Tag Archives: Fast and Furious

LIVES LOST: The Blood on Barack Obama’s Hands

bloody-hand-300x180Originally posted at Clash Daily

Barack Obama’s hands are covered with quite a bit of blood. Actually, as harsh as it may seem to say, Americans are swimming in oceans of blood thanks to this president, and although he hasn’t been, he should be held fully accountable.

Time and again Obama has proven that when it comes to gun control, child safety arguments are powerful tools to assist him in his mission to dismantle the Second Amendment. However, bloodbaths are not nearly as disturbing to the president if guts and gore assist him in the advancement of the left-wing agenda.

That theory is confirmed by Obama’s lack of outrage, or even interest for that matter, in the deaths resulting from initiatives such as “Fast and Furious,” where his administration purposely put weapons in the hands of drug cartels. Obama’s failed gun-walking scandal resulted in the blood of Border Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata being spilled, as well as hundreds of innocent Mexican citizens whose deaths can be tied directly to the U.S. government, which means the blood flows directly to the Oval Office and is the reason Barack Obama’s hands are stained ruby red.

Speaking of bloodletting, it’s common knowledge that Obama is a committed supporter of abortion, is enthusiastic about destroying partially-born infants, and is an unabashed fan of leaving babies born alive in botched abortions to die in hospital laundry rooms.

Those types of radical pro-choice beliefs are the reasons why the president also has the stagnant blood of unborn babies on his hands.

Barack Obama’s rationalization for such barbarism centers on his claim that he doesn’t want to undermine the original intent of an abortion, the primary goal of which is to have the procedure result in a dead baby. Therefore, if a baby is born alive, denying warmth, oxygen and hydration ensures the original intent is fulfilled.

As for the unfettered slaughter of 3,000-4,000 babies a day, the president, who is known to view the U.S. Constitution as a “flawed document”, would likely argue that despite the carnage, at least in this case, Roe v. Wade is settled law.

Then there’s Benghazi; Hillary Clinton’s outburst of “what difference does it make” exposes the indifference those liable for the murders of four Americans have toward the blood that spilt in Libya on September 11th, 2012. Why? Because if the details surrounding the loss of life were exposed in their entirety, the truth that would be revealed would undercut Obama’s real Middle East agenda and possibly put a damper on Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations.

That sort of indifference is deadly coming from an administration that refers to terrorist attacks that result in the death of thirteen troops as “workplace violence.”

Then there’s illegal immigration, which is causing Americans to die from imported viruses and resulting in Americans being killed or maimed by violent illegals who freely roam our nation’s streets with Barack Obama’s implicit approval.

Look around. The tide is rising higher each day. To avoid getting his pant cuffs stained with the blood he’s responsible for spilling, Barack Obama may have to shorten his pant legs by pulling his Mom jeans up tightly under his armpits.

Mom jeans and bloody hemorrhagic viruses aside, thus far, there is no argument that Enterovirus 68 is directly responsible for 796 Americans in 46 states being sickened. Some of Obama’s victims have suffered to the point of needing breathing tubes; some are paralyzed; and seven are now dead and buried. Absent from within the U.S. for 50 years, Enterovirus D68 originated in Latin America, and was delivered via minors who crossed the border accompanied only by a contagious virus that the U.S. government was well aware existed in Latin America since 2010.

So suffice it to say that despite the knowledge that unaccompanied minors could cause American children to fall ill, Barack Obama still encouraged the influx of illegal children and has plans to usher in thousands more who could be harboring a whole new breed of Third World diseases.

And, even more disturbingly, some of the blood on the president’s hands belongs to tiny infant Lancen Kendall, 4-year-old Eli Waller, 21-month-old Madeline Reid, and 10-year-old Emily Otrando, all of whom died from an Enterovirus they never should have been exposed to in the first place.

And all that bloodshed doesn’t even begin to broach what the release of hardened illegal criminals who are rapists, pedophiles, and murderers portends for America’s future.

In the coming months, Obama granting amnesty to 34 million illegals will not only make America unrecognizable, it will also contribute greatly to the deluge of blood to which we will all be subjected.

ISIS members will be granted amnesty, MS-13 gang members will be granted amnesty, and thousands of criminals who were let out of prison will be granted amnesty. All this despite the blood spillage that has resulted from illegal immigrants killing Americans, killings that include more recently two sheriff’s deputies in California being shot in the face by an illegal alien who was deported twice, had a long list of aliases and a drug conviction and who, if not arrested, after the midterm elections, would have been among the millions slated to be granted amnesty.

Scarier than diseases, murders, illegal criminals, open border permeation and much, much more are the “lone wolf” terrorists who, thanks to Obama, have crossed our border and could be wandering the highways and byways of America right now, looking for police and military to hatchet to death and unsuspecting grandmothers to behead in the name of Allah.

After all is said and done, there are many more examples of how, as a result of Obama’s diabolical quest to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America, innocent blood is being spilled.

That’s why, whether he recognizes his culpability or not, the river of blood currently drenching America flows directly toward the White House into both of Barack Obama’s hands.

Will There Be an ObamaCare Victims’ Memorial?

VictimOriginally posted at American Thinker

So Barack Obama, American firebomber extraordinaire, feels he’s “been burned.”  But if truth be told, it is he who has never had his “feet held to the fire” for the multitude of untruths he’s perpetrated on the entire country — let alone the world.

Even the most casual observer, if he puts down his iPhone long enough to focus on what’s befalling our country, will see that, to the nation’s detriment, the president carefully picks and chooses issues to promote, and does so by exploiting sad stories and faking heartfelt sentiment.

Remember when Obama, in his ongoing effort to dismantle the Second Amendment, said that “if it saves one life,” gun control is worth it?  That must be why with each gun-related death, Obama rushed to the nearest podium to tug on America’s heartstrings.

In defense of his unrelenting campaign to curtail the “right to keep and bear arms,” the man who puts his firm approbation on the slaughter of 3,000 unborn babies per day repeatedly said, “If there’s just one life we can save, we’ve got an obligation to try.”

Here’s the problem with the “if there’s just one life” blather Obama spouts opportunistically: he doesn’t mean it, and he’s proven as much in the way he’s responded to talk of potential fatalities resulting from a policy he not only supports, but refuses to back down from despite its threat to American lives.

As a result of his signature health care reform farce, one by one, gravely ill people are stepping forward, many of whom, thanks to Obama’s lies, will ultimately die after losing their health insurance in the middle of their cancer treatments.  And in response, the only thing the president has to say about such misfortune is that he’s sorry some people are “finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from [him]”?

He probably meant to say “finding themselves lying prone on a gurney in the morgue.”

Either way, imagine if Barack Obama supported the Second Amendment and had spent three years assuring Americans that no one would die as a result of gun violence.  Then, despite his promises, 12 people were shot to death in a Colorado movie theatre.  Based on the anemic response Barack Obama is offering now, it would be like saying he’s sorry some people found themselves dead “based on assurances” he gave about gun safety.

With that in mind, here’s a question for Barack Obama: Mr. President, is lost life tragic only when lost as a result of policies you oppose?  Because it sure seems that easily avoidable death and dying is not a problem for you if the body count grows as a result of the liberal legislation you support.

Unlike the children of the Newtown, Connecticut massacre, after dying at the hands of gunmen wielding “Fast and Furious” weaponry that the Obama administration supplied to Mexican drug cartels, Border agent Brian Terry and ICE agent Jaime Zapata were barely acknowledged by the president.

Therefore, if death occurs as a result of Americans losing their health insurance, does anyone really think Barack Obama will host or attend a Tucson Memorial-type event in their honor?  Will he exploit the victims of the political violence he’s perpetrated like he did gun violence victims, by memorializing them with ‘Together we Thrive” t-shirts?

Will the president solemnly eulogize the innocent by painting word-pictures of them splashing through “rain puddles in Heaven,” like he did Christina-Taylor Green, the child gunned down in the Arizona Gabby Giffords shooting?

If three years’ worth of propaganda followed by the disastrous ObamaCare rollout results in deaths, will Barack Obama admit that his substandard leadership and ongoing deception are to blame?

Will the president suggest that the national tragedy called ObamaCare should “prompt reflection and debate”?  And will he keep the discussion alive by encouraging Americans everywhere to make sure the falsehoods he’s told that have brought misery and trepidation to millions are not lost “on the usual plane of politics and point-scoring and pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle”?

Is it possible that the president will have executive order-signing ceremonies where he’ll circumvent Congress to ensure that policies are put into place to protect America from his ongoing health care reform disaster?  At those ceremonies, will he showcase frightened schoolchildren and the letters they’ve supposedly written about being traumatized by his signature policy?

Like he did when 15-year-old teen Hadiya Pendleton was shot dead in Chicago’s Vivian Gordon Harsh Park, as time goes on and more people perish, will the president send his emissary wife to the funerals of cancer victims who decided to “let nature take its course” because they couldn’t afford the ObamaCare premiums?

To put a face on the millions adversely affected by Obama’s abysmal policies, when the Bill Elliots and Edie Littlefield Sundbys of the world die before their time, will their devastated families, like Cleo and Nate Pendleton, be given a seat of honor at the next State of the Union address alongside Michelle Obama?

Will both Barack and Michelle personally identify with the dead, like Mrs. Obama did with Hadiya when she said, “Hadiya Pendleton was me, and I was her,” and like her husband did when he uttered those now infamous words: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon [Martin]”?

The answer to all those questions is “no way.”

What’s also unlikely is that President Obama will use his old “If there’s just one life we can save, we’ve got an obligation to try” line, because it would mean rectifying a deadly situation he knowingly initiated in his mission to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America.

 

‘Better Angel’ Obama Incites More Turmoil

imagesOriginally posted at American Thinker blog

Whenever Barack Obama “expands on [his] thoughts a little bit,” America is in for an eye-opener, which is exactly what happened when he recently crashed a press briefing to comment on the George Zimmerman trial.

Exposing his true colors, the president extended condolences to the Martin family and completely ignored the Zimmerman family, which has also endured considerable pain during what Obama admitted was a “tragic situation.”

Much like Michelle personalizing the fatal shooting of Hadiya Pendleton in Chicago, Barack Obama took the opportunity to make Trayvon Martin’s death about – you guessed it – Barack Obama. Exhibiting the height of narcissistic self-absorption, the president, having previously suggested that he could be Trayvon’s father, on this occasion declared that he could be Trayvon Martin himself.

Barack Obama takes responsibility for nothing. So rather than censure a rap culture or a political party that has cultivated a caustic mindset in black youth, again the president sought out scapegoats for the irate response he and other race-baiters are subtly encouraging in the black community.  Working hard to make sure bad memories linger, Obama blamed “a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away” for the agitated race-focused response to the not-guilty verdict.

Obama felt obliged to mention African-American men being followed in department stores, hearing “locks click on the doors of cars” when on the street, and getting wary reactions from women who “clutch their purses nervously” when riding in an elevator with a male person of color. Mr. Obama must be unaware that being alone in an elevator with a strange man, black or white, makes most women, black or white, feel uncomfortable.

The president claimed that before he was a Senator, he was racially profiled based on the color of his skin. Seeing as how Barry Soetoro’s race is unchanged, maybe it was the cloud of choom smoke surrounding him that singled him out.

Nonetheless, sounding almost like he was proposing leveling the playing field by way of some sort of legal affirmative action, the president said that “there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws — everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws.”

Elucidating that point, the president acknowledged that African-American boys like Trayvon Martin are “disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence,” which he insinuated “is born out of a very violent past in this country.”

Before Obama implied that there was “no context” for Trayvon’s death, he did admit that the African-American community understands that “somebody like Trayvon Martin was statistically more likely to be shot by a peer than…by somebody else.”

However, this was right before assuming that if a white teen was afraid of being homosexually raped by a “creepy ass cracka” and demonstrated that fear by straddling and pummeling the presumed rapist about the head, the scenario would have resulted in hugs and a beer summit.

And while everything Obama said up to that point was disturbing, what followed was downright terrifying, because whenever the president poses the question “Where do we take this?” the answer never seems to be beneficial to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness.

Two potential fixes: federal government intrusion in the form of Eric ‘Fast and Furious’ Holder “reviewing what happened down there,” (meaning Florida of course, not Mexico), and Obama bouncing ideas off his staff (which means Valerie Jarrett).

For starters, one suggestion is federal/DOJ intrusion into local- and state-level law enforcement procedures. Touting one plan, Obama boasted: “When I was in Illinois, I passed racial profiling legislation,” which collected “data on traffic stops and the race of the person who was stopped,” and trained police departments “how to think about potential racial bias.”

From there, he segued into condemning stand-your-ground laws and asked if America is “sending a message …that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there’s a way for them to exit from a situation.” In other words, the president supports Holder’s “duty to retreat” posture which, had the Union taken that advice during the Civil War, would mean that Barack Obama might not be in a position today to be addressing such topics.

Obama mentioned his own naïveté about the “prospects [for] some grand, new federal program,” his own “convening power,” the gathering together of (liberal-minded) “business leaders and local elected officials and clergy and celebrities [like Eva “Brainstormer” Longoria] and athletes,” to contribute better ways to help “young African-American men feel that… they’ve got pathways and avenues to” become president… er…”succeed.”

America’s first African-American president then put his own historical presidency aside when he asked, “Is there more that we can do to give [young black men] the sense that their country cares about them and values them and is willing to invest in them?”

After America has spent 40 years allowing feminism to emasculate all boys, regardless of color, maybe the President should propose caring about and investing in every American boy.

Following the heaping on of guilt, condemnation, and racial polarization, the president admitted that with a racially-sensitive eye, he observes Malia and Sasha s’ relationships with white friends and has concluded that “they’re better than we are — they’re better than we were — on these issues.”

And this from a man who asked America a self-righteous question that he should’ve been asking himself: “[a]m I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can?  Am I judging people as much as I can, based on not the color of their skin, but the content of their character?”

Before wrapping up his performance with his signature tactic of instantly excusing himself from the situation he’s just exploited by pretending his derisiveness was a “teachable moment,” the man with lots of ‘soul’ soullessly encouraged “soul-searching.”  However, this time, before vanishing again, the always-manipulative, always above-it-all Obama suggested encouraging the “better angels of our nature, as opposed to” what he does when he uses these “episodes to heighten divisions.”

In the Wreckage of Moore, Oklahoma, Scoundrels and Fools Exposed

Barack_Obama_at_tornado-smashed_school_in_Moore_OklahomaOriginally posted at Clash Daily

Barack Obama loves to throw around Scripture and pepper prayer breakfasts, memorials, school shootings and Democrat conventions with out-of-context Bible verses. Apparently the president, who is able to compartmentalize actions and separate them from contradictory statements, doesn’t think America notices that a man who approves of the unencumbered slaughter of the unborn, partially-born, and even the just-born perceives himself to be some sort of virtuous Biblical king.

Not only that, but when he’s not citing Scripture, depending on the venue Obama has also been known to cover up crucifixes and lie so blatantly that he puts Liar Liar Jim Carrey to shame. For starters, think Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS, and the AP.

So, to see Obama in his faux preacher attire and hear him quote Scripture he doesn’t believe, let alone adhere to, certainly should qualify as blasphemy.

Six days after a devastating EF-5 tornado that killed two dozen people as it virtually leveled Moore, Oklahoma with winds in excess of 200 mph, President Obama, still avoiding questions about the four Americans who returned from Benghazi in coffins, showed up in the “Sooner State”.

Ravaged by his own whirlwind of scandals, President Obama claimed he traveled to “Monroe”…oops, that’s Moore, as a lowly representative of the American people.

Just for context, it’s doubtful that when pledging federal support for “the reddest of the red states” the thinnest of thin-skinned presidents forgot that he lost the 2012 Democrat Primary in 15 Oklahoma Counties. But he gritted his teeth and flew in anyway, and while he was at it he milked a photo op and quoted some out-of-context Scripture.

When Jesus issued the Great Commission commanding His followers to go and preach the Gospel in every corner of the earth, in summation, this is what He said: “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

With the rubble of the carefully chosen elementary school where seven children drowned as a backdrop, after passing out awkward hugs and flanked on either side by Governor Mary Fallin and Moore’s mayor Glenn Lewis, Obama referred to himself as “a messenger,” sent to let “everybody know that [they] are not alone.”

Funny, that was a message Ambassador Christopher Stevens never got in Benghazi the night he was left alone to be tortured and killed after begging for help that never came.

Then, waxing pseudo-spiritual, Obama shared a story about a Bible that was found in the rubble of a tornado that tore through Oklahoma on another day. Meanwhile the real miracle, the one that pro-choice Barack Obama would never acknowledge as a message from God, involved a purposely-flushed baby boy who was fished out of drainpipe alive in China.

Nevertheless, the president painted a rhetorical word picture replete with images of a gentle breeze softly blowing open the pages to a specific verse in the Old Testament Book of Isaiah, chapter 32:2.

Obama then quoted the prophecy about a righteous king whom Isaiah said “shall be as a hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest.” No one really knows whom Obama was alluding to exactly, but with the tornadic conditions swirling about and his promise to provide federal assistance, it’s easy to guess.

So the real message in Moore was this: Although the Americans in Benghazi were alone, Oklahomans are not alone. There’s a man who claims to be like a hiding place from tornadoes who just so happens to be the same man who was in hiding himself the night Christopher Stevens was being sodomized and left to die.

Somehow, considering those facts as well as others, hearing Barack Obama say that “God has a plan, but we are instruments of God’s will” seemed a smidgeon disingenuous coming from someone whose instrumentation was offline on September 11, 2012.

Nonetheless, while the president seemed to be personally identifying with Bible verses, what he should have done was continue to read, because the passages that followed accurately described his ineffectual leadership and the godlessness he condones – not only with the policies he furthers and supports, but also with his use of non-existent Biblical faith for political expediency.

If that Bible was really salvaged from the rubble the Scripture that Obama should have read but conveniently omitted include the following verses:

No longer will the fool be called noble nor the scoundrel be highly respected. For fools speak folly, their hearts are bent on evil:
They practice ungodliness and spread error concerning the Lord …Scoundrels use wicked methods, they make up evil schemes to destroy the poor with lies.

So, regardless of how many cherry-picked Scriptures Barack Obama chooses to read and regardless of how deluded he is about who he really is, in the end, when the extent of Obama’s evil folly is finally exposed, “[n]o longer will the fool be called noble nor the scoundrel be highly respected” in Moore, Oklahoma, Monroe, Connecticut, or anywhere else.

Michelle Obama’s ‘Plan B’ Gun Control Effort

largerOriginally posted at American Thinker

Plan B is not just a controversial morning-after pill; it’s also an effort on Michelle Obama’s part to paint anyone who doesn’t agree with her husband’s restrictive gun measures as people who are willing to force children to live their lives in terror. Michelle attempted to paint that picture during an interview with Lee Cowan on “CBS Sunday Morning,” when she dredged up sob stories from her gun violence visit to Chicago last month.

The first lady said that after delivering her speech on gun violence in April, she was amazed at the extent to which Chicago’s children were forced to live in subjugation to the fear of being shot. Thus, the unspoken premise of Michelle Obama’s comments is that the cure for children in Chicago being dominated by the fear of being killed by a stray bullet is to subjugate the entire nation’s Second Amendment rights.

Michelle shared that students at Harper High School in Englewood, Illinois told her, “Every day they wake up and wonder whether they’re going to make it out of school alive.” Mrs. Obama said, “I mean, every single kid worries about their own death, or the death of someone, every single day.” Michelle Obama uttering those words is a prime example of liberal duplicity. This is a woman who supports 3,500 babies a day being aborted, and she’s preaching to us about teenagers who, no thanks to her or her husband, miraculously made it out of the womb alive — not making it out of school alive?

To add insult to injury, Mrs. Obama then said “we” have an “obligation to these kids” to try again. When Mrs. Obama uses words like “obligation to these…” anything, it’s a clear sign that hubby, on behalf of some victimized group, believes he is bound to a higher authority than Congress and is probably out searching desperately for some way to circumvent the law.

Michelle Obama, savior of America’s children, then pointed out, “We have millions of kids living in these kinds of circumstances who are doing everything right.” What she forgot to mention was that, despite restrictive gun laws already in place, children living in Chicago “who are doing everything right” will still be victimized by those in Chicago, children or otherwise, who will continue to do everything wrong.

Bordering on tears, the first lady went on to say: “And we, as a nation, have to embrace these kids and let them know that we hear them, and see them.” Disregard that “we as a nation” part, because rest assured, Mrs. Obama believes that no one except her and her husband hear and see the fearful children of Chicago. And only those who adhere to the liberal vision have the power and authority to quell anxiety by finding a way to restrict the ability of the nation’s gun owners to exercise their right to “keep and bear arms.”

Ratcheting up the sympathy factor yet another notch, Michelle then shared with a sycophantic Lee Cowan that “One kid told me he felt like he lived in a cage, because he feels like his community is unseen, unheard and nobody cares about it.” What that caged kid probably hasn’t realized just yet is that the first lady of the United States comes to Chicago regularly to use the “unseen, unheard” and uncared-for children of the Windy City as stage props to help push a progressive gun agenda.

