and his Administration are themselves actually restrictive in whom they allow to immigrate to America., refusing the entry of Middle Eastern Christians, who are attempting to escape for certain death at the hands of Radical Islamists.
The only reason that Obama, Clinton, and the rest of the Democrat Elite are mad at Donald J. Trump’s Proposal to restrict the immigration of those who would kill us, is that he is attempting to thwart their plans to rapidly import thousands of Muslims, and potential Democrat Voters, into our country.
They could care less about the results of their avarice.
Like all Liberals, they remain oblivious of their own callous hypocrisy.
Until He Comes,
KJ

 

The Responses to the Orlando Massacre: Who Wants to Grab Our Guns and Who Actually Wants to Protect Us and Our Sovereignty?

June 13, 2016

th11H2T5YYOn Sunday Morning, June 12, 2016, Americans awoke to the horrific news that Jihad had once again come to America, this time in the form of a horrific massacre at a Gay Nightclub in Orlando, Florida, which left 50 Americans dead and 53 wounded at the hands of an Islamic Terrorist, whom, after 9/11, had claimed that Osama bin Laden was his uncle.

The sitting President of the United States of America did not possess the courage to name the reason for the attack. Instead, in speaking to the nation, he said,

Today, as Americans, we grieve the brutal murder — a horrific massacre — of dozens of innocent people. We pray for their families, who are grasping for answers with broken hearts. We stand with the people of Orlando, who have endured a terrible attack on their city. Although it’s still early in the investigation, we know enough to say that this was an act of terror and an act of hate. And as Americans, we are united in grief, in outrage, and in resolve to defend our people.
 
I just finished a meeting with FBI Director Comey and my homeland security and national security advisors. The FBI is on the scene and leading the investigation, in partnership with local law enforcement. I’ve directed that the full resources of the federal government be made available for this investigation. 
We are still learning all the facts. This is an open investigation. We’ve reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer. The FBI is appropriately investigating this as an act of terrorism. And I’ve directed that we must spare no effort to determine what — if any — inspiration or association this killer may have had with terrorist groups. What is clear is that he was a person filled with hatred. Over the coming days, we’ll uncover why and how this happened, and we will go wherever the facts lead us.

…Today marks the most deadly shooting in American history. The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle. This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub. And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.
 
In the coming hours and days, we’ll learn about the victims of this tragedy. Their names. Their faces. Who they were. The joy that they brought to families and to friends, and the difference that they made in this world. Say a prayer for them and say a prayer for their families — that God give them the strength to bear the unbearable. And that He give us all the strength to be there for them, and the strength and courage to change. We need to demonstrate that we are defined more — as a country — by the way they lived their lives than by thhttp://www.abcactionnews.com/news/national/hillary-clinton-releases-statement-on-the-orlando-massacree hate of the man who took them from us. (courtesy www.whitehouse.gov)

The presumptive Democratic Party Presidential Candidate, Hillary Clinton, marched in lockstep with her former boss, releasing the following statement:

I join Americans in praying for the victims of the attack in Orlando, their families and the first responders who did everything they could to save lives.   

This was an act of terror.  Law enforcement and intelligence agencies are hard at work, and we will learn more in the hours and days ahead.  For now, we can say for certain that we need to redouble our efforts to defend our country from threats at home and abroad.  That means defeating international terror groups, working with allies and partners to go after them wherever they are, countering their attempts to recruit people here and everywhere, and hardening our defenses at home. It also means refusing to be intimidated and staying true to our values.
 
This was also an act of hate.  The gunman attacked an LGBT nightclub during Pride Month.  To the LGBT community: please know that you have millions of allies across our country.  I am one of them.  We will keep fighting for your right to live freely, openly and without fear.  Hate has absolutely no place in America. 
 
Finally, we need to keep guns like the ones used last night out of the hands of terrorists or other violent criminals.  This is the deadliest mass shooting in the history of the United States and it reminds us once more that weapons of war have no place on our streets.  
 
This is a time to stand together and resolve to do everything we can to defend our communities and country.”

Please note that neither one of them had the intestinal fortitude to blame the real reason for the murder and maiming of 103 Americans: Radical Islam.

The only one who actually sounded PRESIDENTIAL yesterday was the Presumptive Republican Nominee, Donald J. Trump.

Last night, our nation was attacked by a radical Islamic terrorist. It was the worst terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11, and the second of its kind in 6 months. My deepest sympathy and support goes out to the victims, the wounded, and their families.In his remarks today, President Obama disgracefully refused to even say the words ‘Radical Islam’. For that reason alone, he should step down. I…f Hillary Clinton, after this attack, still cannot say the two words ‘Radical Islam’ she should get out of this race for the Presidency.

If we do not get tough and smart real fast, we are not going to have a country anymore. Because our leaders are weak, I said this was going to happen – and it is only going to get worse. I am trying to save lives and prevent the next terrorist attack. We can’t afford to be politically correct anymore.

The terrorist, Omar Mir Saddique Mateen, is the son of an immigrant from Afghanistan who openly published his support for the Afghanistani Taliban and even tried to run for President of Afghanistan. According to Pew, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

We admit more than 100,000 lifetime migrants from the Middle East each year. Since 9/11, hundreds of migrants and their children have been implicated in terrorism in the United States.

Hillary Clinton wants to dramatically increase admissions from the Middle East, bringing in many hundreds of thousands during a first term – and we will have no way to screen them, pay for them, or prevent the second generation from radicalizing.

We need to protect all Americans, of all backgrounds and all beliefs, from Radical Islamic Terrorism – which has no place in an open and tolerant society. Radical Islam advocates hate for women, gays, Jews, Christians and all Americans. I am going to be a President for all Americans, and I am going to protect and defend all Americans. We are going to make America safe again and great again for everyone.

Common sense stuff, right?

Then why are Obama and Clinton blaming the gun, instead of the shooter and his political ideology which disguises itself as a religion?

That’s lake a parent, who, when their child trips and bangs their head on the coffee table, spanks the coffee table and says’ “bad table” in order to appease the child.

Are Obama and Clinton naïve or just plain spineless?

Are they so contrary, as to not realize that Radical Islam punishes every single social issue that American Liberals so “righteously” defend in this nation?

The maddening thing is that every time you challenge Liberals like Obama and Clinton on this fact, they try to equate radical Islam with American Christianity.

Frankly, their purposeful ignorance blows my mind.

Americans have heard and read from some of this “Me, First Generation” that there is not any difference between American Christianity and Radical Islam.

Quite frankly, that’s like saying that there’s no difference between an in-ground swimming pool and a garden hose.

In Islam, the way to “walk with God and escape his judgement on that final day of judgment” is through ‘falah’, which means self-effort or positive achievement. The faithful must submit to God and follow all of his laws as found in the Koran. Judgment day in Islam involves some sort of measurement of what the believer has done wrong and what they have done right. And, even then, you might not be let into heaven if Allah decides you’re not good enough.

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

According to the Bible, no man can ever be good enough to deserve God’s favor, to win God’s heaven, because from birth we have Free Will. This Free Will may cause us to reject God and live our lives our own way. That’s why it was necessary for Jesus Christ to die for our sins, covering us in His blood of the New Covenant.

God’s Word tells us that what we need is not ‘falah,’ but faith. To have faith in, to trust, to rely on Jesus and his death as as “the expiation for our sins”. Those who have been Saved by Jesus Christ can be sure that in the future God will welcome them into heaven with wide open arms, because they have been washed by His blood.

Older Americans, such as myself, actually see radical Islam and Sharia law for what it is.

Why is that?

I believe that it is because of the old adage,

With age comes wisdom.

Older Americans can remember when the Shah of Iran was deposed and the Radical Mullahs took over the nation, holding Americans hostage, under the ineffectual American President Jimmy Carter, for 444 days.

The only reason that those hostages were not killed and were let go, was the inauguration of President Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Donald J. Trump hit the nail squarely on the head in his statement about the Orlando Massacre.

The only thing that these barbarians fear is strength, as the leader of Jordan has demonstrated.

Older Americans were raised differently than this current generation, for the most part. We were raised to understand Christianity’s place, as the stitching, in the fabric of our nation.

It is a legacy which our fathers and their fathers, bequeathed to us, along with the courage to stand up for our beliefs.

This latest generation, seems to be more interested in watching a woman who takes a bath in fruit loops, interviewing the President of the United States, than they are about what is actually happening in our nation.

This generation’s predilection for situational ethics, relative morality, and all-encompassing political correctness, is reminiscent of the cattle who are led up the ramp to the slaughter house.

They go through their lives, content in their ignorance, until the blade falls.

Unfortunately, this is the generation that we are leaving our country to.

It is time for them to wake up, grow up, and stand up. .before it’s too late.

I want a President who loves America and will fight for us.

We do not need a President who refuses to call out our enemy by name and, instead wishes to take our Second Amendment Right to defend ourselves away from us.

Please remember what we are all feeling today this November.

And, vote accordingly.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Crooked President Endorses “Crooked Hillary”. Socialist VP Candidate in the Wings?

June 10, 2016

screen%20shot%202016-06-09%20at%202.01.03%20pmYesterday was a very busy day in the World of American Politics.

In fact. it was so busy that it left my head spinning.

Or, it could be nausea.

The Washington Post reports that

President Obama offered his formal endorsement of Hillary Clinton with a video Thursday and plans to campaign with the former secretary of state in Wisconsin next week, efforts aimed at speeding the Democratic Party’s unification around its presumed presidential nominee.

“I know how hard this job can be, that’s why I know Hillary will be so good at it,” Obama says in the video. “In fact I don’t think there’s ever been someone so qualified to hold this office. She’s got the courage, the compassion and the heart to get this job done.”

The swift endorsement came after the president met with Sen. Bernie Sanders at the White House earlier Thursday and the senator from Vermont indicated he is preparing to exit the Democratic nominating battle.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) will offer her own endorsement later Thursday on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, a person close to Warren confirmed on condition of anonymity. The only Democratic woman in the Senate who had not yet endorsed Clinton, Warren’s support is expected to help bring Sanders supporters and the left generally in line behind the presumptive nominee.

Sanders has been under pressure to stand down and help unify the party after a long and contentious contest with Clinton for the nomination.

One of Obama’s tasks will be to try to rally those who have backed Sanders behind Clinton’s candidacy.

The short video provides a preview of the central theme Obama is likely to hammer away at for months to come: that Clinton’s experience, toughness and values make her more qualified to lead the country than a real estate magnate who’s never held public office.“And from the decision we made in the Situation Room to get bin Laden, to our pursuit of diplomacy in capitals around the world, I have seen her judgment, I’ve seen her toughness,” the president said. “I’ve seen her commitment to our values up close.”

Clinton and Obama will campaign together in Green Bay, Wis., her campaign confirmed.

In an interview with Bloomberg News, timed to correspond with the video’s release, Clinton welcomed the Obama endorsement.

“It just means so much to have a strong, substantive endorsement from the president. Obviously I value his opinion a great deal personally,” Clinton said. “It’s just such a treat because over the years of knowing each other, we’ve gone from fierce competitors to true friends.”

Sanders told reporters after his White House meeting he is looking forward to working with Clinton to defeat Trump in the fall.

“Needless to say, I’m going to do everything in my power, and I’m going to work as hard as I can, to make sure that Donald Trump does not become president of the United States,” he told reporters, as his wife, Jane, stood behind him.

Trump, meanwhile, offered his thoughts in a tweet: “Obama just endorsed Crooked Hillary. He wants four more years of Obama — but nobody else does!”

Sanders said he still plans to compete in Tuesday’s final Democratic primary in the District, but he added that “in the near future” he hopes to meet with Clinton — who this week clinched the Democratic nomination — to talk about ways they can work together.

His comments suggested that Sanders is preparing to exit the long and grueling presidential race so long as leading Democrats make a genuine effort to incorporate his policy ideas into their broader agenda.

The hour-long meeting with Obama came on a busy day for Sanders in Washington, where he also met on Capitol Hill with Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.); Reid has sought to play the role of peace broker at the end of a contentious nominating contest between Sanders and Clinton.

An afternoon meeting with Vice President Biden was also added to Sanders’s schedule for Thursday. The two are set to meet at the vice president’s residence at the Naval Observatory, said Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs.

“He is seeking out the counsel of people he admires and respects,” Briggs said of Sanders.

Increasingly, Sanders’s aim seems to be using the leverage that he and his millions of loyal followers now have to ensure that his campaign agenda — anchored around issues of income and wealth inequality — has a central place in the Democratic Party’s platform and general-election strategy.

Meanwhile, the plot sickens…per Fox News:

White House press secretary Josh Earnest on Thursday called the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton a “criminal investigation.”

Fox News reporter James Rosen said to Earnest, “So when a career prosecutor or an FBI agent working on the Clinton investigation hears this President speak openly about how he wants Hillary Clinton to succeed him, you don’t think that that career prosecutor or that FBI agent takes that as some indication as to how the president wants to see this case resolved?”

I have spent a lot of time the last couple of years writing about the Washingtonian Status Quo and the tone-deaf nature of the REplublican Establishment, or “Vichy” Republicans, as I dubbed them, for their predilection to sell out and acquiesce to the political schemes of the other side of the Political Aisle, the members of the Democratic Party.

Now, unless the Socialist Senator from Vermont decides to launch an ill-fated Third Party Campaign for the Presidency, Bernie Sanders’ Supporters, including all of those mush-minded millennials, who thought that Uncle Bernie was going to become President and give them all “free stuff”, are about to “Feel the Bern” alright…in the same region as Jack did when he jumped over the candle stick.

Depending on whether the Far Left Advocates, who now control the Democratic Party, will decide to completely drop their mask dyring Hillary’s Presidential Campaign and proudly proclaim their Marxism or not, Sanders, the “Doc Emmett Brown look-alike, could be asked to be Hillary’s Vice-Presidential Candidate, in order to attempt to secure the much-needed vote of the easily-led millennials.

That would solve one problem that the Democrat Hieracrchy faces.

However, they face an even bigger one:

Their Presidential Candidate is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Obama’s endorsement will not whitewash this fact.

Neither will his blocking the FBI from seeking an indictment of Hillary Clinton, is that is his plan, which I am certain that it is.

The Democrats are calling the Upcoming Nomination and Campaign of Hillary Clinton for the Presidency of the United States, a “Seminal Moment in American History”. All of this adulation is not because she is all that and a bag of chips. They are lauding her candidacy, simply because she is a woman.

Well, it’s a Seminal Moment in American History, alright. But, not for that reason. Other women, as you can read all over Facebook, have run for the Office of President before.

This moment is unique in American History because a Sitting President has endorsed a Former Secretary of State, who is facing CRIMINAL CHARGES for her ability to safeguard America’s Foreign Policy Top Secret Plans and Strategies, which contained acts which quite probably endangered American lives.

To summarize, you have a Machiavellian Sitting President, who has deliberately split this nation along Racial, Moral, Ethical, and Socio-Economic Lines, endorsing as his potential successor a woman, whose biggest professional accomplishment was the mishandling of Top Secret Foreign Policy E-mails, and who might choose a full-blown Marxist as her Vice-Presidential Candidate.

Doesn’t this give you the “warm fuzzies”?

It does me. Although, as I mentioned at the beginning of this post, it is probably nausea.

All of these Democratic Political Machinations should not surprise you.

After all, when it comes to the Sitting President and his Former Secretary of State, it has been proven time and time again that

One lies and the other swears to it.

Now, please excuse, I have to go hurl.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

WH Press Secretary Josh Earnest Does Not Answer When Asked Repeatedly if Administration Lied About Iran Deal

June 7, 2016

ObamalyingI think it’s brilliant! What an idea! And I was there! He took the idea! He saw it ripe on the tree, he plucked it, and he put it in his pocket. It’s, it’s, dare I say… genius? Ah, no, no! But maybe, ooh! ah! maybe it is! Maybe I’m in the presence of greatness, maybe I just don’t know it. But I saw it… – Fire Chief C.D. Bales (Steve Martin), “Roxanne”, 1987

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction. – Barry McGuire, “Eve of Destruction” (1965)

CNSNews.com reports that

White House press secretary Josh Earnest twice on Monday did not give a direct, yes or no response to a reporter’s question about whether any senior administration official had ever lied publicly about the Iran nuclear deal. Each time he chose instead to answer in what he called “the affirmative,” saying the administration had made a “truthful” case about the agreement – an agreement which he also predicted would be “an important part of this president’s legacy.”

Wall Street Journal reporter Byron Tau asked Earnest, “Can you categorically state that no senior administration official in this administration has ever lied publicly about any aspect of the Iran nuclear deal?”

“Let me just state in the affirmative,” he replied, “which is that the administration has made a forceful and fact-based, accurate, truthful case about how the American people and the international community benefit from an international agreement to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Earnest went on to tell Tau it would be a “much more worthy endeavor” to examine the claims of critics of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action who he said had been proven wrong in their criticism.

“I think it’s worthy of spending some time considering exactly whether or not those individuals were just misinformed or lying,” he said.

Tau tried again: “But you’re unwilling to categorically state that no public officials ever willfully misled on the Iran deal?”

“Byron, I can categorically say – ” Earnest began. “I’m going to say it in the affirmative.  Unless you want – you want to present some evidence, or just make a claim?”

“No, I mean, just there was some confusion over this on the question,” Tau said.

“What we said about the Iran deal and its benefits for the American people have come to pass. And that’s something that this administration is quite proud of, and I think it will be an important part of this president’s legacy.”

The question asked by Tau Monday had originally been asked by Fox News reporter Kevin Cooke at a White House briefing on May 9: “Can you state categorically that no senior official in this administration has ever lied publicly about any aspect of the Iran nuclear deal?”

On that occasion Earnest was heard to reply quietly, “No Kevin,” but ABC News reported at the weekend that the two words did not appear in the official transcript.

Tau prefaced his question to Earnest Monday by comparing the missing two words to the ongoing controversy over a State Department briefing video that was censored at the request of an official whose identity remains unknown.

In both cases, he noted, the comments related to the Iran nuclear deal.

Earnest took issue with the comparison, saying that in the White House case the words were omitted from the transcript as there had been some “cross-talk” in the briefing room at the time.

Wait a minute.

The Most Ethical Administration EVAH lied about a cockamamie deal which gives the World’s State Sponsor of Islamic Terrorism Nuclear Capability?

I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

Seriously…since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America. Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Ronald Reagan won the Presidential Election of 1980, partly because of the failure of the Carter Administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And, now, all these years later, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, blatantly lied to the Nation which he is sworn to protect while handing that Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction of both the United States of America and  our staunch ally, Israel.

Schmuck.

Don’t believe me?

Allow me to introduce you to an actual Leader: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu.

Here is what he had, to say at the time about this “wonderful deal”:

The world is a much more dangerous place today than it was yesterday.

The leading international powers have bet our collective future on a deal with the foremost sponsor of international terrorism. They’ve gambled that in ten years’ time, Iran’s terrorist regime will change while removing any incentive for it to do so. In fact, the deal gives Iran every incentive not to change.

In the coming decade, the deal will reward Iran, the terrorist regime in Tehran, with hundreds of billions of dollars. This cash bonanza will fuel Iran’s terrorism worldwide, its aggression in the region and its efforts to destroy Israel, which are ongoing.

Amazingly, this bad deal does not require Iran to cease its aggressive behavior in any way. And just last Friday, that aggression was on display for all to see.

While the negotiators were closing the deal in Vienna, Iran’s supposedly moderate president chose to go to a rally in Tehran and at this rally, a frenzied mob burned American and Israeli flags and chanted ‘Death to America, Death to Israel!’

Now, this didn’t happen four years ago. It happened four days ago.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah Khaomeini, said on March 21 that the deal does not limit Iran’s aggression in any way. He said: ‘Negotiations with the United States are on the nuclear issue and on nothing else.’

And three days ago he made that clear again. ‘The United States’, he said, ’embodies global arrogance, and the battle against it will continue unabated even after the nuclear agreement is concluded.’

Here’s what Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Iran’s terrorist proxy Hezbollah, said about sanctions relief, which is a key component of the deal. He said: ‘A rich and strong Iran will be able to stand by its allies and friends in the region more than at any time in the past.’

Translation: Iran’s support for terrorism and subversion will actually increase after the deal.

In addition to filling Iran’s terror war chest, this deal repeats the mistakes made with North Korea.

There too we were assured that inspections and verifications would prevent a rogue regime from developing nuclear weapons.

And we all know how that ended.

The bottom line of this very bad deal is exactly what Iran’s President Rouhani said today: ‘The international community is removing the sanctions and Iran is keeping its nuclear program.’

By not dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, in a decade this deal will give an unreformed, unrepentant and far richer terrorist regime the capacity to produce many nuclear bombs, in fact an entire nuclear arsenal with the means to deliver it.

What a stunning historic mistake!

Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran and Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran because Iran continues to seek our destruction.

We will always defend ourselves.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir. How refreshing.

Of course, just a few months later, one of our Navy Vessels and its crew was taken captive by the Iranians, who took videos and stills of their interrogations, which were disseminated worldwide for propaganda purposes.

And, what did Obama and Kerry do about it?

They gave the barbarians money to let them go.

Yes, really.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012, and his fellow prisoners.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal have shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” which has already started to blow up in their faces figuratively, and will also blow up literally “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

Obama’s concern is not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Obama, as he always has been, is concerned with himself and leaving a marvelous legacy as president.

Giving Iran the means to “kill the infidels” will definitely cement Obama’s Legacy…if there is anyone left to remember it.

And, as far as lying to us about placing America in danger, Obama could care less.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Obama has screwed both God’s Chosen People and the nation which he is sworn to protect…for the sake of his own ego’s contentment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Remembering D-Day: 72 Years Later…A Tale of Two Soldiers

June 6, 2016

D-Day, also called the Battle of Normandy, was fought on June 6, 1944, between the Allied nations and German forces occupying Western Europe. To this day, 70 years later, it  still remains the largest seaborne invasion in history. Almost three million troops crossed the English Channel from England to Normandy to be used as human cannon fodder in an invasion of occupied France.

The twelve nations who participated in the invasion included Australia, Canada, Belgium, France, Czechoslovakia, Greece, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, the United Kingdom, and, of course. the United States of America.

The codename for the invasion was Operation Overlord. The assault phase was known as Operation Neptune. Operation Neptune began on D-Day (June 6, 1944) and ended on June 30. Operation Overlord also began on D-Day, and ended with the crossing of the River Seine on August 19.

General Dwight D. Eisenhower faced a daunting task in the planning of such a massive invasion. He would have to move his forces 100 miles across the English Channel and storm a heavily fortified coastline. His enemy was the weapon-and-tank-superior German army commanded by the “Desert Fox” Erwin Rommel, one of the most brilliant generals of the war.

Less than 15 percent of the young men called upon to sacrifice their lives for our freedom in the invasion had ever seen combat.

A crossing of the unpredictable and dangerous English Channel had not been attempted since 1688. Once the invading forces set out, there was no turning back. The channel was soon hosting a 5,000-vessel armada that stretched as far as the eye could see, transporting both men and vehicles across the channel to the French beaches. Not to mention, the Allies also launched 4,000 smaller landing craft and more than 11,000 aircraft.

By the time the sun set on June 6, more than 9,000 Allied soldiers were dead or wounded, and more than 100,000 had made it ashore, capturing French coastal villages. Within weeks, supplies were being unloaded at Utah and Omaha beachheads at the rate of more than 20,000 tons per day. By June 11, more than 326,000 troops, 55,000 vehicles, and 105,000 tons of supplies had been landed on the beaches. By June 30, the Allies had established a firm foothold in Normandy. Allied forces crossed the River Seine on August 19.

There has never been an exact count of the sacrifices made on D-Day. Although, it is estimated that more than 425,000 Allied and German troops were killed, wounded, or went missing during the battle. 209,000 of those who lost their lives were Allied forces. In addition to almost 200,000 German troops killed or wounded, the Allies also captured 200,000 soldiers. Captured Germans were sent to American prisoner-of-war camps at the rate of 30,000 per month, from D-Day until Christmas 1944. Between 15,000 and 20,000 French civilians were killed during the battle.

Basically, the invasion of Normandy was a success, due to sheer force of numbers. By July 1944, some one million Allied troops, mostly American, British, and Canadian, were entrenched in Normandy. During the great invasion, the Allies assembled nearly three million men and stored 16 million tons of arms, munitions, and supplies in Britain.

Among the young men who stepped off those boats, in a hail of gunfire, was a fellow named Edward, whom everyone called Ned, from the small town of Helena, Arkansas.  Already in his young life, Ned had been forced to drop out of school in the sixth grade, in order to work at the local movie theatre to help support his mother, brother, and sister, faced with the ravages of the Great Depression.

He was a gentle man who loved to laugh and sing, having recorded several 78 rpm records in the do-it-yourself booths of the day. And now, he found himself, a Master Sergeant in an Army Engineering Unit, stepping off a boat into the unknown, watching his comrades being mercilessly gunned down around him.

Ned, along with the rest of his unit who survived the initial assault, would go on to assist in the cleaning out of the Concentration Camps, bearing witness to man’s inhumanity to man.

The horrors he saw had a profound effect on Ned.  One which he would keep to himself for the remainder of his life.  While his children knew that he served with an Engineering Unit in World War II, they did not know the full extent of his service, until they found his medal, honoring his participation in the Invasion of Normandy, while going through his belongings, after he passed away on December 29, 1997.

The second soldier in this tale was born 41 years after D-Day, in Sun Valley Idaho, to a pair of “Devout Calvinists”, who homeschooled him and his sister, while their parents both worked at jobs, which according to a famous national magazine in 2012, were “nearly off the grid”.

At 16, tired of being cooped up at home, the young man went in search of fencing lessons, and wound up being a ballet “lifter”, moving in with the girl he was “lifting”.

At 20, he left for France, to learn to speak French and join the Foreign legion. Failing miserably at that, he returned home,where he worked for a few years at a local coffee shop.

He joined the Army in 2008, and arrived in Eastern Afghanistan in 2009.

According to his parents, and the “national magazine”, this young man had “a heart for the Afghan people”, which led him to become disgusted with the actions of our nation, whom he was supposed to be fighting for.

The young man would detail his disillusionment with the Afghanistan campaign in an email to his parents three days before he went missing.

“I am sorry for everything here,” he wrote. “These people need help, yet what they get is the most conceited country in the world telling them that they are nothing and that they are stupid.”

Bergdahl also complained about fellow soldiers. The battalion commander was a “conceited old fool,” he said, and the only “decent” sergeants, planning to leave the platoon “as soon as they can,” told the privates — Bergdahl then among them — “to do the same.”

“I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools,” he concluded. “I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

His father responded in an email: “OBEY YOUR CONSCIENCE!”

This young man would then desert his post, for the second time, concluding a pair of calculated moves, proven by the fact that he sent his laptop and his personal journal, back to his mother and father.

On his second “walkabout”, he was taken in by local Afghan Muslim Terrorists, with whom he lived for 5 years, converting to their religion and declaring himself a “WARRIOR FOR ISLAM” in 2010.

Some Liberal supporters say his purpose in leaving the base was an attempt to “broker a peace deal”. Others, within his own unit, believe that he wanted to “aid and abed the enemy”.

As far as his “conversion” goes, his defenders are claiming that he did it to insure his own survival, unlike former POWs, who chose death to renouncing God and Country.

The young man was flownt back to the country that he betrayed, his freedom having been secured through the release of 5 of the enemy: high-ranking Muslim Terrorists, who had sworn an oath to “destroy the Great Satan” (That’s US.)

Of course, that young man was Bowe Bergdahl.

The man responsible for this inequitable deal is the unapologetic President of the United States of America Barack Hussein Obama, the product of an Islamic Private School for the wealthy in Jakarta, Indonesia.

Since that incomprehensible prisoner swap, the New York Post reported that at least 3 of the 5 Muslim Terrorists have attempted to resume their barbarism.

Bergdahl has yet to face a Court Martial for his desertion.

That will have to happen under a United States President who actually loves this country.

Why do I feel so strongly about this? And, how do I know so much about Ned?

Ned was my Daddy.  You see, my love of Christ and, of this country, comes from my Earthly father, 40 years my senior.

I was raised by members of the Greatest Generation.  It is today that we pause to remember their sacrifices at home and abroad.

May this day also serve as a reminder of the sacrifices made by our Brightest and Best and their families, yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

May God bless them all and may He hold them in the hollow of His hand.

Until He Comes,

KJ


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,747 other followers