Friday, March 13, 2015

-Netanyahu’s Speech Broadsides Obama


     Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s powerful speech that was delivered to a joint session of congress on March 3, 2015, made the President of the United States Barrack Obama, look like a fool in front of the international community.
Benjamin Netanyahu -

      The Prime Minister eloquently pointed out that inspections and talks would not stop Iran from developing a nuclear capability that could destroy Israel.

      Yet after Netanyahu’s speech, our President claimed that the Prime Minister has not offered any solutions to this problem. It was quite obvious by Obama’s lame comment that he did not read Netanyahu’s speech.

      Israel’s leader clearly stated, “We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home...For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves…Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

      Those words sounded like the words of a Prime Minister who has his back against the wall and is ready for a fight. How far Netanyahu will take military conflict is not clear, but back in 1981, Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear facility in Osirak during Operation Opera.

      Considering the tone of Netanyahu’s speech, a similar operation, if not more, should be expected.

      Meanwhile our naïve President is clinging to the idea that his “deal” with the Iranians will somehow give us some say in their nuclear development.

      In other words, Obama is putting his faith in a worthless piece of paper to be signed by a regime that Netanyahu claims is sponsoring global terrorism and threatening to destroy Israel. It is amazing that the President would think that Iran should have a nuclear program in the first place considering how much they hate Jews.

      “Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated.” Said Netanyahu.

Neville Chamberlain - Adolph Hitler -

     President Obama is not the only oblivious leader to put his faith in a worthless scrap of paper. On September 29, 1938, England’s Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain signed a non-aggression pact known as the Munich Agreement with Adolph Hitler, Édouard Daladier (Fr), and Benito Mussolini in Munich Germany.

     By March of 1939, Hitler’s Nazi army took all of Czechoslovakia instead of the Sudetenland, the portion Germany wanted to reclaim as its territory in the Munich agreement. By September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland causing England and France to declare war on Germany two days later, right after Hitler ignored their three ultimatums to withdraw from Poland.

      So much for the scrap of paper Chamberlain and Hitler signed a few months prior.

Sudetenland Czech? -

     Not everyone was as foolish as Chamberlain in believing that the power hungry Hitler could be trusted by signing a scrap of paper. Winston Churchill stated, “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war.”

    Netanyahu, shrewd like Churchill, understands Iran, Iraq, Hezbollah, and Isis, better than Obama because he lives on the front line between the Jewish people and the countries that would like to annihilate Israel.

    Unlike Obama the book smart president, Netanyahu lives in a country where Islamic extremist rush into picnics and buses strapped with explosives detonating their payloads killing many in the process.

    According to a Reuters story, on September 24, 2012, former President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations and said that Israel, “has no roots in the Middle East and would be ‘eliminated.’” Nuclear weapons in Iran’s arsenal would certainly enable them to accomplish their goal.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -

    It’s a shame our schoolboy President doesn’t realize what Netanyahu is trying to teach him or what Churchill was trying to teach Chamberlain. That signing silly scraps of paper cannot appease genocidal dictators.

    History stands with Winston Churchill and Benjamin Netanyahu.


-Neville Chamberlain’s Speech

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

-A Call to Arms for France

[Revised: 18Feb15]

     On January 7, 2015, two Muslim extremists, Cherif Kouachi and his brother Said Kouachi reportedly ran into the headquarters of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and systematically executed employees of the magazine in cold blood with Ak-47’s.  

     Also in Paris, their fellow Jihadist, Amedy Coulibaly, according to police, shot and killed four unarmed Jews at a Hyper Cacher supermarket. Police shot and killed all Jihad suspects except a female named Hayat Boumeddiene who is still unaccounted for.

     It is believed the cowardly attack was initiated because Charlie Hebdo has a history of ridiculing the Muslim Prophet Muhammad. This was Isis or Al-Qaeda’s way of retaliating rather than using a more educated response by creating commentaries of their own challenging Charlie Hebdo. The Hyper Cacher supermarket motive appears to have spawned from a deep hatred of Jewish people.

     An unarmed police officer named Ahmed Merabet was executed outside of the Charlie Hebdo office by the Charlie Hebdo shooters. As Officer Merabet lay wounded after being shot initially, the two armed gunmen ran over to his location and executed Merabet while he lay wounded on the ground.

     How rational is the French government for expecting unarmed police and private citizens to operate in a world where so many illegal weapons make their way across the globe and into the hands of criminals that terrorize unarmed people?     

100 lashes of the whip if you don't die laughing
    According to a report published by the Associated Press, French authorities have known for some time that 1,200 citizens in France are linked to terrorism. Many have gone to Iraq or Syria to join Middle Eastern Jihads. Yet the wisdom of the French government is to keep its private citizens and a portion of the police unarmed and helpless.

     Charlie Hebdo was bombed back in November of 2011 after publishing an edition called “Charia Hebdo” with a picture of Muhammad on the cover saying, “100 lashes if you don’t die laughing.” Clearly terrorists were operating in France at this time. Keeping French police officers and civilians unarmed in the face of such danger shows a remarkable amount of stupidity on the behalf of the French leadership.

     Since as far back as 1939, France has placed many restrictions on the ownership of weapons and currently employs many police that respond to serious crimes without the ability to protect themselves.

     Clearly the firearm culture in France is much different there than in the United States were the average citizen here can apply for a concealed carry permit and carry a loaded firearm for their protection.


It's hard to be liked by Jerks
     Last month, Joseph Toombs, a Georgia National Guardsman, was confronted at a Sonic Drive-In by four thugs in DeKalb County Georgia who attempted to rob him. Toombs shot one, two fled and were captured, and one managed to elude police. Clearly the armed citizen in this case made a difference.

     Back in 2007, Jeanne Assam, who had previously worked as a police officer, shot a man with a rifle who had just killed two people in the parking lot then made his way into a church that she was guarding. She shot the gunman several times preventing a mass homicide. If she would have been guarding Charlie Hebdo, this devastating attack may have been stopped right at the front door.

     Unfortunately for 27-year-old rookie French police officer Clarissa Jean-Philippe, she was not armed on the day she was allegedly murdered by Amedy Coulibaly and Hayat Boumeddiene during a traffic stop in Montrouge less than 24 hours after the Charlie Hebdo murders. She became another victim of France’s absurd gun laws.

     According to The Telegraph in the UK, when Amedy Coulibaly took many hostages at the Hyper Cacher supermarket, he laid a dysfunctional weapon on a counter in the store. One of the hostages grabbed the gun and aimed it at the Jihadist whose back was turned. The firearm did not discharge. Coulibaly reportedly killed the hostage when he realized what he was doing.

    What if the hostage would have had his own weapon? Instead of grabbing a useless weapon, he could have drawn a weapon fully capable of disabling the terrorist. An armed hostage could have brought this criminal’s reign of terror to an end and may have saved a few lives in the process.

Officer Clarissa Jean-Philippe - nydailynews
    The attack on Charlie Hebdo has caused the French government led by President Francois Hollande to step up a counter-terrorism effort. The French plan on spending 425 million euros for better guns, 2,600 counter terrorism officers and retain 7,500 military personnel to better fight terrorism according to the Associated Press.

    Although this sounds good, it would be better if France would arm all of its police officers instead of leaving many unarmed and defenseless. France should also allow for its population to join a concealed carry program that could help prevent the next massacre waged by imbecile religious zealots against an intelligent people expressing their satire via the freedom of the press.

Je suis Charlie!


Thursday, December 11, 2014

-Police brutality and the Garner Case


            Eric Garner was certainly no rocket scientist. He had been arrested several times in Staten Island for selling “loosies,” or loose cigarettes to people who avoid the purchase of a pack that costs around $12 or more. A loosie costs about 75 cents.

            The shameful part of his death is the fact that it did not have to happen. Poor judgment on his behalf, the City of New York, and a few malevolent idiots on the police force are what ultimately caused his demise.

Officer Pantaleo Choking Eric Garner -
            The infinitesimal wisdom of the City of New York’s exalted bureaucrats is to discourage people from smoking and make money for the city by raising taxes on cancer sticks sold in their jurisdiction.

     The problem with this logic is that higher cigarette prices drive customers to avoid the higher price by buying loosies from someone like Garner or by smuggling in smokes from areas that have lower taxes.

     Since 2006, the city has raised its taxes on lung destroyers over 200 percent resulting in and estimated 50 percent of its coffin nails being imported from some place else.

     Naturally this offends the powers that be so they hire goon-squad police officers like chokehold specialist Officer Daniel Pantaleo to bully people around who violate such a superficial law.

NYC Officer Daniel Pantaleo -
     On July 17th of this year Garner, obviously someone hard pressed for cash, and several overly aggressive New York City Police Officers including Pantaleo came face to face. A stupid law enforced by idiots and a guy selling loosies clashed and Garner was dead in a blink of an eye.

     Prior to his death Garner repeated several times, “I can’t breath.” All the while his killer, Officer Pantaleo was choking him. Pantaleo did not even display one moment of sympathy for Garner by easing up on his grip. Instead he continued to choke Garner until he died. A local grand jury decided that no charges should be brought against Pantaleo.

     This combination of events, stop-and-frisk policies, and others like the Michael Brown shooting have tipped the scales of the population’s emotions and anger towards police officers mostly in cities where racial tensions have been high for decades.

     Garner’s death could have been avoided if only The City of New York would have imposed more reasonable taxes to discourage the sale of loosies and the illegal importing of smokes. They could have better trained their officers to disperse people who commit petty offences rather than physically engaging them; though chokeholds are forbidden.
Eric Garner Memorial -

     A simple ticket and an order for Garner to move on would have avoided all of the anguish caused by choke-happy-officer Pantaleo and the City of New York’s ridiculous cigarette tax laws.

     Hopefully if there is a Federal Grand Jury called for this case they won’t be as sympathetic as the one in New York. Pantaleo should go to prison for violating Garner’s constitutional rights as NYC Police officer Frances Livoti did in 1994 when he choked Anthony Baez to death over a football hitting a squad car.   

     Accordingly, the City of New York should be obligated to pay the Garner family a large sum for their loss.


-I am NOT Michael Brown


The sacking, looting, and burning of Ferguson Missouri on the 24th of November has become another despicable moment in American History. Police cars were flipped and some were set on fire by Visigoths trying to correct perceived injustices caused by police.

Police car burns in Ferguson -
Although in the Michael Brown case his death appears to be a result of his own stupidity.

On the day he was shot to death, Brown threw a shop operator around like a sack of garbage on video then waltzed down the middle of the street like he owned the town itself. Shortly after being asked to get off of the street by Officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson police department, a fight ensued and Brown was on the receiving end of his just desserts for bullying a shopkeeper, delaying traffic, and fighting with a cop. Karma is a bitch!

It’s common knowledge, however, that racist police have killed blacks long before the Michael Brown case. Back in 1964, Neshoba County Mississippi Deputy Sheriff Cecil Price arrested and turned three Congress of Racial Equality or CORE civil rights workers over to the Klu Klux Klan. They were executed as a result. 

Slain Civil Rights workers -
James Chaney, one of the three CORE members that were killed was black. The other murdered civil rights workers Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman were both white.

But in the case of Officer Darren Wilson, where is the evidence that he was a racist like Deputy Sheriff Price? If anything, it appears that Officer Wilson was defending himself against an abusive thug who took pleasure in robbing and pushing around a shopkeeper much smaller than him. Even if Officer Wilson was acting illegally by shooting Brown, does burning down businesses in the neighborhood bring justice?

Burning down businesses, torching cars, and making Ferguson look more like a war zone than a civilized town appears to justify the argument that police must use deadly force against blacks because they act so violently and uncivilized compared to everyone else.

Although most blacks are not violent, protests like this promote a violent image of black youth. However, disproportionate amounts of black youth are dead or in prison because of gang violence. Couple that with the violent protests in Ferguson and the image of the black community has been tarnished in the minds of many. 

"I have a dream speech" August 28, 1963
The wisdom of Martin Luther King Jr. and his peaceful method of protest is obvious here. If peaceful civil rights workers are beaten or killed by police, the police look bad and it becomes obvious as to whom the bad characters are.

But if people seeking justice for a shooting they consider to be performed by a racist cop protest violently by destroying the town that they live in to the amazement of millions watching worldwide, then the protesters look like the bad characters. Therefore their violent protests are contradictory to the goals that they are trying to achieve.

The Ferguson Vandals, have disgraced the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with their violent behavior. If there was a need to find justice for Michael Brown, it is certainly lost at this point. Not to mention the many businesses that may not reopen due to the fact that marauders have stolen their merchandise and burned down their buildings.

The hordes of non compos mentis have really put their town, the credibility of the black community, and their business districts in a fix that could take years to resolve. As a result of their stupidity, they could ultimately turn Ferguson Missouri into a town no one in their right mind would invest in while actual police abuse cases may not be taken seriously as the believability of the black community has been compromised.