BlogWonks

The lamestream media told you:

“The nation’s top two law enforcement officials acknowledged Friday that the FBI broke the law to secretly pry out personal information about Americans,” according to an AP report with no byline.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

No arrests are expected in this case, since the nation’s top two law enforcement officials didn’t do the actual prying, will deny any personal culpability, and you can’t “arrest the FBI” named as the culprit in the story.

“The only difference between this offense and all the others the FBI routinely commits is that this one is in the news for some reason,” said an observer who wishes to remain anonymous. He echoes the sentiments of “news” readers everywhere. In addition to occasional scandals, malfeasance, lost weapons and computers, waste, inefficiency, inter-agency bickering, ineptitude, deceit and complaints, the FBI does a lot of good work bringing serious criminals to justice.

Unlike the FBI and the tens of thousands of agents and bureaucrats in its headquarters and 400 satellite offices, a citizen who runs afoul of the law, even for paperwork errors, faces time in prison, confirming critics fears that the tyrannical nature of government is advancing unchecked.

“There’s a remote possibility someone will be fired over this,” one observer observed, “but if you or I flagrantly and repeatedly broke federal law, getting fired would be the least of our worries.”

Federal employees who are fired instead of being imprisoned for crimes are often hired by other agencies, or even the private sector, at an increase in salary. The few who are imprisoned must wait until they get out to get new jobs with pay raises.

The lamestream media told you:

Gas prices have gone up at least twenty cents everywhere, the AP reports with a straight face in a story with no byline.

“Concerns over falling gasoline inventories from decreased refinery production and fewer imports have boosted oil and gasoline prices lately,” they say. The government reported that gas inventories dropped by more than analysts had expected, AP says in a brief squib.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Anyone who drives, walks or rides public transit can see the big signs with big gas prices getting bigger, so saying the price went up hardly qualifies as news, unnamed analysts say.

“The bafflegab about ‘concerns’ and ‘refinery production’ do little more than hide any semblance of news, and sounds like old-world communists managing the public with mindless verbiage,” critics point out. “Wheat production is up in sector four,” while the public starves.

To qualify as news, the report would need to tell who has these concerns, who is in charge of raising the prices everywhere (a complete mystery to American “news” consumers), and why the people in charge imported less oil and refined less gasoline, deliberately forcing these increases. Prices, as people know, do not increase themselves. The rumor that imports were lowered so prices would rise could not be confirmed at press time.

“We’re being soaked, and the media is hiding the culprits,” says one gasoline user who owns a pickup and an SUV.

The AAA, often quoted when fuel prices rise, is a private consumer club of drivers and has no direct connection to fuel prices, oil giants or the perpetrators. “But the publicity is good for the club,” one AAA member noted.

Why the government would report gasoline inventory numbers, when private industry manages the supplies, refining, inventories and pricing, was unexplained by the AP, as usual. In the interest of fairness, it should be explained that reporters are encouraged by their bosses to rely on official sources.

The lamestream media told you:

“Criminals in Texas beware: if you threaten someone in their car or office, the citizens of this state where guns are ubiquitous have the right to shoot you dead,” reports Reuters, from Dallas.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Texas today joined a growing list of states determined to remove barriers that could jeopardize or impede citizens who protect themselves from unprovoked violence instigated by vicious hardened criminals.

Texas Governor Rick Perry, on signing the Castle Doctrine bill, said the right to defend yourself from imminent harm is intuitive to human nature, and that Texans can protect themselves from criminals, and receive protection from state law when they must use deadly force in self defense.

Effective on Sep. 1, 2007, the new law creates a legal presumption that a criminal forcibly and unlawfully entering an occupied home, automobile or place of work is entering to do harm to the occupants, making deadly force justified.

It removes so-called “duty to retreat” language under such circumstances, and establishes clear civil immunity for anyone involved in a justifiable defensive deadly force situation — preventing nuisance lawsuits from being filed by criminals or their family members. Lawyers who bring such suits used to be disbarred, a practice no longer followed.

The Reuters wire service, running editorial comment where news belongs, said, “Sympathy for violent offenders and criminals in general runs low in Texas, underscored by its busy death row… A conservative political outlook and widespread fondness for hunting also means Texans are a well-armed people capable of defending themselves with deadly force.”

The lamestream media told you:

“A top aide to Sen. James Webb was charged Monday with trying to carry a loaded pistol and extra ammunition into a Senate office building, U.S. Capitol Police said,” according to the Washington Post on March 27. The firearm was taken into protective custody, along with the aide.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

A top aide to a freshman Democrat was caught trying to bring a fully loaded semiautomatic handgun and extra fully loaded magazines through security and into a Senate office building it was learned today.

The notoriously anti-gun Washington Post referred to the device as a loaded pistol, and as a firearm, abandoning its usual terminology when guns are in the hands of armed people committing criminal acts. They failed to note in their lead that the perpetrators were both Democrats.

“They managed to get a quote from a Sgt. spokeswoman,” noted the Uninvited Ombudsman, “that, ‘I don’t think he intended to harm anybody,’ which the perp was also quoted as saying, implying they might ‘go easy’ on him.”

We’ll be watching to see if elite Democrats gets the same justice the public might expect for a similar act. So far, a massive feeding frenzy of followup stories has failed to materialize for unknown reasons.

Real research and reporting finds that: Perp was arrested under a local D.C. statute — Carrying a pistol without a D.C. license (up to 5 years), unregistered pistol (up to 1 year), and possessing ammunition for an unregistered pistol (up to 1 year). One felony count and 2 misdemeanor counts. If convicted, it also includes loss of right to vote, hold office, keep and bear arms, more.

The spokeswoman, Kimberly Schneider, was also quoted as saying, “Any senator who has a gun permit and wants to bring a gun onto congressional property must unload the gun and make sure it is ’securely wrapped.’”

No such law is known to exist, but laws making such actions federal felonies do exist, and went unreported. Webb is a former Marine, his aide is a former Marine, and Webb has reportedly gone shooting at the NRA HQ range in Virginia.

The safety aspect of carrying a fully loaded very dangerous semiautomatic handgun with extra bullets in multiple clips in a briefcase and “forgetting about it,” as well as why any Senator would even need such a thing, was not discussed by the Post.

They did however find space to say the gun was unregistered, the ammo was unregistered, and the Senate aide had no license. The consequences of a Senator’s ownership of an unregistered gun was not mentioned, but we’ll be watching that too.

No one was harmed in the incident.

I was invited to a neighborhood rally against gangs this past Wednesday (3-21-07), in a park near Grant High School about three miles from my home.
The flyer that was sent to me said, “bring signs” so I hastily made a big 30″ X 40″ sign, just minutes before the event began.

I arrived at our meeting point on time, and found about 40 people gathered in the park, including: L. A. City Councilwoman Wendy Gruel, L.A. City Prosecutor and L. A. Unified School District School Board Candidate Tamar Galatzan, several official looking people assisting Ms. Gruel and Ms. Galatzan, a representative of the local neighborhood council, and an LAPD, gang task force officer.  The assembled dignitaries spoke to the crowd of people around 5:30 P.M.  Near the end of the speech making, an LAPD squad car drove up to the crowd (on the grass) and a couple of more LAPD officers joined the assembled throng.  All the public speakers expressed their sincere concerns for gang problems and spoke of the importance of reducing graffiti, having proper lighting, having adequate police officers and prosecutors to enforce the laws, and community involvement in reporting gang crimes.

After the dignitaries finished speaking, I personally handed Councilwoman Gruel a copy of some Fatherlessness statistics I’d cut and pasted from this Internet site.

http://www.thecardp roject.info/ the_card_ 002.htm

This site also appears to accurately document the cost of Fatherlessness to our society. http://fathersforlife.org/divorce/chldrndiv.htm

Around 6:00 P.M., the crowd marched to Grant High School with Gruel and Galatzan marching alongside the neighborhood crowd.  It turns out I was the only person who brought a sign, but I was undeterred and held it high as we marched the approximately half mile to the Grant H.S. Auditorium. http://www.granths.org/ 

 Several people inquired as to the meaning of my sign throughout the afternoon and evening.  On the walk to the Grant H.S. Auditorium, a woman spoke to me about the sign and told me, “Dads are involved in their children’s lives when they pay their child support promptly and regularly.”  I replied that, “Men are more than wallets.”  I also told her, “Surveys show that men want to pay child support and the vast majority does, unless experiencing joblessness, injury, illness, or sometimes the vindictiveness of an ex-wife denying visitation.”  I told her that denying Fathers no more than “just a financial role in their children’s lives” was the kind of gender feminist policy, destroying Fatherhood and creating gangs, that I was referring to.http://www.ncfmla.org/ncfmla-flyer.pdf

Most divorced and separated dads want to nurture their children, but courts often reduce them to “visitors” and do not even enforce “visitation.” So-called “deadbeat dads” are usually dead-broke or dead-bolted from their kids’ lives by biased court orders or moms who impede access. Over 80% of divorced or separated dads who have jobs and access to their kids pay their support in full. Nonetheless, our government spends hundreds of dollars to enforce monetary support for each dollar it spends to enforce access. (Sanford Braver, Ph.D., “Divorced Dads.”)

