Category Archives: Crime
MYANMAR: Burmese Buddhist Monk burned with acid, slashed with knives, had genitals cut off, all by Muslims
Burmese-Buddhist monk Shin Thawbita who was brutally assaulted and then burned alive by the Muslim mob in Meikhtilar on March 20 was a devout teacher-monk from Mogaung Monastery in Hanzar Village of Tharzi Twonship. (And people wonder why Buddhists are fighting back so hard against Muslim savages who are trying to take over the country, piece by piece, as they have done in every other Buddhist country)
HLAOO 1980 He’d been a monk at his friend U Pannisa’s monastery for over two years and on that fateful day of 20 March 2013 at about 4:30 in the afternoon he and a friend came to Meikhtilar to buy some books on Buddhism for his class of 200 students. Neither knew that a race-riot was brewing between Muslims and Buddhists in Meikhtilar that day.
When they reached Meikhtilar, they saw a large mob of angry Muslim Kalars armed with swords and iron rods gathering on both sides of the main road. “Doesn’t look too good, let’s turn back,” said fearful Tin Maung Win to U Thawbita. But U Thawbita wasn’t so concerned. “Maybe they’re fighting each other, don’t worry you’re with me, just drive on,” said U Thawbita who was very confident that even the rioting Muslims wouldn’t harm a Buddhist monk. Wrong!
The Muslim Kalar swinged and hit violently U Thawbita from behind. By then the motorbike was hardly moving forward as the Muslim crowd thirsting for the wounded Buddhist-monk’s blood was all over them.
“We’re from Tharzi, we’re from Hanzar, we come here to buy books, please, please, we don’t know what’s going on here, please,” pleaded and begged desperately for mercy both U Thawbita and Tin Maung Win but the Meikhtilar-Muslims were determined to kill the first Buddhist monk they ran into.
A steel ball from a Muslim-slingshot hit the left side of U Thawbita’s shaved head. The Muslims were also beating up U Thawbita’s back with sticks and iron rods. The “bone,bone,bone” noises from the back beating was unbearable for Tin Maung Win at the front. He then saw a sword swing just above the bare head of the monk behind. U Thawbita then fell limp to the ground. The monk’s head just above the ears was deeply hacked and blood was flowing like water from the deep wound.
When Tin Maung Win turned he saw the same Muslim man who first struck the monk with his huge farming-fork was running towards them with a big 5-gallon yellow-jerrican on his shoulder and shouting loud, “Burn him, burn him, burn the bloody monk.”
According to the eyewitnesses while Tin Maung Win was fleeing the Muslim mob, Muslim Kalar Myo Win (A shoe-shop owner) and his wife Ma Yu and another Muslim Kalar Annawar were cutting U Thawbita with knifes.
Soon Another Muslim kalar brought the petrol can and he pulled the blood-stained saffron-robe off the dying monk. The Muslims who wanted to inflict maximum possible pain on the Buddhist monk then turned him flat on his bare back and slowly poured petrol and some acid on his belly and lower body.
Instead of just throwing petrol and acid from the cans, the Muslim men, women, and even the children were using small cups to slowly pour acid and petrol all over his body as if they were committing a communal torture on the Buddhist monk.
When the Burmese-Buddhists reached the dying monk his almost naked and burning body was away from his robe lying in the pool of his blood on the hot-tarred road. Meanwhile the angry Buddhist crowd had followed some fleeing Muslims into the nearby mosque and burned the huge Saudi-built mosque down with the Muslims inside.
By about 9 in the night the Meikhtilar Hospital was in total chaos as ambulances were constantly bringing in so many wounded. Most were Buddhist-Burmese with severe knife-wounds and only few were not seriously wounded.
U Thawbita passed away on exactly 9:45 that night of 20 March 2013. Blood from his head wound was still flowing as his body was being moved onto a concrete slab in the hospital morgue. The dead monk was completely naked. The morgue staff was then sewing the gaping head wound back. When they looked close-up they sadly noticed the monk’s genitals had been completely chopped off by the Muslims.
Muslims brought this upon themselves as they do wherever they go. With Muslims, it’s either kill or be killed.
From Bare Naked islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Muslim thugs with weapons threaten English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson’s family outside his home
Early in the morning of April 9th, a group of rabid Islamist savages gathered in front of Tommy’s home shouting abuse and making threats against Tommy, his family, and other innocent bystanders. Police arrive and make one arrest – Tommy Robinson.
EDL (h/t ZILLA) Tommy was held in custody for 30 hours and his house was searched under the powers granted by Section 32 PACE (search without warrant upon arrest). These powers allow the police to enter and search your home if the police officer “reasonably suspects that he will find on those premises items relating to the offence for which the suspect was arrested.” Why weren’t the people who started the incident arrested?
This is not a two-tier application of the law, this seems more like perversion of the law to persecute those who do not subscribe to the government-approved double-think. So when was it made law that those who suffer antagonism, threats of death and serious beatings must be arrested for their victim status?
A member of Tommys family was followed home by none other than Ibrahim Anderson, a notorious member of the now proscribed “Muslims Against The Crusades” and “Al Muhajiroun” a gang of backward Islamist scum. When Anderson (a white ginger haired convert to Islam) started an altercation with threats outside Tommys family home, it was apparent that the threats made were real, credible, and potentially life threatening.
If someone follows a member of your family to your home to instigate trouble then it’s pretty safe to assume that person clearly intends to cause harm, to intimidate. It would be pretty safe to assume he’s not there to give a sermon or flowers or chocolate as a well wisher now is it?
Of course as anyone would, Tommy and his family acted in the interests of self defence, damage was caused to a car and Anderson soon called his fellow islamist bed buddies to aid him in his “street jihad”.
Tommy turned up as did the police and they arrested him, they also arrested another member of his family for entering his own home. The Muslims who turned up on masse in support of their jihadist Islamist brother were armed to the teeth with blades and bats.
Not one of these backward savages was arrested or searched! Now forgive us for perhaps not quite understanding this but an armed gang of Muslim hatemongers armed with weapons, threatening all and sundry are not arrested or searched?
Video of Tommy’s arrest.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
A stabbing incident at a northwest Harris County college on Tuesday injured 14 people, with two of them in critical condition, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.
Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia said a 911 call was received at its call center at 11:12 a.m. regarding a stabbing at Lone Star College, 9191 Barker Cypress Road. “The call was described as a white male, on the loose, stabbing people,” said Garcia.
College officials said the incident happened in and around the LSC-CyFair Health Science Center.
An update from the Lone Star College system at 3 p.m. confirmed that six victims were taken to Memorial Hermann Hospital and six to North Cypress Medical Center. Four of the victims were airlifted and eight transported via ambulance, according to the update.
Garcia confirmed that two of the victims were in critical condition and four were in fair condition. Garcia would not confirm earlier reports that many of the victims were stabbed in their cheeks, shoulders and/or necks.
No gun, no high-capacity magazines, no “assault rifle” yet, multiple people were attacked, and some hurt seriously. HMMMMM, must be the NRA’s fault.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Former Weather Underground radical Kathy Boudin — who spent 22 years in prison for an armored-car robbery that killed two cops and a Brinks guard — now holds a prestigious adjunct professorship at Columbia University’s School of Social Work, The Post has learned.
Boudin, 69, this year won another academic laurel — being named the Sheinberg Scholar-in-Residence at NYU Law School, where last month she gave a lecture on “the politics of parole and re-entry.”
Another violent communist who ought to be in prison also enlightens the students at this extravagantly expensive Ivy League school:
One Friday, a criminal-justice conference at the school will feature keynote address by Angela Davis, another infamous radical, and later this month Boudin is scheduled to speak at Columbia Law School’s conference on child and family advocacy.
Bullet points on Angela Davis:
• Communist professor at the University of California’s Santa Cruz campus
• Recipient of the Lenin “Peace Prize” from the police state of East Germany in 1979
• Provided an arsenal of weapons to Black Panthers who used them to kill a Marin County judge in a failed attempt to free Davis’ imprisoned lover, Black Panther murderer George Jackson
• Leader of a movement to free all criminals who are minorities claiming that they are political prisoners of the racist United States
A sawed-off shotgun owned by Angela Davis was used to blow off Judge Harold Haley’s head. Here’s how she escaped justice:
Following the announcement of the verdict that acquitted Davis, one juror faced news cameras and gave a revolutionary’s clenched-fist salute.
O.J. wasn’t the first enemy of society to benefit from jury nullification.
What kind of sick lunatics would want criminal scum like Kathy Boudin, Angela Davis, Bill Ayers, et al. educating young Americans? The same kind who would want Ayers’s protégé Obama running the country.
On tips from Wiggins and Spider.
Found at Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
“The media insist that crime is the major concern of the American public today. In this connection they generally push the point that a disarmed society would be a crime-free society. They will not accept the truth that if you take all the guns off the street you still will have a crime problem, whereas if you take the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem.”
“In the larger sense, however, the personal ownership of firearms is only secondarily a matter of defense against the criminal. Note the following from Thomas Jefferson: The strongest reason for the people to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny of government. That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants.”
Found at American Digest
BAILEY O’NEILL, age 12, died Sunday after being punched so hard by a fellow elementary school student in Upper Darby, Pa., a racially mixed working class suburb of Philadelphia, that he sustained serious brain injuries. The vast majority of articles about O’Neill’s death do not mention that the boy who assaulted him was black. Television news reports have indirectly confirmed the race of the attacker with interviews of his father. The father says his son “was not guilty of anything” even though the incident was caught on video cameras.
Instead of informing the public of the racial dimension of the incident, journalists have focused on”bullying” in public schools. “Bullying” is a mindless term used to encompass everything from a mild insult to a brutal assault. People refer to “bullying” as if it were a cholera plague rather than a lack of discipline and order.
The student who attacked O’Neill was suspended for two days. Imagine if the races of these individuals had been reversed. There would be protests in the street. O’Neill joins a long list of murder victims who never inspire public indignation over black savagery.
ROBERT HUBER writes in Philadelphia Magazine on ”Being White in Philly,” a majority nonwhite city. Huber describes — blandly and without indignation — the squalor and fear that are common in many parts of the city due to black crime and negligence. He says whites deliberately adopt a sunny attitude. They live in denial, never stating the obvious and removing what is disturbing from their thoughts. Huber deserves credit for admitting that many things are left unsaid, but he then predictably concludes that the real problem is that whites and blacks don’t try hard enough to connect. If only whites could manage to engage blacks in “dialogue,” everything would be better.
That’s all liberals have to offer on the subject of race: endless “dialogue,” a merry-go-round of talk that leads to nothing more than dizzying, incapacitating white guilt and confusion. It inevitably leads to one conclusion: whites are to blame in some form or another for black dysfunction. Dialogue is an exercise in escapism.
Huber’s lengthy piece includes an interview with “Jen,” a white woman from Fairmount who criticizes her white neighbors for refusing to send their children to an elementary school that is 74 percent black. In the comments section following the article, we find the honesty that Huber never approaches himself. A reader writes that “white peoples brains would blow up” if anyone spoke the truth about the “overt disdain” many blacks possess toward whites. He writes: (Continued)
From The Thinking Housewife: http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/
Via Beltway Confidential:
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, scolded Attorney General Eric Holder for saying he doesn’t “respect” any of the congressmen who voted to censure him for contempt of Congress, but Holder responded by repeating the comment.
“It was an effort that had a predetermined result,” Holder said of the House of Representatives contempt vote during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this morning. He laid some of the blame for the contempt vote on “the gun lobby,” after initially suggesting he lacked respect for the “process,” not the members of Congress.
Then he said what he really thinks. “I’ll stand by that: the people who pushed that, I don’t respect,” Holder told Grassley.
That would be my solution to Phildelphia’s Burqa Problem. Daniel Pipes, well-known Islamic scholar and author, would like to see female Islamic garb (full face-covering burqas and niqabs) banned in public in Philadelphia, where burqas have become the disguise of preference for criminals, especially robbers of stores and banks.
Washington Times The Philadelphia region has had at least 15 robberies (or attempted robberies) of financial institutions in the past six years in which the thieves relied on an Islamic full-body cover. The most violent one took place on May 3, 2008, when Police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski was killed in a shootout following a robbery by perpetrators wearing burqas. One of the criminals also died in the exchange.
As David J. Rusin points out in his detailed survey of these crimes, Muslim garb holds two great advantages over other forms of disguise. First, plenty of covered women walk the streets of Philadelphia without criminal intent, thereby providing cover for thieves; the more head coverings around, the more likely it is that head coverings will facilitate criminal activity.
Second, the very strangeness and aloofness of these garments affords their wearers an extraordinary degree of protection. As in other cases (notably a purchase of alcohol in Toronto liquor stores by a 14-year-old boy in a burqa), clerks so fear being accused of racism or “Islamophobia” that they skip established methods, such as asking a niqabi to establish her (or his) identity.
In response, some banks have adopted policies of not allowing head coverings. For example, a PNC Bank branch office in Philadelphia boasts a sign stating: “The safety of our employees and customers is our foremost concern. We request that you remove any hats, caps, sunglasses or hoods while inside this financial institution.” Such policies may help account for the lack of burqa robberies in Philadelphia in almost a year.
Two burka-wearing bank robbers have pulled off a heist using a handgun concealed beneath their full Islamic veil.
Even if banks stop this crime wave, however, Islamic garb presents a more general danger. For example, a murderer wore an Islamic full-cover outfit in an attack at a barber shop in Philadelphia, also in April 2012, in which the owner was killed.
The abduction and rape of a 5-year-old child last month was less fatal, but equally horrific. A woman in a niqab signed Nailla Robinson out from the Bryant Elementary School in Philadelphia by pretending to be her mother taking the girl to breakfast. The girl then disappeared for nearly a day. Investigators believe the two walked a few blocks to where a man awaited them. Nailla was later found in a park by passersby. Last week, the police arrested Christina Regusters, 19, an employee at Bryant who apparently had prior contact with Nailla. Charges against her include criminal conspiracy, aggravated assault, kidnapping, rape and recklessly endangering another person.
School kidnapping caught on CCTV
The usual two factors noted above were critical to this crime’s commission: the spread of full-body gear (Nailla’s mother, Latifah Rashid, wears a niqab, meaning Ms. Regusters could plausibly pretend to be her) and the Bryant school staff deferring to a niqabi (completely ignoring the many rules that restrict the withdrawal of a child from school).
These crimes prompt several reflections: First, as full-body Islamic covers spread, criminals increasingly use them to perpetrate their offenses. Second, government workers and others need to get over their timidity and apply normal security procedures to those wearing full-body coverings. Third, this is deadly serious business, involving thefts, rapes and murders. Finally, this problem has a simple solution: Ban the niqab and burqa in public places, as has been done in France and Belgium.
Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org) is president of the Middle East Forum.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Found at 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
But he did have time to talk to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsy for the umpteenth time. Worth noting Morsy is trying to secure the release of the cleric behind the attacks, the Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman.
Via ABC News:
Edward Smith remembers vividly the call from the morgue 20 years ago today, that his pregnant wife had died in the World Trade Center bombing hours before she was supposed to start her maternity leave.
“It seems like kind of yesterday sometimes,” he told ABC News, “but it seems like a long time ago, too.”
Today marks the 20th anniversary of the 1993 WTC bombing, which was overshadowed eight years later by the 9/11 attacks. Six people died and about 1,000 were injured after terrorists detonated a truck bomb in the parking garage of the World Trade Center’s North Tower Feb. 26, 1993.
Four of the six killed — Robert Kirkpatrick, 61, Stephen A. Knapp, 47, William Macko, 57, and Monica Rodriguez Smith, 35 — were employees of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owned the buildings. John DiGiovanni, 45, a dental-supply salesman visiting the World Trade Center, and Wilfredo Mercado, 37, a purchasing agent for Windows on the World restaurant, also died.
To commemorate the event, ABC News spoke with several people affected by the bombing — a widower, a former Port Authority executive director, a plaintiff’s attorney and a jury foreman — to illustrate how the bombing resonates 20 years later.
The media advances the relentless grievance mongering by Muslims over mythical “islamophobia” when, in fact, Muslims are terrorizing and brutalizing non-Muslims as they relentlessly advance their supremacist colonization of host countries.
And this is not a “race issue.” Islam is not a race. “Asian” “yob” “immigrant” “youth” — all euphemisms for Muslim.
Aaron, 9, ‘bullied to death for being white’ The Sun, February 24, 2013
Family blames Asian yobs for suicide
Tragedy … Aaron Dugmore
THE devastated family of a nine-year-old boy who hanged himself say he took his life after racist taunts by Asian bullies.Aaron Dugmore — thought to be one of Britain’s youngest suicides after bullying — was found in his bedroom after months of jibes at school, they claim.
His family say that Aaron was threatened with a plastic KNIFE by one Asian pupil — who warned him: “Next time it will be a real one.”Heartbreak … mum Kelly-Marie Dugmore and stepdad Paul JonesCATERS
But despite complaints to the school, where 75 per cent of pupils come from ethnic backgrounds, they claim nothing was done to stop the bullying.
Heartbroken mum Kelly-Marie Dugmore is convinced the taunts led to her son killing himself two weeks ago. She sobbed: “We are not racist people. Aaron got on with all the children at his last school, and for him to have been bullied because of the colour of his skin makes me feel sick to my stomach.”
Aaron joined Erdington Hall primary in Birmingham last September after the family moved nearby. But Kelly-Marie, 30, and stepdad Paul Jones, 43, noticed a change in him from his first day.
Paul said: “He became argumentative with his brothers and sisters, which wasn’t like him at all. Eventually he told us that he was being bullied by a group of Asian children at school and had to hide from them in the playground at lunchtime. He said one kid even said to him, ‘My dad says all the white people should be dead’.”
Kelly-Marie claimed: “He was even threatened with a plastic knife by one boy. When Aaron stuck up for himself he said it’d be a real one next time.
“I went to see head Martin Collin a few times, but he only said, ‘You didn’t have to come to this school, you chose to come here’.”
A spokesman for Erdington Hall, labelled unsatisfactory by Ofsted, said Aaron had “settled in quickly”. West Midlands Police are investigating the causes of Aaron’s death.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
War on Women? I’ll show you a war on women:
While trying to explain why women in college don’t need firearms for self-defense on campus, Colorado state Rep. Joe Salazar said even if women feel like they might be raped, their suspected attacker might not actually have intent to rape. So please, put the guns away ladies.
“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at,” he said during a legislative hearing. “And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble and when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop — pop a round at somebody.”
Kudos to Salazar for displaying the discipline required to keep a straight face while implying that call boxes and “safe zones” negate the need for self-defense.
Hot Air notes that Salazar (a Democrat, of course) touches all the bases:
Downplaying the threat of rape? Check. Questioning the ability of grown, sentient women to perceive that threat? Check. A man in a position of power presuming to know what’s best for women he knows nothing about? Check. Limiting women’s choices by law in potentially life-threatening situations? Check. Six months ago, this was known as the frightful patriarchy. Now, it’s just another member of the Party of Women doing his part for the good work of gun control.
According to Democrats, it is better that women should be raped, beaten, and murdered than that our constitutional right to bear arms be preserved.
On tips from dan and Laurie.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
From 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
Finally. This is monstrous. This story is close to four years old. Why did this take so long? And why did ABC wait until after election to run this terrible miscarriage of justice?
How far will the jihad sympathizer in the White House push this?
Members of Congress Demand Obama Administration Classify Ft. Hood Attack as an ‘Act of Terrorism’ ABC News
In the wake of an ABC News story detailing claims by victims of the Fort Hood shooting that they have been neglected by the military and ‘betrayed’ by President Obama, the chair of the House Homeland Security Committee has sent a letter to his fellow members of Congress demanding that the Obama administration classify the attack as a terrorist act and provide full benefits to the victims and their families.
“It is time for the administration to recognize the Fort Hood shooting for what it is—an act of terrorism,” wrote Rep. Michael McCaul, R.-Texas, in a letter cosigned by Rep. Frank Wolf, R.-Virginia. ”To date, the Department of Defense and the Army classify this attack [as] ‘workplace violence,’ despite mountains of evidence [that] clearly proves the Ft. Hood shooting was an act of terror.”
The letter recommends that members of Congress view the ABC News report, “which highlights the broken promises made to the victims of that attack by the Obama Administration. The video contains never-seen-before footage of the terrorist attack and moving interviews with several of the survivors.”
“As this news piece makes clear,” wrote McCaul and Wolf, “the result of this inexcusable [workplace violence] classification … is that victims and their families have not received the same recognition or medical and financial benefits as those wounded or killed in war.”Exclusive Video of Fort Hood Shooting Aftermath Watch VideoFt. Hood Hero: Obama ‘Betrayed’ Victims Watch Video
In a report that aired on “World News with Diane Sawyer” and “Nightline,” former police sergeantKimberly Munley, who helped stop the Ft. Hood shooting, said that President Obama broke the promise he made to her that the victims would be well taken care of.
“Betrayed is a good word,” said Munley, who sat next to First Lady Michelle Obama at the 2010 State of the Union address. “Not to the least little bit have the victims been taken care of … In fact, they’ve been neglected.”
There was no comment from the White House about Munley’s allegations.
Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 others shot in the Nov. 5, 2009 rampage by the accused shooter, Major Nidal Hasan, at the Army base in Killeen, Texas. Hasan now awaits a military trial on charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder.
Despite extensive evidence that Hasan was in communication with al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack, the military has denied the victims a Purple Heart and is treating the incident as “workplace violence” instead of “combat related” or terrorism.
Al-Awlaki has since been killed in a U.S. drone attack in Yemen, in what was termed a major victory in the U.S. efforts against al Qaeda.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
The Obama administration’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says it should be a federal crime to refuse to hire ex-convicts – and threatens to sue businesses that don’t employ criminals.
In April the EEOC unveiled its “Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records,” which declares that “criminal record exclusions have a disparate impact based on race and national origin.”
The impetus for this “guidance” is that black men are nearly seven times more likely than white men to serve time in prison, and therefore refusals to hire convicts disproportionally impact blacks, according to a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by James Bovard, a libertarian author and lecturer whose books include “Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen.”
Most businesses perform background checks on potential employees, but the EEOC frowns on these checks and “creates legal tripwires that could spark federal lawsuits,” Bovard observes.
An EEOC commissioner who opposed the new policy, Constance Baker, said in April that the new guidelines will scare businesses from conducting background checks.
Reason: If a check does disclose a criminal offense, the EEOC expects a firm to do an “individual assessment” that will have to prove that the company has a “business necessity” not to hire the ex-convict. If the firm does not do the intricate assessment, it could be found guilty of “race discrimination” if it hires a law-abiding applicant over one with convictions.
Bovard points out that the “biggest bombshell” in the new guidelines is that businesses complying with state or local laws requiring background checks can still be sued by the EEOC.
That came to light when the EEOC took action against G4S Secure Solutions, which provides guards for nuclear power plants and other sensitive sites, for refusing to hire a twice-convicted thief as a security guard – even though Pennsylvania state law forbids hiring people with felony convictions as security officers.
Bovard quotes Todd McCracken of the National Small Business Association: “State and federal courts will allow potentially devastating tort lawsuits against businesses that hire felons who commit crimes at the workplace or in customers’ homes. Yet the EEOC is threatening to launch lawsuits if they do not hire those same felons.”
Bovard concludes: “Americans can treat ex-offenders humanely without giving them legal advantages over similar individuals without criminal records.”
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Later in the day CNN had on another guest who openly praised Dorner… shockingly, both guests were black liberals.
On Wednesday morning, Carol Costello‘s panel on CNN tackled the question of whether ex-LAPD officer and murder suspect Chris Dorner, who was the center of a manhunt in California, can “teach” us anything about gun violence. The panel quickly turned into a two-against-one discussion, with the majority not humoring Dorner’s manifesto.
“He says a lot about more than just guns,” Politic365′s Jason Johnson asserted. “He tells us a lot about how our urban police departments are working, he tells us a lot about corruption. He tells us a lot about institutionalized racism. His story is the kind of testimony that we need to take a look at how America operates in general.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
“Pour encourager les autres” Burning Man in California. This time for real
“SLA 1974. MOVE 1985. Waco 1993. Dorner 2013. Next?” — Lewis in comments
Kipling would’ve been proud of this.
It also happens to be a clearer version of “what happened” to our two ex-SEALs than ANY of the bloviations to erupt from the orifices of Congress, the present regime, or the media shills. Musloid apologists and wannabe Dhimmi’s, the lot of ‘em.
…Did I forget to mention that they are ALL cowards and liars? Well, allow me to correct that error: Congress, the Regime, and the Media are all COWARDS and LIARS.
THE BATTLING BASTARDS of BENGHAZI
We’re the Battling Bastards of Benghazi,
No fame, no glory, no paparazzi.
Just a fiery death in a blazing hell,
Defending the country we loved so well,
It wasn’t our job, but we answered the call,
Fought to the consulate, n scaled th’ wall.
We pulled twenty countrymen from the jaws of fate,
Led them to safety, ‘n stood at th’ gate.
Just the two of us, ‘n foe by th’ score,
But we stood fast to bar th’ door.
We called for reinforcement, but it was denied,
So we fought, ‘n we fought, ‘n we fought, ‘n we died.
We gave our all for our Uncle Sam,
‘n Obama didn’t give a damn,
Just two dead SEALS, who carried the load,
No thanks to us, we were bumps in the road.
If Obama & Co. are helpless to prevent gang warfare, what are they doing trying to disarm the law-abiding?
But let me give you some actual common sense about gun control. Barack Obama, and the entire federal government, and all the state governments, and all the city and county governments, COMBINED, do not even have the power to take guns away from criminals. That includes so-called “assault weapons” (more sophistry and deception, go into a gun store and ask to see the “assault weapons”).
All that government, and Barack Obama, even have the power to do is take guns away from the victims of criminals. Is that common sense? To disarm the victims of crime, but not the criminals?
The same applies to government policies to limit the number of shots in gun magazines. Government, even Obama the Magnificent himself, does not even have the power to limit the number of shots available to the criminals. They can only limit the number of shots available to the victims of crime.
Is that common sense? To leave the criminals with unlimited shots, but limit the shots available to the victims of crime? Can liberals and Democrats even reason?
The answer is yes, they can reason. Because what we are talking about here is not gun violence and how to limit it. What we are talking about here is the power of Barack Obama. It increases his power and the power of the government to disarm the citizenry. That is why the Second Amendment is in the Constitution, to protect the power of the people.
Read the entire article at The American Spectator: http://spectator.org/archives/2013/02/06/the-root-cause-of-gun-violence
Radical Leftist Group With Close Ties To Obama Admin Inspired Leftist Gunman To Shoot Up Conservative Group’s HQ…
The same Southern Poverty Law Center that Obama’s Department of Justice has been working closely with.
In a Washington, D.C. courtroom today, Floyd Lee Corkins, II, pleaded guilty to three charges associated with his shooting a security guard at the national headquarters of a pro-life group. The guilty plea included a District of Columbia charge of committing an act of terrorism.” [...]
The prosecutor said they reviewed the family computer and found that he identified his targets on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s web site.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins offered a reaction in an email to LifeNews.
“The day after Floyd Corkins came into the FRC headquarter and opened fire wounding one of our team members, I stated that while Corkins was responsible for the shooting, he had been given a license to perpetrate this act of violence by groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center which has systematically and recklessly labeled every organization with which they disagree as a ‘hate group,’” he said.
From Weasel Zippers:
Mortal fear of the federal government isn’t just for the tinfoil hat set anymore — not now that the Obama Regime has authorized extrajudicial executions of American citizens on American soil using drones. Even the normally subservient toadies at NBC are alarmed:
The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director. Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”
But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” [PDF available here] introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches. It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.
Instead, it says, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”
Note that a new study funded in part by Homeland Security has recently characterized those who are “reverent of individual liberty” and/or “suspicious of centralized federal authority” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists. The pieces are in place for the federal government to assassinate you for believing in the principles this country was founded on. The judicial system need not be involved.
According to the memo, assassination by drone may be authorized if arresting the patriot terrorist would pose an “undue risk” to government personnel. Whether they will call in a drone strike on your house because you went to a Tea Party event and have a CCW depends on how far this Hopey Changey thing is allowed to go.
These developments fit smoothly among other harbingers of tyranny listed by Doug Ross:
Anyone still wonder why the Democrats are pushing a gun grab?
On tips from Bob Roberts, wingmann, St. Gilbert, IslandLifer, The Only Other Conservative in Seattle, and Sean C.
According to our liberal rulers, we don’t need guns to defend ourselves, because the police will do that for us. Yet in Chicago, where possibly the most repressive gun laws in the country have resulted in stratospheric levels of gun violence:
Starting this week, Chicago police are changing their responses to 911 calls. They’ll no longer come right away to reports of things like criminal damage to property, vehicle thefts, garage burglaries, or other crimes in which the suspect is no longer on the scene, and the victim isn’t in immediate danger.
Liberals take away your money and use it to breed a massive underclass of violent savages. Then they take away your God-given right to self-defense and leave you at the mercy of the jungle they created.
On tips from wingmann and Bob Roberts.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
It is the duty of the media to condition the gullible to accept what liberalism is doing to our country. Here’s how the flagship publication of the left-wing ruling class (the NY Slimes) explains why Chicago is a national leader in both repressive gun laws and gun violence:
Not a single gun shop can be found in this city because they are outlawed. Handguns were banned in Chicago for decades, too, until 2010, when the United States Supreme Court ruled that was going too far, leading city leaders to settle for restrictions some describe as the closest they could get legally to a ban without a ban. Despite a continuing legal fight, Illinois remains the only state in the nation with no provision to let private citizens carry guns in public.
And yet Chicago, a city with no civilian gun ranges and bans on both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, finds itself laboring to stem a flood of gun violence that contributed to more than 500 homicides last year and at least 40 killings already in 2013, including a fatal shooting of a 15-year-old girl [last] Tuesday.
Is it because law-abiding citizens aren’t allowed to defend themselves? Nah.
Chicago’s experience reveals the complications inherent in carrying out local gun laws around the nation. Less restrictive laws in neighboring communities and states not only make guns easy to obtain nearby, but layers of differing laws — local and state — make it difficult to police violations. And though many describe the local and state gun laws here as relatively stringent, penalties for violating them — from jail time to fines — have not proven as severe as they are in some other places, reducing the incentive to comply. …
“Chicago is not an island,” said David Spielfogel, senior adviser to [Mayor Rahm "Dead Fish"] Emanuel. “We’re only as strong as the weakest gun law in surrounding states.”
That is, it’s the rest of the country’s fault, for still honoring the Constitution. If we turn the whole country into Chicago, the rotting pustule of a city that produced Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Barack Obama won’t resemble the innermost circle of hell anymore.
Any liberal who can regurgitate this nonsense with a straight face gets extra brownie points for political obedience.
On a tip from Ghost of FA Hayek.
Via Washington Examiner:
President Obama and the Department of Homeland Security care more about “special interests” in the Democratic campaign base than the lives of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, the ICE union boss told Congress today.
“Death or serious injury to ICE officers and agents appears more acceptable to ICE, DHS, and Administration leadership, than the public complaints that would be lodged by special interest groups representing illegal aliens,” Chris Crane, president of the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement 118, told the House Judiciary Committee this afternoon.
From Weasel Zippers:http://weaselzippers.us/