Tag: security

Odessa Gunman “Was On a Long Spiral Down” Per Investigators…Can Mass Shootings Be Prevented?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

31odessashooting-4-promo-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600-v2

“You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There’s only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time… It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.” – President Ronald Reagan

FoxNews.com reports that

The gunman in the West Texas rampage that killed seven people over the weekend “was on a long spiral down” before he was fired from his job on the day of the shooting, investigators said Monday.

The gunman had been fired Saturday morning from his job at Journey Oil Field Services and made “rambling” phone calls to both the 911 and the FBI afterward, the investigators added.

FBI special agent Christopher Combs said the gunman had gone to work that day “in trouble.”

Combs said Monday that the killer’s home was “a strange residence,” and that the condition “reflect what his mental state was going into this.”

“Texans are strong. We will get through this,” Odessa Mayor David Turner said Monday on “Shepard Smith Reporting.”

The gunman killed seven people and injured at least 22 others Saturday before officers killed him outside a busy movie theater in Odessa, investigators said.

Officials said those killed were between 15 and 57 years old but did not immediately provide a list of names. Family and employers, however, said that among the dead were Edwin Peregrino, 25, who ran out of his parents’ home to see what the commotion was; mail carrier Mary Granados, 29, killed in her U.S. Postal Service truck; and 15-year-old high school student Leilah Hernandez, who had been walking out of an auto dealership.

The attack began Saturday afternoon when Texas state troopers tried pulling over a gold car on Interstate 20 for failing to signal a left turn. Before the vehicle came to a complete stop, the driver “pointed a rifle toward the rear window of his car and fired several shots” toward the patrol car stopping him, according to Texas Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger. The gunshots struck a trooper, Cesinger said, after which the gunman took off and continued shooting. He fired at random as he drove in the area of Odessa and Midland, two cities over 300 miles west of Dallas.

Police used a marked SUV to ram the mail truck outside the Cinergy Movie Theater in Odessa, disabling the vehicle. The gunman then fired at police, wounding two officers before he was killed.

The shooting came at the end of an already violent month in Texas following the El Paso attack at a Walmart that killed 22 people.

The problem in stopping mass murders from happening is not that there are not enough gun laws. The problem is the gun laws on the books are not properly enforced.

The dissolution of the Family Unit, the revolving door state of our Municipal Justice Systems, and, in the case of the perpetrator of last weekend’s massacre in Odessa, the lack of recognition and treatment of the mentally ill and wannabe Terrorists, have a lot to do with the rise of these horrible massacres in America and the horrible violence which plagues cities like Chicago and Memphis.

In Democratic Politicians’ and Political Activists’ zeal to grab our guns, there is an “inconvenient truth” that they always fail to mention:

A 1997 Justice Department survey of more than 18,000 state and federal convicts revealed the truth:

• 39.6% of criminals obtained a gun from a friend or family member
• 39.2% of criminals obtained a gun on the street or from an illegal source
• 0.7% of criminals purchased a gun at a gun show
• 1% of criminals purchased a gun at a flea market
• 3.8% of criminals purchased a gun from a pawn shop
• 8.3% of criminals actually bought their guns from retail outlets

This fact remains unchanged to this day.

And, Modern American Liberals are quite aware of these numbers.

So, why attempt to restrict the gun ownership of law-abiding Americans?

Have you ever watched a mother, when their toddler bumps their head on a table, attempt to distract their child, by pretending to spank the table, while saying, “Bad Table”?

That, in a nutshell, is what the Democrats and their minions are attempting to do through their incessant attempts to limit the Constitutional Right of American Citizens to own guns.

By creating new restrictions, instead of enforcing gun laws which are already in place, they shift the blame from the Radical Islamic Terrorists and those who operate outside of the law to America and her citizens.

Restricting private ownership of firearms by a country’s citizens is nothing new.

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

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

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

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

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

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

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Russian Marxist Revolutionary Vladimir Lenin said:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

What Liberals have never understood, in their continuous quest to take away the Second Amendment rights of average Americans is that we will never surrender our Constitutional Right to defend ourselves and our families from enemies foreign and domestic.

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

Passing more restrictive gun laws is not the answer.

Criminals are called “outlaws” for a reason.

They will find a way to get guns. They do now.

In this age of apathy, it is time for families, friends, and neighbors to once again pay attention to those around them in order to prevent massacres like those which the nation has witnessed lately, such as the one in Odessa, Texas.

This is a people problem. Not a gun problem.

After all, have you ever seen a gun pull its own trigger?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Dim…err…Dem. Senator From California Grills Future CIA Director Pompeo as to Whether He Believes in “Climate Change”. Really? Why?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

kerry-climate-change-ignores-isis

Have you ever wondered why Modern American Liberals are still so preoccupied with the faux science of Global Warming/Climate Change?

I mean, how arrogant do you have to be to believe that you can make a change in the very weather itself, which is controlled by Someone way above your pay grade?

Invented by Al Gore, and propagandized in the book and the movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”, “Climate Change” has become both a Secular Liberal Religion and an industry, a failed one, but an industry none the less.

Ranging from washouts like Solyndra to GreenTech Automotive, millions of taxpayer dollars have been sunk into these so-called green projects, since the advent of the Obama administration.

It is so much a part of Congressional Liberals personal mantras, they believe that literally EVERYTHING is secondary to this faux science, including the security of our Sovereign Nation.

CNSNews.com reports that

CIA director nominee Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) said Thursday that he would rather not wade into the climate change debate during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee.

“I frankly as a director of CIA would prefer today not to get into the details of climate debate and science. It seems my role is gonna be so different and unique from that. It is gonna be to work alongside warriors keeping Americans safe, and so I stand by the things that I’

Sen. Kamal Harris (D-Calif.) asked Pompeo, “CIA Director Brennan, who spent a 25-year career at the CIA as an analyst, a senior manager, and station chief in the field, has said that when ‘CIA analysts look for deeper causes of rising instability in the world, one of the causes those CIA analysts see is the impact of climate change.’ Do you have any reason to doubt the assessment of these CIA analysts?”

“Senator, I haven’t had a chance to read those materials with respect to climate change. I do know the agency’s role there,” said Pompeo.

“Its role is to collect foreign intelligence, to understand threats to the world. That would certainly include threats from poor governance, regional instability, threats from all sources and deliver that information to policymakers, and to the extent the changes in climactic activity are part of that foreign intelligence collection task, we will deliver that information to you all and to the president,” he added.

Harris asked a follow-up question about whether Pompeo doubted NASA’s findings on the issue of climate change.

“In the past, you have questioned the scientific consensus on climate change. Nevertheless, according to NASA, multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively published climate scientists agree that climate warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities,” she said.

“In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. Do you have any reason to doubt NASA’s findings?” Harris asked.

“Senator, I’ve actually spoken to this in my political life some. My commentary most all has been directed to ensuring that the policies that America has put in place actually achieve the objective of ensuring that we didn’t have catastrophic harm that resulted from change in climate,” Pompeo said. “I continue to hold that view.
 
“I frankly as a director of CIA would prefer today not to get into the details of climate debate and science. It seems my role is gonna be so different and unique from that. It is gonna be to work alongside warriors keeping Americans safe, and so I stand by the things that I’ve said previously with respect to that issue,” he said.

“So I’m not clear. Do you believe that NASA’s findings are debatable?” Harris asked.

“Senator, actually I haven’t spent enough time to tell you that I’ve looked at NASA’s findings, and just, I can’t give you any judgment about that today,” Pompeo replied.

“Can you guarantee me that you will and we’ll have a follow-up conversation on this?” Harris asked.

“I’m happy to continue to talk about it. Yes, ma’am, of course,” Pompeo responded.

Leonard Weinstein, ScD, published an article on 4/25/2009 titled Disproving The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Problem. 

Here are some excerpts:

A hypothesis has been proposed that human activity over about the last 150 years has caused a significant rise in Earth’s average temperature.

…In order to support a hypothesis, specific predictions need to be made that are based on the claims of the hypothesis, and the predictions then need to either happen or be falsified. While the occurrence of the predicted events is not proof positive of a hypothesis, they increase the believability of the claims. However, if the predictions are not observed, this tends to indicate the hypothesis is flawed or even wrong. Some predictions are absolute in nature. Einstein’s prediction of the bending of light by the Sun is such a case. It either would or would not bend, and this was considered a critical test of the validity of his hypothesis of general relativity. It did bend the predicted amount, and helped raise the concept to the status of theory.

Many predictions however are less easily supported. For example, weather forecasting often does a good job in the very short term but over increasing time does a poor job. This is due to the complexity of the numerous nonlinear components. This complexity has been described in chaos theory by what is called the butterfly effect. Any effect that depends on numerous factors, some of which are nonlinear in effect, is nearly impossible to use to make long-range predictions.

However, for some reason, the present predictions of “Climate Change” are considered by the AGW supporters to be more reliable than even short-term weather forecasting. While some overall trends can be reasonably made based on looking at past historical trends, and some computational models can suggest some trends due to specific forcing factors, like any respectable hypothesis, specific predictions need to be made, and then shown to happen, before the AGW models can have any claim to being reasonably valid.

The AGW computational models do make several specific predictions. Since the time scale for checking the result of the predictions is small, and since local weather can vary enough on the short time scale to confuse the longer time scale prediction, allowances for these shorter lasting events have to be made when examining data that is supposed to be supporting the predictions. Nevertheless, if the actual data results do not significantly support the stated predictions, the AGW hypothesis must be reconsidered or even rejected as it stands.

…The final question is what prediction has the AGW hypothesis made that has been demonstrated, and that strongly supports the hypothesis. It appears that there is NO real supporting evidence and much falsifying evidence for the AGW hypothesis as proposed. That is not to say there is no effect from Human activity. Clearly human pollution (not greenhouse gases) is a problem. There is also very likely some contribution to the present temperature variations from the increase in CO2 and CH4, but it is almost certainly a small effect and not a driver of future climate.

Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic AGW hypothesis fails.

So, why are Congressional Democrats still “ate up with the Dumb A@@” (a colorful Southern expression)and still tilting at windmills, fighting their Quixotic Crusade?

Well…Here are some possible reasons…

1.  Appeasing the Gullible –Hey “The Facts Are In.” The “science” is true. And, as P.T. Barnum said,

There is a sucker born every minute.

Remember…these “true believers of the Goreacle”, also voted for Obama. They are easily fooled.

2. Money, Money, Money – Too much money invested by Democrat “Power Brokers” and to much of American Taxpayers money spent needlessly to back down now. These Democratic Congresscritters have political promises to keep.

3. Hey, look! Squirrel! – With Obama and his minions about to be kicked out of the Halls of Power, with possible Federal Investigations to follow, the Congressional Democrats are grasping for whatever national distraction they can come up with.

What would make Senator Harris think that the Director of the CIA has anything to do with “Climate Change” in the performance of his job duties?

Perhaps, she was thinking about “The Day After Tomorrow”, the movie starring Dennis Quaid, which bombed spectacularly, in which the ice was chasing everybody.

ROFL!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

As His ISIS Strategy Sputters, Obama Tells America “All is Well.”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

th (18)United States President Barack Hussein Obama got in front of the cameras yesterday, to give Americans an update on his marvelous military strategy in the ongoing “war that is not a war” against ISIS.

Alexander the Great, he ain’t.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama, in a rare visit to the Pentagon where he got an update on the military campaign against the Islamic State, acknowledged Monday that ISIS and its ideology have spread far beyond Iraq and Syria as he urged the world to unite against this threat – saying that if the U.S. tries to address it unilaterally, “We’ll be playing whack-a-mole.”

The president, giving a report card of sorts on the nearly yearlong military campaign against the terror network, offered a mixed picture. He cited a string of ISIS losses in Iraq and Syria in claiming they “can be pushed back” in the region.

“In short, ISIL’s recent losses in both Syria and Iraq prove that ISIL can and will be defeated,” Obama said, vowing: “We will ultimately prevail.”

At the same time, he braced the public for a “long-term campaign” that will involve a “generational struggle” — a global battle with extremists for hearts and minds.

In unusually blunt remarks, the president acknowledged that ISIS and its ideology “pose a grave threat beyond the region” that has spread around the world.

The president cited deadly attacks in recent weeks in Tunisia, Kuwait and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.

“We see a growing ISIL presence in Libya and attempts to establish footholds across North Africa, the Middle East, the Caucasus and Southeast Asia,” Obama added, while also citing recent attacks in France, Canada and beyond. He said the world must unite against this threat, and that if the U.S. tries to address it unilaterally, “We’ll be playing whack-a-mole.”

Obama spoke to the media at the Pentagon, following meetings with top military officials and other national security advisers for an update on the strategy.

The meetings follow a wave of weekend airstrikes by the U.S.-led coalition in eastern Syria. The coalition says it was one of the most sustained aerial operations carried out in Syria to date.

The meetings also come a month after Obama approved sending up to 450 additional U.S. troops to Iraq, as part of an effort to help and train local forces. Addressing a key goal of that effort, Obama said Monday that “more Sunni volunteers are coming forward.”

Aside from long-running struggles in attracting Sunni volunteers in Iraq, efforts to train Syrian rebels are also sputtering. Fewer than 100 rebels are being trained by the U.S., far fewer than the goal of producing 5,400 fighters a year.

But Obama cited a string of victories over ISIS in both countries, including in Kirkuk, Tikrit and Kobani. He said, with the help of more than 5,000 coalition airstrikes, ISIS has lost more than a quarter of the population areas it once had seized in Iraq.

“ISIL’s strategic weaknesses are real,” Obama said.

But he said ISIS is “nimble” and digs in among local civilian populations, and, “It will take time to root them out.”

And, after a July Fourth holiday where security officials were on alert over terror threats, Obama warned that preventing lone wolf terror attacks on the homeland will continue to be a challenge.

“We’re going to have to pick up our game,” he said.

Obama met Monday with more than 30 Pentagon officials and national security advisers, including Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It appears to this writer that President Barack Hussein Obama, our first anti-American President, is rather ambivalent about the war against ISIS.

He says that he wants to prosecute this war, but his ineffective use of aerial drones and his reliance on the foreign Air Forces of Middle Eastern Countries , leaves a lot to be desired concerning his actual conviction to prosecute this war.

Does Obama value the “rights” of the followers of Mohammed more than the lives of Americans?

Obama spoke before the UN General Assembly in September of 2014. Joseph Curl, in an Op Ed for the Washington Times, titled “Obama’s breathtaking naivete at the United Nations” wrote,

He asked delegates from nations across the world to mull this “central question of our global age: Whether we will solve our problems together, in a spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect, or whether we descend into the destructive rivalries of the past.”

His answer? “It’s time for a broader negotiation in the region in which major powers address their differences directly, honestly, and peacefully across the table from one another, rather than through gun-wielding proxies.”

Simply believing something doesn’t make it so. The president’s desire for a world in which nations talk openly about their true feelings, perhaps share a good cry together, and sing kumbaya around the campfire, is the height of naivete.

So is this passage of his speech: ” … the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Islam teaches peace. Muslims the world over aspire to live with dignity and a sense of justice. And when it comes to America and Islam, there is no us and them, there is only us.”

But Islam and the holy Koran on which Muslim militant groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State base their actions do call for the extermination of all who do not follow Islam, do demand that followers kill anyone who leaves the religion, do subjugate women. For the record, the Koran contains more than 100 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers.

Mr. Obama said in his speech that “all people of faith have a responsibility to lift up the value at the heart of all great religions: Do unto thy neighbor as you would do — you would have done unto yourself.” But that is not a cornerstone of Islam. Militant Muslims have a very different belief: “Fight in the name of your religion with those who disagree with you.” And that edict comes straight from their holiest book.

To the president, that ideology “will wilt and die if it is consistently exposed and confronted and refuted in the light of day.” Again, the callowness is astounding. While he urged the world, “especially Muslim communities,” to reject the ideology that underlies al Qaeda and the Islamic State, nothing will change the fact that cold-blooded killers are determined to destroy the West, wipe all infidels from the face of the earth and build a new caliphate based on strict adherence to Shariah law (which leans heavily toward beheadings, lashings, stonings).

The president let loose some passing platitudes — “right makes might,” “the only language understood by killers like this is the language of force” — but in the end Mr. Obama still labors under the delusion that the Islamic State group and its ilk have “perverted one of the world’s great religions.” He still rejects “any suggestion of a clash of civilizations” — despite al Qaeda’s and Islamic State’s express declaration of war against western civilization (and anyone who is not Muslim).

Not only does Obama seem more than content to go after these Islamic Killers with all the ferocity of a college co-ed in a pillow fight with her sorority sisters, he continues to rely on others to be our “boots on the ground” who are less than reliable.

As the King of Jordan showed us, several months ago, a leader has to stand up for his own citizens and defend them and his country in a way that will leave no doubt in the Neanderthal minds of Radical Muslims that any violence perpetrated on these citizens, will be delivered back to them one thousand-fold.

But, in order for that to occur, we would have to have an actual AMERICAN PRESIDENT, who loves this country.

Unfortunately, we still have to endure two long years of an anti-American President, who once said in a New York Times article, posted March 3, 2007:

“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office. He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.

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

I believe that if Obama had his way, he would hear that call to prayer every morning from the Upstairs Living Quarters at the White House.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