Finally, I referred her to a Google search of, “fatherlessness predictor delinquency juveniles” and told her that would produce a number of hits, including feminist opinions attempting to refute the fact that Fatherlessness leads to a whole series of problems and maladies in juveniles.  I further stated my opinion, that the mere fact feminists were refuting the overwhelming statistics showing Fatherlessness as a predicator of delinquency in juveniles, shows that Fatherlessness is a significant issue in the politics played by gender feminists in our liberal, local government. 

Los Angeles has a women’s commission, office of women’s health, women’s studies programs on local college and university campuses, with nothing likewise for males, and those women’s industries institutions all work to demean and diminish the role of fathers in their kids’ lives, IMO.  It appears these gender feminist institutions undermine the role of Fathers in families, and that they actively work to deny Fathers the choice(s) Mothers have.  Further isolation of Dads from their children often occurs when the dissolution of a marriage occurs.http://www.ncfmla.org/ncfmla-flyer.pdf

In divorce proceedings, false accusations of domestic violence or child abuse, and restraining order abuse, are common. Without warning, men are arrested, jailed and barred from their homes and bank accounts without due process. More than 50% of child sexual abuse allegations are unsubstantiated. (Eckenrode, Powers, “Substantiation of child abuse and neglect reports, Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psych., 1998, 56, 9-16; Lewis, “Reliability rather than zealotry,” Summer 1996, Kentucky Bench & Bar, 60, 23-30.) False accusers are rarely prosecuted.

Once we got to the auditorium, I was surprised to find several hundred more “neighbors” gathered there, as well as other Los Angeles government agencies: Dept. of Water and Power, Sanitation, Street Lighting, Graffiti Removal, etc., etc., etc. I worked my way through the large crowd to the front of the auditorium, had a seat and waited for the meeting to start.

 While waiting, a reporter from KABC, TV, Channel 7, approached me and asked if she could interview me. “Certainly,” I replied. I reiterated what I’d said on the march over from the park, but added, “Randy Kendrick, Independent Women’s Forum, Board Member, points out in an interview in their Winter 2007 journal,”

‘An alarming percentage of young men are not going to college, and they are getting into a lot of trouble and ending up in prison. Most of them don’t have good male role models. Well, have you ever looked at elephants and dolphins? Did you know that dolphins have teenage gangs? Well, if a couple of teenagers go off without the influence of a male, they actually do things that teenage gangs do - violence, rape, theft. It is the same with elephants. When people are managing elephants in Africa, they found if there were no strong male [elephants], the young teenage male elephants would run rampant.’

 It was convenient that I had the journal with me to quote from. I went on to point out that most of this aberant behavior in elephants is also documented in a National Geographic Explorer entitled, “Elephant Rage,”http://shopngvideos.com/products/elephant_rage_2

After my interview had concluded, and once everyone had taken a seat, Councilwoman Gruel opened the meeting and again spoke on the issue of gangs as they affect the quality of life in Los Angeles neighborhoods.  Councilwoman Gruel was followed by Deputy Chief Michael Moore of the Los Angeles Police Dept. (LAPD), and he was followed by an Administrator from the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), whose name I neglected to take down.  There were other less notable public servants, who gave snippets of speeches from the main podium, however those three aforementioned public servants sat at a table on the stage (each with a microphone), and their input was lengthy.Councilwoman Gruel largely repeated what she said to the crowd in the park, and perhaps expanded a little.  Deputy Chief Michael Moore spoke, while going through a power point presentation (slide show).  I recall Deputy Chief Moore stating that gang homicides increased in the San Fernando Valley in 2006 by 54%.  That statistic stood out in stark contrast to this obviously inaccurate “feminist fact” I found on the Internet, http://members.aol.com/asherah/fatherlessness.html

“Among the report’s most positive results is a 40 percent drop in serious violent crime involving juvenile offenders since 1993.’”

A few other points that stood out from Deputy Chief Moore’s presentation were, “Our jails are full,” “Crime is down,” and “Arrests are up.”

After the meeting, I had a chance to talk to Deputy Chief Moore and began by telling him I was supportive of his work to reduce gang crimes and violence.  I then asked him about “our jails being full,” to confirm that I’d not misunderstood what he’d said.  He confirmed I’d heard correctly.  I mentioned my concern that we may someday live in a society largely comprised of ex-convicts, or people in jails, if we don’t find some other way to address societal problems leading to crimes and violence.  He expressed, that when he goes home in the evening, as a private citizen, he too shares those serious concerns.  He added, “America has the highest rate of incarceration in the world.”  “Yes,” I joined in, “we’ve passed Russia.”

I also asked Deputy Chief Moore if I’d heard him correctly when he stated, “Crime is down,” and “Arrests are up.”  I said, “I assume we are still arresting people for crimes so that statement seems contradictory to me.”  Deputy Chief Moore cited some statistical accounting/categorizing procedure, but honestly, I still failed to reconcile that seeming contradiction in my mind.  I did not pursue the question.  I thanked the Deputy Chief for his time (as he had others waiting to ask him questions) and proceeded to filter out of the meeting room.

Later Wednesday evening, I watched the 11 o’clock news on KABC, channel 7, and was pleased when I saw my face on the screen, but then was very disappointed, when neither my words, nor my sign (calling attention to the issue of Fatherlessness and Gang violence), made it into the report.  I’m certainly pleased there’s at least some structure in place in Los Angeles to address the frightening dilemma of gang crime and violence, but I’m very discouraged that so little effort is being expended to promote meaningful roles and relationships for Fathers in their children’s lives.  No men’s commissions, men’s studies programs, or offices of men’s health exist anywhere to work for such things.  Los Angeles has a long way to go, IMO, before it can effectively address Fatherlessness in families as a major cause of gang crimes in Los Angeles.  The first thing Los Angeles has to do is recognize that the connection exists.

http://www.ncfmla.org/ncfmla-flyer.pdf

Society pays a huge price for this gender bias. Fatherlessness is the leading predictor of crime in a community. The less time a child spends with his/her dad the more likely the child will drop out of school, commit crime, abuse drugs or alcohol, become pregnant or commit suicide. (Warren Farrell, Ph.D., “Father and Child
Reunion.”)

The fierce determination of the eagle shown through in our nation’s capitol.  They came from near and far, some as far away as Canada to answer the calling to defend our sacred memorials on March 17, 2007 from anti-war protesters who have been known to get out of control in recent marches. 

Ordinary Americans supporting the troops, and proud Vets from past and present wars, met up in Washington D.C. under the banner of the Gathering of Eagles.  Approximately 30,000 Eagles came together to show that the voice of the silent majority, those who support the troops and their mission, must be heard! 

Of course we all knew that the mainstream media had no intention of covering the Eagles event, only anti-war protesters. They called the Eagles the “opposition”, “the other side”, or “demonstrations” being held near Memorials, but they did not go into specifics about the Eagles.

That is the sort of attitude in the media Blue Star Mom Deborah Johns, and the rest of the Move America Forward family spoke of during their caravan stop in Memphis March 13, 2007.  Johns spoke about how disgusted she is with the way the leftist media depicts the war, and that the entire truth is not being told.

Note: The Move America Forward group started their caravan in San Francisco March 8, 2007 and planned to reach D.C. March 17, 2007 to join the Eagles. Their theme, “These Colors Don’t Run” traversed with them through several states, stopping along the way to collect flags to display at the memorials and to hand to military families in a show of support. Many people, some families, joined them as they made their way across the country.

It is evident by the fact that the media only chose to cover anti-war protests, that they have a bias. A HUGE showing of 30,000 Eagles didn’t even get their attention!

The Gathering of Eagles was to me, an historic event. Even as the Move America Forward caravan passed through the Memphis area, local media was barely present. However, many from radio and quite a few bloggers including Freerepublic.com, BlueCollarRepublican.com, and Alpha Patriot showed and documented the event enthusiastically.

As a reporter for the Mid-South Patriot newspaper, I was honored to see these fine Americans come to Bartlett, a suburb of Memphis, to talk of their brave family members who have served in Iraq. 

The Move America Forward organization, other military personnel, patriotic families, and the Rolling Thunder Motorcycle group, stopped at Coletta’s Italian Restaurant in Bartlett to mingle and talk.  A press conference was held at noon amidst the threat of rain. However, everyone pressed on with the saying of the Pledge of Allegiance and a quick prayer. A heavy downpour began as the prayer commenced, but people stayed intact. Afterwards, the Move America Forward crew urged everyone to file towards the restaurant’s overhang to say a few words.

Among the speakers were Blue Star mom Deborah Johns and Gold Star mom Debra Argel-Bastian, who spoke emphatically about the need to support our troops. 

The military moms were in sync in saying that, “Our military are counting on us” and that they need funding.

In countering the liberal media’s lies, Deborah Lee said that her son, who served as a Navy seal, wants everyone to know of the Iraqi people, ”they want us there.”

After the speeches, flags were collected from attendees to go with the caravan to D.C. to be flown during the Gathering of Eagles rally, placed at the Vietnam Memorial, and given to military families.

Then everyone headed inside Coletta’s for some Italian food.  It was a great time meeting and talking with those who had joined along the way and was in full support of the mission to D.C., which was to ultimately uplift the troops and to tell them that their job is not in vain. 

Our troops are watching all that is occurring back home, so let’s not disappoint them. If we should lend an ear to anyone, it should be the family members of the fallen and our troops serving.  In this case, the mothers of the fallen (other than Cindy Sheehan) DESERVE to be heard! 

Despite the rain, approximately 70 people showed for the Memphis rally. 

The Memphis rally and the D.C. Gathering of Eagles pro-troops rally was peaceful unlike recent protests from the anti-war crowd.

Blog sites like Littlegreenfootballs.com are abuzz with news of an anti-war rally in Portland, OR in which protesters burned an American Flag and an American Soldier in effigy! That’s NOT what I’d call supporting the troops ( http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24853_Leftists_Supporting_the_Troops&only )!

Those who supported and attended the Gathering of Eagles pro-troop rally, the ordinary Americans are the true patriots who stand behind our troops 100%. Others who rant on the anti-war crowd side like to cause trouble, and many of them do not like this country. They do not like our troops.

Anti-war protesters are also very good at vandalizing, defacing, and resorting to violence when they do not get their way… as in another case of a window that was destroyed in the building of an Army Recruiting office in Milwaukee ( http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/6585292.html ).

I don’t need to say more. It’s enough to make one vomit considering the sacrifices our military men and women have had to endure just so that we have the freedom to assemble and voice our opinions.

But in staying positive, I want to say, proud Americans stood at the Vietnam Memorial and at various Memorials in D.C. with American flags and in silence, stood by their fallen comrades. In that, they sent a loud message, they accomplished their goal! 

The Eagles, America’s patriotic, will not hesitate to come together and make their petition for the respect of our military if needed. And March 17th will not be the last time!

Important Links:

Pictures from the Move America Forward caravan stop in Memphis, TN (scroll down):

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/benamon/070322

Photo of a fraction of the Gathering of Eagles Group in D.C.:

http://gatheringofeagles.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/goe-rally.jpg

Gathering of Eagles website:

www.gatheringofeagles.org

Move America Forward website:

www.moveamericaforward.org

Rolling Thunder National Organization Headquarters website:

http://rollingthunder1.com/  

Berlin Residents to protect monuments:

http://www.newbritainherald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18087941&BRD=1641&PAG=461&dept_id=572377&rfi=6

Other Links:

Sponsors of the Move America Forward rally in Memphis:

Rolling Thunder Chapter V Motorcycle Group:

www.rollingthundertnv.com

Coletta’s Italian Restaurant:

www.colettasrestaurant.com

Mid-South Patriot:

www.freewebs.com/midsouth-patriot

*Felicia (Fee) Benamon is a political columnist who writes for various conservative sites including RenewAmerica.us, Michnews.com, Daley-Times Post, Renaissance Women ( http://www.rwnetwork.net/ ) , Capitolhillcoffeehouse.com, TheConservativeVoice.com, Mensnewsdaily.com, ConservativeCrusader.com, and other news sites like AmericanChronicle.com.  She is a columnist and a reporter for the Mid-South Patriot ( www.freewebs.com/midsouth-patriot ) in Memphis, TN.  Felicia hails from a military background, and has been politically active since the 2000 elections. She has been a guest speaker on several conservative internet radio shows, most recently KFNX News talk radio in Arizona with Clancy Jayne ( www.insidepoliticswithclancyjayne.com ).  

 

You may email Felicia: Feereports@aol.com  

I have been reading David Horowitz’s new book, Indoctrination U and have found many of the observations in parallel with my own experiences in taxpayer funded, American institutions of higher education - especially in the area of taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs.In My Opinion:

The prejudice and discrimination that is allowed to be preached and practiced in taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs across America is astounding.

Perhaps the demonstration in front of a California University with a taxpayer funded, women’s studies program (included at the end of this article) will add some graphic perspective to problems that exist today in taxpayer funded women’s studies programs.

The two photos at the very end are taken in front of a California Police Station, and a California City Hall.   Those two photos are meant to emphasize how the misandry, taught in taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs, has transformed into so much bad social policy and law.   Many taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs, in addition to teaching, also offer internships to students to train and lobby in Washington, D.C.   Therefore, if you don’t consider taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs a religion, then just consider them a taxpayer funded political party.   You know how it works in a Stalinist country’s politics, where all those lines are very blurred.   Well, that’s the model taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs in America aspire to.

There are approximately 52 taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs in California and none for men.   There are hundreds of classes taught in those programs, if not thousands.   How again, is that supposed to work under Title IX?   Somebody please explain that to me.

Patriarchy Theory (a foundation block of taxpayer funded, women’s studies):

# It can be shown that men are indeed oppressed in numerous ways and not all receipients of some vast Patriarchal network’s endless benevolence to all men.   Where then, is the universal “male privilege” that taxpayer funded, women’s studies advocates have been touting?

# It can be shown that the vast majority of men are not members of a Patriarchal conspiracy to oppress all women.  Where then, is any justification for the vilification of all males that has been rampant in taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs?

# The concept of Patriarchy as taught in taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs is flawed to the core, and does not consider men as individual human beings as our United States Constitution intends.   Taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs blatantly violate the human rights of every individual American male.

Taxpayer funded, women’s studies programs are not content to exist just within the women’s studies discipline, or even the liberal arts dept.   Taxpayer funded, women’s studies activists are constantly lobbying academic administration to have their curriculums integrated into the curriculums of many disciplines, where it seems oddly out of place - Geography, Physics, Mathematics, etc., etc., etc.  Where is the academic freedom of individual departments to ”choose,” what goes into their own disciplines, based on their own scholarly expertise?

Taxpayer funded women’s studies programs have justified teaching from the woman’s perspective, in the women’s studies discipline, because (in their words) ”women’s studies is about women.”   Yet when women’s studies advocates lobby academic administration to integrate (foist) taxpayer funded women’s studies curriculum into other disciplines, the taxpayer funded women’s studies curriculum does not change.   It does not include the oppression of men.   It does not show ways in which women have many privileges in our society that men do not enjoy.  It does not talk honestly about domestic violence committed against men by women, or the absences of shelters and services for men.  It does not talk about the horrendous number of child fatalities attributed to women by HHS, nor lobby for remedy, etc., etc., etc.

Taxpayer funded, women’s studies curriculum cannot withstand objective,   logical,  methodical,  analysis and remain valid.   Even though “women’s ways of knowing” professes to be a valid form of “knowing,” the contradictions and factual inaccuracies resultant from its “research” appear to me to be damning indictments of such a “fuzzy,” unsound methodology - so why is this apparent “taxpayer funded, hate movement,” (vilifying all men) still in existence anywhere in America’s college and university systems?

Taxpayer funded, gender feminist, women’s studies curriculum is not fit to be accredited for teaching in any college  or university class anywhere in America, IMO!

 

Concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by:

Gore: 19; Bush: 29

Square miles of land won by:

Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by:

Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:

Gore: 13.2; Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Gore’s territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…”

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The left wing of the Democrat party, lead by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), has introduced a bill to form the swell sounding U.S. Dept. of Peace.

This would be a cabinet-level position, with a Secretary of Peace, Undersecretary of Peace, and dozens upon dozens of other officials, each with a staff of their own. The starting budget will be only eight thousand million dollars ($8 billion), and will grow only as fast as everything else at the federal level.

According to a presentation attended by The Uninvited Ombudsman, the new Dept. will avoid the usual bureaucratic waste and inefficiency because it will be, “an umbrella group” absorbing other agencies, and “it will be streamlined and efficient.” Why other federal agencies can’t also operate that way was unexplained. The Dept. will be better than a private operation, a non-profit, or a think tank, organizers are sure.

Promoters are quick to point out that the Dept. of Peace will “research, facilitate and articulate peaceful nonviolent solutions to conflict.” They are less quick to point out that the new Dept. will have policy making powers, social engineering programs, indoctrinations for school children called “educational programs,” enforcement powers, and more, in its 5,000-word enabling statute, HR 808.

As currently written, the Dept. of Defense will have to confer with the Dept. of Peace before it can do anything. It was not clear from the discussions if any of the bill’s supporters have read the bill.

Not to overlook an opportunity for backdoor gun control, the Peace Dept. will, “(5) analyze existing policies, employ successful, field-tested programs, and develop new approaches for dealing with the implements of violence, including gun-related violence and the overwhelming presence of handguns.”

The reason the lamestream media missed this story are unclear.

Apologies friends and fans –

I must have been half asleep –

let me start with the easy errors,

and progress to the more involved issues:

WRONG:

“1- Second Circuit Court Ends D.C. Gun Ban”

RIGHT:

1- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Ends D.C. Gun Ban

WRONG:

“By now you’ve probably heard that the federal 2nd Circuit Court has overturned…”

RIGHT:

By now you’ve probably hard that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned… [the 2nd Circuit is up New England way.]

WRONG:

“Congress could care less.”

RIGHT:

Syndicated radio host Tom Gresham of Gun Talk notes — Alan, this means the opposite of what you wanted to say. This means that Congress cares. You mean to say that Congress could NOT care less. It’s common usage, but it means the opposite of the intended meaning. Thanks for being on the show Sunday. As always, you did a great job. Tom

http://www.guntalk.com/site.php

WRONG:

“The case is named after Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer.”

[Dumbest error of them all. Sheesh.]

RIGHT:

“Parker v. DC” is named after Shelly Parker, an African-American woman who lives in DC and had her life threatened by local thugs. I knew that. Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer was one of the six D.C. residents in the case who argued for the right to defend themselves in their homes.

WRONG:

“The Cato Institute… lead this successful charge.”

RIGHT:

The Cato Institute does not litigate. It does occasionally file amicus briefs, but did not in this case, didn’t fund it, and made no arguments. This was a personal project by Cato scholar Robert A. Levy, who paid expenses out of his pocket, and had legal assistance from colleagues. Lead counsel Alan Gura worked for small compensation and co-counsel Clark Neily worked pro bono. Cato was supportive on the issues, and weighed in with the media, but was only indirectly connected to the case.

PLUS:

An NBC correspondent objected to how I characterized their coverage of the case (”I fear your recent note did not fairly represent the story I did for NBC News”). The quote attributed to NBC came directly from the caption at the top of their website story, with the glum-faced DC mayor all upset. Admittedly their story did go further than the single item I used. On the other hand, they didn’t lead with jubilant civil rights advocates who were jumping for joy nationwide, now that the tyrannical decades-long repression of basic human rights had been lifted.

In that sense, the NBC coverage was remarkably similar to the other networks and mainstream outlets — a similarity that leads many in the public to wonder about their independence of thought. Why do mainstream stories have such a uniform slant, which so often does not harmonize with what the public thinks?

Note to correspondent — I don’t recall seeing any reports from NBC on armed self defense, even though by all accounts these occur frequently in America; yet I frequently see isolated criminal acts involving guns from remote areas of the country on national news. This leads many to believe NBC has a bias against all the good that guns do — saving lives, stopping crime, family enjoyment and the rest. How would you respond to that claim?

Aaron Zelman, the head of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership asked for a public apology, and here it is. They are definitely not “shouting from the rooftops with joy” as I indicated by batching them with other gun-rights advocates who are. They are keenly aware of the downsides of the decision, and the huge potential damage an appeal could cause. Check them out here: http://www.jpfo.org. And Aaron, let’s not overlook the court’s reliance on permit schemes instead of rights, easy acceptance of onerous conditions like mandated training and registrations, reasoned discussion of the bogus individual/collectivist subterfuge, and the severe limit of the decision to people only in their homes.

Author and scholar Dave Hardy observes:

“And the dissent is … weird. It doesn’t say there is no individual right, it says the right doesn’t apply in DC because it was meant to protect states against federal tyranny and DC is not a State. If that sounds rather nonsensical … well, that’s the best I can read it.”

Syndicated columnist Vin Suprynowicz notes:

Unfortunately, ALL THREE judges ruled there’s no right to keep and bear arms. Yes, yes, I know two of them SAID there’s a fundamental individual right. They then proceeded to instruct D.C. to issue the plaintiff a PERMIT to own and carry a weapon, but ONLY IN HIS OWN HOUSE. How can you issue a PERMIT to exercise a RIGHT? Got your Freedom of Religion Permit? Don’t try to use it outside your own house, now!

I have to agree with Vin, and have been a long-time foe of all the permit schemes so willingly embraced by gun-rights advocates everywhere. See, for example, “Reciprocity Schemes.” The question before us is one of incrementalism, and politics being the art of the possible. We can, like libertarian purists do, stand on perfect philosophical grounds and be crushed, or stand by and watch politicos of every stripe do battle in the belly of the beast and gather up what crumbs may fall. Yeah, mixed metaphor. And a tough call. For complaints on that point, please place finger in electrical outlet.

Item (6) about the gun lobby being less than unified on the merits of this case (and that’s putting it nicely) will be explored in a story under development (not by me), and I’ll let you know when there is news.

And finally, news media everywhere characterized this as a battle between the “individual rights” and “collective rights” interpretations of the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The New York Times: “unconstitutional on the ground that the Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals, as opposed to the collective rights of state militias.”

That is a fallacious, underhanded and preposterous deception, because the “collective rights” nonsense was invented late last century solely as a way to attack this basic human right. Into the 1960s nearly every high school in NYT’s home turf had a firing range and rifle team, and there was virtually no debate on whether you had a right to arms — it’s a new concoction (but why let that stop the Gray Lady).

Attorney Stephen Halbrook’s extensive historical research lead him to this interesting conclusion:

“In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the ‘collective’ right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of ‘the people’ to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 states such a thesis. The phrase ‘the people’ meant the same thing in the Second Amendment as it did in the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments — that is, each and every free person.”

In further research he discovered:

The “collective rights” theory originated in U.S. v. Tot, (1943). The historical references in Tot simply do not support its thesis. See Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed 189-191 (1984): http://www.gunlaws.com/books3.htm. Subsequent cases merely string cite to earlier cases which are ultimately traceable to Tot. http://www.gunlaws.com/SCGC-News.html.

Stephen’s work is just SO good.

And thanks, y’all, for your patience with me.

The lamestream media told you:

The first 100 hours of Congress under Democrat rule was amazing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

You weren’t told much about Congress under the second 100 hours, confirming critics’ fears that the media only reports what the government tells it to report.

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The rumored “assault-weapon” ban expected from Democrats in Congress has been introduced as HR 1022. It is a 2,000-word general firearms ban and “gun control” (disarmament) proposal that has little to do with the now expired “assault-weapon” category invented under president Clinton in 1994.

The bill controls vast inventories of existing firearms by redefining them as “assault weapons.” Assault, as The Uninvited Ombudsman has noted previously, is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware.

From the standpoints of the civil right to arms or crime control, the bill is a travesty in direct violation of the Constitution, and a violation of the oath of office of any legislator who supports it. No action against any of the perpetrators is expected.

The bill attacks by name some of America’s most basic, traditional firearms: The Colt AR-15, the M-1 carbine, the Ruger 10-22 and the Thompson, and classic import models like the SKS, AK, FN/FAL, Steyr AUG, Uzi, Galil and many more.

More than 60 firearms are named for the ban (Clinton’s bill named 19), but few autoloaders could escape the proposal: it includes most semi-auto magazine-fed pistols, and rifles with a “grip,” which basically excludes nothing. (This is hidden for rifles by referring to a “forward grip,” but that’s later defined as anything that works as a “pistol grip,” which is then defined later as anything “that can function as a grip.”) It’s as sneaky as any language I have ever seen.

To make sure nothing is omitted from the controls, the Attorney General is granted unrestricted power to include virtually anything else, disguised with “sporting purposes” language. All semi-auto shotguns are also banned.

New conditions for background checks, private sales, children, magazines, imports and more are included in this “assault-weapon” bill. Read it yourself, the language is fairly plain, by entering “HR 1022″ here.

CONTENTS

1- Court Restores Gun Rights to D.C. (insider analysis)

2- News Media Non-plussed Over Restoration of Rights

3- “Supreme Court Gun Cases” Book Named to All-Time Top Ten List

4- Gun Sales Up, Gov’t Tax Revenue Increases

5- Gun Ownership Up But Firearm Fatalities Hit Record Lows

6- “Sudden Jihadi Syndrome” Identified

1- Second Circuit Court Ends D.C. Gun Ban (insider analysis)

By now you’ve probably heard that the federal 2nd Circuit Court has overturned the firearms ban in Washington, D.C. It’s a glorious decision, accurately reflects reality about the Second Amendment’s Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and vigorously supports the individual right to arms enjoyed by Americans everywhere. It could hardly be better in the battle to defend firearm rights. Details on the court’s decision are posted all over the web, try this one from the main sponsor in the case, The Cato Institute.

Or see the decision yourself.

And there was rejoicing throughout the land…, but how about a dose of reality, and what this landmark decision really means –

(1) This decision won’t stop the antis.

Anti-rights activists will take heart in the lone dissent, just as you would. They will be no more deterred by this case than you would be if the decision said D.C. residents have no rights at all (as other courts in other areas have said). The ultimate battle for the right to arms will be fought in the court of public opinion, where the news media holds inordinate sway (and slant).

(2) The news media will ignore the facts and continue to bash your rights.

It’s business as usual for the anti-gun-rights mainstream media. They’re afraid of guns, hate gun owners, don’t know what “the good side of guns” means, and will continue filling their reports with anti-rights bigotry, crime and distortion in their battle to disarm the public. If a case works against the public’s rights, they’ll headline it. For a case like this that accurately reflects history and protects your rights, they’ll focus on whining authorities and tell you to prepare for doom in the streets. See the detailed analysis of their trash, below.

(3) One-third of the court said you do not have an individual right to arms.

This defies tons of scholarly work now available that establishes the intent and history of the individual right to keep and bear arms in this country, but that won’t stop ideologically driven court characters. The dissent does agree with other anti-rights decisions, and the antis will rely on this. We only “won” by a single vote. They only lost by a single vote.

(4) It’s probably too risky for the antis to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court.

They may ask for a re-hearing from the Second Circuit “en banc,” meaning from all the judges, not just the three-judge panel that reached this decision. They will count votes BEFORE they seek an appeal, and if the think they MIGHT win, they will ask, since they have nothing more to lose.

But let me be a complete skeptic here for a minute: The contents of this case WILL NOT MATTER at the Supreme Court. Insiders already know where the Justices stand on support of your right to arms. Four men stand four-square in favor of the truth on the issue — you have an individual right to arms — Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito. The other five are hard lefties, or a mixed bag, and this case of itself (or another one) won’t change their philosophy — Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter, and Kennedy and Stevens.

This makes an appeal to the Supremes too risky for the losers at this time, and since we “won,” we have no standing to file the appeal. That would change if an “en banc” decision reversed the three-judge panel. Would you risk it if the choice was yours? The Circuits are now strongly split, which the Supremes look for before taking a case. They also estimate where the case will wind up before accepting an appeal. No one really knows what they will do.

(5) The smart choice for the antis is to wait for 2008 and then destroy gun rights.

They are aware of this of course. If the anti-rights forces, largely Democrats though with a good share of Republicans and quislings, take greater control of Congress or the White House, THAT’S the time to finally wipe out this pesky right the people currently have, and have always had. Stack the Court and push through their agenda. Calmer voices on the left are arguing to lay low, do nothing, and wait for the right time to pounce. Fortunately, their radical wing is impatient and pushing for severe actions right away, afraid they may never have a better chance. It’s a drama.

(6) Certain elements of the gun lobby fought AGAINST this case.

Gun-rights advocates are not as unified as you might wish they were. Fear, uncertainty and conflicting agendas fought against this successful effort, a success not lead by the usual suspects. The Cato Institute and others lead this successful charge (the case is named after Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer).

Within the gun lobby, powerful forces wanted the case dropped, and sought to overturn the D.C. ban in Congress — which would have made this case moot. The case was delayed and harmed while that activity took place behind the scenes. Orrin Hatch (among many others) tried to derail the case by getting a bill through Congress, but he was unable to do so.

(7) D.C. is not a state so the precedent is indeed low.

That’s one reason some power brokers argued against the case — it doesn’t set a national precedent. Fooey. Everyone — pro and anti — is too scared of losing to go after a full-blown national decision. That made the D.C. case ideal if you ask me — get a great decision (which we did), and then argue over how important it is. The sole dissent argued that the Second Amendment doesn’t even apply because D.C. is not a state. The majority’s reply: fooey; they’re Americans like the rest of us (though sometimes the beltway crowd makes you wonder).

(8) The big legal issue will not be over whether a right to arms exists, it’s how far the right goes.

A definitive ruling against RKBA would have people rioting out in the streets, and is just too far from the record to support. What’s much more likely is some definition on the limits of the right. All rights have limits — you know, your right to swing your arms stops at the tip of my nose, you can’t shout Fire! in a crowded theater.

The Second Circuit left that door open, and that’s where this battle is headed. The “news” media made a point of concocting limits that might apply (see the analysis below). The court said registration might be OK.

(9) Thanks to this decision, the media will renew their overhype of criminal activity.

As soon as Bob Levy at the Cato Institute sent me a note, right after the decision was released, saying in red, “We won!” I wrote back predicting that the media would run stories like “Authorities Brace For Crime Wave,” “Local Court Sides With Crooks, Ignores Precedents,” and “‘Gun Nuts Will Run Wild,’ Says Some Police Spokeswoman.” Sure enough, they did. If you get email you’ve already seen the flood — civil rights groups like NRA, GOA, SAF, JPFO and state groups shouting hooray, and every mainstream outlet singing the blues.

(10) Congress could care less.

There will be zero effect on anti-rights proposals for gun owners from the Democrat-controlled Congress (main Dem gun-ban plan summarized here).

If anything, they will step up their efforts to counter the tidal wave of court and scholarly support for your right to self defense, personal safety, crime control, counterbalance to government, self sufficiency, terrorism deterrence (see Sudden Jihadi Syndrome below), sport, fun, recreation, competition, and all the other good things guns represent that government, on principle, prefers to deny.

If ever there was a motivator to join the rights groups locally and nationally, and to do something, anything, to help preserve traditional America and your gun rights, this is it.

Links for national groups

The Cato Institute

Easy ways to have fun while getting active

THE BIG Q:

(11) Now that D.C. residents can have guns at home, how will they get them?

Don’t count on gun stores opening in the nation’s capitol any time soon. And it’s been illegal to buy a handgun outside your home state of residence since 1968 (under the Gun Control Act). Will nearby Virginia and Maryland gun stores sell sidearms to people whose ID says Washington, D.C.? It’s anyone’s guess, and the law, as near as I can tell, is not real clear on the point. Would you risk your FFL to sell to some decent-looking individual whose rights are now reaffirmed by some court somewhere out of state? How about to some sleazy-looking character in rags?

So D.C. residents now have (pending appeals, if any, I suppose) the right to keep a loaded sidearm at home, for personal safety, crime deterrence and self defense, but they have no predictable way of getting one. How’s that for a fine mess of stew.

And remember, this ruling has no impact whatsoever on the thousands of vicious armed criminals and drug gangs running free, who are unaffected by and could care less about the 1976 ban or this case. All they have to care about now, maybe, is that their victims may not be as defenseless as they have been for so many years. Now THERE’S a deterrent.

2- News Media Non-plussed Over Restoration of Rights

While much of the nation was jubilant on hearing that civil rights were finally restored for residents of Washington D.C., where the right to keep and bear arms has been denied since an edict in 1976, news media everywhere reported the story as if the civilized world was ending.

“This slanted reporting contributes to the destruction of news credibility, and is forcing an exodus from mainstream outlets to anything else in sight,” said Alan Korwin, an author and news-media observer who runs the media watchblog, pagenine.org.

Headlines in alternative media proclaimed, “We Won!,” “Victory at Court,” “A Victory for Self Defense,” and “Civil Rights Restored for Washington, D.C.” though the leads in mainstream “news” media were sour across the board and featured pictures of glum looking officials (whose right to arms was never affected). Here’s a brief look at the propaganda promoted by some mainstream sources.

CBS:

In a bizarre imitation of providing “balance,” CBS ran a single quote from the NRA:

“Washington’s ban on owning handguns went into effect in 1976 and is considered to be the toughest in the nation, according to the National Rifle Association.”

Meanwhile, the NRA told its members:

“This week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right and concluded that the District of Columbia’s ban on guns in the home is unconstitutional.”

NBC:

In covering this news, NBC featured the officials responsible for denying people’s rights:

“After the District of Columbia’s long-standing ban on handguns was overturned by a federal appeals court, Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty, far left, speaks about his disapproval of the court decision during a news conference.”

Meanwhile, civil rights activist Larry Pratt at Gun Owners of America told the country by email:

“For 31 years, the DC gun ban has been the criminal classes best friend. DC victims have been legally disarmed and helpless in the face of savagery from home invaders and street assailants… The Court has provided a lengthy and well-reasoned rebuke to those who have willfully misinterpreted what the Second Amendment protects — an individual right to keep and bear arms.”

AP:

The Associated Press, one of the most anti-gun-rights outfits around, told the world:

“D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said the city plans to appeal. ‘I am personally, deeply disappointed and quite frankly outraged,’ Fenty said… In 2004, a lower-court judge told six city residents that they did not have a constitutional right to own handguns… Judge Karen Henderson dissented, writing that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a state.”

Noting that the decision recognized some “reasonable restrictions” might be possible, AP listed some: Restrictions might include gun registration, firearms testing to promote public safety or restrictions on gun ownership for criminals or those deemed mentally ill.

Meanwhile, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms summarized the decision:

“Judge Silberman properly concludes what gun rights scholars have been saying for years,” Executive Director Joe Waldron observed. “The Second Amendment is not some mythical “collective right,” but an individual civil right equal to rights guaranteed to individual citizens under the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments.”

VPC:

The widely media-quoted gun-ban lobbyists at the curiously named “Violence Policy Center” said:

“Today’s split decision by the Court of Appeals to overturn the District of Columbia’s handgun ban is not only contrary to the overwhelming weight of legal authority, but will certainly increase gun death and injury among District residents and increase the risks faced by the law enforcement personnel who protect all residents and workers in Washington, DC.”

Author Alan Korwin notes that:

“Saying the ban ‘contradicts overwhelming legal authority’ is flat out incorrect. Saying the decision ‘will certainly increase gun death’ is provocative hysteria, but might be true if they’re referring to criminal perpetrators who will be stopped by honest residents of D.C. Saying that restoring rights to innocent residents of D.C. will ‘increase the risks faced by the law enforcement personnel’ is patently false and shows the irrational hoplophobic mindset of the gun-ban lobby.”

It should also be noted that the risk faced by law enforcement personnel from countless wild-eyed criminals running loose remains unchanged.

For good measure, VPC concluded that:

“While today’s decision is a dream come true for America’s gun lobby and gunmakers, it may mark the beginning of a long, national nightmare from which we will never recover as nation.”

If nationwide restoration of civil rights is their nightmare, we can only hope they are correct.

Court:

The Second Circuit Court said, “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.”

Meanwhile, news outlets singled out all sorts of quotes, but not that one. AP (and their 1,100 followers) used this point of clarity: “are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia.” They are such slithery bottom feeders.

3- Supreme Court Gun Cases Book Makes All-Time Top Ten

672-Page Tome Set Record Straight

“The New York Times has never issued a list of top ten books in this category, and never will,” said Scottsdale author Alan Korwin, on hearing that his book, Supreme Court Gun Cases, was in the top 10 “must-read” books on the civil right to keep and bear arms.

Korwin co-wrote the book with attorneys David Kopel and Stephen Halbrook in 2003. The list appears in the March edition of the 600,000-circulation America’s First Freedom, a publication of the National Rifle Association.

“It took six years to finish the first complete study of Supreme Court jurisprudence on this subject,” Korwin said, “and it broke new ground. It destroyed the myth that the High Court has been quiet on the subject.”

Using plain English, the book examines 92 gun cases, which use some form of the word “firearm” more than 2,900 times (rifle, shotgun, pistol, etc.). Before its release, scholars and the media believed there were less than a dozen gun cases. “The Court has consistently recognized an individual right to keep arms and to bear arms, for more than two centuries,” Korwin discovered.

Some of the cases read like novels, with drunken bullies, hotel brawls, blood feuds, property wars, international criminals, family battles, corrupt judges, murderous jailers, abusive parents, vendettas, infidelity, a mutiny and shootouts of every description.

http://www.gunlaws.com/supreme.htm

4- Gun Sales Up, Gov’t Tax Revenue Increases

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (nssf.org) reports that:

Manufacturers See Increase In Third Quarter

Sales by gun and ammunition manufacturers grew by 7.8 percent in the third quarter of 2006 compared to the same period a year earlier, according to the firearm industry’s best economic indicator — the federal excise tax collection report. Excise taxes are a percentage of wholesale receipts, paid quarterly by firearm and ammunition manufacturers to federal tax collectors, and earmarked for state wildlife conservation and habitat restoration programs.

From July through September, sales of pistols and revolvers were up 25.7 percent, while ammo sales increased 15.7 percent over 2005. During the quarter, $65 million was generated for conservation, compared to $60.3 million in 2005. The latest tax collections suggest overall sales of $603.5 million during the quarter, not including retail markup or final retail sales.

Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax Collections

Third Quarter 2006 (July - September)

Handguns $13,154,775.76

Long Guns $25,201,242.36

Ammunition $26,716,420.50

Total $65,072,438.62

Third Quarter 2005 (July - September)

Handguns $10,461,323.27

Long Guns $26,769,971.86

Ammunition $23,088,926.61

Total $60,320,221.74

Source: U.S. Department of Treasury

5- Gun Ownership Up But Firearm Fatalities Hit Record Lows

More than 99% of all accidents unrelated to firearms

NEWTOWN, Conn. A new report from the National Safety Council shows that accidental firearm-related fatalities remain at record lows, and accidents involving youths continue to decline significantly. The downward trends are occurring even as firearm ownership rises in the U.S., and was not reported by mainstream news outlets for some reason.

The decline is supported by research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), typically an anti-gun-rights advocacy group. According to the CDC, in the past decade, all four regions of the U.S. have witnessed dramatic declines in the number of accidental firearm-related fatalities.

Statistics in the council’s 2007 “Injury Facts” report show a 40 percent decrease in accidental firearm-related fatalities over a 10-year period ending in 2005. The report also shows firearm-related accidents involving children ages 14 and under declined 69 percent between 1995 and 2003.

The council’s most recent statistics show 109,277 U.S. residents died in accidents of all types in 2005. Less than 1 percent involved firearms.

The most common deadly accidents involved motor vehicles, poisonings and falls, claiming 75 percent of all accidental deaths. Poisonings and falls, which represent a true threat to an American’s safety are not covered by news outlets because they are not considered “sexy” enough.

“Programs and efforts that communicate the importance of firearms safety have undeniably played a part in bringing these numbers to record lows, and continuing that awareness will only help ensure they continue downward,” Doug Painter, NSSF president said.

The likelihood of publicizing safety issues where the other 99% of accidents occur is not good, if current news media priorities are any measure.

The estimated number of citizen-owned firearms in the United States, widely recognized as the linchpin of freedom on the planet, has risen to more than 290 million.

6- “Sudden Jihadi Syndrome” Identified

Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, has recognized that Muslim fanatics do not have to join a “club” to commit horrific acts against innocent individuals, and argues that public possession of firearms needs to expand to meet this growing deadly threat.

“Convinced that they will go to heaven if they die killing infidels (who Mohammed taught his followers to hate), some Muslims don’t bother joining al Qaeda or some other organized band of thugs. They get so filled with hatred from hearing Islamic sermons and visiting jihadi web sites that they decide to become freelance jihadis.

“Politically correct spokesmen for the FBI and other agencies seem to be under orders to issue a denial that an SJS-related murder could possibly have anything to do with Islam. The rest of the population should come to grips with the fact that many in America are susceptible to SJS. The best antidote for many SJS-related acts of terrorism is a bullet fired from the gun of a prospective victim.”

Pratt has compiled a long list of Islam-inspired freelance murderers, argues that that SJS is a reality, and that, “rational Americans should be prepared to deliver the most effective known antidote - a bullet administered at the first sign of an

outbreak of SJS.”

See the entire list and discussion here.

The Utah jihadi described in Page Nine here, for example, had no carry permit of course, but carried his weapons to the scene of the crime concealed anyway. “Why should the laws make it harder for the rest of us to counter what criminals are already doing?” Pratt asks. “Our current restrictions on concealed carry in most states facilitate murder by tying the hands of victims. The law should be on our side, not on the side of the bad guys.”

America is and has been flirting with danger.  Our country is suffering from a slow death from within. All one has to do is look around to the constant onslaught of far left secular and progressive activism aimed at destroying the traditions of Americans. The veracity to which this is being carried out is in tune to communism, atheistic, and anti-American beliefs.  It’s everywhere it seems.

So many examples of this have occurred recently that I can barely keep up.  Anti-Americanism has even seeped into the comic strips.  Captain America, a classic American icon in the comic book world has drawn his last breath, for now at least. It’s particularly telling how he dies. The iconic hero is shot down by a sniper as he leaves a courthouse. It’s not a particularly noble way to die.

In Captain America’s heyday, he was known for kicking some communist and Nazi butt, now; he’s been removed from the comic scene.  Such an admired American comic hero, who has been around since 1941, is no longer.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070307/ap_on_en_ot/captain_america

This may seem like a minute detail in the fight to drag down America, but it is a further example of how attitudes towards America have changed.  All one needs to do is read between the lines.

Christianity and traditions related to the faith continue to suffer attacks. If it weren’t the recent insidious mention that Jesus’ tomb and coffin has been found, add these headlines to the list:

• The United States Mint Pressroom:  United States Mint Unveils Designs of New Circulating Presidential $1 Coins …Historic Change On The Way ( http://www.usmint.gov/pressroom/index.cfm?flash=yes&action=press_release&ID=722 ) ”In God We Trust” has been systematically removed off the face of the new $1 Presidential coins and instead, put on the edge of the coins.  God is now being pushed to the outside edge of our currency. Disgraceful. Many conservatives, who found out about the new coins, share my view in that regard. Because of the Presidential Coin Act of 2005, the coins will feature 4 presidents a year, until the year 2016. So the goal of the US Treasury is to push these coins in mass quantity on the general public, a flawed bunch of coins in my opinion. It remains to be seen if the public will take to them or brush them aside.  

• Walter Cronkite endorses Campaign to Force Christianity out of U.S. Public Life : US “First Amendment First” Campaign Targets Churches, Religious Groups ( http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/feb/07022803.html ).  I guess some view the influence of conservatives or the “religious right” as a threat. And that requires some restraints on the church or conservatives to be politically involved. They forget, we are Americans also, and have a right to freedom of speech. No one complains when Democrats use churches as their political pulpit, but let a conservative start talking about social issues that affect our nation, people are ready to scream.

• 9th Circuit endorses censoring Christians: Ruling says ‘family values’ is hate speech that scares city workers ( http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54587 ). This ruling is so absurd; it’s not really worth commenting on. Just tell me how “family values”,”marriage”, and “natural family” cause someone to freak out?! This is unnecessary!

• Chaplain who prayed ‘in Jesus’ name’ to fight: Says he wants to return to Navy to worship according to conscience ( http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54517 ). As he SHOULD be able to do! If our own troops are being targeted for praying in Jesus’ name, what does that say about our society? Our troops fight and die for our freedom of religion. Shall we not honor that and allow them to pray as they have done always?

• College conservative settles over firing ( http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070305-113012-8524r.htm ). Fired for expressing his beliefs and wanting a more balanced view on campus?!  It’s come to this!

• School prayer: Suspensions grab national attention ( http://www.newhouse.com/controversy-over-school-prayer-suspensions-grabs-national-attention.html ). Students, who gathered in a well populated area to pray, defying school administrators, are suspended!  Their intent was to bless the school, and instead, they are met with a hassle.  This all goes back to freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Speech that surely did not infringe on another person’s rights, it was positive in nature. If anti-war activists can spew hateful speech about our nation, then surely high school students can gather and say a prayer lifting up the President, this nation, and their school.

  

•  WND: Historic Jamestown marks 400 years since ‘invasion’: ‘Celebration’ banned as events condemn ‘holocaust’ that resulted  ( http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54603 ).  America’s early settlers DID NOT “invade” this country or intend to cause mass suffering of any race.  Their intention was to live free of oppression themselves. We should celebrate EVERYTHING, the good and bad of what has been a part of our nation’s history. Because without those birth pains, our nation wouldn’t be as great as it has become.  

Some argue that America is defined by her diversity. No, America is defined by our traditions, what we’ve held dear for hundreds of years. And all that is being challenged by secular left forces. We can still be a diverse nation, but a nation that doesn’t neglect or forget where we come from.  We need to be a nation that respects each other’s religion, race, and background…being proactive in uniting under one banner, that we are all Americans. The answer is not to be engaged in trying to alter our nation’s history of Christianity or attacking the beliefs of a majority of Americans who believes in Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Those who see America as the evil one has not appreciated the luxuries of living in this great nation. Nothing is for free, nothing comes without sacrifice. The evident anti-Americanism is shameful and I wonder why people who hate this country would want to tear at it so much instead of living somewhere where they are comfortable with their beliefs. I surmise it is because they feel they can get away with it here and not elsewhere. But that all needs to stop.

So is America in the throes of death, or is there hope? Time will tell as concerned Americans become increasingly aware of the activities of the far left crowd and find their voice again.  One such way we will know is by the noise many Americans will make at the Vietnam Memorial this Saturday, March 17, 2007, as they stand by our heroes who’ve fought to keep our land free. Americans will stand up for the right to keep our rights intact during the Gathering of Eagles event.

But following the Gathering of Eagles event, let us remain vigilant and outspoken. Let the majority remain active to counter the minority rogue group of leftists who seek to wreck our country from within. They seek to change our nation to fit their standards…and those standards are not inclusive for Christians, for one. And that’s not what America is about.

It’s time the majority stood up and showed the world who we are.

Related Reading:

Gathering of Eagles:

www.gatheringofeagles.org

You Don’t Say–Fred Gielow:

http://www.amazon.com/You-Dont-Say-Fred-Gielow/dp/096039382X/ref=sr_1_18/104-4879541-5610309?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173753028&sr=1-18

*Felicia (Fee) Benamon is a political columnist who writes for various conservative sites including RenewAmerica.us, Michnews.com, Daley-Times Post, Renaissance Women ( http://www.rwnetwork.net/ ) , Capitolhillcoffeehouse.com, TheConservativeVoice.com, Mensnewsdaily.com, ConservativeCrusader.com, and other news sites like AmericanChronicle.  Felicia also does freelance writing/reporting in her area. You may email Felicia: Feereports@aol.com

The lamestream media told you:

A new poll suggests guns are bad, should be banned, and the Brady Campaign is leading the way to make America safer, with new gun ban plans.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Just like the surveys often sent out by pro-gun-rights groups, the new Brady survey is more about fundraising than actually seeking anyone’s opinion. The Firearms Coalition encourages people to answer the survey and consider following through on their fundraising appeal by writing a check to your favorite gun-rights group. “We at the Firearms Coalition would be very proud to receive donations in honor of Sarah Brady.”

Follow this link to answer Sarah Brady’s survey.

The “Name”, “Address”, and “Email” request at the top can be left blank. If you enter an eddress, they might put you on their mailing list so you can keep tabs on their activities.

Thanks to Jeff Knox, Director of Operations, The Firearms Coalition, for bringing this news to my attention. On-line contributions to the Firearms Coalition can be made at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org or mailed to: The Firearms Coalition, Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108. Their periodic reports pull no punches.

The lamestream media told you:

Firearms are being purchased legally in U.S. gun stores and then smuggled into Mexico by drug and human-smuggling gangs. Texas stores are seeing an increase of “straw purchases,” where a person with no criminal record goes around getting arms for the criminal gangs on both sides of the border.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Pictures obtained of some of the seized weapons indicate that they have not been obtained legally, as suggested in lamestream reports.

Among the seizures were 40mm grenades and at least one M16 equipped with an M-203 grenade launcher, not currently available to U.S. citizens at retail. Additional gear suggests paramilitary operators are planning an assault unrelated to routine smuggling. Included in the seizures, and unmentioned in the “news,” were three civilian vehicles upgraded with bulletproof glass, armor plate, and enough bulletproof clothing and ammo to equip three 6-man strike teams (link).

Firearms purchased legally for smuggling are not purchased legally.

The lamestream media told you:

And the Oscar winner is… An Inconvenient Truth!

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

In an easily predictable result, Al Gore, the man who formerly claimed he invented the Internet, won the Academy Award for best documentary, for a mockumentary about global climate. In the film, which examines one side of one theory about Earth, Gore makes horrific dystopian predictions of what Earth will be like in 100 years, with a straight face. He predicts a devastating 20-foot rise in sea levels. (The U.N.’s IPCC estimates suggest a change of 8-17 inches may be possible; note that climatologists are currently unable to predict weather one week into the future.)

The Cato Institute characterizes the film as a riveting work of science fiction, and backs up the claim with real research from real scientists.

In other news, Mars, which has no known man-made greenhouse gases or SUVs, has been warming steadily for the past decade. Sunshine has been blamed as the culprit.

The lamestream media told you:

Oscar ratings continue to slide, as competition for viewer time, reduction of exclusive star status from the golden Bogie/Bacall days, non-stop overexposure of every minor scantily clad trollop, a numbing glut of awards shows and instant idol status for wannabees continue to tarnish Oscar’s image.

This year’s audience was up by a slight 0.004, even though the number of TV sets in U.S. homes grew.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Unmentioned in lamestream reports on the slipping ratings for the Academy Awards are the real reasons so many Americans no longer idolize Hollywood:

Hopelessly debauched and depraved films of mindless violence that depend more on effects and camera work than scripts and acting; hopelessly one-sided manipulative propaganda videos nominated and winning as documentaries years in a row (Michael Moore and now Al Gore); and hosting this year by a person who makes a mockery of American values, the American family, cares more for green Hollywood multiculti-isms than red-blooded JohnWayne-isms, and is considered by tens of millions of citizens a borderline degenerate, Ellen DeGeneris (I know I’m going to take heat for calling her “borderline”).

The lamestream media told you:

Five respectable student advisors at Long Island University are in trouble for producing a funny parody video in which they hold a rubber duck hostage, and threaten to cut its throat in crude Middle Eastern accents while wearing burkha-style face masks.

“I demand iPod Nano,” one of the ‘terrorists’ on the video says. The video has so enraged officials at the school that they’ve fired the five students from their jobs as resident advisors and have threatened to expel them.

Students are marching in support however, and a lawyer has been hired and is threatening the intolerant school officials.

Muslim groups have expressed outrage at the video, which was posted and then removed from YouTube. “The harm that generates out of such jokes stereotypes Muslim Americans,” Gazi Khanhan of the American Muslim Alliance said on Thursday.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It has become increasingly important to get Muslims infuriated, using humor and routine commentary, according to free speech advocates in the United States. “We need to show the true nature of the greatest enemy America faces,” they said.

“The Muslims believe they can unhinge our system by becoming “outraged” at any speech they dislike, even accurate jokes,” said one observer who requested anonymity, fearing for his life from Muslim peace lovers who kill infidels. A basic tactic Muslims rely on is lying, which they consider honorable, if it advances their cause, he said.

“These uncivilized barbarian fanatics chop off people’s body parts for minor offenses, publicly exhibit the remains, and then scream they are offended by mere speech, videos and even cartoons. They are lying scoundrels and must be exposed. Insensitive, intolerant, stereotyped and insulting remarks aimed at them are a good thing.” The stereotypes typically aimed at Muslims, he said, are all true.

Many U.S. politicians are complicit with the fanatics, feigning sympathy to appear sensitive and politically correct, and are borderline traitors, the well-spoken observer observed. “Those officials who believe we should be ’sensitive’ and ‘tolerant’ to the abusive behavior of Muslim men toward women and non-Muslims should be removed from office.”

The lamestream media told you:

An off-duty police officer halted a shooting rampage in a Salt Lake City mall, when 18-year-old Sulejmen Talovic, wearing a trenchcoat, opened fire on shoppers for no apparent reason. Officer Ken Hammond, having lunch nearby, heard the shots and rushed to return fire and hold the gunman at bay until reinforcements arrived. Who fired the shot that stopped the criminal was unknown at press time, Paul Foy reports for The Associated Press.

“He was such a good boy. I don’t know what happened,” said his aunt in a TV interview. Five people were murdered in the attack, and others wounded.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

This homicidal maniac was identified by WorldNetDaily, a highly respected web news source, as a Muslim refugee from Bosnia, a fact somehow omitted in the lengthy AP story. Although gunfire was required to stop the murderer, as it routinely is, apparently none of the victims were armed.

Anti-gun-rights advocates are expected to use the Muslim’s murderous spree to call for gun-control efforts aimed at people, like you and I, who didn’t do anything.

The Woman’s Real Man
Written by Bernard Chapin
Read by Mike LaSalle

[audio:wrm1.mp3,wrm2.mp3,wrm3.mp3,wrm4.mp3,wrm5.mp3#093;]

Or download the files here:

http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm1.mp3

http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm2.mp3

http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm3.mp3

http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm4.mp3

http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm5.mp3

What’s up fellas? I wrote that Coulter piece the other day which made me quite a few enemies, lol. It was also VERY entertaining. Anyway, check out the opinions of these feministas to the piece and our ensuing battles. - Bernard

http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/06/stout-hearted-men/

Written by Bernard Chapin
Read by Mike LaSalle

[coolplayer width="200" height="100" autoplay="false" download="hide"]
http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm2.mp3
[/coolplayer]

Listen to part 1 here.

By Bernard Chapin

Always late to a party, it wasn’t until yesterday that I heard Ann Coulter’s remarks regarding Presidential candidate John Edwards. The video is available at this link, but, for those of you without the proper plug-in, she informed a Conservative Political Action Committee audience that she could not comment on the former Senator because “you have to go into rehab if you use the word f*ggot.” Predictably, a firestorm ensued. CBS News dubbed her words a “slur against gay people.” Mr. Edwards called her comment, “hateful, selfish, childish behavior.” He further noted, “What I’ve learned is that if you don’t have the courage to speak out against it — no matter who says it, and no matter who it’s leveled at — then it becomes tolerable. And it’s not tolerable, any more than the language I heard leveled at African Americans when I was young.”

As it turns out, the fringe candidate is wrong on all counts. F*ggot is not a term of hate. It’s a word sometimes used to describe gays as well as a bundle of sticks or branches, a type of meatball, and, way back when, it even represented a unit of measurement. As far as offensiveness goes, there is no reason why it would appall gays; particularly since it has “been employed by gay men in a defiant, self-consciously empowering or self-mocking way.” Gay advice guru Dan Savage, in his “Savage Love” columns, an adult version of “Dear Abby,” prefaced each query with the salutation of “Hey F*ggot.” A person coming across his columns, as I used to in The Chicago Reader, would never have considered the greeting to be a symbol of abomination.

I honestly think that when most people utter it they use it to describe something they regard as silly, goofy or embarrassing which, at its root, may have nothing to do with homosexuals. Consider Coulter’s statement for a moment. Does she really think that Edwards is gay? I seriously doubt it. She was using her enemies PC sensitivity as a means to provoke and incite—which is exactly what happened. The quip was an incendiary joke. Coulter is not publicity shy, and, given her background, must have known that furor would follow her heretical observation. Ironically, Howard Dean’s response—“this kind of vile rhetoric is out of bounds”—plays like made-to-order dogma. Like Dean, many leftists would like to send Coulter to places far fouler than rehab. Why is saying a word like f*ggot out of bounds? If a homosexual called Coulter a breeder or a black person called her a cracker, would we judge them “hate-filled and bigoted?” Of course not.

Many of her adversaries, those supposed lovers of diversity and goodness, can be seen on YouTube referring to her as a c*nt and a transvestite. I guess this goes to show that tolerance can only be tolerated when it is extended to the right kind of people. Some guerrillas sabotaged her wikipedia page by altering her biographical entry [they may have deleted the insertions by the time this piece is published] by fictionalizing her early history and mental status:

After her birth in New York City, she was taken to central park, where the family had built a sacrificial platform. Young Ann was then stoned and burned alive. Because obviously she fit all characteristics for being an evil satan spawn. It was however, found that her body was resilient and oppositely gotten stronger. After another attempt where her infant body was thrown down the laundry shoot…After observant careful study of Ann’s behavior, it is obvious her mental well being is not in check. Possibilities include: Manic-Depressive Disorder, Rare form of Gonnorrea which consumes your thoughts and logic over a long period of time.

Well, at least they weren’t being hateful.

Most humorous was Edwards’ exploitation of the situation. He put together a special webpage in which one can eradicate injustice by forwarding him a cool 100 grand which he’ll be happy to call “Coulter Cash.” Ambulance chaser fails to describe most lawyers, but John Edwards could smell a C-note even if it were encased in lead.

As for the offending agitator, Coulter responded by saying, “I’m so ashamed, I can’t stop laughing!” The hullabaloo is absurd but far from funny. Our media and politicians continue to be involved in a great race to prove which uncaring overfed yuppie happens to be the most sensitive and self-righteous of all. The general public has little interest in these pursuits, but are the only losers in the competition. Since the late eighties, we have been cowed into modifying our speech and thoughts as one can only view so many PC crucifixions before realizing the inherent danger of speaking truth to commissars. Sadness, as opposed to mirth, is the proper emotion for this circumstance.

The most important thing to remember about this incident is that Coulter has not, and hopefully will not, apologize. Thank God there are a few conservative millionaires out there who possess the financial and mental wherewithal to actively defy societal convention. Their presence helps to delay the date of PC’s eventual victory over free speech as the totalitarian nature of our Therapy State becomes more apparent with each passing day. Indeed, this morning I awoke to discover that high school officials in Washington State are now considering banning fan booing during games due to its supposed cruelty. I have a better idea, why don’t they just mind their own f*cking business? That’s a better government “solution” than any other in history.

People should have the right to say what they want to in our society, and when we disagree with them we have the right to respond. Mumbling a few cacophonous syllables does not align one with the forces of evil. In my opinion, more fearless commentators like Ann Coulter—on both the right and the left—are precisely what this country needs.

Bernard Chapin is a writer living in Chicago. He is the author of Escape from Gangsta Island, and is currently at work on a book concerning women. He can be contacted at veritaseducation@gmail.com.

Written by Bernard Chapin
Read by Mike LaSalle

[coolplayer width="200" height="100" autoplay="false" download="hide"]
http://www.yakvox.com/audio/wrm1.mp3
[/coolplayer]

Hollywood continues in its attempt to shove untruths down our throats. But it all depends on whether or not the American public ingests the lies or not.