Speaking of guns, Barry visited Mexico where, thanks to him and Eric Holder, it’s even worse than Chicago when it comes to gun violence. Careful not to mention beheadings and machetes in his speech, Obama did suggest to a rapt audience of Mexican students that gun control would save lives on both sides of the border. Ohhh… so that explains why the president decided not to control gunrunners taking illegal high-capacity rifles from one side of the border to the other.

In a rare moment of honesty, Obama did acknowledge his own involvement in supplying Mexico with guns when he said, “Most of the guns used to commit violence here in Mexico come from the United States.” No Shiite, Sherlock.

Then the president gave the crowd an impromptu refresher course on the U.S. Constitution, saying, “I think many of you know that in America, our Constitution guarantees our individual right to bear arms. And as president, I swore an oath to uphold that right, and I always will.” While pushing amnesty in Mexico, what he didn’t do was explain how United States immigration law works. Trawling for future voters, the president chose to conveniently skip that particular lesson.

Instead, immediately following the mini-course on the Second Amendment came the ‘but’ portion of the president’s speech, which is also known as the unofficial ‘Obama clarification.’ That’s where an unspoken ‘but’ cues the president to insert an addendum that corrects what he perceives to be one of the fundamental flaws in the Constitution.

Obama then said “At the same time (which is really a ‘but’), as I’ve said in the United States, I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common-sense reforms,” (which are really ‘Barack Obama-approved modifications’) “that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people,” (that would be law-abiding Americans) “that can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States. It’s the right thing to do.”

Sorry, Mr. President, it’s a little too late to ‘do the right thing.’ Why wasn’t that option proposed prior to illegally arming drug cartels with AK-47s? Who knows, maybe some of those guns have even made their way up to Illinois where your wife is now claiming we need to make an effort to “embrace… hear and see” Chicago’s terrified children who live each day in fear of being shot.

Chaos and Carnage Outside a Mexican Pepsi Bottling Plant

mexicoOriginally posted at Clash Daily

The “place of eternal formation and fertility of flower buds,” also known as Uruapan, is located in the Mexican state of Michoacán and is home to avocado farms, a monarch butterfly sanctuary, and a Pepsi bottling plant. That is why having to pass seven corpses propped up on plastic picnic chairs in the middle of a traffic circle would definitely put a damper on anyone’s day.

That’s right. Dropped in the center of the city, seven men aged 15 to 40 who had been tortured and shot in the head were neatly positioned in lawn chairs with notes anchored to their chests – not with a safety pin, but with ice picks! The Post-Its did not say “Note to self: bring home a quart of milk.” Quite the contrary – all seven messages read: “Warning! This will happen to thieves”, except for the one that said “Warning! This will happen to thieves, kidnappers, sex offenders and extortionists.”

All of the alleged car washers were shot execution-style, but only some of the victims had their hands and feet bound. Those victims were probably the ones who were refusing to cooperate before having their brains blown out. Nonetheless, it goes without saying – Pepsi or no Pepsi, it looks like these fellows made either the La Familia Michoacana or the Los Caballeros Templarios very, very angry.

Although quite a sight, the Pepsi Seven weren’t the only murders in Mexico in recent days. In a neighboring town called Guerrero, the body count climbed to 14 when seven more people were shot to death in the Hotel Restorants Vegas bar in the Ciudad Altamirano region of Tierra Caliente.

According to authorities, “Fast and Furious” masked men armed with AK-47s arrived in trucks, burst into the bar and opened fire, gunning down nine people, leaving two alive in critical condition.  Although the stories vary as to the identity of those killed, most agree that among the dead were four civilians and three off-duty federal agents. That time, no notes were left behind.

The noncombatant patrons were likely innocent victims of a confrontation between armed gunmen and federal agents who, after being followed to a bank, sought refuge in the bar of the nearby hotel. The assassins followed them in and shot up the place, messing up the bar, shattering bottles of Mexican beer, and ruining everyone’s evening.

Over the last seven years, about 70,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence attributed to drug cartels. The Mexican government “estimates that at least another 26,000 have ‘disappeared’ in that same period.”

Abductions and fatal gunshot wounds aside, the mode of execution that garners the most attention is beheading. The fine art of head removal, sometimes with a steak knife and sometimes with a chainsaw, made its debut and picked up speed in Uruapan, Michoacán, home of the Pepsi Seven, after armed men in masks rolled five heads onto the dance floor of a bar as a warning to a rival gang. That special delivery also came with a note that said the act was “divine justice” on behalf of “the family.”

If you think finding seven dead bodies in an intersection is disturbing, try having your line dancing interrupted by heads rolling across the dance floor right in the middle of a well-executed synchronized dance step.

Decapitations increased during Felipe Calderon’s presidency. In 2011 between January and November, there were 493 beheadings and dismemberments directly attributed to the Zetas, who got the idea to remove heads from bodies after they mimicked al-Qaeda and received training from Kaibiles, a Guatemalan Special Forces squad.

While a gory sight to see, at least the Pepsi Seven didn’t have their faces peeled off, sewn onto soccer balls, and delivered to city hall in plastic bags. That’s what happened in Sinaloa in 2010 to Hugo Hernandez. Poor Hugo gave new meaning to the concept of being unable to “hold it together.” The deceased man’s torso was “found in a plastic container in a separate location from another box that contained his arms, legs and skull” and was also accompanied by a note that said “Happy New Year, because this will be your last.”

After Enrique Pena Nieto replaced Felipe Calderon as Mexico’s new president, he vowed to quell the chaos and carnage. Yet by mid-February of this year the bodies were really beginning to pile up, as 2,243 individuals had already been murdered in cartel-related incidents.

Granted, the lawn chair lineup was a shocking thing to discover, especially at 5:30 in the morning. However, in the overall scheme of things, intact corpses with their heads and faces still attached is a vast improvement over the bloodshed and butchery that Mexico has endured for the past six years. As for those seven bodies found outside the Pepsi plant in Uruapan, well, unfortunately for them that ‘Pepsi Day’ they had hoped for didn’t turn out quite like they expected.

Seizing Hairdryers and Emancipating Aliens

Immigrants_Released_03b10-300x247Next time you’re in a large crowd or eating a powdered cruller at Dunkin Donuts, try not to think about the fact that there are people coming over the border or arriving through customs from Asia with drug-resistant tuberculosis. Moreover, when you’re at the mall and you see a nervous-looking Middle Eastern-type guy pacing around with a backpack, shoo it away from your mind and don’t let anything stand between you and that hot Aunt Annie’s pretzel you’ve had a hankering for.

Furthermore, when you realize that the President can’t figure out that there’s a big difference between releasing 1,000 immigrants a week for three weeks versus releasing a “few hundred” in a couple of weeks, don’t let that stop you from demonstrating “The Harlem Shake” on Face Time.

The concern here isn’t “the high prevalence of infectious diseases and increasing movement of people across the borders.” No, what takes precedence over the infiltration of foreign contagions is our government making sure the produce guy handling the tomatoes in the supermarket is free to pass along a  deadly super bug without fear of reprisal or deportation.

Read the rest of the article at The Blacksphere.net

 

‘Dangerous Hairdryers’ and Self-protective Cutting Shears

shootervid3-620x345-220x220Originally posted at American Thinker blog

Last year, with the authorization of Attorney General Eric Holder and the U.S. Department of Justice, after thousands of “Fast and Furious” assault rifles wreaked mayhem on both the U.S. border and inside Mexico, the Obama administration commissioned Janet ‘Big Sis’ Napolitano to do whatever was necessary to help save American lives.

Soon thereafter, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, overseen by Secretary Napolitano and the Department of Homeland Security, seized 13,000 “unsafe hair dryers” from blowing their way across the border.

Apparently, Mexican drug cartels entering the U.S. to buy illegal guns and Al Qaeda operatives infiltrating American soil are not the problem.  But hairdryers that “fail to have adequate immersion protection” — now that is a huge problem.

Fully aware that nervous citizens were grappling with hairdryer immersion concerns, the DHS reassured the public that “The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a nationwide targeting operation by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Import Safety Commercial Targeting and Analysis Center (CTAC).”

Well-coifed Americans breathed a collective sigh of relief. Thankfully, the government made sure that if one should decide to dry their hair in the bathtub, thanks to the efforts of attentive border agents there’s a good chance they won’t be electrocuted.

Now, a year later, after pulling the plug on a successful “dangerous hairdryer” crusade, Ms. Napolitano and company have embarked on a new venture: offering advice on how to stay alive if one is fortunate enough to have a job and a demented gunslinger decides to vent his anger in the workplace.

In an effort to save lives, the Department of Homeland Security, an agency that still hasn’t confiscated all the guns that were purposely walked across the border into Mexico, posted a government-produced video entitled “Options for Consideration Active Shooter Training Video.”

Excuse me, but that title just cries out for a DHS-style acronym, and is almost as ridiculous as the infamous DHS “man caused disaster” definition that the organization came up with for terrorism.

When overseeing the content of the video, Big Sis must have felt it was necessary for the narrator to explain to grown adults that an “active shooter is an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people inside an occupied structure or outside in a populated area.”  What Janet forgot to mention was that “active shooters” attempt to kill people with guns.

Naturally, because the government objects to honest Americans citizens being armed and able to defend themselves, the DHS was forced to get creative when suggesting lifesaving options that should have also included: When making a business call, instead of looking for the donuts and coffee or scoping out the location of the bathroom, be on the lookout for an escape route and never sit with your back to the door.

On behalf of Barack Obama’s December 2012 “Critical Infrastructure Protection and Resilience” initiative, the deliberate tone of the narrator also suggests intuitive things like scurrying under a desk or conference room table; shutting off lights; closing blinds; trying not to sneeze or cough; and cell phone deactivation. The video also suggests locking and/or barricading oneself in an office; running for the stairwell; stepping over dead coworkers; and putting your hands in the air with fingers spread apart while passing the SWAT team on the way out of the building under siege.

According to the video, for lack of a legal firearm or a place to hide, victims have a better chance of survival if they attempt to “overpower the shooter with whatever means are available.”

DHS forgot to mention that Office Retaliation Options, or OROs, could also include even more creative defensive measures such as: Jamming chewing gum into the barrel of the gun; stapling the shooter’s feet to the floor; bludgeoning the aggressor with a fire extinguisher; asphyxiating the assailant with a baseball-size wad of Post-Its; using a letter opener as a stabbing implement; or better yet, slicing an assailant to ribbons with the pair of scissors depicted in the video being pulled from a disorganized desk drawer by a quick-thinking office worker under fire.

A word of caution for jujutsu experts defending themselves for the first time with office-supply-quality cutting shears: Just make sure the blades are not in the gunman’s jugular with your hand still on the handles.  Why? Because the video advises that when the cops arrive those wielding sharp objects must “Put down any items [and] immediately raise [their] hands,” lest they survive the gunman but lose their lives to an overenthusiastic first responder.

In the end, between Ms. Napolitano’s successful “dangerous hairdryer” endeavor last year and the lifesaving instructions for using scissors against an angry, gun-wielding former coworker on a rampage this year, the Department of Homeland Security’s information campaign is destined to save lives.

In the meantime, in the near future a taxpayer-funded “Options for Consideration Active Shooter Training Video Part. II” may be warranted to address a situation where a gunman attacks, oh, let’s say a beauty parlor. In that case, someone will need to provide step-by-step self-defense “options” for a hair stylist with only a “dangerous hairdryer” handy and no assault scissors within reach.

Whittling Away our Freedoms

whittling

Originally posted at American Thinker

In the aftermath of the tragic murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Barack Obama, together with a supportive left-wing media, has called for “meaningful action” to address the problem of mass shootings. Since that heartbreaking episode, the president has been publicly weeping, praying, pontificating, quoting Scripture, and poetically sharing verbal vignettes on the responsibilities of fatherhood. He’s been so convincing that pro-gun Democrats are abandoning their former commitment to the Second Amendment, crossing over, and siding with liberals on gun laws.

Meanwhile, despite all the passionate rhetoric, except for passing blame, Obama has yet to fully acknowledge his administration’s participation in the failed gun-walking operation called “Operation Fast and Furious.”

The orchestrated scheme called “Fast and Furious” started in the first year of Barack Obama’s presidency. That year, federal officials decided to allow straw buyers to visit gun stores in Arizona and Texas, load up vans with weapons like the AK-47 and drive them back across the border into México, straight into the hands of vicious cartels.

Rather than arrest the “trafficking kingpins” and confiscate the guns, the federal authorities that conducted the operation were instructed to allow “straw gun buyers for a smuggling ring to walk away from gun shops in Arizona with weapons,”so they could then be tracked. The problem is that, as usual, inept government bureaucracy lost track of the weaponry and the guns purchased illegally have been showing up at crime scenes along with dead bodies ever since.

The gun used in the shooting death of former Marine/U.S. Border agent Brian Terry was traced back to an Arizona gun shop. ICE agent Jamie Zapata was murdered by a drug cartel and the gun that took his life was traced to a gun shop in Dallas.

In total, “Operation Fast and Furious” allegedly allowed approximately 2,000 still unaccounted-for weapons to walk across the southern border. México’s former Attorney General Victor Humberto Benítez Treviño guesstimates that “Fast and Furious” guns, to date, have also killed more than 300 Mexicans.

The irony is that Mexican drug cartels sought out guns in the U.S. because Mexican gun laws are restrictive. Cartel members from a country with the same kind of laws currently being proposed murdered two U.S. Border agents and shot to death hundreds of Mexican civilians and soldiers with firearms obtained with the full knowledge and permission of the U.S. government.

At the Sandy Hook vigil, a teary-eyed Barack Obama stressed that “[t]he majority of those who died were children — beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. They had their entire lives ahead of them — birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own.”

Yet, after tugging at America’s heartstrings, it appears the president’s gun safety concerns remain exclusive to American guns, gun owners, and people.

If that weren’t true, then why, in 2010 when “Fast and Furious” weapons gunned down 14 teenagers and wounded 20 attending a birthday party in Ciudad Juarez, didn’t Barack Obama — who is now so concerned about missed “birthdays, graduations, weddings” — address the Mexican bloodbath? Why hasn’t the Obama administration accepted any responsibility or even suggested locating the still missing U.S. weapons?

As Obama manipulates tragedy to advance Second Amendment restrictions in the U.S., guns walked across the border with his approval are still taking lives.

Case in point: another “Fast and Furious” gun was recently found at the scene where a beauty queen died as a result of a shootout between a Mexican drug cartel and soldiers.

The day after Thanksgiving, in the mountainous area of Sinaloa, México, home to México’s most powerful Sinaloa drug cartel, 20-year-old Maria Susana Flores Gamez’s body was found together with an assault rifle that has since been revealed was walked across the border.

In February, the beauty pageant winner was awarded the title of 2012 Woman of Sinaloa. By November she was riding in a vehicle that engaged Mexican soldiers in a gun battle. Just as the 20 children who died in Newtown, Connecticut had nowhere to hide from Adam Lanza’s bullets, neither could Maria Susana Flores Gamez hide. Police believe she was used as a human shield and perished when Mexican police returned fire on gang members using an illegal firearm provided compliments of the gun-control obsessed Obama administration.

In the meantime, for four months, former U.S. Marine Jon Hammar is chained to a bed in México’s notorious CEDES prison. Jon is being held for declaring a legal antique Sears Roebuck shotgun to Mexican customs officials on his way to surf and hunt in Costa Rica. What is curious about Hammar’s situation is that after México was systematically flooded with illegal weaponry, the Obama State Department now claims they are powerless to help.

Maybe that’s because after the horrendous nature of the shooting in Connecticut, Barack Obama would rather not spoil the mood by calling attention to a legal gun owner rotting away in a Mexican jail on trumped-up gun charges. After all, why chance losing the emotional capital he needs to convince America that it’s time to moderate firearms?

Nonetheless, for the president to exploit tragedy for political gain while knowing full well that innocent people are being killed with the guns his administration placed in the hands of dangerous gang members is downright reprehensible. Someone needs to ask President Obama to clarify how he justifies condemning assault weapons, especially after his administration intentionally armed Mexican drug kingpins with the weaponry he now blames for the chaos and death we recently witnessed in Connecticut.

Therefore, rather than sitting idly by while freedom continues to be whittled away, it’s up to Americans to demand accountability. It’s time that Time magazine’s Person of the Year explains why he continues to insist that stricter gun control laws will save American lives when he’s well aware that his Justice Department, headed up byAttorney General Eric Holder, purposely and illegally furnished lethal firearms to murderers in México.

 

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

‘Eye Candy’ Lies, and Candy Swears to It

Originally posted at American Thinker

In the run-up to the second debate, feminists have been moaning about how Candy Crowley, unlike Jim Lehrer, was reduced to a “Vanna White … holding a microphone.”  Advocating for equal debate clout, Crowley has been speaking out on her own behalf and told Mark Halperin of TIME magazine that during the debate, “[o]nce the table is kind of set by the town-hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, ‘Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?'”

In other words, Candy made it known prior to the event that she had no intention of keeping to the rules and that she in no way would she remain a “voiceless moderator,” fielding questions from the undecided audience and keeping close watch on the clock.  Going rogue, Ms. Crowley succeeded in her objective and in the process managed to weaken the credibility of women as debate moderators.

The guidelines in the memorandum of understanding that was agreed upon by the debate commission, as well as both campaigns, stated:

The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.

Those restrictions did not sit well with feminist groups, who’ve managed to make even a presidential debate about women’s issues.

So, on behalf of the sisterhood, Candy Crowley took to the town hall podium and proceeded to defy the rules and run the debate her own way.  The result was dreadful — not only for Candy’s reputation as a journalist, but also for a weak incumbent who looked like he needed a woman to protect him from being verbally spanked.  Moreover, her performance did nothing to convince the debate commission that female moderators should be granted more freedom in the future.

The reason why?  Candy Crowley cut off Mitt Romney 28 times, including when he was making a point about Barack Obama’s gunrunning debacle, “Fast and Furious.”  According to CNN’s own count, Candy allowed Obama to speak for a total of 44 minutes and 4 seconds and ordered Romney back to his stool by cutting him off and bringing his time down to 40 minutes and 50 seconds.

The CNN anchor showed obvious deference to the president.  Every time he spoke, her eyes widened in admiration and she exhibited an odd mix of what looked like coaxing and agreeing.  While claiming to be an unbiased moderator, Candy Crowley adjudicated on the president’s behalf when he stretched the truth on the subject of Libya.

Most would agree that Candy’s foot-in-mouth moment came when Mitt Romney accused Obama of not calling the attack in Benghazi an act of terror for two weeks and flying to Las Vegas and Colorado for a fundraiser the day after four Americans died. Crowley, like a mother hen protecting her chick, interrupted Romney and said: “It — it — it — he did in fact, sir.  So let me — let me call it an act of terror.”

In response, lily-livered Obama smirked, hid behind mama’s apron strings, and then asked her to restate the falsehood on his behalf, saying, “Can you say that a little louder, Candy?”  Candy gladly complied.  Stuttering, stammering, and tripping over herself to rush to Junior’s defense, Candy added: “He — he did call it an act of terror.  It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out.  You are correct about that.”

If hard-hitting girl power representative Candy Crowley was really looking to bolster female credibility, she should have gone according to the original script and asked Obama, “Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?”  If Crowley were really mixing it up with the boys, she could have demanded an answer from Barack Obama as to why it took fourteen days to acknowledge an al-Qaeda terrorist attack that left four Americans dead in the streets of Benghazi.

After the fact, Candy Crowley is now being forced to admit that Romney, who insisted that Obama did not call the incident a terrorist attack for weeks, was right — “in the main” — on Benghazi.

Rather than conceding that Obama picked the wrong way to go about handling the murder of an American ambassador, Ms. Crowley instead chooses to say that Romney “picked the wrong way to go about talking about it.”  Attempting to explain her unmitigated favoritism, Candy underscored that her second “two week” point favored Romney and generated applause much like her first point, which generated applause from one half of the audience led by an unrestrained Michelle Obama.

Prior to the Hofstra debate, America was forced to endure listening to Crowley whine about a woman’s rightful role as a debate moderator.  Then, during the actual debate, the nation witnessed the hot mess Candy made while shilling for Obama.

Suffice it to say that Candy proved that the “memorandum of understanding” was correct in its attempt to limit her role, because by the end of the debate, every headline should have read: “Eye Candy” Lies, and Candy Swears to It.

So, after all the fuss, Candy Crowley’s behavior and inappropriate intrusion did nothing to advance the feminist cause.  But wait, there’s still time!  How about if Crowley’s cheerleaders — NOW, The New Agenda, and former news anchor Carol Simpson — recommend that for the upcoming foreign policy debate, Lara Logan replace Robert Schieffer?

%d bloggers like this: