Wanted by the FBI





Adnan G. El Shukrijumah
AKA:
Adnan G. El Shukri Jumah, Abu Arif, Ja'far Al-Tayar, Jaffar Al-Tayyar, Jafar Tayar, Jaafar Al-Tayyar

Terrorist Threats against U.S.
If you have any information,

Worthy Causes!











100% owned by Hugo Chavez

UN or US


Write your reps!




Fed up with Congress, or politicians in general? Write your Representative and - or Senator and tell them so They serve us, folks!

Click the links below to write yours. 



  • Recommended Blogs



  • Recommended Reading




















“Short takes”

Posted on May 12, 2008 | Filed Under In My Opinion... 

Proving again and again that the good folks at the Patriot Post (linked) GET it.

Sheer Ignorance? Or just stupid

I guess I”m in the “stupid” column for explaining this jerkoff.

FOR THE RECORD

“In his victory speech after the North Carolina primary, Sen. Barack (Hussein) Obama…[defended] his stated intent to meet with America’s enemies without preconditions…:

‘I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.’

That he made this statement, and that it passed without comment by the journalists covering his speech indicates either breathtaking ignorance of history on the part of both, or deceit. I assume the Roosevelt to whom Sen. Obama referred is Franklin D. Roosevelt. Our enemies in World War II were Nazi Germany, headed by Adolf Hitler; fascist Italy, headed by Benito Mussolini, and militarist Japan, headed by Hideki Tojo. FDR talked directly with none of them before the outbreak of hostilities, and his policy once war began was unconditional surrender. FDR died before victory was achieved, and was succeeded by Harry Truman. Truman did not modify the policy of unconditional surrender. He ended that war not with negotiation, but with the atomic bomb. Harry Truman also was president when North Korea invaded South Korea in June, 1950. President Truman’s response was not to call up North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung for a chat. It was to send troops… Sen. Obama is on both sounder and softer ground with regard to John F. Kennedy. The new president held a summit meeting with Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev in Vienna in June, 1961. Elie Abel, who wrote a history of the Cuban missile crisis (The Missiles of October), said the crisis had its genesis in that summit… Mr. Abel wrote, ‘There is no evidence to support the belief that Khrushchev ever questioned America’s power. He questioned only the president’s readiness to use it.’… It’s worth noting that Kennedy then was vastly more experienced than Sen. Obama is now. A combat veteran of World War II, Jack Kennedy served 14 years in Congress before becoming president. Sen. Obama has no military and little work experience, and has been in Congress for less than four years… History is an elective few liberals choose to take these days… The lack of historical knowledge among journalists is merely appalling. But in a presidential candidate it’s dangerous. As Sir Winston Churchill said: ‘Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it’.”
Jack Kelly

Those who can, do - those who can’t, teach. Maybe

Proving the old saying quoted above …
“This year, American taxpayers will spend more than $9,200 on the average public-school student. That’s a real increase of 69 percent over the per pupil expenditure in 1980. The total bill for a student who remains through high school will be almost $100,000. This spending would be worthwhile if it gave us the results we need to compete globally. But it hasn’t been doing so. American students still score poorly compared to students from other countries, especially in math and science. The National Assessment of Educational Progress shows 18 percent of fourth-graders and 29 percent of eighth-graders scored ‘below basic’ in mathematics last year. And far too many students drop out. At least 1 in 4 quits high school. Among minority children, the picture is even bleaker. In 2002, only 56 percent of black and 52 percent of Hispanic students graduated, compared to 78 percent of white students. The Census Bureau has found that a full-time employee with a college degree will earn more than $2 million over a lifetime. One with only a high-school diploma will earn half as much, while a dropout, obviously, will earn even less. More ominously, an independent study found dropouts die an average of nine years sooner than graduates. Our educational system is a national problem—but one that calls for local solutions. One approach is to provide school choice.”
Ed Feulner

Supreme Court tells Democrat Party - Dead people can’t vote!

Judicial Benchmarks: Indiana voter ID OK

The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to the Democrat Party and the ACLU on Monday when it ruled that Indiana’s law requiring voters to produce a photo ID at the polls was not excessively burdensome. The Supreme Court’s decision paves the way for other states to take steps to prevent voter fraud. Liberal justice John Paul Stevens joined the court’s conservative justices in upholding Indiana’s law, and he wrote the majority opinion. “There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the state’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters,” Stevens wrote. “Moreover, the interest in orderly administration and accurate recordkeeping provides a sufficient justification for carefully identifying all voters participating in the election process. While the most effective method of preventing election fraud may well be debatable, the propriety of doing so is perfectly clear.”

Not surprisingly, the ACLU’s Indiana legal director said he was “extremely disappointed” by the decision, even though Democrats’ own expert witnesses admitted that 99 percent of Indiana’s voting-age residents already have the necessary photo ID. While the Left is busy crying foul over “voter disenfranchisement,” the real story is that the Democrat Party can no longer rely on duplicate IDs and dead people to help win elections in Indiana. It is our hope that Monday’s ruling will prompt other states to follow Indiana’s lead in reducing voter fraud.

Chicago Heat

After a weekend that saw 36 shootings in Chicago, perpetual Mayor Richard Daley has decided to equip Chicago police officers with “high-powered M4 carbines” (more commonly known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians). Just one day after blaming the gun industry for Chicago’s crime problem, Daley said it was “not a difficult decision” to issue rifles to every police officer, making it unclear whether Daley thinks guns are the problem or the solution. Daley also failed to elaborate on how the Chicago Police Department’s new acquisitions were supposed to help citizens defend themselves in the city with America’s second-strictest gun control laws (crime-ridden Washington, DC, is first). A famous quote goes likes this: “The beatings will continue until morale improves.” Such absurd reasoning has its own parallel in Chicago, where official policy is that defenselessness will continue until crime improves. Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama supported his hometown’s draconian stance on self-defense last week when he told the Chicago Sun-Times,

“There has not been any evidence that allowing people to carry a concealed weapon is going to make anybody safer.”

In light of Obama’s opinion, we think he should give up his Secret Service detail, since it isn’t “going to make anybody safer” and is therefore a waste of taxpayer money.

Meanwhile, law-abiding gun owners are busy proving Obama wrong. When an angry customer pulled a gun on the manager of a grocery store on Monday in West Palm Beach, Florida, the manager and his assistant both drew their own handguns, forcing the attacker to retreat. Manager Marino Hernandez and assistant manager Robert Espinal found the criminal, 73-year-old Marshall Hugo Grant, cowering in the parking lot, where they detained him until police arrived. We’re not sure how Hernandez and Espinal would have been safer without their guns, but we’re sure Barack Obama does. Leftists always know a great many things that aren’t so.

** This one scares me more than a little bit.

I was a NYC police officer for 25 years before retiring in 1994. In that time I was either involved in or had direct knowledge of many “officer involved” shooting incidents. I also saw first hand the lack of training discipline and skills of far too many officers in my twice yearly qualification course - street cops barely able, or NOT able, to qualify to the lowest standard. There was at times a total lack of firearms discipline on the street. I was there - I saw it.

The fact is, unlike cops of the 60’s and early 70’s - few officers these days have any military experience and have absolutely no familiarity with guns before becoming police officers, never once shot a gun, and don’t like them to start with. This shows in the statistics of police shootings - the number of “hits” compared to the number of shots fired. It happens to be, in New York City, something like a 27% hit ratio. Astounding, and disturbing. In other major cities the percentages are similar - some (too many) are worse. Much worse. Taken in context, that means for every 10 shots fired by an officer, only 3 shots find the expected target. “And where do the other rounds go”, you may rightly ask? Well that’s something officials would rather you NOT ask, frankly, because the odds are one or maybe more might hit an innocent bystander.

That’s with the standard duty sidearm. But now departments are seeking to ‘even up the odds” and play soldier by equipping individual patrol officers with fully automatic, military issue assault rifles like the M4 carbine - the latest iteration of the vaunted M16 rifle of Vietnam fame.

To their credit, the NYPD has resisted this push somewhat and is only equipping the more highly trained (and disciplined) Emergency Services Division officers with these weapons. But cities like Chicago are putting them on the street in the hands of the same regular patrol officers who can hit their target barely 30% of the time. Scary shit! It’s also interesting that these are the same weapons the liberals condemn as “assault weapons” with no useful purpose but “to kill” in the hands of civilians, but give a free pass in the hands of untrained cops. Note also that police officers are not trained ‘to kill”, but to “shoot to stop”. Also interesting that now as a “civilian”, I am suddenly incapable of being trusted with an assault weapon or semi-auto handgun - after 25 years of qualifying “Expert” as a police officer, regularly (still) shooting on my own dime and time to improve my skills, and having a personal “hit ratio” exceeding 90%.


Comments

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.