Main Content RSS FeedLatest Entry

This Is What Happens When You Pay Ransom

Barack Obama paid 400 million dollars to his buddies in Iran so they would release Americans they were holding. The longstanding policy of not negotiating with terrorists and not paying ransom was ignored by Obama as he sent a plane load of money to Iran.

He claims it was a coincidence but the Iranians said it was paid to release the hostages and the hostages said the plane they were on was not allowed to leave until the plane with the money arrived.

The State Department put out a warning to Americans yesterday (22 August 2016) telling them to avoid travel to Iran because Americans are being targeted for capture there.

That was pretty easy to see coming. You get more of what you pay for. Give in to demand for ransom and there will be more incidents of abductions leading to requests for more ransom money.

If you paid it once there is no reason for the bad guys to think you won’t pay it again.

Why Americans would even go to Iran escapes me. If you go there and get captured then you are on your own if the only way to get you back is to pay a ransom. We will keep negotiating for your release but we are not going to pay because it will encourage the abductions of others.

At least that is how it was until Obama gave in and provided a state sponsor of terror with 400 million dollars.

Just think what that kind of money would have done for the folks in Louisiana…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Recent Entries

Hillary Agrees With Trump

She might be saying different things NOW but Hillary gave a speech in 2006 at the Council on Foreign Relations and she was saying a lot of the things trump has said. You know, Mexico is a problem, Mexican government encouraging people to come illegally, need a barrier (a wall is a barrier), secure the border, and those kinds of things.

You know, the things she is NOW attacking Trump for saying.

She changes her positions all the time. Perhaps it is more accurate to say she says whatever she thinks people want to hear in order to get their votes.

She is Satan. And she appears ill.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

The Art Of The Khan

Before I begin I want to say that CPT Khan was a hero and he died fighting for America. There has never been any question about that regardless of how the media portray what has been said. No one has dishonored the service and sacrifice of CPT Khan. The important takeaway is HIS sacrifice.

Khizr Khan, CPT Khan’s father, sacrificed nothing. Let me be clear, he sacrificed nothing. The sacrifice was solely CPT Khan’s. The Khan’s suffered a loss and we grieve with them and empathize with them for their loss but it is a loss, not a sacrifice. Saying that the family of a dead service member sacrificed is like saying the family of a Medal of Honor recipient earned that medal. We service members and veterans take our own decisions and the sacrifices made (as well as the awards earned) belong to us and us alone.

Mr. Khan’s attack on Donald Trump at the Democrat convention was based on Trump’s assertion that we needed to stop Muslims from countries that support terrorism from coming to America until we could figure out what was going on. In other words, put a halt to this until we can determine what kind of people are coming in. We need to make sure the kind of people that killed CPT Khan are not allowed into this country.

The attack had nothing to do with CPT Khan and HIS sacrifice. Khizr made a slim connection by saying his son, a Muslim, served honorably and Trump would keep people like him out but this is part of the false narrative. CPT Khan is the kind of person who would have been allowed in (if, you know, he were not ALREADY and American citizen). Trump wants to keep out the kind of people who killed him so the argument from Khizr is false.

There has been a firestorm over Trump’s reaction to Mr. Khan. I personally think there were many better ways Trump could have responded that would have made a point in his favor without directly attacking Mr. Khan. Make no mistake, Khizr Khan went on national TV and berated a candidate for the presidency so at that point he became fair game. The fact that he lost a son in the war does not give him blanket protection. He is responsible for what he said and his hero son’s death is not a shield to keep him from being held responsible.

But Trump could have handled it better. This, of course, is why the Khan’s were paraded out in the first place. The Democrats used them to score political points because they knew full well Trump would respond and their supporters (as well as a large portion of the electorate) would be too stupid to see all of this. All they needed was a compliant media to start a lie that Trump attacked a Gold Star family and dishonored their hero son and the bait was set. Liberals and many establishment Republicans took it hook line and sinker and the firestorm over Trump began.

It was a con game from the beginning. Hell, one only needs to look at Khizr Khan’s background and what he does to know he is a liberal who works to bring Muslims into this nation and he thinks Sharia Law trumps (see what I did there) the very Constitution he waved around on stage. He aligns himself with the party that does not give a rodent’s derriere about his son or any other service member and then plays the victim when he is taken to task for his politically motivated speech. You know it is a con game when the families of the Benghazi victims are treated horribly by Hillary Clinton and not a word is said but Khizr is taken to task by Trump and boom, suddenly she and the liberals care about those who sacrificed their lives for America.

If Khan’s motivations were not political then he would embrace Trump’s plan because it is designed to deny the kind of people who killed his son from coming here.

But that would be bad for Khizr’s immigration business….

As for Donald Trump, he would probably benefit from an old idea called thinking before you speak, or tweet, as the case may be.

There are plenty of ways to tell people to go have sex with themselves and have them leave wanting to actually do it.

Trump knows the art of the deal, perhaps he should learn the art of tact. Remember Donald, being tactful is not political correctness.

Imagine if Trump had responded by saying; “I understand their grief and I am sorry for their loss. I would think they would support a plan such as mine that ensures the kind of people who killed their son are prevented from entering our great nation. God bless.”

We would probably be talking about something else and Mr. Khan would not be all over the TV continuing the con.

In short Mr. Trump, if you get beat you get beat but don’t get beat because you gave your enemy the weapon that caused your demise.

Related:
Ann Coulter; The Wrath of Khan
Breitbart; Khan and Sharia Law…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Texas, Ignore The Court And Do What You Want

Texas has had a strict voter ID requirement since 2011 and the Obama administration challenged it in court. Today the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violates the Voting Rights Act and instructed a lower court to make changes to fix the discriminatory effect of the law with as little impact on this year’s election as possible.

The Constitution describes voting in several amendments and they state Congress can write laws to carry out the things described in those amendments. Those amendments talk about when a right to vote can be denied or abridged. This is not the case with regard to ID laws. No one is denying or abridging the right to vote. A person must simply provide ID to do so.

As liberal courts are eager to state with regard to the Second Amendment, reasonable restrictions can be applied to it and to all rights. That is why courts have allowed restrictions to be applied to the Second Amendment (most of which are actually unconstitutional). So if reasonable restrictions can be applied (most people would not argue that a background check for a non-private firearm sale is unreasonable) then it is not out of the question to require ID to vote. It is a REASONABLE restriction.

Evidently, the law is discriminatory because it has a short list of IDs that are acceptable. The list looks about the same as the list required to prove citizenship when applying for a job. Does this mean the requirement to show ID (and prove citizenship) when applying for a job is discriminatory?

There is nothing discriminatory about asking for ID before allowing someone to vote, period. It matters not what any court or President says about it, asking for an ID is not discriminatory at all.

The unions Obama loves so much require IDs before anyone can vote in union elections. One must show an ID to get on a plane and that is not deemed discriminatory.

Neither is showing ID to buy alcohol or tobacco, registering kids for school or sports programs and it is definitely not deemed discriminatory to show ID to get into a government building.

None of these acts requiring ID would be deemed discriminatory based on the types of ID deemed acceptable…

Texas should probably tell the court thanks but we will do things our way. This is our law and this is what we are going to do. If you want to vote here then you need to follow the law, period.

In other words, Texas should tell them to stick it because ID laws are reasonable and the list of acceptable IDs is not prohibitive.

As an aside, please don’t blast me with the idea that poor people can’t get an ID (even from the short list). Practically everyone needs an ID for some aspect of life and the poor seem to be able to get an ID to get welfare…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Will The Real Barry Obama Please Stand Up?

Just some thoughts on Obama and his response to police officers who have been murdered at the hands of terrorists from the terror group, Black Lives Matter.

Before I get to his words I would like to point out that Obama is either very stupid, blind, or deliberately ignorant of reality. Every time one of these things happens the murderer tells us why he did it (or tells us why he is going to do it) but Obama (or should we call him oblivious) says “we don’t really know the killer’s motivation.” It is going on now with the cop murders and it happens when there is a terror attack by ISIS or some other Islamic terrorist. They scream we hate America and we are doing this in the name of ISIS and Allah to avenge (fill in the blank) and Obama tells us we don’t know why they did it…

Hell, the guy could hire a plane to tow a banner saying why he did it, put it on all social media, give interviews with the media and send out cards in the mail and Obama would tell us we don’t know why he did it…

Of course, Obama is always ready to tell us why cops did what they did long before any facts are in. He might say they acted stupidly….

Now on to the response from Obama on the latest terror attack by BLM.

Obama said that we need to stop using inflammatory rhetoric:

We don’t need inflammatory rhetoric. We don’t need careless accusations thrown around to score political points or to advance an agenda. We need to temper our words and open our hearts … all of us.

This would be the same Obama who said this about how he would counter Republican attacks:

If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.

I am pretty sure that this remark would be considered inflammatory and designed to score political points…

But, but, but Obama is a great guy. Look at how he supported the Dallas police officers by referring to himself a lot and by telling us how cops can be better and that guns are the problem…

He even had some words about attacking police officers after the BLM terrorist murdered three in Baton Rouge:

Attacks on police are an attack on all of us and the rule of law that makes society possible.

Obama is the one who has blood on his hands. He has blamed the police for these issues and he has been one of the first to blame them when a black person is shot by police (most times the shooting is warranted). He is the one who fans the flames of racism and victimhood. He might tell people that attacks on police are an attack on all of us but he blames the police for this mess and says they need to admit they are the problem:

There are legitimate issues that have been raised, and there’s data and evidence to back up the concerns that are being expressed by these protesters.

And if police organizations and departments acknowledge that there’s a problem and there’s an issue, then that, too, is going to contribute to real solutions. And, as I said yesterday, that is what’s going to ultimately help make the job of being a cop a lot safer. It is in the interest of police officers that their communities trust them and that the kind of rancor and suspicion that exists right now is alleviated.

You cops got that? You have a problem and you have to admit it in order to be safe. This kind of talk gives the radical BLM terrorists their cues. They hear what Obama said and they don’t hear cops saying they have a problem so to them it means they can attack because Obama said cops can’t be safer until they fess up.

Obama has caused a lot of this strife. He has fanned the flames of racism and he has encouraged the violence that is taking place. He started an open season on law enforcement and his words still reflect his belief that they are the problem.

It is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

Keep in mind though, the violence you see is caused by liberals who follow the ideology of Obama and his ilk. Any violence at the Republican convention will be caused by liberals, not the Republicans…

God help the US because we sure need it after eight years of Satan in the White House.

Sources:
WSJ
MRCTV
AP

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.