Daily Archives: January 6, 2026

House Votes to De-Fund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz, Sends Bill to Obama’s Desk

I hate to say it, but you know that filth in our white house will veto this, and there are not enough votes to override the veto. Too many representatives are lovers of death and killing babies.

Steven Ertelt FOR LIFENEWS.COM

The House voted 240-181 to de-fund Planned Parenthood with republicans voted 239-3 for the bill and Democrats voting 1-178 against it. (See bottom of article for vote tally to see how your member voted).

Once the House sends Obama the bill, he can support the American people, who are tired of funding the nation’s biggest abortion business, or he can support Planned Parenthood. Obama has 10 days to sign or veto the bill, which he’s already threatened to do.

Leading pro-life groups applauded passage of the bill, which is the first time a measure de-funding the nation’s abortion corporation has gone to the desk of any president.

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must De-Fund Planned Parenthood Immediately

“For the first time in nearly 50 years, the president will have to decide up or down on a bill that defunds Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider,” Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser told LifeNews. “It is the first bill ever to get to the president’s desk that would achieve this longtime pro-life goal. We applaud the House and Senate’s passage of this reconciliation legislation as the most important vehicle for actually achieving the goal of defunding Planned Parenthood.

Although Obama will veto the bill, Dannenfelser said the vote is important because it shows a similar de-funding bill can get to a pro-life president in 2017.

“The reconciliation process which brought this bill to the president’s desk is the most important process because it is the one way to avoid a Senate filibuster, ensuring a similar bill could go to pro-life president in 2017,” she said.

Following Obama’s expected veto, House Republican leaders will push for a veto override vote on January 26th. That vote would come just days after more than half a million Americans are expected to march for life in the nation’s capital and solemnly mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, which has resulted in the deaths of 57 million unborn babies since 1973.

Both the House and Senate would need a two-third vote (67%) to override Obama’s expected veto. The House passed the bill in October on a 55% vote margin with virtually every Democrat voting against it.

Leading pro-life groups say the passage of the Planned Parenthood de-funding bill and the subsequent veto and override votes sets up the pro-life movement for the 2016 elections — where pro-life voters will need to defeat pro-abortion Hillary Clinton and elect a pro-life president if they want the nation’s biggest abortion business de-funded in 2017.

“As we learned from the reconciliation fight to defund Planned Parenthood, we CAN advance pro-life legislation through the Senate… but the veto pen of a pro-abortion president remains our biggest road block,” Susan B. Anthony List spokeswoman Jill Stanek says. “Only when we elect a pro-life president (and retain our pro-life majorities in Congress), can we get a bill defunding Planned Parenthood signed into law.”

“President Obama is likely to veto the recent reconciliation bill defunding Planned Parenthood as soon as it gets to his desk,” Stanek said. “Hillary Clinton would be no different, which is why we must work to advance pro-life candidates and ensure a pro-life candidate wins the White House. Planned Parenthood and other allies of pro-abortion Democrats will be throwing in millions of dollars to protect the status quo of abortion on demand up until birth – at taxpayer expense! – and we must not let them win.”

The bill would block, for one year, most federal payments to Planned Parenthood. At least 89% of federal funding of Planned Parenthood would be blocked by this bill. The bill would repeal a number of major components of the Obamacare health law, including two of the major provisions that will lead to rationing of lifesaving care — the “Independent Payment Advisory Board” and the “excess benefits tax.”

In August, Senate Democrats defeated an effort to revoke taxpayer funding for the Planned Parenthood abortion business by filibustering the bill and preventing a vote on it. Republicans were unable to secure the 60 voted needed to invoke cloture and stop debate on the bill, allowing an up or down vote. Republicans could only get 53 votes to shut off debate.

Then, in September, Senate Democrats voted to defeat a government funding bill that would de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business after it was caught in a series of 10 videos selling aborted babies and their body parts. The Senate voted 52 to 47 against ending debate.

Dozens of leading pro-life groups have already indicated their support for the bill, including the National Right to Life Committee. In a letter to members of Congress that NRLC provided to LifeNews.com, the group indicated it strongly supports the bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

“NRLC strongly supports the language in the bill that would block, for one year, most federal payments to affiliates of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). It would close the largest pipeline for federal funding of Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, and apply as well to the CHIP and the Title V and Title XX block grant programs, thus covering roughly 89% of all federal funds to Planned Parenthood. The amounts denied to Planned Parenthood in effect are reallocated to community health centers,” the pro-life group explained.

“Over one-third of all abortions in the U.S. are performed at PPFA-affiliated facilities. Longstanding objections to the massive federal funding of PPFA have been reinforced by recent widely publicized undercover videos, which illuminate the callous brutality that occurs daily in these abortion mills,” NRLC added.

The reconciliation bill also repeals portions of Obamacare,including its rationing components. With regard to the rationing aspects of Obamacare, NRLC strongly supports a repeal.

“In addition, NRLC has always opposed the Obamacare law and advocated its repeal. With respect to H.R. 3762, we particularly endorse the components that would repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) and the “excess benefits tax” (“Cadillac Tax”), both dangerous mechanisms that would ultimately contribute to the rationing of lifesaving care,” the right to life group said.

Leading pro-life groups that also support the reconciliation bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood include Susan B. Anthony List, National Right to Life, Family Research Council, March for Life, Concerned Women for America, Students for Life, Priests for Life, Operation Rescue, and American Life League, among others.

A new Congressional report finds that de-funding the Planned Parenthood abortion business — even for one year — would save “several thousand” unborn babies from the nightmare of abortion. The report also finds de-funding Planned Parenthood would save the federal government $235 million.

The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all eleven:

  • In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
  • In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
  • In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
  • In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
  • In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
  • In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
  • In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”
  • In the eighth video: StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer admits Planned Parenthood sells “a lot of” fully intact aborted babies.
  • The ninth video: catches a Planned Parenthood medical director discussing how the abortion company sells fully intact aborted babies — including one who “just fell out” of the womb.
  • The 10th video: catches the nation’s biggest abortion business selling specific body parts — including the heart, eyes and “gonads” of unborn babies.The video also shows the shocking ways in which Planned Parenthood officials admit that they are breaking federal law by selling aborted baby body parts for profit.
  • Unreleased Videos: Unreleased videos from CMP show Deb Vanderhei of Planned Parenthood caught on tape talking about how Planned Parenthood abortion business affiliates may “want to increase revenue [from selling baby parts] but we can’t stop them…” Another video has a woman talking about the “financial incentives” of selling aborted baby body parts.
  • The 11th video: catches a texas Planned Parenthood abortionist planning to sell the intact heads of aborted babies for research. Amna Dermish is caught on tape describing an illegal partial-birth abortion procedure to terminate living, late-term unborn babies which she hopes will yield intact fetal heads for brain harvesting.

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must Investigate Planned Parenthood for Selling Aborted Baby Parts

The full, unedited videos have confirmed that revelations that some aborted baby remains sold by Planned Parenthood go to biotech companies for the purpose of creating “humanized” mice. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood has been exposed as having sold body parts from aborted babies for as much as 15 years.

The federal law that technically prohibits the sale of aborted babies and their body parts was written by a pro-abortion Congressman decades ago and essentially spells out a process by which sellers of aborted baby body parts can meet certain criteria that allows the sales to be legal. That’s why a Colorado congressman has introduced legislation to totally ban the sales of aborted baby body parts.

HOW DID YOUR HOUSE MEMBER VOTE ON THE BILL TO DE-FUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD?

Yea = pro-life vote, Nay = pro-abortion vote

—- YEAS 240 —

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

—- NAYS 181 —

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cárdenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutiérrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kildee
Kilmer
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Luján, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O’Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

—- NOT VOTING 13 —

Cleaver
DeLauro
Hinojosa
Issa
Johnson, E. B.
Kennedy
Kind
King (IA)
Miller (MI)
Nugent
Payne
Rush
Titus

—

defundplannedparenthood9

 

Former Carson Campaign Manager: ‘Harder and Harder to See How Donald Trump Isn’t Our Nominee’

Wednesday in an interview with CNN, Barry Bennett, who was Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson’s campaign manager up until being fired last week, made a stunning claim when he said he foresees Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump winning the GOP presidential nomination.

“All you’ve got to do is compare the size of everyone’s rallies. And that’s really a demonstration of grass-roots support,” Bennett said. “Donald Trump is having 10,000, 12,000 people show up at rallies. A lot of these guys are having five or six people show up at their events in Iowa. There’s just not a comparison. You know, the establishment can fret about it all they want, but this is the new reality.”

“By mid-March, this thing could be well over,” he added. “At this point, it’s getting harder and harder to see how Donald Trump isn’t our nominee.”

(h/t Politico)

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Cancer on the uptick

Do our loved ones & friends KNOW ?

  • Note taken from Health Sciences Institute e-Alert - Jenny Thompson - 1/5/16

    Dear Reader,

If it seems like cancer is hitting more and more people than ever before, it is.

So what is causing this huge uptick in America’s scariest disease?

Believe it or not, common foods we eat every day could be causing an epidemic of cancer.

And even scarier, that soft drink, granola bar, slice of bread — even something as benign as ketchup — could contain a trigger that causes a tumor to metastasize.

That’s what has researchers at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center issuing one of the most important health alarms sounded in a long time.

But by taking four simple steps, you’ll be able to boot the worst form of this cancer-promoting additive out of your diet for good.


The ‘sweet’ new tobacco

No doubt scientists and doctors of the future will look back at how much fructose Americans of our era were consuming every day and shake their heads.

And I’m not just talking about soda and candy addicts, either. Fructose, in a variety of dangerous forms, is added to more processed foods and drinks than ever. And that’s because it’s as addictive as cocaine.

Last year I told you how a neuroscience professor from a Canadian university got his lab rats to behave like drug addicts. It was simple. He added high fructose corn syrup in three different amounts to their water. And the bigger the dose they got the more they worked harder and harder to get their fructose “fix.”

And when people get that jolt of fructose, they act almost the same way. Only it works on us by shutting off the part of our brain that tells us when to stop eating.

That was bad enough. But what the MD Anderson cancer researchers found is 100 times worse.

They determined that “it was specifically fructose” that is “responsible” for causing both an increase in breast cancer and its deadly metastasis.

“A lot of patients are told it doesn’t matter what you eat after you are diagnosed with cancer,” said Professor Lorenzo Cohen, co-author of the study. This research, he said, shows that “it does.”

While this study focused on breast cancer and how fructose can accelerate its spread throughout the body, it’s a wake-up call for all kinds of cancer. Two years ago researchers found that fructose was the perfect fuel to speed the growth and spread of pancreatic cancer cells. And as this new study shows, the same applies to breast cancer.

Now, we’re not talking about some crazy amount of this deadly sweetener equal to 1000 Cokes, either. The researchers called the amounts they used “comparable to levels of Western diets.”

In fact, the lowest dose given to the mice in Cohen’s study was the maximum amount of “sugars” that the USDA says we should be consuming — just 10 percent of our daily calories.

Yet even at the lowball amount, the mice were still developing tumors that were being fueled along by the fructose.

And those MD Anderson cancer doctors found something else about fructose than may explain the “why” behind their findings.

Fructose helps speed along and make more active a metabolic pathway that is believed to be a big factor behind how cancers spread. Fructose is also thought to increase inflammation, another thing that gives cancer a chance to develop and metastasize.

But it’s no longer a case of just avoiding soda. At this point, HFCS can be found in foods ranging from pizza to pierogis. And the corn refiners are making sure that some versions of this test-tube sweetener contain even more fructose than ever before.

So along with reading labels to dodge HFCS, here are four ways to keep this cancer-promoter out of your diet:

  • Watch out for foods and beverages with added fructose, and even “fruit sugar.” (When you eat fruit, however, you’re getting fructose “packaged” with fiber, something that slows the its absorption and allows you to digest it in a different and healthier way.)
  • Avoid crystalline fructose — which is around 99 percent fructose!
  • Steer clear of agave syrup, even if it’s organic. Agave will give you a giant jolt as it’s practically 100 percent fructose.
  • Check all processed foods for the presence of HFCS, even ones that you would never imagine could contain it.

To Your Good Health,

Jenny Thompson

Sources:
“Here’s how sugar might fuel the growth of cancer” Maggie Fox, January 1, 2016, Today Health & Wellness, today.com

THE HIJRAH INTO EUROPE

“Refugees” colonize a continent. BY ROBERT SPENCER FOR FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

Approximately 104,460 asylum seekers arrived in Germany during the month of August, setting a new record. That makes 413,535 registered refugees and migrants coming to Germany in 2015 so far. The country expects a total of around 800,000 people to seek asylum in Germany this year. And that’s just Germany. The entire continent of Europe is being inundated with refugees at a rate unprecedented in world history. This is no longer just a “refugee crisis.” This is a hijrah.

Hijrah, or jihad by emigration, is, according to Islamic tradition, the migration or journey of Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Yathrib, later renamed by him to Medina, in the year 622 CE. It was after the hijrah that Muhammad for the first time became not just a preacher of religious ideas, but a political and military leader. That was what occasioned his new “revelations” exhorting his followers to commit violence against unbelievers. Significantly, the Islamic calendar counts the hijrah, not Muhammad’s birth or the occasion of his first “revelation,” as the beginning of Islam, implying that Islam is not fully itself without a political and military component.

To emigrate in the cause of Allah – that is, to move to a new land in order to bring Islam there, is considered in Islam to be a highly meritorious act. “And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance,” says the Qur’an. “And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah. And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.” (4:100) The exalted status of such emigrants led a British jihad group that won notoriety (and a shutdown by the government) a few years ago for celebrating 9/11 to call itself Al-Muhajiroun: The Emigrants.

And now a hijrah of a much greater magnitude is upon us. Evidence that this is a hijrah, not simply a humanitarian crisis, came last February, but was little noted at the time and almost immediately forgotten. The Islamic State published a document entitled, “Libya: The Strategic Gateway for the Islamic State.” Gateway into Europe, that is: the document exhorted Muslims to go to Libya and cross from there as refugees into Europe. This document tells would-be jihadis that weapons from Gaddafi’s arsenal are plentiful and easy to obtain in Libya – and that the country “has a long coast and looks upon the southern Crusader states, which can be reached with ease by even a rudimentary boat.”

The Islamic State did not have in mind just a few jihadis crossing from Libya: it also emerged last February that the jihadis planned to flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. Now the number is shooting well beyond that in Germany alone. Of course, not all of these refugees are Islamic jihadis. Not all are even Muslims, although most are. However, no effort whatsoever is being made to determine the refugees’ adherence to Sharia and desire to bring it to their new land. Any such effort would be “Islamophobic.” Yet there are already hints that the Islamic State is putting its plan into effect: jihadis have already been found among the refugees trying to enter Europe. There will be many more such discoveries.

Eight hundred thousand Muslim refugees in one year alone. This will transform Germany, and Europe, forever, overtaxing the welfare economies of its wealthiest nations and altering the cultural landscape beyond recognition. Yet the serious public discussion that needs to be had about this crisis is shouted down by the usual nonsense: the Washington Post Wednesday published an inflammatory and irresponsible piece likening those concerned about this massive Muslim influx into Europe to 1930s Nazis ready to incinerate Jews by the millions. Hollywood star Emma Thompson accused British authorities of racism for not taking in more refugees – as if British authorities haven’t already done enough to destroy their nation.

And so it goes. If you don’t accept the brave new world that is sure to bring more jihad and more Sharia to Europe, you’re a Nazi and a racist. Meanwhile, no one is bothering even to ask, much less answer, one central question: why is it incumbent upon Europe have to absorb all these refugees? Why not Saudi Arabia or the other Muslim countries that are oil-rich and have plenty of space? The answer is unspoken because non-Muslim authorities refuse to believe it and Muslims don’t want it stated or known: these refugees have to go to Europe because this is a hijrah.

This is also Europe’s death knell.

 

Image

Let Them All Hear: YOU’RE FIRED!

The Rule Of Law No Longer Exists In Western Civilization

My work documenting how the law was lost began about a quarter of a century ago

My work documenting how the law was lost began about a quarter of a century ago.

A close friend and distinguished attorney, Dean Booth, first brought to my attention the erosion of the legal principles on which rests the rule of law in the United States. My columns on the subject got the attention of an educational institution that invited me to give a lecture on the subject. Subsequently, I was invited to give a lecture on “How The Law Was Lost” at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law in New York City.

The work coalesced into a book, The Tyranny Of Good Intentions, coauthored with my research associate, Lawrence M. Stratton, published in 2000, with an expanded edition published in 2008. We were able to demonstrate that Sir Thomas More’s warning about prosecutors and courts disregarding law in order to more easily convict undesirables and criminals has had the result of turning law away from being a shield of the people and making it into a weapon in the hands of government. That is what we witness in the saga of the Hammonds, long-time ranchers in the Harney Basin of Oregon.

With the intervention of Ammon Bundy, another rancher who suffered illegal persecution by the Bureau of Land Management but stood them off with help from armed militia, and his supporters, the BLM’s decades long persecution of the innocent Hammonds might have come to a crisis before you read this.

Bundy and militiamen, whose count varies from 15 to 150 in the presstitute media, have seized an Oregon office of the BLM as American liberty’s protest against the frame-up of the Hammonds on false charges. As I write the Oregon National Guard and FBI are on the way.

The militiamen have said that they are prepared to die for principles, and the rule of law is one of them. Of course, the presstitute media is making the militiamen into the lawbreakers—and even calling them terrorists—and not the federal government’s illegal prosecution of the Hammonds, whose crime was their refusal to sell their ranch to the government to be included in the Masher National Wildlife Refuge.

If there are only 15 militiamen, there is a good chance that they will all be killed, but if there are 150 armed militiamen prepared for a shootout, the outcome could be different.

I cannot attest to the accuracy of this report of the situation:https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/723 The resources required to verify the information in this account of how the government escalated a “crisis” out of the refusal of a family to bend is beyond the resources of this website. However, the story fits perfectly with everything Lawrence Stratton and I learned over the years that we prepared our book on how the law was lost. This account of the persecution of the Hammonds is the way government behaves when government has broken free of the rule of law.

I can attest with full confidence that the United States no longer has a rule of law. The USA is a lawless country. By that I do not mean what conservative Republicans mean, which is, if I understand them, that racial minorities violate law with something close to impunity.

What I mean is that only the mega-banks and the One Percent have legal protection, and that is because these people control the government. For everyone else law is a weapon in the hands of the government to be used against the American people.

The fact that the shield of law no longer exists for American citizens is why, according to US Department of Justice statistics, only 4 percent of federal felonies ever go to trial. Almost the entirety of federal felonies are settled by coerced plea bargains that force defendants to admit to crimes that they did not commit in order to avoid “expanded indictments” that, if presented to the typical stupid, trusting, gullible American “jury of their peers,” would lock them away for hundreds of years.

American justice is a joke. It does not exist. You can see this in the American prison population. “Freedom and Democracy” America not only has the largest percentage of its population in prison thanany country on the planet, but also the largest number of prisoners.

If you consider that “authoritarian” China has four times the population of the United States but fewer prisoners, you understand that “authoritarian” China has a more protective rule of law than the United States.

Compared to “freedom and democracy America,” Russia has hardly anyone in prison. Yet, Washington and its media whores have defined the President of Russia as “the new Hitler.”

The only thing we can conclude from the facts is that the United States Government and those ignorant fools who worship it are evil incarnate.

Out of evil comes dictatorship. The White House Fool, at best a two-bit punk, has decided that he doesn’t like the Second Amendment to the US Constitution any more than he likes any of the other constitutional protections of US citizens. He is looking for dictatorial methods, that is, unlegislated executive orders, to overturn the Second Amendment. He has the corrupt US Department of Justice, a criminal organization, looking for ways for the dictator to overturn both Congressional legislation and Supreme Court rulings.

The media whores have fallen in line with the would-be dictator. All we hear is “gun violence.” If only Karl Marx were still with us. He would ridicule those who turn inanimate objects into purposeful actors. It is extraordinary that the American left-wing thinks that guns, not people, kill people.

The position of the “progressive left-wing” in the United States is perplexing. Here are Americans, immersed into a police state, as are the Hammonds, and the progressive left-wing wants to disarm the population.

Whatever this “progressive left-wing opposition” is, it has nothing in common with revolutionaries. The American left-wing is totally irrevelant, a defeated force that sold out and no longer represents the people or the truth.

Even more astonishing, judging by comments on RT’s report on the situation and the readers comments, all RT and American blacks want to know is where is the National Guard in Oregon? Why isn’t it called out against the White militia protests as it was called out against the Black Ferguson protests?https://www.rt.com/usa/327809-bundy-militia-oregon-reaction/
If protesting the murder of a young black American by Ferguson police is not legitimate and the protesters are “terrorists,” why aren’t the Oregon protestors terrorists for trying to protect jailbirds from their “lawful sentence”? This is the wrong question.

It really is discouraging that the American black community is unable to understand that if any American can be dispossessed, all Americans can be dispossessed.

It is also discouraging that RT decided to play the race card instead of comprehending that law is no longer a shield of the American people but is a weapon in the hands of Washington.

Why doesn’t RT at least listen to the President of Russia, who states repeatedly that America and the West are lawless.

Putin is correct. America and its vassals are lawless. No one is safe from the government.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available.

Pentagon Avoids the Word ‘Combat’ After Another American Soldier Dies in Afghanistan

Defense officials said two HH-60 Pavehawk medevac helicopters were sent in to provide help, but one was “waved off” after coming under fire

A U.S. Special Operations service member was killed and two others were injured after coming under enemy fire in Afghanistan’s Helmand province Tuesday, but asked whether this meant U.S. troops were engaged in combat, a Pentagon spokesman said repeatedly that they were there in their mandated mission to “train, advise, assist” Afghan forces.

Defense officials said two HH-60 Pavehawk medevac helicopters were sent in to provide help, but one was “waved off” after coming under fire and returned safely to base. The other landed, but sustained rotor blade damage after apparently striking a wall.

Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook, briefing reporters even as hostilities in Marjah were still reported to be underway, said he could not comment on claims by the Taliban that it had brought down the helicopter, or that it had been hit by a mortar while on the ground.

Cook was asked several times, in different ways, whether U.S. forces were in fact engaged in combat in Afghanistan, but did not answer directly.

Read more

Study: Obama Has Issued More Restrictive Executive Orders Than Past SIX Administrations

Uses more words that create binding, legal obligations, such as ‘shall’ and ‘must’.

A study undertaken by the Mercatus Institute reveals that President Obama has used more restrictive executive orders than his previous SIX predecessors in the White House.

Despite Obama running on a campaign promise not to abuse executive orders, the findings indicate that while he has not used as many orders as past Presidents, the language in Obama’s executive orders is much more restrictive.

“We examine the usage of restrictions—words that create binding, legal obligations, such as ‘shall’ and ‘must,’” a Mercatus statement said.

“Although the current administration has issued fewer executive orders than other modern administrations, the figures show that its total usage of restrictions in executive orders and proclamations exceeds that of any of the past six administrations, with the exception of Clinton’s first term.” the statement continues.

“We don’t know the actual burden the president’s executive orders impose on the public,” noted James Broughel, a program manager at the Mercatus Center.

“This is because these policies avoid benefit-cost analysis requirements that have been an accepted feature of the regulatory process for over thirty years.” Broughel added.

Figures compiled by the Federal Register also show that while Obama has issued 229 executive orders, to George W. Bush’s 292 and Bill Clinton’s 308, the total length of Obama’s orders equates to 1,086 pages.

Bush’s orders comprised 922 pages and Clinton’s just 781 pages.

“Not all executive orders are created equal,” said John Hudak of the Brookings Institution. “Some are quite forceful, making dramatic changes to policy. Others are more routine, housekeeping issues.”

In 2014, Obama vowed “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone—and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward.”

Obama issued an executive order this week to implement stricter gun control laws that could see Americans having to obtain a federal license to sell just one previously owned firearm.

The order will also resurrect a plan to prevent many Social Security recipients from buying guns, a move that could see millions of Americans barred from legally owning firearms.

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, andPrisonplanet.com.

Obama’s Gun Grab Crosses The Rubicon

This is only the beginning of the propaganda on parade

 

Watch and listen carefully to this Alex Jones produced video. Wake up if you haven’t already. We are under attack and war has been openly declared on America.

“If You Don’t Choose You Have Already Chosen!” - F.R.

—————————————————————-

 

Obama’s dictatorial national policy strategy is forming into what can only be described as a global government coordinated subterfuge of the language of the Constitution and Bill Of Rights.

 

These 10 Corporations Control Almost Everything You Buy

image

A chart we found on Reddit.com (click the graphic above to see a larger version) shows that most products we buy are controlled by just a few companies. It’s called The Illusion of Choice.

Ever wonder why you can’t get a Coke at Taco Bell? It’s because Yum Brands was created as a spin-off of Pepsi — and has a lifetime contract with the soda maker.

Unilever produces everything from Dove soap to Klondike bars. Nestle has a big stake in L’Oreal, which features everything from cosmetics to Diesel designer jeans.

Despite a wide array of brands to choose from, it all comes back to the big guys.

Now check out 13 small eco brands that are actually owned by giant corporations >

Mayor of Cologne Slammed For Telling Women To Keep Rapists at “Arms Length”

Top German broadcaster apologizes for delay in reporting mass molestation by Muslim migrants

The Mayor of Cologne is coming under increasing pressure after she said that women should follow a “code of conduct” to avoid sexual attacks by Muslim migrants by keeping potential rapists at “arms length”.

The comments were made after a crisis meeting was called in response to a mass molestation of women near Cologne train station on New Years Eve. The perpetrators were Arab and North African migrants, setting off a firestorm of debate about Germany’s open door refugee program.

Mayor Henriette Reker reacted to the incident by asserting that it had nothing to do with Germany’s refugee program despite the fact that a wave of sexual assaults have been reported in and around migrant camps in the country for the past six months.

Reker doubled down on her comments, asserting that women should stay at “arms length” from strangers to prevent being molested.

“There’s always the possibility of keeping a certain distance of more than an arm’s length – that is to say to make sure yourself you don’t look to be too close to people who are not known to you, and to whom you don’t have a trusting relationship,” she told journalists.

Reker also advised women, “stick together in groups, don’t get split up, even if you’re in a party mood.”

This prompted a huge backlash, with Germans flooding Twitter to ridicule the pro-refugee Mayor.

“I have short arms. Will that be a problem for me then in the worst case scenario?” tweeted Birgit Haase.

Others were even harsher, with Julie Zeilinger accusing the Mayor of blaming the victims for being attacked.

Reker also asked Germans to follow this “code of conduct” at Cologne’s upcoming festival so as to avoid confusing migrants “from other cultures”. There was no discussion of the fact that Germany is importing potentially millions of people from a culture and a religion that treats women little better than animals.

Top German broadcaster ZDF also apologized for its delay in reporting the story. Police initially claimed that there were no incidents on New Years Eve, prompting accusations of a cover-up. German police were previously caught covering up details of rapes linked to migrants so as not to “legitimize” critics of mass immigration.

Meanwhile, rumors are swirling that Chancellor Angela Merkel is set to reveal a new “code of conduct” for German women to prevent rapes by Muslim migrants….

Merkel announces new “code of conduct” for women to prevent them being raped by migrants.

Image

Can’t Have One Without The Other

The End of European Civilization?

by Paul R. Hollrah

January 3, 2026

Having visited Austria and Germany just months ago, and recalling the indescribable beauty of that part of the world and the cheerful, hard-working people who live there, it is hard to visualize the dark fate that awaits them in the weeks, months, and years ahead. An October 26 article by Leo Hohmann for WorldNetDaily, describes the massive invasion of Muslim refugees flooding into Europe and the frantic attempt by locals to purchase guns in countries that have made it all but impossible to own a firearm. It provides a chilling picture of things to come… not only in Europe, but in America as well.

In Austria, for example, where gun ownership is legal, the shops struggle to meet the demand. Because the Muslim immigrants feel that European women are theirs for the taking because they appear in public provocatively dressed (by Muslim standards), most Austrian gun-buyers are women. Across Europe, sexual assaults by Muslim men have become endemic and police officials refuse to describe the sexual holocaust for what it is for fear of agitating the Muslims.

European and American police and government officials need not worry any longer about when and where the first shots in the war to save western civilization will be fired. Those shots were fired in the heart of Paris on an otherwise peaceful autumn evening in November 2015, and they were fired at a Christmas party in sunny San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015.

In an article titled, Tet, Take Two: Islam’s 2016 European Offensive, author Matt Bracken provides a most chilling prediction of what the people of Europe have in store for them in the weeks and months ahead. If Bracken is correct in his assessment… and I believe he is… what we will witness in the coming year will be, literally, the beginning of the end of European civilization. He predicts a violent 2016 showdown and collision that will, in historical terms, be on par with the First and Second World Wars.

Unless I am mistaken, Bracken may underestimate the horror of what is about to occur on the European continent. During World War II, allied bombers targeted cities and towns that were home to a wide variety of industries critical to the German war effort, while units of infantry, armor, and artillery came behind, shelling strategically located towns and villages until German forces were driven out. Many cities, towns, and villages across Germany escaped relatively unscathed. The same will not be true during the coming Muslim holocaust.

Bracken points out that, right now, approximately a million new Muslim migrants… at least 75% of them men between the ages of 18 and 40… are struggling to find a warm place to sleep and something to eat. None of the European countries have food or living quarters for that many cold and hungry people, so what will happen when the worst part of the European winter arrives with blizzards, high winds, and sub-zero temperatures? Bracken speculates that, “When the snow is deep in Germany and across Europe, these men are going to enter local houses, demanding to be taken in as boarders… or else! Where it is useful, small migrant children will be held up in front as human shields for their emotional blackmail value; elsewhere, they will be discarded. One way or the other, Muslim migrants will be attempting to move into German homes and apartments seeking heat and food, and the young Muslim men will be seeking undefended infidel or kafir women to slake their lust (which is their right under Islamic law).”

To put the coming Muslim holocaust into perspective, Bracken uses as a yardstick the September 2004 school siege at Beslan, in the Russian Federation. The siege began on September 1, 2004, when armed Chechen Muslims occupied a school in Beslan, taking 1,100 hostages, including 777 children. Three days later, Russian security forces stormed the school with heavy weapons. At least 385 hostages were killed, including 186 children.

As we sit before our Christmas trees and our fireplaces this Christmas season, surrounded by family and friends, it’s difficult to imagine the horrors that await the good people of Europe who’ve seen their Muslim population grow from 29 million to 55 million in the years between 1990 and 2013… before the massive invasion of Muslims in 2014 and 2015. Bracken asks us to visualize not just one Beslan-style incursion by Muslim jihadists, but ten or twenty such atrocities occurring simultaneously all across Europe.

Already, in cities, towns, and villages, from Italy and Austria to Norway, Sweden, and Finland, we hear the anguished screams of women and young girls as they are gang-raped by bands of Muslim hijra invaders. Such savagery will tear the hearts out of the male population of Europe until they decide that death is preferable to such humiliation. Then, and only then, will they begin to fight back with all the ferocity they can muster. Bracken predicts that this is what lies ahead for the people of Europe who have silently allowed their socialist governments to disarm them in the years since World War II.

So who is to save them from their all-but-certain fate… the United States? Let us not forget, we have a political party in our country… the Democratic Party… which has a record of importing potential voters from abroad, no matter who and what they are, so long as they will ultimately vote Democratic. According to U.S. government statistics, nearly 50,000 Muslim immigrants were granted permanent residency status in the United States in 1992. By 2009, that number had increased to more than 115,000. If current trends continue, by the year 2030 roughly 130,000 Muslims are expected to be granted permanent residency status in the United States annually.

A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that, among likely Republican voters, 59% support a temporary ban on Muslim immigration until the federal government is able to develop a failsafe method for screening out violent jihadists, while 82% of Democrats oppose such a ban. Overall, party affiliation aside, only 36% of Americans favor such a ban, yet 60% feel that Obama’s handling of the terrorist threat has been a failure.

When European civilization is seriously challenged in the weeks and months ahead, those

numbers will likely change dramatically in favor of a ban on Muslim immigration. While Democrats are quite sanguine about security matters, so long as someone else’s “ox is being gored,” even they exhibit a bit of common sense when their own lives and property are at stake.

As an indicator of how far the Democratic Party is out of touch with reality, a group of 123

Democrats have introduced HR 4269, titled The Assault Weapons Ban of 2015. Introduced on December 16, 2015, the stated purpose of the bill is, “To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.”

This, of course, comes at a time when the people of Europe are scrambling to get their hands on weapons of any kind to protect themselves and their families from rampaging hordes of Islamic butchers and rapists. At a time when the people of Europe will do almost anything to get their hands on weapons and ammunition, and the Obama administration conspires to import at least an additional 100,000 unvetted Muslim immigrants into the United States, Democrats continue their effort to disarm the American people. When the Islamic holocaust of 2016 comes to full fruition and European civilization teeters on the brink, the gun control issue in the United States will be brought into sharp focus and the gun control zealots of the Democratic Party will finally be exposed for the fools they truly are.

Matt Bracken reminds us that the Vietnamese Tet Offensive of 1968 was carried out by just 80,000 Viet Cong fighters. He asks us to consider the killing and the bloodshed that will occur at the hands of 800,000 well-armed muhajirs flooding into Europe, many of them intent upon killing as many non-believers as possible. When asked by German journalist Jurgen Todenhofer, in a rare interview for Jewish News, if ISIS was prepared to kill every Shiite Muslim, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi scoffed, “150 million or 500 million, we don’t care; it’s only a technical problem for us. We are ready to do that.”

The question is, are Europeans and Americans ready for an intra-Islamic genocide of that magnitude and the implications such savagery holds for the future of western civilization? If ISIS considers the difference between killing 150 million or 500 million Shia to be a mere “technicality,” a matter of “scale,” how will the people of Europe handle a full-scale onslaught by such people? In response, will they be willing to carpet-bomb major Islamic cities, much as Dresden was carpet-bombed during World War II? Or are they simply too war weary from having two world wars fought on their soil to even defend themselves?

With an all-out, no-holds-barred effort by the civilized world… including an unlikely coalition comprised of the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Russia, China, Germany, and the rest of NATO, excluding Turkey… the forces that now comprise the Islamic State can be utterly destroyed. But even if we are able to achieve that result, we must not allow ourselves to be deluded into thinking that this will be the end of the matter. Even if the world of Islam is temporarily chastened by the loss of millions of their believers, they will lick their wounds for a few years and then they’ll be back with even greater force and bloodlust than before.

We in the west have just two options: 1) we must either find a way to bring about a massive reformation among the 1.6 billion Muslims of the world… a solution that is given little or no creative thought whatsoever in western nations, or 2) we must be prepared to defend ourselves against an unending onslaught of radical Islamists who wish to either convert us or kill us. There are no other alternatives.

Given what we see as the near term future of Europe, we might wish to warn our European allies, “The last ones out of Europe, please turn out the lights.”

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College. He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.

WTO Authorizes $1 Billion in Retaliatory Tariffs Against COOL

map-North-America_406x250The World Trade Organization (WTO) has authorized Canada and Mexico to charge the U.S. $1 billion in retaliatory tariffs for country-of-origin labeling (COOL) on meat.Last spring, WTO rejected a U.S. appeal of its decision that COOL unfairly discriminates against meat imports and gives the advantage to domestic meat products.

COOL, which went into effect for meat in 2013, requires that packaging indicate the country, or countries, where animals were born, raised and slaughtered.

Canada and Mexico initially sought more than $3 billion in retaliatory tariffs. The United States Trade Representative (USTR) said this was a dramatic overestimation of damages and argued that the WTO set allowable tariffs at no more than $43.22 million and $47.55 million for Canada and Mexico, respectively.

WTO decided on Monday that Canada could impose $780 million in retaliatory tariffs for COOL, and Mexico could impose $228 million.

Bill Bullard, CEO for R-CALF USA, called the decision “utterly absurd,” arguing that those numbers can’t possibly represent the losses those countries are facing.

Other industry groups, such as the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, the National Grain and Feed Association, the National Pork Producers Council, and the National Chicken Council, urged Congress to repeal COOL immediately.

“It is important that the United States adhere to its WTO obligations and set an example for the rest of the world, particularly as it pursues significant new trade accords under the Trans Pacific Partnership and other initiatives,” said Randy Gordon, president of the National Grain and Feed Association. “A full repeal of COOL is the only policy option available that unquestionably would prevent imposition of sanctions and the economic damage that would result.”

Over the summer, many in Congress called for a full repeal of COOL for beef, pork and chicken, and the House of Representatives passed a bill which would do just that. Others, such as Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), said action had to wait at least until WTO had approved tariff levels. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) offered up a bill to make COOL on meat voluntary.

POLITICO reports that a rider to fix COOL could be included in the omnibus bill expected later this week.

“The WTO has warned us multiple times, and Congress has ignored the warning,” said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, in reaction to WTO’s decision Monday. “This is no longer a warning. Retaliation is real. Now more than ever, we need to repeal COOL.”

But R-CALF’s Bullard said that Congress still shouldn’t repeal COOL or make it voluntary.

“Instead, Congress should direct our U.S. Trade Ambassador to negotiate a diplomatic solution to Canada’s and Mexico’s complaints,” he said. “Congress should also direct the U.S. Agriculture Secretary to immediately begin promulgating new COOL rules to close some of the loopholes identified in the WTO dispute that are effectively limiting the effectiveness of COOL.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Obama Goes it Alone on Gun Control

8The Radical-in-Chief ignores the Constitution and the Jihadist threat.

Joseph Klein FOR FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

Wiping away tears that eluded him when he spoke about the jihadist massacres in Paris and San Bernardino, President Obama condemned congressional inaction in the face of gun violence during remarks he delivered from the East Room of the White House on Tuesday morning. The president vowed to fill in the void through executive action. The most egregious of these measures is a wholesale re-writing of the definition of what constitutes a “seller” in order to extend the reach of federal government control over all gun owners. Obama listed this as his top priority action, ahead of what he described as “smart and effective enforcement of gun safety laws that are already on the books.”

Enforcing the laws already on the books is the responsibility of the executive branch. Making new laws or changing existing laws is the responsibility of the legislative branch.

Apparently, President Obama has learned nothing from the Supreme Court’s reversal of his unconstitutional recess appointments and the judicial stay issued against his unconstitutional immigration amnesty executive orders. Obama gave little comfort to skeptics when he claimed in his White House remarks that “I believe in the Second Amendment. It’s there written on the paper.”

The problem is that Obama believes the Constitution is only just a piece of paper, which he can erase and then use the blank page to write his own rules of governance. After all, this is the same man who complained years ago that the Constitution says “what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

As president, Obama has gone even further, railing against the separation of powers. If Congress does not act the way he thinks it should, he will just proceed all by himself. In his mind, he is doing something he must on behalf of the American people right now, while the “gun lobby” is holding Congress “hostage.”

As usual, President Obama raised strawman arguments to justify his latest power grab.

For example, Obama claimed in his East Room remarks announcing his gun control executive actions that “we are the only advanced country on Earth that sees this kind of mass violence erupt with this kind of frequency. It doesn’t happen in other advanced countries. It’s not even close.”

Obama’s claim is misleading.

First of all, we do not have complete data from countries such as China and Russia to draw any meaningful conclusions. Secondly, raw total numbers of mass shootings tell less in terms of real comparisons than normalizing the numbers utilizing some constant unit of population. According to a study conducted by the Crime Prevention Research Center, which compared annual death rates per million people from mass public shootings between the United States and European countries from 2009 to mid-2015, the United States ranks 9th. The United States has the same ranking when comparing the frequency of mass public shootings during the same time period. This data, by the way, was compiled before the deadly jihadist mass shootings in Paris that claimed 130 lives last November.

Moreover, deaths in general that have occurred as a result of gun violence have declined sharply during the last twenty years. According to a Pew Research Center analysis of death certificate data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “The nation’s overall gun death rate has declined 31% since 1993.” President Obama is deliberately distorting the scope of the problem to convince Americans that we are facing an urgent crisis which he must address immediately to resolve.

Obama also tried to debunk the argument that other forms of weapons such as knives, which are not so heavily regulated, are also effective lethal instruments that can be as deadly as guns. Israeli civilians, facing the constant threat of Palestinian knife attacks which have taken multiple lives, would beg to differ. Conveniently ignoring what is going on in Israel today, Obama chose to use a knife attack in China to buttress his point that guns are far more deadly:

“Some of you may recall, at the same time that Sandy Hook happened, a disturbed person in China took a knife and tried to kill — with a knife — a bunch of children in China. But most of them survived because he didn’t have access to a powerful weapon.”

Again, Obama is guilty of cherry-picking his facts, or perhaps he was just misinformed. Last September, knife-wielding jihadists killed at least 50 people to death at a coalmine in China’s violence-ridden Xinjiang province. Last June, a group of knife-wielding jihadists killed 33 people and injured 130 others. In September 2014, a deranged man stabbed three children and a teacher to death and wounded several others at a Chinese primary school that had refused to enroll his daughter. These are just a few examples of deadly stabbing incidents in China.

Guns are very strictly controlled in China, but not knives. People who are determined to engage in mass killings, whatever their motives may be, will find the weapon to carry out their evil deeds.

Obama tried to debunk the argument that comprehensive background checks might not have stopped at least some previous mass killings. “I reject that thinking,” he said. Obama cited Connecticut as an example of a state where background checks make a difference. “After Connecticut passed a law requiring background checks and gun safety courses, gun deaths decreased by 40 percent — 40 percent,” he proclaimed to applause. Obama omitted to mention that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in Connecticut happened seventeen years after the passage of that law. According to the final Report of the State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of Danbury, “All of the firearms were legally purchased by the shooter’s mother.”

Moreover, the president undercut his own argument regarding the need for more gun control measures when he casually mentioned that gun violence claiming the lives of kids “happens on the streets of Chicago every day.” Chicago has amongst the strictest gun control laws in the country.

Some proponents of Obama’s executive actions claim they are modest improvements to tighten loopholes in existing laws, ramp up enforcement resources, improve dealers’ reporting of lost or stolen guns, address mental health issues including better information sharing and boost gun safety technology. However, Obama’s past performance on a host of issues indicates that if you give him an inch he will take a mile. His first priority – to require anyone the Obama administration deems to be “in the business of selling firearms” to “get a license and conduct background checks”- is an invitation to further abuse of power. According to a report in the New York Times, White House officials have said that someone selling even one or two guns could be considered in the business of selling firearms and subject to the new requirements. How would a barter arrangement instead of a cash transaction be treated?

President Obama should save his tears for the victims of global jihad, including those Americans killed in such places as Fort Hood, Boston, Seattle, Chattanooga and San Bernardino. If he wants his final year in office to show any accomplishments, he should go after ISIS, al Qaeda and other jihadist groups who mean to do us harm with the “fierce urgency of now” that he reserving for his gun control agenda. The president’s drive to release more and more jihadists from Guantanamo, some of whom have returned to battle against us, demonstrates his “fierce urgency” in the opposite direction.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,415 other followers

%d bloggers like this: