The Grande Finale

Terrorists have struck again and this time it was at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester England. Ariana Grande is a pop star whose fans range from young girls to teenagers and that demographic is expected to make up the bulk of the casualties of the bombing where (as of this post) twenty-two have died and nearly five dozen have been injured.

According to the news the concert had ended and people were leaving when a suicide bomber detonated a bomb filled with nails. That kind of bomb is designed to hurt a lot of people and it is likely the numbers will rise throughout the day.

When the news flashed last night to report the bombing the first thing I thought was that it was another radical Islamic terrorist (though the lines continually blur between radical and traditional Muslim) even as we were, once again, cautioned not to make snap judgements.

As events unfolded two things became clear, as they do in all these kinds of attacks. The first is the bomber was a Muslim (and the recent news would tend to support that) and the government already knew about him.

Yes, these things always end up being radical Islamic terrorists and the government always knows the guy. You know how it is, they were suspicious but really had no evidence so they did nothing. That should be comforting to the families who lost loved ones.

CBS News confirmed Tuesday that the man who blew himself up the previous night at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England, was 23-year-old Salman Abedi, who was known to British authorities prior to the attack. CBS News

The events after this attack will be the same as all the previous attacks. People will change social media pictures to flags of the attacked nation, claim that we are all them, say they are praying and for us to pray, and then we will be cautioned not to judge all Muslims based on the attacks of a few.

If only gun owners could get this same consideration. When some nut gets a gun (often ILLEGALLY) and shoots a place up the government and its puppet supporters scream about gun control, gun bans and more laws to infringe on the rights of law abiding Americans. All gun owners are blamed and the only way to end the carnage is to ban or restrict guns. The victims are often still warm while the left is screaming about gun control, never let a crisis go to waste. Anyone hear these same people blaming all Muslims and demanding a ban on them?

The left will blame many things while telling us that it is not all of them. Perhaps not and in reality the bomber and his support group (and the radical religion) are to blame. You know who else is to blame? The people of England in political office who have relaxed the laws and turned a blind eye to the influx of Muslims. Same is true for France and many other countries in that part of the world. They welcome everyone and then get attacked.

This incident did not happen here in the US but it very well could and the likelihood is great considering that liberals have made it easier. You read that right because liberal politicians, worthless liberal judges and the liberal thumb sucker snowflakes have all opposed President Trump’s Constitutional Executive Orders on immigration. Trump wants to slow or temporarily halt immigration from a number of unstable nations until we can more accurately determine the people trying to come here.

Liberals oppose that and their sock puppet judges issue rulings counter to what the president has done, things that are well within his authority. But hey, liberal politicians and pocket judges know best.

Truth is, they don’t care about you, they don’t care about the country and they don’t care if a bunch of kids get murdered by a suicide bomber. They are protected and it is unlikely they or their families will ever be the victims so they do not care. If your kids get blown up then there will be more outrage, more opportunity for them to raise cash by duping morons into contributing, and there will be more opportunity for them to seize even more power.

If these people really cared they would not oppose the president’s orders and they would not oppose action to end these barbarians.

It is time for all civilized nations to band together to attack ISIS and all other radical Islamic groups (and any other terror groups we can find) and keep attacking them until they are completely destroyed. They cannot be damaged or degraded they must be eliminated from the earth and removed from the human gene pool so that they can never recruit and attack again.

As an aside, I can’t help wonder what Grande is thinking. At one point in her career she claimed to hate America and Americans (she later stated something different) and she is anti-Trump and for all things liberal. Reports are she can’t wait to get back to the safety of the US. I wonder if she will oppose the immigration crack down Trump is fighting in favor of in the court system…

This attack was senseless and cowardly. The radical Islamic terrorist (I base that on his name but am willing to change that should it be wrong. History is on my side on this one) attacked a bunch of little girls. That is the very definition of a coward. He detonated a bomb and murdered a lot of people and injured many more. He did all this because the politically correct world can’t open its eyes and see the real enemy before us.

It is easier to chase bogeymen and make up stories about Russia than to actually work to keep the nation safe.

And that is because of what I stated earlier. The left is not concerned about your safety. They know more attacks eventually lead to more control by the government and that is what they want. And fewer of us means a smaller carbon footprint and who can argue against that, right? Our overlords sure are great….

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

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

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

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

Note To Libs: Muskets Were Weapons Of War

Liberal LogicEvery time there is a shooting in this country, that is every time some deranged liberal or Muslim terrorist shoots a bunch of people, there is always a cry to ban guns. The left wants to ban all firearms in this country regardless of what they say.

Make no mistake about that, they want to ban all firearms and all private ownership. They will do it incrementally but their end goal is a complete ban. If you listen to them you can hear them saying it. One only needs to hear them say we need what Australia has to know they want private ownership to end or be so difficult that no one has anything more powerful than a pea shooter.

The issue is not the gun, it is not the background checks, and it is not the availability of guns or the alleged ease with which a person can buy one (this ease all depends on where you live).

The firearm used was not an AR 15 though anti gun nuts keep calling it that and showing pictures of one when they appeal to the masses. They want control and nothing else.

Removing all guns will not end gun violence and the liberal model of Australia shows us that crime will actually rise as all other categories of crime did in that nation. Background checks exist and every time a person who bought a gun legally uses it to harm others liberals scream we need expanded background checks. What do they actually hope to find that government (the entity conducting the checks) does not already have access to? The government has failed in doing background checks when it fails to discover the future motives of people.

Sound ridiculous? That is what government wants you to believe it can accomplish with “expanded” background checks. It wants you to believe that it can tell what a person will do in the future if only we could look a little deeper.

The reality is most of the gun crimes committed are done by people with illegally purchased firearms and legal gun owners account for a small fraction of the murders.

It is also important to note that the government conducted a background check on the Islamic terrorist who shot up the gay night club and said he could own a gun. They said nothing in his background kept him from buying the firearm. If that is true then we just have a case of a person who had not done anything wrong deciding to do so. That happens all the time in our country though the case of legal firearms owners doing so is rare.

When these things happen we get this outcry of people who want more gun control as if restricting those who follow the law will stop those who don’t. It is more convenient to blame a gun than it is to blame the liberal moron, or in this case the Islamic terrorist, who pulled the trigger. Liberals would rather moan about one guy with a gun and claim him as the problem rather than seeing the issue was the 150 people who did not have a gun. Even if half of the club goers were carry permit holders they were banned from having their firearms in the club. Evidently the Muslim terrorist did not follow that law either.

Look, the reality is bad people do bad things and we can’t predict when they will but we can’t infringe on the rights of the law abiding as some feel good measure to make liberal bed-wetters think they are doing good. We also can’t allow liberal (and sadly some alleged conservative) politicians to take away our rights. Doing so will allow them to control us instead of us controlling them.

When they take away your means to resist they will then do as they wish, just ask some old German and Jewish folks about that.

The problem is not the firearm, it is the person using it illegally (and to some extent politicians who refuse to allow law abiding people to carry firearms). We do not ban cars or alcohol because people drink and drive. We don’t say that some person might drink and drive so he can’t own a car or buy alcohol. We don’t do these things even though more people die in alcohol related accidents than are murdered with firearms. In these cases we hold the driver responsible for his actions.

Blaming firearms for the shooting at the night club is like blaming the planes for 9/11.

I am also tired of hearing liberals tell us we don’t need these assault weapons or these weapons of war.

Alan Grayson, a moron politician and wife beater from Florida, claimed that these firearms could shoot 700 rounds a minute. A semi-automatic firearm’s rate of fire depends on how fast the shooter can squeeze the trigger. To shoot 700 rounds a minute the shooter would have to squeeze the trigger almost 12 times a second and that does not include the time to change magazines. Misinformed people are easy to control and government is doing the misinforming because it wants to control people. Though in this case it is likely Grayson, who is unintelligent, does not know.

First of all, there are no assault weapons. Assault is an action and people commit that action. They use many things to do so but whatever they use is not an assault item.

Second, all firearms can be weapons of war. In fact, the musket was a weapon of war and everyone had a musket. Obviously the Founders made no distinction and neither should we.

The important words are shall not be infringed. There is no qualifier, no sentence about weapons of war or only if you need or only if government says it is ok or anything else. The words are the right of the PEOPLE (all citizens) to keep and bear arms (to have and to carry) shall not be infringed.

Remember, the people telling you that you don’t need these firearms are surrounded and protected by people who have these firearms.

How many more Islamic terror attacks are we going to allow before Obama is held accountable?

The gun is not the problem. Anti-gun politicians, Muslim terrorists and bad people are the issue. But keep pushing for gun control and one day there will be pushback and you will not like it at all.

We will not comply.

MOLON LABE

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline