The Associated Press is upset that Pam Geller has no regrets that two terrorists were killed when they tried to attack an event she was part of. The event was a contest to draw MoHAMad something those ‘tolerant” Muslims don’t like.
Two guys tried to attack the event but were stopped by a good guy with a gun he knew how to use.
The liberal world is up in arms because Geller would dare to have such an event. But liberals are not the only ones. Bill O’Reilly is also blaming her. Hell, many alleged conservatives have decided to blame the victims here and those victims are the people whose First Amendment rights are being trampled upon.
Add me to the list about having no regrets that two terrorists died. If these jackasses had not shown up and started shooting they would still be alive to molest goats and spread hatred.
So as far as I am concerned there is no issue here. Geller and her group did nothing illegal and were only exercising their rights.
I would like to know why it is people will attack Geller and defend those who were “offended” so much so that they resorted to a terrorist attack but will not attack the people who walk all over the American Flag knowing this is provocative as well.
Perhaps it is because they know that those offended by the Flag walkers will not show up shooting those who demonstrate such ignorance. Sure folks show up and try to take the Flag or stop the people walking on it but they don’t show up shooting.
No one calls for the Flag walkers to stop because they might incite people.
No, they only tell people to stop when it might offend Muslims because that might lead to violence. It seems to me that the same people who tell us Islam is a religion of peace and full of tolerant people are also telling us not to upset members of that cult because they will resort to violence.
Here is an idea for the AP and others who are upset with Geller. Why not tell gays to stop holding hands and kissing in public because it might offend the Muslims? Why not tell women to cover up and stop driving because it might offend Muslims?
Or how about we live our lives in freedom and if people get upset so be it. If they resort to violence they can be dealt with, preferably like they were in Texas.
Geller did nothing wrong but the way the AP and others are acting one would think she is the reason for the attack.
What next AP? Will rape victims be blamed because they wore revealing clothes?
I side with Geller and all others who exercise their freedoms. That includes Muslims who want to PEACEFULLY object to things they do not like.
What I do not side with is blaming the victims and that is what is happening here.
Never surrender, never submit.
Mar 12, 2015 Commentary
I am skeptical of the police. I respect them as a group of people who, for the most part, do dangerous jobs to protect people. But we have continually militarized them and they have a culture that sees them remain silent when some among them do wrong. There are far too many cases of police officers beating people and violating their civil rights.
That small group causes the good among them to be viewed skeptically. I believe all agents of the government should be viewed with a bit of skepticism but the bad actions of a small minority of cops has tarnished the good work of honorable officers.
It is also true that far too often police officers are extensions of the taxing authority of a government. They write tickets for nuisance items just to generate revenue.
But no matter how one feels about what policing has become the reality is these folks are men and women who have families. Their lives matter just as much as anyone else’s. They should not be targeted. Don’t get me wrong. I believe people have the right to resist unlawful acts by any agent of the government but I do not think police officers should be targets just because some segment of society does not like them.
Last night two officers in Ferguson MO were shot. They are expected to survive but they should not have been shot in the first place. This is not an issue where police issued some no knock raid and got shot by a scared home owner. No, these police officers were monitoring yet another protest in ferguson when some jackass shot them.
We saw all the protests and riots when people believed that Michael Brown was shot with his hands up. That turned out to be a lie and he was the aggressor. Unarmed or not he ws dangerous and Officer Wilson was well within his right to shoot him.
Will there be protests in favor of these cops? The race baiting poverty pimps are already making excuses and rationalizing the shootings.
People get up in arms when they think a cop shot someone (or their dog) unnecessarily (and their anger is justified when that turns out to be the case especially when the cop is cleared of wrong doing) but they find no issue with police officers being shot while doing their jobs.
Imagine if you will a scenario where a group of people has been arrested after a long police investigation. Say they all had tons of drugs and illegal firearms when they were arrested. The cops all testify and they think this is a slam dunk. But for some reason the jury finds the defendants not guilty and they walk on all charges.
How would people respond if the police waited for them to gather someplace and then gunned them down?
The people of Ferguson were fed a false narrative and they were led to believe they would get the verdict they wanted from the Grand Jury. When they did not they burned the place to the ground. How many of them were arrested for that?
In any event, the false narrative and all the negative statements from Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton and plenty of other people has resulted in this violence against these police officers.
Their lives matter too and this should not be happening. They need to catch who did this and nail him to the wall.
Here is the key. Mutual respect. Police officers need to respect the people who pay their salaries and who they work for. They need to do their jobs with honor and dignity and without regard for ones color ar any other demographic.
The people need to obey the law and they need to respect the police.
If that happens people can work together to ensure their communities are safe.
Never surrender, never submit.
After three Muslims were murdered in North Carolina Barack Obama made this statement:
“No one in the United States of America should ever be targeted because of who they are, what they look like, or how they worship.” CBS
He made this statement even though evidence suggests the people were killed over a parking dispute and not because of their religion. The shooter has been involved in a number of incidents regarding parking and this case appears to be about that and nothing else.
A man walked to a bus stop and asked two people if they were Muslim and when they answered that they were not the man stabbed both of them.
The attacker stated he was a Muslim so it is obvious by his question that he attacked the two victims because of their religious belief (in that it was NOT Muslim).
Will Barack Obama make the same statement he made regarding the incident in North Carolina? That statement fits this incident whereas it did not fit with what happened in NC. This would be the time to make such a statement.
I imagine Barry will ignore the Detroit incident because the attacker was a Muslim and we all know that people who follow the religion of peace would never do anything violent…
Never surrender, never submit.
Sixteen female Senators have sent a letter to the NFL Commissioner calling for a zero tolerance policy regarding domestic violence after the Ray Rice video was released.
Why is this Congress’ business? It would seem to me that Congress should worry about the nation and its problems and leave private business to solve its issues without the nanny state jumping in.
It also seems to me that Congress might want to adopt a zero tolerance policy regarding its own members before demanding others do so. Congress is full of people who have done various bad things from tax evasion to domestic violence (gasp). If Congress wants to set an example how about it expel any member who has been involved in a domestic violence episode? How about dumping the tax evaders and the drunkards?
Clean up your own home before you demand others clean theirs.
I do not believe that Commissioner Roger Goodell is telling the truth about the Rice incident and I think he mismanaged it terribly. How the issue is handled is up to the NFL and not Congress.
Perhaps Goodell should respond to the letter by informing the Senators that the NFL is a profitable business that generates 6 billion dollars a year in profit and that its problems are not the concern of Congress. He might want to let them know that while the NFL is profitable the US is 17 TRILLION dollars in debt (and continues to run a deficit) and their attention might be better focused on solving their issues instead of worrying about things that are not their business.
He might even offer to give them some advice on working to get rid of the debt they have accumulated.
Spousal abuse (whether a man or a woman is the abuser) is a bad thing and needs to be addressed by private organizations in the manner they see fit. It is not the business of Congress or the harpies who want some face time.
If these Senators want to make an impact perhaps they could write letters to law enforcement agencies demanding zero tolerance policies since police officers are involved in more domestic violence incidents (nearly twice the rate) than the general population.
Then again that would not be their business though they would at least be interacting with another government agency rather than a private business.
Of course, the first step would be for Congress to clean its ranks of law breakers, sexual harassers, predators and those who engage in domestic violence.
They turn a blind eye to their own and stick their noses in the business of others.
Better yet, these folks might want to turn their attention toward the Muslim Terrorists who treat women badly as a way of life.
No, these morons will embrace them.
Never surrender, never submit.
When someone uses a bomb to blow up a building we go after the bomber not the bomb. When a person uses matches to light a building on fire we go after the arsonist and not the matches. When someone drinks and drives we go after the drunk driver and not the car or the alcohol.
For some reason though, when someone uses a gun to commit a crime we go after the gun. Not only that, they go after the guns of all the people who had nothing to do with the crime.
When I wrote for some reason above I knew the reason and you know it as well. They use incidents of violence with guns to go after guns because they want to disarm all of us. Gun control is not about the gun it is about control and government knows that if it can disarm its citizens it can control its citizens.
This is why we have a Second Amendment. Despite the stupidity of people like Andrew Cuomo of New York the Second Amendment is not there to protect hunting or sport shooting. It is there to protect the population from its own government and any other that tries to attack us.
Make no mistake about it, our Founders protected our right to keep and bear arms so that we would never be held as slaves under a tyrannical government. We would always have the ability to fight our government should the need arise.
This is not a radical idea as our Founders did just that to gain our freedom.
But gun grabbers want to disarm everyone. I know they claim otherwise with nonsense terms like “common sense laws” and such but their plan is to incrementally impose more and more bans until we are disarmed. Places like Maryland are already well along in the anti gun, gun ban, confiscation scheme. Communist Governor Martin O’Malley and the Democrat idiots in the legislature have passed gun laws that are unconstitutional and will hopefully be negated by the Supreme Court (though one can never tell with the outside influences blackmailing justices).
In any event, the shooting at the Navy Yard elicited the same visceral response we have come accustomed to. The immediate reaction of the gun grabbers was to call for more gun control. The reality that the shooting took place in a city that has strict gun control on a military base with strict gun control has not even dawned on the people who are so hell bent on enslaving us that they were screaming for more gun control while the dead bodies were still warm.
Barack Obama lamented that we are once again dealing with this kind of tragedy. I will shoot his words back at him. We are once again dealing with you exploiting a criminal to disarm non criminals. You danced on the bodies of the dead children in Newtown and you are dancing on the dead at the Navy yard.
The narrative was the same in the media as we were bombed with stories of an AR 15 and assault this and assault that.
Turns out the gun used was a shotgun and the pistols used were taken from the guards who were shot. Not to worry, the media came to the rescue like they did when George Zimmerman turned out to be Hispanic instead of white (and thus became the new race of white Hispanic) and invented the new AR 15 shotgun…
We are now finding out that the shooter had a real problem with mental illness and that it was reported months ago but not acted upon by the very government that wants to disarm you for the deeds of the shooter. It also turns out that this guy would spend up to 18 hours at a time playing the Call of Duty video game. It is reported that the game took him to his dark side.
In other words, the video game influenced this mentally ill man to act on his inner dark side. Thus, he sneaked a firearm onto a post and went around shooting people like in the video game.
So now that we know this is it safe for us to conclude that we do not need to ban guns we need to ban video games? The game caused the problem and made this man shoot others. In order to stop this senseless violence we must have the following:
- All people who want to buy a video game must be 21
- All people who want to buy a video game must pay money and submit an application with a set of fingerprints
- All people who want to buy video games must sign a release for a medical and mental health records check
- All video games must no longer be capable of being played longer than 2 hours in a 24 hour period. This is our ban on high capacity video games
- Anyone who purchases a video game must wait 3 days before picking it up so a background check can be completed
- No one can buy more than one video game in a 30 day period
- Online video gaming will no longer be allowed so we can close the internet loophole
These are a must because there are millions of people out there using video games. These games cause people to turn violent and result in death. It is not the person, it is the game and you should never forget that.
We must do this…
…for the children.
However, in keeping with the spirit of Barack Obama’s tenure video games may be given to terrorists.
Yep, Barack Obama wants to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms and wants to impose even tougher restrictions on law abiding citizens while at the same time he has waived the law disallowing us from sending arms to terrorists so he can arm the Syrian Rebels.
Think about it folks, Barack Obama trusts terrorists with firearms but does not trust you with them.
And he knows the terrorists would fail the background check. That is why he waived the law…
Never surrender, never submit.