Sunday, March 10, 2013

Gabby Giffords's Husband Buys AR-15

I am confused here. An avowed anti-gun guy who purchases an AR-15 and a 1911 pistol. He says its to show how easy it is to get through the background check. This still doesn't make sense...personally I think he wanted the AR and the pistol...what do you think of this?

The Story

Mark E. Kelly, gun-control proponent and husband to former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, recently purchased an AR-15 (an "assault weapon," he called it)—which he now says he intended as an illustration of the need for more stringent gun laws.

Kelly reportedly bought the AR-15 and a 1911-style semi-automatic pistol at a gun store in Tucson, Arizona.

Breitbart News received a tip on this when Neil McCabe, editor of Guns & Patriots newsletter, contacted us on March 7 and said:

Mark E. Kelly, made purchases which included an AR-15--sometimes described as an "assault rifle"--at 3:30 pm on the afternoon of March 5 at Diamondback Police Supply, 170 S. Kolb Street, Tucson, AZ.

According to McCabe, witnesses to the purchases claimed Kelly purchased "high capacity" magazines as well.

On March 6, McCabe contacted Kelly's gun control group--"Americans for Responsible Solutions"--and on March 8 they replied that his message had been passed on to colleagues who handle press requests. Breitbart News then began investigating the details surrounding the purchase, including visiting the gun store.

Suddenly, Kelly announced on his Facebook page that he was not going to keep the AR-15, which he has yet to pick up from the store.

Days after making the purchases, Kelly wrote on Facebook:

I just had a background check a few days ago when I went to my local gun store to buy a .45. As I was leaving, I noticed a used AR-15. Bought that too. Even to buy an assault weapon, the background check only takes a matter of minutes. I don't have possession of it yet but I'll be turning it over to the Tucson PD when I do.

Testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee Jan. 30, Kelly had urged senators to restrict sales firearms based on their lethality--a common refrain with other witnesses that day, who argued that semi-automatic weapons, which chamber subsequent rounds as bullets are fired, and other guns with military-style features level the playing field against law enforcement.

Kelly and Giffords founded their own advocacy group to restrict gun rights, Americans for Responsible Solutions, in January. On its website, ARS wrote: “High capacity magazines are a deadly factor in gun violence.” A 30-round magazine is considered a high-capacity magazine.

The ARS website says: “Congress should act to limit the sale of high capacity magazines, which are not needed for hunting or self-defense, but have proven very lethal.”

Similarly, the ARS website says: “Congress should act to limit the sale of assault weapons.

In February, Kelly told Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace that lawmakers need to address "assault weapons." He said the purpose of an "assault weapon" is "to kill a lot of people very quickly," and he lamented that such products were "too readily available."

Kelly has not commented on whether he will also return the .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol he purchased.

Photo: Captain Mark Kelly/Facebook

This post has been updated.

Saturday, March 9, 2013

More Anti-Second Amendment Stupidity


I posted this "Acclaimed Professors" contact info at the head of his racial blathering. Feel free to contact him and give a clear voice.

The Second Amendment Was Primarily To Enforce The Slavery Regime

Ezrah Aharone is an adjunct associate professor at Delaware State University and the author of two acclaimed political books: Sovereign Evolution: Manifest Destiny from Civil Rights to Sovereign Rights  and Pawned Sovereignty: Sharpened Black Perspectives on Americanization, Africa, War and Reparations. He can be reached at

Thursday, March 7, 2013

They Missed It!

Ok, so like you I have read the article that Roger Ailes, who ran Fox News. Ailes is certainly a heavyweight in the news business. Then something caught my eye...and later it begged some more thought. I have highlighted the text I'm referring to in red. Read it and see for yourself.

I think that Obama is a liar. I don't say that lightly, I say it as a description of his personality. I believe he has mislead us since day one, and we as a nation have bought into it.

I honestly believe we are in deep trouble, far deeper than we realize.

Roger Ailes: Obama Is ‘Lazy,’ Biden ‘Dumb As an Ashtray’

Wednesday, 06 Mar 2013 03:02 PM
By Bill Hoffmann

Fox News chief Roger Ailes says President Barack Obama is “lazy’’ and claims the commander-in-chief “never worked a day in his life,’’ a controversial new book claims.

Ailes also takes shots at Vice President Joe Biden, saying, “he’s as dumb as an ashtray,” and at Newt Gingrich, who he says is a “sore loser.”

In his upcoming biography, “Roger Ailes: Off Camera,’’ author Zev Chafets writes that Ailes reacted to a crack by Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen that Ann Romney, wife of last year’s Republican presidential candidate, “never worked a day in her life,” with his own blunt opinion of the president.

“Obama’s the one who never worked a day in his life. He never earned a penny that wasn’t public money,’’ Ailes said, according to Chafets.

“How many fundraisers does he attend every week? How often does he play basketball and golf? I wish I had that kind of time. … He’s lazy, but the media won’t report that.”

Ailes insists, however, that he didn’t come up with Obama’s “lazy’’ tag — but rather the president did himself during a 2011 interview with Barbara Walters in which he described his most deplorable trait as “deep down, underneath all the work I do, I think there’s a laziness in me.’’

Ailes, who granted Chafets one-on-one interviews for the biography, also takes the gloves off on Vice President Joe Biden.

“I have a soft spot for Joe Biden. I like him. But he’s dumb as an ashtray,’’ Ailes says, according to the book, which is published by Penguin Sentinel and excerpted on

Chafets’ biography shows there’s no love lost between Ailes and Obama and details a testy sit-down between the two during the 2008 presidential campaign in which the future commander-in-chief lit into Sean Hannity.

“Obama was upset by Fox News,’’ writes Chafets. In a private room at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Manhattan, “Obama arrived with his aide Robert Gibbs, who seated Ailes directly across from Obama, close enough for Ailes to feel the intention was to intimidate him.

“[Ailes] didn’t mind; in fact, he rather appreciated the stagecraft, one political professional to another.’’

Chafets says after some pleasantries, “Obama got to the point. He was concerned about the way he was being portrayed on Fox, and his real issue wasn’t the news; it was Sean Hannity, who had been battering him every night.

“Ailes didn’t deny that Hannity was anti-Obama. He simply told the candidate not to worry about it.

Ailes is quoted as responding: “Nobody who watches Sean’s going to vote for you, anyway.”

According to Chafets, Obama then asked Ailes what his personal concerns were.

“Ailes said he was mainly concerned about Obama’s strength on national security issues. The candidate assured Ailes that he had nothing to worry about,’’ the author writes.

“‘Well, why are you going around talking about making cuts in weapons systems?’ asked Ailes. ‘If you’re going to cut, why not at least negotiate them and get something in return?’”

Obama said Ailes was misinformed, according to Chafets. “He said this looking me right in the eyes,” says Ailes. “He never dropped his gaze, which is the usual tell. It was as good a lie as anyone ever told me.

“I said, ‘Senator, I just watched someone say exactly that on my computer screen before coming over here. Maybe it wasn’t you, but it sure looked like you and sounded like you. I think it was you.’”

At that point, according to Chafets, “Gibbs stood and announced that the session was over. ‘I don’t think he liked the meeting very much,’ says Ailes.’’

Ailes doesn’t let the GOP get by without some criticism.

Of Gingrich, he says, the former GOP House Speaker is a “sore loser and if he had won he would have been a sore winner.” The book claims Ailes also described Gingrich with an obscenity.

Chafets’ book is one of two new biographies on Ailes. The second is the upcoming “The Loudest Voice in the Room: Fox News and the Making of America,” by New York magazine writer Gabriel Sherman.

Meanwhile, The New York Times reports Ailes himself is writing his autobiography, although no date is set for its release.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Two Stories, Two News Sources, We Must Have Two Presidents?!

I read a couple of stories the other day. One from the British paper "The Guardian." the other from another British paper, "The Telegraph."

Both papers talk about our President. It would seem that we have split personality President. I'll let you decide for yourself             

Obama not bluffing over Iran military threat, Biden tells Aipac

Barack Obama's threats to use military force to prevent Iran securing a nuclear weapon are more than idle bluffs, vice-president Joe Biden told the biggest pro-Israeli lobbying group Aipac on Monday.
Biden said that while the US preferred a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Iran, a military option remained on the table.

"The president of the United States cannot, and does not, bluff. President Barack Obama is not bluffing," Biden told the audience in Washington.

Israel is seeking assurances of support from the US, should it decide to launch air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

There has been scepticism about Obama's commitment to a military option against Iran, given the administration's general unwillingness to be drawn into new conflicts after the experience of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Some observers feel that Obama's threat is aimed purely at putting pressure on Iran to resolve the standoff diplomatically and not embark on another conflict.

You can read the rest of the article here

The second story;

Barack Obama a 'dithering, controlling, risk-averse' US president

Barack Obama is a "dithering" president whose controlling tendencies and extreme risk-averse attitude to foreign policy has damaged US interests in the Middle East, according to a new book by a senior former State Department adviser.

The insider-account of the damaging divisions between the White House and the State Department comes as diplomats around the world wait to see if John Kerry, the new US secretary of state, can persuade Mr Obama to greater engagement on Syria, Egypt and the wider Middle East.
Vali Nasr, a university professor who was seconded in 2009 to work with Richard Holbrooke, Mr Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, records his profound disillusion at how a "Berlin Wall" of domestic-focused advisers was erected to protect Mr Obama.
"The president had a truly disturbing habit of funnelling major foreign policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisers whose turf was strictly politics," Mr Nasr writes in The Dispensable Nation: America Foreign policy in Retreat.

The Rest of the Story is Here

Any thoughts?

Monday, March 4, 2013

Post-Constitutional America: The Trap is Closing

Post-Constitutional America: The Trap is Closing
article by Peter Farmer

“A government big-enough to give you everything you want, is big-enough to take everything that you have.” —President Gerald Ford, Address to Joint Session of Congress, 12 August 1974

By tradition, Americans are accustomed to referring to themselves as free citizens of a constitutional republic, and not subjects of an all-powerful ruler or state. Today, however, evidence continues to mount that we are no longer a free people and no longer live in a constitutional republic.

 The increasing size and scope of government at all levels has been a fact of life in the United States for quite some time, but in recent years – especially since the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks – that growth has accelerated dramatically. Under the Obama regime, it has gone exponential.

During the First World War, Randolph Bourne famously stated “War is the health of the state.”
How prescient his words remain almost a century after he first uttered them – for a state of war offers nearly-ideal conditions for government to seize and consolidate powers that far-exceed its peacetime boundaries.

In the months following the September 11th attacks, the Bush administration and Congress created the Department of Homeland Security and enacted the Patriot Act. In the panicked, near-hysterical post-attack political climate, the vast new and often extra-constitutional powers assumed by the federal government were deemed a necessary measure, and objections to these developments were brushed aside. A few clear-eyed observers noticed the Orwellian names of the new agencies and laws – a harbinger of things to come – but their warnings were largely ignored.

Whatever the intentions of George W. Bush, there can be little argument that the nescient national security super-state he helped to create has proven to fit the iron fist of his successor, Barack Obama, like a glove. Using a combination of executive orders, unaccountable appointed “czars,” extrapolations and modifications of existing regulations, and old-fashioned political strong-arming, Obama and his ideological comrades have shredded the constitution and seized vast new powers for themselves and the federal government.

Consider the following developments, which have unfolded since the man from Chicago took over in early 2009…
In March, 2012, Obama signed an executive order for the National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, whose language authorizes the White House and cabinet-level departments of the federal government to seize control of any and all food, water, energy, health resources, transportation and “all other materials, services and facilities” in the U.S. that it deems necessary – even if the nation is not experiencing emergency conditions. The NDRPA heavily-modified existing language from E.O. 8248, passed in 1939 during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration. NDRPA effectively strips Americans of their right to own property and also subjects them to unreasonable search and seizure, a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

Each year, Congress passes a national defense authorization act (NDAA), which appropriates funds for the annual operation of the military and also sets forth modifications to national defense policy. Buried within its pages, the 2012 NDAA contained language authorizing the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely without due process or habeas corpus, if they are suspected of being “terrorists” or what the act terms “covered persons.”

In addition to being a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act – which prohibits the U.S. military from conducting combat operations on American soil – the NDAA effectively abolishes the constitutional right to due process. The term “covered persons” is sufficiently vague as to be meaningless and thereby can be stretched to accommodate whatever purpose the government desires. In short, this is bureaucrat-speak for the government giving itself carte blanche to do whatever it pleases, the constitution be damned.

In July, 2012, Small Wars Journal - a mainstream military affairs publication, published an article entitled “Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A Vision of the Future” by Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, which considered the prospect of military anti-insurgency operations on American soil; the purported “enemy” under their scenario were “’Tea Party’ insurrectionists.’”

In February 2013, without warning - the Department of Defense took over a Houston-area high school for conducting urban warfare drills; alarmed local residents mistook blank training rounds for actual gunfire. Days earlier, urban warfare drills – including exercises by low-flying Blackhawk helicopters shooting blanks – took place in and over downtown Miami.  Similar exercises have taken place over the last year in fourteen other American cities.

The Department of Homeland Security, the Transportation Security Agency and other parts of the federal government recently have contracted for the purchase of 1.7 billion rounds of ammunition, including a recent purchase of 450 million rounds of .40 caliber hollow-point handgun ammunition.  Under the Geneva Conventions, for humanitarian reasons the use of hollow-point (HP) bullets is prohibited during warfare between nations. However, domestic law-enforcement and other agencies are legally permitted to use HP ammunition. Additionally, DHS, TSA and other agencies have contracted for substantial amounts of 5.56mm rifle ammunition, and other calibers as well. Responding to inquiries, Federal spokespersons have stated that the purchases are routine and for training purposes only. Under analysis, the facts tell a different story…
During the height of combat operations in Iraq, the U.S. military had a monthly small arms ammunition “burn rate” (rate of usage) of approximately 5.5 million rounds of all calibers and types. Using that yardstick, the federal government has recently purchased enough ammunition for a domestic “war” of more than 25 years duration.

Why do these civilian agencies need that much ammunition? Hollow-point bullets are designed explicitly for anti-personnel use. The government claims this ammunition is strictly for target practice and annual qualifications drills. If so, why is so much HP ammunition required?

Are they preparing to fight a war? Do they know something we do not?  It should also be noted that these purchases amount to a form of back-door gun control – via restricting the ammunition supply to the civilian firearms market.

In a related development, the company Law Enforcement Targets, Inc. – which supplies DHS and other agencies with training materials – came under harsh criticism after disclosures that it is marketing a new line of targets call the “No Hesitation” series, which depict images of pregnant women, children and the elderly on marksmanship targets. The existence of such products proves that the government isn’t telling the truth about its motives.

In addition to the foregoing, it has just been disclosed that DHS has purchased 2,717 military-surplus MRAP (i.e., mine resistant ambush protected) armored personnel carriers from the military and is retrofitting them for use with that agency. The 18.9-ton MRAP was designed for service in combat; specifically, to withstand small-arms fire, improvised explosive devices, mines, rocket-propelled grenades and other military-grade threats. Why does a civilian agency of the federal government need such equipment – and in such quantity?
The National Security Administration (NSA), the agency of the government responsible for collecting foreign electronic/signals intelligence and conducting cryptanalysis, is opening a massive new data collection center in Utah. By law, the NSA is limited to conducting foreign signals intelligence activities – but whistle-blowers have come forward to disclose that the data center in Bluffdale, Utah will collect not only foreign signals, but domestic ones as well. When operable, the facility will have the ability to comprehensively collect and store all cell phone, text message, e-mail, and internet search engine traffic – not only collected from other nations, but those originating in the United States.

Americans are - to a large extend unknowingly - being enclosed in a massive surveillance grid being constructed by government and large business concerns.  A national discussion and debate about the wisdom and ethicality of such measures has not occurred. The powers-that-be have simply decided that it is their right to surveil ordinary citizens – and have done so.

Former CIA Director David Petraeus disclosed in an interview shortly before resigning, that transformational new technologies will make it possible for agencies like the CIA to surveil and spy upon ordinary citizens in their own homes, automobiles and places of business, “Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters — all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing.” Common household items/goods such as automobiles, refrigerators, washers-dryers and thermostats will be “chipped,” connected to the internet and mined for data.

Has anyone reminded Petraeus that the Central Intelligence Agency is a foreign intelligence agency, one whose mission does not include spying on Americans in their own homes and communities?

It isn’t only household objects being wired for surveillance, either – but ubiquitous devices in the surrounding outdoor environment, such as streetlights. Streetlights? Yes, that is correct – high-tech streetlights funded by the government are being installed all over the country and have the capability to record both audio and video content. Starting in 2015, electronic data recorders – aka “black boxes” similar to those found in airliners – will be mandatory on all new vehicles – including privately-owned automobiles. These, too, will be linked to the data-collection networks.

Americans have grown accustomed to reading about the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) over foreign battlefields, but what about drones over our own soil? Inevitably, these systems have been pressed into use domestically by the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies, ostensibly only for patrolling our northern and southern borders. However, it has now come to light that DHS is modifying its Predator Type B unmanned aerial vehicles to be used for domestic surveillance. DHS requirements for General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, the contractor doing the modifications, stipulate that the system shall be capable of “identifying a standing human being at night as armed or not” and also of direction-finding and signal capture of mobile phones, two-way radios and other forms of electronic communications. How long before live ordnance is hung beneath the wings of these remotely-piloted aircraft now operating over American soil?

The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, remind us that the price of liberty is vigilance and that those willing to trade freedom for the illusion of security will end up neither free nor secure.
Patriots, be warned – the trap is closing. America is rapidly becoming a garrison state.

Peter Farmer is a historian and commentator on national security, geopolitics and public policy issues. He has done original research on wartime resistance movements in WWII Europe, and has delivered seminars on such subjects as political violence and terrorism, the evolution of conflict, combat medicine, and related subjects. Mr. Farmer is also a scientist and a medic.