War Hero Scott O'Grady speaks with Sean Hannity on dangers of arming Egypt - YouTube

War Hero Scott O'Grady speaks with Sean Hannity on dangers of arming Egypt - YouTube

SurveyResults

SurveyResults

NO GUN CONTROL, IT'S UNANIMOUS

Latest

Should Obama's Gun Ban Be Approved? Vote Here Now in Urgent Poll

Should the federal government regulate guns of any type? Yes, it should 140,361(27%)   No, it should not 378,943(72%)

Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons? Yes, it should 109,254(20%)   No, it should not 412,000(79%)

If Congress does not act, should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons? Yes, he should 98,647(18%)   No, he should not 421,986(81%)

Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right to own and bear guns without infringement? Yes, I agree 431,435(82%)   No, I don't agree 89,564(17%)

Visit Newsmax’s mobile homepage

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Surveys/Results/id/64#ixzz2IdDojWDs
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Holder Begs Court to Stop Document Release on Fast and Furious

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/17/Holder-begs-court-to-indefinitely-delay-group-s-lawsuit-fighting-for-release-of-Obama-s-executive-privilege-Fast-and-Furious-documents

These hypocrites need a hard lesson ASAP.   Justice must be served, and these dawgs are in the way.  Time for the guilty to pay.  Karma may take longer sometimes, but the longer she takes, the more she takes away.   GUILTY COVER UPS are usually worse than the crime.  This crime is deserving of major time, and the cover up?  Let's just say, paybacks are LIVING HELL.  


Better Get on your knees and keep begging, BITCH!!

HOLDER BEGS COURT TO STOP DOCUMENT RELEASE ON FAST AND FURIOUS

 3392

 81

 46.9K

 

---

Email Article

Print ArticleSend a Tip

by MATTHEW BOYLE 17 Jan 2013 611POST A COMMENT

Attorney General Eric Holder and his Department of Justice have asked a federal court to indefinitely delay a lawsuit brought by watchdog group Judicial Watch. The lawsuit seeks the enforcement of open records requests relating to Operation Fast and Furious, as required by law.

Judicial Watch had filed, on June 22, 2012, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking all documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious and “specifically [a]ll records subject to the claim of executive privilege invoked by President Barack Obama on or about June 20, 2012.”

The administration has refused to comply with Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, and in mid-September the group filed a lawsuit challenging Holder’s denial. That lawsuit remains ongoing but within the past week President Barack Obama’s administration filed what’s called a “motion to stay” the suit. Such a motion is something that if granted would delay the lawsuit indefinitely.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that Holder’s and Obama’s desire to continually hide these Fast and Furious documents is “ironic” now that they’re so gung-ho on gun control. “It is beyond ironic that the Obama administration has initiated an anti-gun violence push as it seeking to keep secret key documents about its very own Fast and Furious gun walking scandal,” Fitton said in a statement. “Getting beyond the Obama administration’s smokescreen, this lawsuit is about a very simple principle: the public’s right to know the full truth about an egregious political scandal that led to the death of at least one American and countless others in Mexico. The American people are sick and tired of the Obama administration trying to rewrite FOIA law to protect this president and his appointees. Americans want answers about Fast and Furious killings and lies.”

The only justification Holder uses to ask the court to indefinitely delay Judicial Watch’s suit is that there’s another lawsuit ongoing for the same documents – one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives. Judicial Watch has filed a brief opposing the DOJ’s motion to stay.

As the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was voting Holder into contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate with congressional investigators by failing to turn over tens of thousands of pages of Fast and Furious documents, Obama asserted the executive privilege over them. The full House of Representatives soon after voted on a bipartisan basis to hold Holder in contempt.

There were two parts of the contempt resolution. Holder was, and still is, in both civil and criminal contempt of Congress. The criminal resolution was forwarded to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald Machen–who works for Holder–for prosecution. Despite being technically required by law to bring forth criminal charges against Holder, under orders from Holder’s Department of Justice Machen chose to ignore the resolution.

The second part of the contempt resolution–civil contempt of Congress–allowed House Republicans to hire legal staff to challenge President Obama’s assertion of the executive privilege. That lawsuit remains ongoing despite Holder’s and the DOJ’s attempt to dismiss it and settle it.

It’s unclear what’s in the documents Obama asserted privilege over, but the president’s use of the extraordinary power appears weak. There are two types of presidential executive privilege: the presidential communications privilege and the deliberative process privilege. Use of the presidential communications privilege would require that the president himself or his senior-most advisers were involved in the discussions.

Since the president and his cabinet-level officials continually claim they had no knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious until early 2011 when the information became public–and Holder claims he didn’t read the briefing documents he was sent that outlined the scandal and how guns were walking while the operation was ongoing–Obama says he’s using theless powerful deliberative process privilege.

The reason why Obama’s assertion of that deliberative process privilege over these documents is weak at best is because the Supreme Court has held that such a privilege assertion is invalidated by even the suspicion of government wrongdoing. Obama, Holder, the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and virtually everyone else involved in this scandal have admitted that government wrongdoing actually took place in Operation Fast and Furious. 

In Fast and Furious, the ATF “walked” about 2,000 firearms into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. That means through straw purchasers they allowed sales to happen and didn’t stop the guns from being trafficked even though they had the legal authority to do so and were fully capable of doing so.

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and hundreds of Mexican citizens–estimates put it around at least 300–were killed with these firearms.

The Fast and Furious scandal and more is covered in detail in the New York Times best-selling book Corruption Chronicles. 

Second Amendment 101 | Angry White Dude

Second Amendment 101 | Angry White Dude

http://angrywhitedude.com/2013/01/second-amendment-101/


Great Article all Politicians should read as a REFRESHER COURSE.   Hope they don't force us to remind them the old fashioned way, as this Constitutional Right is our Birthright to protect ourselves from un-natural Tyranny that goes against humanity, period.   If Obama cared about our children he wouldn't be diminishing their future into oblivion and murdering them to shut people up, stage tragedies and make his political agenda's point.  The Hypocricy is Staggering.

By the way, Obama, what makes you the authority on gun control?   The fact that you controlled them right into the hands of murderous criminals in Mexico's drug cartels?   That's RICH.  You're a poor man, a trashy, deceitful man full of hate and vitriol.   Hate your mother, SHE was the whore, Hate your Father, he hit it and quit it.   He'd be disgusted with your slimy whiny excuses to be a piece of shit.  He'd be proud if you came at us Straight Up.  Get out and redeem yourself for him.  Don't be a coward.  Your father would be proud if you bravely stepped away and fought like a real man.  He was no sauna soaking elitist-- YOU are.  Change YOURSELF, and HOPE for redemption.

Second Amendment 101

January 13, 2013 | Filed under: Conservative Intellectuals,Guest Bloggers,Guns | Posted by: RedStaterNYC

Brought to us by commenter “Healey” (original comment found here:
http://angrywhitedude.com/2013/01/meet-joshua-boston-he-has-a-message-for-a-certain-senator/comment-page-1/#comment-249004). I thought it deserved its own post.

Word.

I am a retired Marine Corps Officer, former military law enforcement, an armed federal agent, and I hold a Federal Firearms License (FFL, which means I know the laws regarding the buying and selling arms in the US). Plus, I’ve been a gun owner, shooter (competitive), sportsman, and collector for 45+ years. I support the second Amendment and have been vocal defender of the right to bear arms for most of my life. I was proud to know the late Charlton Heston, and have been personally invited by Wayne La Pierre to advise on NRA strategy meetings. I have literally heard every argument relating to gun control one could imagine. The misinformation that comes out of the mouths of that rabid anti-gun crowd never ceases to amaze me.

I mention these facts only to let those reading know that I have a certain expertise in firearms use, training, safety, and the law and that my opinions should hold more weight than someone who learned about guns and violence from TV or video games.

BTW I own no AR-15 or AK-47 style weapons and in fact most of the arms I own are 40 to 100 years old, yet several will be on Feinstein’s assault weapons ban if she has her way.

A little history review…

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to protect themselves, their families, property, and to prevent future tyranny. The citizens of this country need the tools to do this. It has nothing to do with hunting!

The term “Well Regulated”, in the language of 1791, meant “Well Manned, Well Trained (able to effectively put rounds on target), and Well Equipped” as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case, this after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time.

The “Militia” in the language of 1791 referred to any male citizen over the age of 17, and of course in this enlightened age, we can now include women in this category. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control. We all know that this does not refer to the modern National Guard as the liberal anti-gun crowd loves to argue.

United States v. Miller also determined that the term “Arms” refers to “Ordinary Military Weapons” (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to “Keep and Bear”, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle, which includes past, present and future weapons.

“Shall not be infringed” is self-explanatory, and ties the aforementioned language together.

To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to writings in quill pens.

Don’t take my word on this, the US Supreme Court agrees. And yes, there are limits, but I will cover these shortly.

During the revolution, when the British Army (The most powerful fighting force on the globe at that time) had inaccurate smooth bore muskets, our patriot militia had superior and more accurate, albeit slower firing, long range rifles.

When the US Army went to single shot rifles in the mid-19th century, civilians owned similar arms, and in fact, a limited number of Union troops, purchased with their own money, the new “Henry” 16 shot lever action repeating rifle at the end of the civil War, which was far superior to the issue rifles of the day. Called by the Confederates… “That damn Yankee rifle that they load on Sunday and shoot all week long.”

When the Army adopted the bolt action rifle, civilians had the same, and the same can be said for the adoption of the semi-automatic rifles used in WWII. Magazine feed, semi-automatic sporting arms have been popular since the early 1900s.

Semi-automatic arms are the most popular and plentiful in the US, and other than looking evil in the minds of the disingenuous, uninformed, or the gullible, the semi auto AR type of rifle is essentially no different than my vintage 1950′s Browning Automatic deer rifle. Or for that matter, my little “Ruger 10-22″ (.22 caliber) hunting and target rifle I’ve owned since 1968.

“For their own convenience, or just a woeful lack of historical knowledge, the anti-gun crowd and their accomplices in the media have for several generations mislead the American public into believing that semi-automatic firearms were made only for the military, and have no civilian purpose.” Now let’s dispel this myth once and for all; semi-automatic firearms were originally designed for the civilian market and then quickly adapted for use by the military and law enforcement. Not the other way around.

http://nebraskanews.blogspot.com/2004/12/semi-automatic-firearms-were-not.html

Now the US military has a true “Assault Rifle” which by definition is a select fire weapon, i.e., both semi-automatic and full automatic (a machine gun). But guess what sports fans… full auto weapons (once again machine guns) have been effectively outlawed since the NFA of 1934, so the public currently does not have the same weapon as the military, contrary to what the anti-gun crowd asserts. See – limits! Finally, there is no such thing as an “Assault Weapon” except in the misinformed opinion of, and defined by the various progressive liberal, anti-gun, media and lawmakers.

The bottom line… the first so called assault weapons ban failed miserably in preventing these tragedies. The second AWB, if passed, will do no better, but the real agenda is to ultimately ban all guns from the hands of private citizens. Just wait until my bolt action deer rifle with a scope is considered a sniper rifle by anti-gun crowd. This is their agenda and goal, they say so themselves.

The bad guys do not obey the law, gun free zones are just safe killing zones for the bad guys. And yes, the best way to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun. Fact.

Some final thoughts…

Those like Senator Feinstein who use tragedies to push agendas are amongst the more deplorable elements of a society. We should not let the scum of society dictate who we are – rather, we should reaffirm who and what we are in the face of such tragedies.

Shame on them and everyone else for using the deaths of kids as an excuse to push their anti-gun agenda. Let’s face it – they didn’t lose ANY sleep over those kids’ deaths any more than they did over the thousands of other strangers that die every day. Where were they with the horrendous the murder rate in Chicago (the most restrictive gun laws in the nation) this past year, where was Rahm Emanuel? Oh, I know, the hypocrite Emanuel sends his children to a school that has armed guards, and then mocks Wayne LaPierre for suggesting the same be done in all schools. Hypocrites like Senator Feinstein on the other hand either have a concealed weapons permit (She is interviewed stating this fact), or an armed security force which the majority of us Californians are denied.

This piece of legislation in the face of senseless acts of violence is nothing more than opportunism displayed in very poor taste. If the anti-gunners like Senator Feinstein would be as rabid to protect us from “‘bad” people as they are from “bad”‘ guns, I’d respect their rants. But most of them are ideologues that use these shootings politically, and never address the societal problems that are breeding these narcissistic killers.

Video brought to my attention courtesy “michael”.

One more courtesy Scott Page from the III%ers Facebook page…

This web page is a pretty good primer on “assault weapons”…

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

What's the Real Problem With Gun Violence?

This run for gun control by this administration (Obama) has been something many clued in Americans have anticipated since 2008.  Upon his election, law abiding citizens lined up and spiked gun sales in the U.S. increasing the demand and making for more lax laws in pre-emptive measures of more stringent ones on the way.   First term Obama started with his Fast and Furious "program".   It wasn't botched; him and Eric Holder got busted after one of our finest courageous warriors, Brian A. Terry, a young Border Agent, Marine, and dedicated Patriot, was killed by a gun put in violent drug cartel members' hands to do just what they did..... create tragedy and "issues" with U.S. guns proving to be a "problem".  

Yes, they are a problem when this "amateur" group of corrupt chimps get hold of them or try to control them.  Fact is, there is NOT a gun violence problem, and there wasn't one when they sent the mentally ill Jared Loughner out to kill Gabby Giffords in Arizona.    Congresswoman Giffords was shot in the head, her assistant killed, as well as a conservative judge by the wild spray of bullets randomly aimed at the crowd killing too many others including a little girl who wanted to see Ms. Giffords speak, as she was interested in going into politics already in her first decade of life cut short.

It's no coincidence that Giffords was a pro-gun activist, a Democrat Congresswoman in Arizona at the time ATF Agents were blowing whistles on the Fast and Furious Operation, and went to Congresswoman Giffords with the issue.   Loughner was swept away, and we never heard a word from the ME.P. recruit since...other than his life sentence with no chance of parole in a high security prison where his story will no doubt, never be told, at least not in the near future.

These manufactured mass killings continued.   The last, tragically, with a cast of actors, one specifically getting filmed in his actor swagger right before speaking as a bereaved father of one of the children lost in the Sandy Hook Massacre... Laughing, joking, then prepping to get into "character" ....  Disturbing it was..  almost as disturbing if it were really true.   Our children our safe.   They could be safter if they were not held in public soft targets all day.  Knowing their schools are soft targets makes it a prime favorite spot to spew bullets by many violent suicidal sickos.  This one was beyond heinous, and This Fraud used a Lanza boy, the son of a Lanza sitting on the economic advisory board, a tax counsel for G.E. to testify in the 43 trillion dollar lawsuit including Obama, Holder, Dunn, Pelosi, et all, including Banksters, who embezzled, laundered, and used foreign banks to skim into their own personal accounts.. I know, shocker, as if we didn't know we were being ripped off, literally by this fraud.

If he were so concerned with our children, maybe he'd put together a responsible budget so that we don't drown them in debt before they're born, much less under 10 and have a lifetime of struggle and strife ahead of them because of this America busting Beat Down Obama is putting on us.

So let it be known... Gun Violence WAS NOT A PROBLEM.   It became a problem when Obama got into office and wanted to disarm the public from the start, he made it a problem, and at this point, he's ruined those children's lives already, by debt or by sword, he's picking both, as gun violence was not a problem, and with his agenda, good people will be sitting ducks for the bad guys who will kill them for survival, or because like this President, is just full of Hatred and Resentment for America and her people.    

DON'T FALL FOR THE PROPAGANDA.   EVERY DICTATOR DISARMS ITS PEOPLE FIRST, THEN FREEDOMS DISAPPEAR AND WE BECOME HIS TO DISPOSE OF, EXPLOIT, IMPRISON AND USE FOR UNSCRUPULOUS MATTERS.  

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE DICTATOR, and out of control Gov't, a Tyrannical Gov't that is trying to wipe out the Second Amendment so that we have no recourse to defend ourselves..not from criminals on the street, but the criminals in D.C.. The people who work FOR US.   They got lost in all the power drunken greed and the ease to which they found controlling and stealing better than crack and then run amok...

Some folk hero will save the day.  Count o it.

Barack Obama on Gun Control Executive Order: More Gun Tracking - Katie Pavlich

Barack Obama on Gun Control Executive Order: More Gun Tracking - Katie Pavlich

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/14/barack-obama-on-gun-control-executive-order-more-gun-tracking-n1488923


We all know they're the masters of tracking Guns... HAH, right into the hands of murderous criminals... "botched operation" it was NOT. It was a planned attack against our FREEDOM. Vultures hover over the U.S. as we wimper under the guise of him taking over and watching out for our lives. Give in to that false premise, to our own demise. #LastChanceLastStance #FreedomRang #WeAllFallDown "ByeByeMissAmericanPie" #JustSayNO #StandOurGROUND #SaveTheSecondAmendment

Barack Obama on Gun Control Executive Order: More Gun Tracking

• 
 
• Katie Pavlich 
  News Editor, Townhall

Jan 14, 2013 12:35 PM EST

Click if you like this post!

 

President Barack Obama just wrapped up the final press conference of his first term in which he was questioned multiple times about his plans for gun control, either through legislation or executive order. Vice President Joe Biden is expected to deliver gun control recommendations to Obama tomorrow after gathering information and ideas from various groups last week as part of his gun control task force.

"My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works," Obama said. "Members of Congress are going to have to come to terms with their own conscience."

When asked what specifically he would target with executive action, Obama referred back to Biden's recommendations but didn't get into detail about what exactly he's focused on. Obama did however suggest greater enforcement power through executive order, saying better tracking of guns is a way the power of his office can get something done.

"I'm confident there are some steps we can take that don't require legislation," he said. "How we are gathering data on guns that fall into the hands of criminals, how we track that."

Given the way the Obama administration tracked gunsduring his first term, this doesn't seem like a good idea. "Better gun tracking" would give the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms more power.

During his remarks, Obama didn't let a chance to slam the gun industry go to waste. When asked about long lines at gun shows and a record number of FBI background checks on gun purchases, the President said these things were a result of fear mongering and are "obviously good for business."

"It's a pretty effective way of ginning up fear among gun owners that somehow the federal government is going to take away all of your guns," Obama said. "Even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area somehow fans this notion that here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away."

As noted above, Vice President Joe Biden will deliver gun control recommendations to the President tomorrow.

Click if you like this post!

 

Tags: Operation Fast and Furious , Gun Control , Barack Obama , Gun Control Debate

Americans never give up your guns - English pravda.ru

Americans never give up your guns - English pravda.ru

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

28.12.2012

 

By Stanislav Mishin 

These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bear arms and use deadly force to defend one's self and possessions.

This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.

Also read: How American matrix destroys every culture

• Print version
•   Font Size
• Send to friend

Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

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.

Stanislav Mishin

The article reprinted with the kind permission from the author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina