Archive for the ‘lies’ Category

The Manic Media Hatred of the AR15 – Part 2

Posted: September 19, 2013 by ShortTimer in Guns, Journalism, Leftists, lies, Media

Emily Miller of the Washington Times was on Cam & Company/NRA News last night, and she discussed the fact that the New York Times went and reported that the DC Naval Yard murderer had an AR15… then he tried to buy one but was turned down by some Virginia state law, both of which are complete fabrications.  They not only got it wrong, they got it wrong over and over, and intentionally.

From the Washington Times:

Aaron Alexis passed Federal Bureau Investigation and Virginia state background checks to purchase a shotgun from Sharpshooters Small Arms Range in Lorton, Va., over the weekend.

Alexis did not attempt to purchase a rifle or handgun from the store, The Washington Times has learned exclusively.

She explained this thoroughly on Cam & Company, where she basically talked about how she called the gun store and asked them what the story was.  (She’s also much more of a journalist than a gun person, because when she mentioned the shotgun Alexis used, she got the designation wrong.)

A little big of journalism can go a long way, as Emily Miller found more of the story and reported it in the Washington Times again:

The liberal media is so obsessed with linking the Navy Yard shooter with the AR-15 rifle that it is making up false tales of Aaron Alexis trying to obtain one.

The New York Times attempts to give the impression that a so-called assault-weapon law stopped Alexis from buying a rifle in Virginia, but that is not true.

It’s important to make yesterday’s point again.  The media is lying in order to create a narrative.  The NYT said Alexis was prohibited from buying an AR due to some VA gun law that doesn’t exist.  The message is AR=bad, gun control=good.  But it’s all a fabrication.

“Virginia law does not prohibit the sale of assault rifles to out-of-state citizens who have proper identification,” Dan Peterson, a Virginia firearms attorney, told me Tuesday night. The required identification is proof of residency in another state and of U.S. citizenship, which can be items like a passport, birth certificate or voter identification card.

That’s the only difference in VA law.  If you want to buy a rifle that can take 20-round magazines or more, or that has a folding stock or threaded barrel, you have to prove you’re a US citizen.

While it is true that Alexis rented and shot an AR-type rifle at Sharpshooters Small Arms Range in Lorton, sources close to the investigation tell me that he did not attempt to buy the rifle.

Instead, he passed both the federal and state background checks and bought a Remington 870 shotgun and 30 shotgun shells (00 buckshot), which he used, tragically, to kill 12 innocent people.

The Times’ mistakes indicate the paper is trying to give the impression only some unexplained “assault weapon” ban in Virginia stopped Alexis from killing more people. The truth is that we have thousands of gun laws on the books, but none of them stopped a homicidal maniac intent on mass murder.

On top of this, there’s the obvious disconnect that someone with a secret security clearance and special access to a naval base has already been background checked by the government with access to very restricted areas.  His prior gun-related offenses and craziness didn’t restrict him from working on a “secure” facility.

He not only bought a shotgun (as endorsed by Joe Biden) and not an evil baby-killing assault death murder rifle, but he’s been passed through enough background checks to be in secure areas.  If the people who are trusted with secret clearance can’t be trusted with guns, who can?  The answer, to the left, of course, is no one (they exempt themselves and their enforcers, of course).  Their goal is an eventual total ban.  Asking why we should trust a government that spies on citizens, spies on journalists, targets political dissidents with the tax system, smuggles weapons to narcoterrorist cartels and mid-east terrorist cells, is responded to with the typical modern liberal/leftist argument.

Consider as well that when the Aurora, CO murderer decided to go on his rampage, he obtained everything he used to make both his incenidary bombs at his apartment and his assorted weaponry used at the theater, not as a madman, but as a neuroscience graduate student.  On paper, he was the promising future doctor or neurosurgeon because nobody reported any erratic behavior – there’s no mechanism to have him taken in for treatment.  On paper, the DC Naval Yard murderer was a man admitted every day into a secure facility with secret clearance and a 10 year record in the Navy that had all its flaws overlooked, and with run-ins with the police that never turned into convictions that would have denied him access to firearms, or more importantly, perhaps gotten him recognized for being a danger to himself & others so he could’ve been treated.

Ultimately, criminals and madmen intent on mayhem will get weapons.  All that’s necessary to make a firebomb is a container and a source of fuel.  It’s a good thing we don’t sell IED firebomb fuel by the gallon on the corner.

gas station

Oh yeah, that’s right.

It might be wise to focus on the actor in these crimes, not the tools.  Fixating on the tools gets grandma strip-searched at the airport for nail clippers while a jihadi sneaks through with a bomb in his underwear.  Fixating on the tools means that when Russia lets us know about a pair of Chechen terrorists and our intelligence and defense agencies do nothing, they’re surprised when terrorists come up with IEDs.  Remember what the I in that stands for – improvised.

But that would require a whole other kind of discussion and solution, and it’ll be one that neither aids those who desire a more powerful government, nor those who want quick solutions.

The Manic Media Hatred of the AR15

Posted: September 19, 2013 by ShortTimer in Guns, Leftists, lies, Media, Ruling Class, Tyranny

They really hate America’s Rifle.  They really, really hate it.

Some idiot at the NY Daily news had a propaganda column all ready to go.

ny daily news ar

Of course, the DC Naval Yard murderer didn’t use an AR.  He used a shotgun.  He took Joe Biden’s advice.

Mediaite has a huge roundup of various leftist media who blamed a rifle that wasn’t even there.

CNN had yet another “AR15s are bad, m’kay” piece.

(CNN) — It has been called the most popular rifle in America, and it briefly returned to the spotlight after Monday’s shooting at the Navy Yard: the AR-15.

It’s also in the CNN slideshow.  The first three photos of police and military personnel there to secure the area all carry AR variants.

A U.S. law enforcement official said Monday that gunman Aaron Alexis unleashed a barrage of bullets using an AR-15, a rifle and a semi-automatic handgun. Authorities believed the AR-15 was used for most of the shooting, the official said. The news prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein, one of the strongest proponents of a ban on assault weapons like the AR-15, to issue a statement the same day asking, “When will enough be enough?”

Except he didn’t use an AR.  The demand was made again to ban semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines… yet this massacre was perpetrated with a shotgun and pistols taken from murdered security guards.

However, federal law enforcement sources told CNN Tuesday that authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one — a shotgun — that investigators believe Alexis brought in to the compound. The other two weapons, which sources say were handguns, may have been taken from guards at the Navy complex.

The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning’s shootings. Authorities are still investigating precisely how many weapons Alexis had access to and when.

One shotgun, two handguns at last count, both handguns taken from guards.

Regardless, the massacre pushed the AR-15 back into the gun-control debate.

No, it didn’t.  There was no AR15 used.  The media pushed it, and the rights-control debate, to the forefront.

Within a day, there were claims in the media across print, TV, and radio that “high capacity magazines” and “assault weapons” needed to be banned to prevent shootings like the Naval Yard murders, but the DC murders were done with neither of those things.

Anti-gun tyrants simply have one goal, and that is the total disarmament and subjugation of the populace, and they will not ever stop.

It seems hyperbolic, but listen to what they’ve said and the context it’s in.

A series of murders took place in a gun free zone in a gun free base in a gun free city, where a criminal madman walked through the gun free signs, killed people, and kept on going because no one could resist him as they were disarmed.  He didn’t do it with an AR, he didn’t do it with “high capacity” magazines.  He did it with a Remington 870 shotgun and some 00 buck shells and a whole lot of evil.  The response from the media is “Ban the AR15!  Ban assault clips!  Ban the shoulder thing that goes up!”

Who in their right mind can have as a solution a demand to ban something totally unrelated?  But they’re not mad, they’re simply fixated on the next step to the destruction of individual liberty, and the physical tools to maintain one’s own life are a big obstacle to pushing people into what the Ruling Class demands they become.  It’s been a goal for decades, and they simply dance in the blood of the victims every chance they get, thinking that the next series of murders (again committed by a schizophrenic on mind-altering drugs) will give them the emotional push to convince the populace to not think about their actions and simply act and make this thing they want happen.

They can’t win a rational argument (hence why they frame tyranny with the word “reasonable”), they have all of history disproving their suppositions and showing their desires for abolition of self-defense tools and rights to be inherently destructive to the individual, but they can dance in the blood of innocents and scream very loudly about their feelings.  They will,they do, and they are using every avenue to attack the rights of self-defense.

volk shooting victims violated twice

politician bodyguard oleg volk

Iraqi AK oleg volk

Photo by Oleg Volk.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

As soon as Obama decided not to decide on Syria and passed the buck to congress, anyone looking at it could see he’d play politics with it and use congress as his scapegoat.  If congress said no and he chose not to go to Syria, he could blame congress for Assad’s use of chemical weapons.  If congress said no and it was a wise choice, he’d pat himself on the back for staying out.  If congress said yes and the war went well, he could claim credit.  If congress said yes and the war went sour, he could blame congress.

Obama has chosen to completely and 100% pass the buck in order to shift blame.

Now he’s even blaming others for his own red lines:

“I didn’t set a red line, the world set a red line,” Obama said. “My credibility’s not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’s credibility’s on the line.”

Obama set a red line a year ago.  Now he’s saying he didn’t, the world did.  Now he’s saying it’s not his credibility, it’s everybody else’s – everybody else who he can blame.

And he’ll blame everyone:

My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line and America and Congress’s credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.

“Norms?”

norm cheersAnd he blames the world:

So, the question is, how credible is the international community when it says this is an international norm that has to be observed.

“International norms?”  When the hell do we go to war for “international norms?”  Are we the conformity police now?  This is a very thin veneer of an excuse for war.

The question is how credible is Congress when it passes a treaty saying we have to forbid the use of chemical weapons.

So what?  Syria isn’t a signatory.

If you want to lean on them with sanctions, great.  But military actions against them for breaking a treaty they’re not party to is like going into your neighbor’s house and spanking your neighbor’s kid for not cleaning his room.  Make all the arguments about the greater good that you want, it’s really not your place, no matter what the neighborhood “norms” are.

That is progressivism at it’s core, though.  Woodrow Wilson’s desire to get involved in the Great War, and Teddy Roosevelt’s desire to get involved in all sorts of noble little wars – we belonged in none of them but there was always some great moral argument for going to war – to save Europe from the Hun or to avenge the Lusitania or the Maine.

If we’re going to be the world’s policeman, we’re two years late to the hundred-thousand conventional deaths in Syria, and we were smuggling anti-air missiles to Al Qaeda in Syria (which is why Ambassador Chris Stevens was out in Benghazi and not in Tripoli).  But this isn’t about being the world’s policeman or the role that would entail, this is about the president covering his ass, using classic progressive rhetoric to say “We must act!  Now now now!  Action!  The time for talk is over!  We must act!” and force congress into a decision that gives him a scapegoat.

Obama and his willing media sycophants are phenomenal liars.  They can convince people that their own words don’t mean what they say, that a war isn’t a war, and that Obama didn’t say what he said, that nations that don’t sign treaties must have military force used on them to enforce “norms”, that 1000 nerve gas deaths are worse than 100,000 conventional deaths, and that congress is to blame no matter what goes wrong.

It really is masterful propaganda.

One last bit here, from Real Clear Politics:

First of all, I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous thing that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for. And so, when I said, in a press conference, that my calculus about what’s happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn’t something I just kind of made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air. There was a reason for it. That’s point number one. Point number two, my credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.

Again, Syria isn’t a signatory to chemical weapons treaties.  But the Syria Accountability Act is rather interesting, since it was passed in 2003, and that means Obama’s been ignoring it since 2008, and his party was ignoring it when Kerry and Pelosi were busy sitting down to dinner with Assad.  It also only applies to international terrorism, not a civil war, and nowhere in the bill is there a provision for military strikes, only sanctions.

The UK Daily Mail has made a point that John “Stupid People Get Stuck In Iraq” Kerry used to wine and dine with Syrian president Assad:

kerry and assad 2009

But he’s not the only one.  Remember when Nancy Pelosi took a little trip to Syria in 2007 to say what wonderful people the Assad regime is?

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad shakes hands with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in Damascus

Remember how she was harshly criticized by many on the right since she was hanging around with a dictator and giving a thug legitimacy?

pelosi assad ad rjc

Don’t worry if you forgot, the media would never remind you.

Now she wants to bomb Syria for being “outside the circle of civilized behavior”.

Are you serious?

eviloverlord12

Remember, these people will not stop.  They do not stop.  Theya re professional propagandists, and professional revolutionaries, professionally out to disarm you and fundamentally change the country.

From WSJ:

Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner has uncovered a fascinating document: an 80-page “talking points” monograph titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging,” written by a trio of Democratic political operatives.

The document, as Bedard writes, instructs politicians and advocates “to hype high-profile gun incidents like the Florida slaying of Trayvon Martin to win support for new gun control laws.” Essentially it’s a how-to book on inciting a moral panic.

The booklet explicitly urges foes of the Second Amendment to abjure rationality in favor of the argumentum ad passiones, or appeal to emotion. “When talking to broader audiences, we want to meet them where they are,” the authors advise. “That means emphasizing emotion over policy prescriptions, keeping our facts and our case simple and direct, and avoiding arguments that leave people thinking they don’t know enough about the topic to weigh in.”

The 80-page propaganda booklet can be found here: Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging.

gun violence messaging propaganda booklet pg10

gun violence messaging propaganda booklet pg11The entire thing is a ruthless propaganda screed designed to train people into using emotional arguments to brainwash citizenry into believing that they can surrender to government to make themselves “safe”.

This is subversion, professional propaganda designed to destroy freedoms paid for in blood of past and current generations.

gun violence messaging propaganda booklet pg31

It’s a wonderful propaganda primer that’s worthy of being dissected on every page.

There is no “freedom from” violence.  You can’t make people safer by making them defenseless.

The Declaration of Independence also says this:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

That’s achieved through force of arms.

The NRA and the “gun lobby” are more in tune with Americans than the professional left.  The argument put forth there is the Tim Robbins Team America “corporations being all corporationy in their corporation buildings and they make money”.  It’s not only cynical, it’s silly.  The firearms industry has been doing booming business in the face of legal threats because people want to get arms while they still can.  The threat of legal action by the statist left has created a market shift.  People buy guns for their own reasons, not because of NRA lobbying or gun company marketing.

The whole thing is worthy of dissection, but just a couple more pages as examples:

gun violence messaging propaganda booklet pg49Shoot First and Kill at Will are absurd.  Unless threatened with greivous bodily harm or death, you can’t shoot at all.  In many states, even showing a weapon unjustifiably will get you sent to jail – brandishing.

Stand Your Ground replaces Duty To Retreat.

The anti-gun left wants you to be forced to retreat.

It’s indicative of the whole “government will do what’s best for you” mindset of the left.  In this case, it’s quite literal.  You must trust the state to protect you, you must trust the state’s officers to protect you, and you must flee because you are not allowed to defend yourself.

Demonization of individual action is the goal, and absurd talking points that lie and willfully ignore reality are their stock and trade.

gun violence messaging propaganda booklet pg51

There are no gun-toting vigilantes in their neighborhoods.  Normal folks do not want to end up being targeted by the entire federal government for trying to defend their neighborhoods.  No one wants to be George Zimmerman and be targeted by President Barack “If I Had A Son He’d Look Like Trayvon” Obama and Eric “Sends Guns to Narcoterrorist Cartels And Then Sets Up A 1-800 Number To Target One Man” Holder and the entire DOJ for thoughtcrimes.

Why should employees of the government’s lives be more important than yours, citizen?  Why should trained, disciplined police officers with body armor and backup on call, and disciplined soldiers with body armor, backup, and artillery fire on call have more legal leeway to defend themselves than your 80 year old grandmother who’s facing a pair of home invaders?  The argument is that they need to crack down on grandma because she should have more government restrictions that minimize her ability to defend herself.  The threat to her life isn’t meaningful to the left.

They think you’re too stupid to defend yourself, and should not be allowed to defend yourself.  Your life isn’t meaningful to them.  You’re too stupid to live your own life, so you’re clearly too stupid to defend yourself.  Just like ol’ Colorado Democrat Joe Salazar said.

oleg volk salazar rape

To the propaganda again, all a person has to do is claim they’re threatened and have all the facts and evidence back it up as well.  And even that may not be enough, as evidenced by Zimmerman being targeted nationally by race-baiting hatemongers and the DOJ.  Plus for normal people (not criminals), they get their lives turned upside down by the process of being involved in even a justified shooting that prosecutors pass on.

Anyone not carrying a gun in the same circumstances as a good shoot won’t have anything to claim – as they’ll be a victim of greivous bodily harm or murder.  Criminals and thugs win, innocent people become dead victims buried on the moral high ground.

To contrast:

oleg volk cop with rifle 1

More contrast:

nssf infographic

Trey Gowdy explains that CIA operatives are being moved and having their names changed so they can’t talk to congress.

Via HotAir, from CNN:

Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings.

The goal of the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if anyone is talking to the media or Congress.

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.

In exclusive communications obtained by CNN, one insider writes, “You don’t jeopardize yourself, you jeopardize your family as well.”

Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.

A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously.

While it is still not known how many of them were CIA, a source tells CNN that 21 Americans were working in the building known as the annex, believed to be run by the agency.

A “phony” scandal according to Obama, with seriously wounded operatives being moved around the country, having their names changed, and being hidden from congress.  Most transparent administration ever.

Via Jawa Report, from FOX:

The federal government is hiring what it calls a “Behavioral Insights Team” that will look for ways to subtly influence people’s behavior, according to a document describing the program obtained by FoxNews.com. Critics warn there could be unintended consequences to such policies, while supporters say the team could make government and society more efficient.

To make society more efficient – because you don’t know how to make your own decisions, they will manipulate you into their chosen path.  They will adjust your choices, and create you into their image of the perfect efficient serf.

Milton Friedman famously said that we should be thankful for government inefficiency, because without it, we’d all be slaves.

Such policies — which encourage behavior subtly rather than outright require it — have come to be known as “nudges,” after an influential 2008 book titled “Nudge” by former Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein and Chicago Booth School of Business professor Richard Thaler popularized the term.

The term “nudge” has already been associated with the new program, as one professor who received Shankar’s email forwarded it to others with the note: “Anyone interested in working for the White House in a ‘nudge’ squad? The UK has one and it’s been extraordinarily successful.”

Cass Sunstein is one of the most vile men on the planet, who desires to corrupt institutions made to serve the people into institutions that control the people.  It’s for your own good, you stupid peasant.

Richard Thaler told FoxNews.com that the new program sounds good.

“I don’t know who those people are who would not want such a program, but they must either be misinformed or misguided,” he said.

“The goal is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government by using scientifically collected evidence to inform policy designs. What is the alternative? The only alternatives I know are hunches, tradition, and ideology (either left or right.)”

“Misguided” to this master of puppets is anyone who opposes him.  “MIsinformed” means you haven’t been properly indoctrinated to accept him as your master, as someone who knows better than him.

The goal is to control people, to force them to make decisions they otherwise wouldn’t, to use a government instituted by the people as a tool to preserve freedom as a tool to coerce behavior.  It is the antithesis of freedom, and it is the most insidious form of tyranny.

Thaler is a would-be master of men, and a liar of the first order.

The alternative is that individuals make decisions for themselves, because no luciferian social scientist knows better than any individual in their own life.  He doesn’t know what’s best for you.  You have your own individual life full of information that you’ve collected that makes a difference in your own life that should inform your own decisions.  The “ideology” tack at the end is just to make him seem so “moderate” and “reasonable” by saying he dismisses both sides with his third way… of government leading you, you stupid, contemptible peon.  He mocks any other ideas as hunches, too, as though people don’t make their own decisions.

His ridicule of tradition is easily shot down by a man much wiser – Thomas Sowell:

“For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before.”

But they are your masters, and they will lead, and they will educate you into believing that following is your natural condition, your correct place in life, and ultimately that it’s for your own good that you’re a serf.