I have an problem with the fact that public schools refrain from teaching the Constitution, while at the same time public education continues to turn out social justice warriors that claim to stand up for their "rights" when they aren't even privy to those stated rights in the first place. My question is, how can you encourage young ones to go out and stand up for their liberties, when they don't understand the word liberty in the first place, nor can they identify with Constitutional rights and the context in which they were established? This breeds uneducated zombies, or "useful idiots" as Vladimir Lenin used to call them. This term is obviously not a term of endearment, but it is not meant to be an insult. Useful idiot, is defined as a person that fights for a cause that he/she does not fully understand. College kids that think communism is superior to capitalism do not have a grasp on what communism is in theory or practice. They are not aware that 95 million + people were murdered at the hands of communist leaders in the 20th century. Instead they are taught to look up to these murderers as role models, or great men. Horrible acts of genocide, by the likes of Mao, Che, and Stalin, is not recognized as evil by academia, and if you compare the number of people killed at the hands of Adolf Hitler, the number murdered by Stalin, Stalin takes the cake. Why the selective condemnation and outrage? Our young people are being brainwashed by educators residing in academia, some of which, acted as domestic terrorists in the 1960's, Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn to name a few. I have to believe that kids aren't taught constitutional rights, because the powers that be want to be able to tell them anything and have them follow blindly, any cause that seem politically expedient for progressivism at any given time. The absence of a foundation, assures that no questions will be asked when the recruiting for foot soldiers begins to perpetuate the spread of toxic leftist ideology at the most opportune time, based on current societal trends. If we are going to have young people stand for liberty, then we must teach them what liberty is, and why it is important.
Terrorism is chaos, but more often than not it is controlled chaos. It is chaotic because it exists in so many forms, but individual attacks seem controlled and organized. Defining terror is not as easy as it may seem. There is not a one size fits all formula to aid in classification of a group or to develop a strategy for prevention or a response after the point of failure. Terror has no race or face, nor does it have a specific country of origin. The only way to get a handle on terror, is to understand strategies and tactics that are used by organizations, and looking for weaknesses, and ways to exploit those weaknesses. It is paramount to know how they operate, what makes them tick, what they see as an end game, are they working toward apocalypse, how are they funded and who is providing the funding. We need to know our enemy, and be skilled at using that knowledge to hit them where they are most vulnerable.
We all have tendencies to act and operate a certain way. It might be the route that we take to the grocery store, or the sequence that we follow when we get dressed. As human beings, we are creatures of habit, and this conformity to order can be beneficial to us, but it can also be detrimental. Terrorists study their targets, and they study their enemy. For a terror attack to be successful, the terrorist mind must understand the environment in which they are operating, and the standard operating procedure of the enemy. The US anti-terrorism effort has to involve the same kind of strategic evaluation when attempting to prevent terrorist attacks on US soil. Analysis of terrorist groups, their operations, and preferences, is necessary to prevent acts of violence at the hands of these groups.
What terrorist tactics and strategies can be exploited in order to enhance our national security? That would depend on what group you are looking at and their operational preferences. ISIS for example, has used free market principles to acquire materials and funding. When they originally took control of Mosul, the intent was not limited to the desire to put another notch in their belt for the caliphate. Mosul was a strategic move, that gave ISIS control of the city’s natural resources and the means by which to manufacture goods. ISIS has created terrorist’s economy, as they have used the land that they take for the caliphate, for its resources and geographical location by seizing oil, selling it to neighboring countries, stealing military equipment and either choosing to sell it, or use it for their own fighters. ISIS has even created their own currency that utilizes precious metals like gold and silver. These business savvy terrorists make it necessary for intelligence analysts to view this group and its financial dealings differently, especially when it comes to monitoring transactions while attempting to intercept those that appear shady or inconsistent with what is generally considered legitimate in its appearance. Mosul was just recently taken back from ISIS, after being in their possession for quite some time.
Behavioral profiling is an important part of understanding terrorists and their intentions. The fact that terrorist attacks usually rely on simplicity, rather than intricate plans with many moving parts, makes the tangible warning signs much more difficult to observe, left of boom. The intangible quality of one’s behavior can be the most obvious indication that is available to you right before things start to get chaotic. Someone that is walking through an airport to get on a plane with his/her family, is not going to act the same as someone that is getting ready to blow themselves up or crash a plane. Law enforcement and national security professionals entrusted with the task of keeping America safe, must also be able to observe physiological changes in individuals and integrate those observations into a broader profile analysis. These physiological signs might include, increased heart rate, diaphoresis, dilated pupils, etc. Many of these natural responses can be monitored via modern surveillance equipment that we currently have in airports and other potentially sensitive locations.
Another crucial part of any terrorist organizations’ operation, is recruiting. Recruiting is done through propaganda, and taking advantage of emotionally vulnerable individuals. Propaganda can come in the form of state run media, magazines, books, and even on Youtube. People like to win, and terror groups that tout their accomplishments, victories, and effectiveness of their jihadi message in the west, have no problems when it comes to bringing new blood into the organization. This is why we strive for tactical victories overseas, to show the world that terror can be defeated when they go toe to toe with world superpowers or western coalitions. It shoots holes in their message and shines light on their weaknesses. However, we have to keep in mind that there are limitations when it comes to tactical military victories. The optics may be good, but when you drive them out of the Middle East, and the evil invades western countries as we have seen recently in Europe and the US, the dynamic changes. Terrorists reside in every inhabitable continent and to think that we can wipe them out with bullets and bombs is blatantly naïve at best, extremely dangerous at worst. Instead we have to destroy their credibility and delegitimize their message of death and hate. Islamic terrorists draw their ideology straight from the Quranic texts, and understanding the Quran is absolutely necessary when dealing with jihadists that swear allegiance to Allah.
Islamic terrorism does not account for all terrorism in America or the world, but it does seem to be the most prominent, especially when looking at terror on a global scale. Many tactics used by the modern terrorist, have origins dating back to the founding of Islam, in the 7th century. Quranic scripture offers Muhammad as the perfect role model for men to emulate. Quran (Surah Al-Ahzab, Verse 21) states, “Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.” Knowing that Muhammad was the model follower of Islam, allows you to understand the ideology that exists in this belief system, and how that ideology affects the actions and state of mind of a jihadist leading up to an attack. Jihad was a task that was given to followers by the prophet according to Quranic text. It is referenced in the Quran as, “striving in the path of God” and has been interpreted various ways, including striving for morality and armed struggle (Lewis, 2007). If we hope to prevail, in a battle with an ideology such as this, we should aim to destroy the credibility of that ideology and removing the mystique, and spectacular optics that are fed to potential recruits though propaganda. This means more winning by the US, and more dead terrorists on the other side to use as a form of counter-propaganda. Tactical victories only go so far, and they are a vehicle for taking away the glorification of the ideology, but if you hope to defeat an ideology by dropping more bombs, you are just participating in an exercise of whack-a-mole (Gorka, 2016). We are in an age of information, and ideology spreads like wildfire through the internet, and other digital outlets. 100 years ago, ISIS, Al Qaeda propaganda or the like, might have never had a global impact, due to the lack of resources to distribute the message. The information age is a double edge sword, as it can aid forces of evil, or it can give firepower to the opposition to eradicate that evil.
Many refer to Islam when they hear the word terrorism, but terrorism has no ethnic boundaries, and it does not claim any nationality. Terrorists that operate without a government sponsor, or without support from a known funded terrorist organization can kill with the same impunity, and channel the same hate, as any well-funded professional terrorist. Individuals that may commit acts of terror, in order to persuade policy makers, may not leave the same kind of paper trail, thus making it more difficult to observe activities or transactions, that might otherwise be associated with potential terrorists. Blinders cannot be worn at any time and stereotypes must be abandoned, or the probability of letting something slip by you, goes up significantly. Terrorists are classified by their experience, effectiveness, abundance or scarcity of funding and the entities that provide said funding, ideology and common cause. Race, gender, faith, and age are not relevant when one is attempting to profile, as terrorists have operatives that tend to be so diverse, that general appearance can be very deceiving when trying to identify a potential threat.
To stop a terrorist, you must be able to think like a terrorist. Knowing the rationale that accompanies decisions on target selection, and potential media exposure, makes it a little easier to predict where the next attack will happen, and where it will come from (Wright, 2011). While studying the enemy, one must remember that terrorists study law enforcement in the same fashion and that they adapt based on patterns of behavior that they observe. This is why we are told from day one to vary the sequences in how we operate, and not to fall into a cyclic routine that can be observed and capitalized upon by an observer. Terrorism exists mainly as a means by which to instill fear. This goal can be met through a ridiculously high body count, or a spectacular scene that is shown on every local and national news network for maximum psychological effect. The effects of an attack, reach every person in the country with a TV, not just those that are directly and physically affected by the attack. Mass media is played like a fiddle, at the hands of these barbarians.
Assassination is another tactic, that is used by almost every known terrorist organization. The target is usually someone that represents the establishment that the terror group is at war with, political, social, or economic figures, or a symbol of the infrastructure in which they are in conflict. Other reasons for assassinations can include intimidation, swaying public opinion, revenge, or to gain media attention. In modern times, with media being consumed by so many people, an assassination that is recorded, or on live TV, could have the maximum effect and instill fear in the masses. Look at the impact that the 8mm home movie taken by Abraham Zapruder while standing near the greasy knoll, had on the American mind, as it shows a US President having half of his head shot off while riding through Dealey Plaza. Media distribution has a huge impact on the public perception of terror.
False credentials when traveling, can be another indication of affiliation with a terrorist organization. Indicators that suggest fraudulent passports, include those that are physically altered, serial numbers that are on a watchlist, or show up as stolen, absence of additional supporting documents, significant gaps in travel history, and many others. Terrorists will always find a way, but that is why law enforcement must keep up with the latest trends in terrorist tactics as they change quite frequently, as they adapt to changes in security policy. Therefore, taking your shoes off when going through security, is ridiculous and ultimately ineffective in the grand scheme of things. We lose our rights permanently, and they just shift gears. Violating our rights to keep us safe? Some would say, that this argument doesn’t really pass the smell test.
Knowing the philosophical motivations of a terror group, is crucial when trying to anticipate their next move. Understanding details about their political leanings and world view, and whether those views are rational, or irrational in nature, is a great starting point. Is there a Bible, manifesto, or other religious or ideological doctrine that governs their actions, and sets a baseline for their moral behavior (Dyson, 2015)? It is important to keep in mind, that morality is relative, especially in religious texts, as killing someone of a certain race or religion would be the standard for morality in one case, whereas loving one’s enemies is the standard elsewhere. Ideology and word view drive the actions of terrorists, and variations of these closely held beliefs determine how they act and react to certain situations.
In conclusion, there is no cookie cutter approach to defining terror, as organizations and events must be observed objectively and handled in such a way, that the perpetrators are dealt with in an appropriate manner, and an assurance must be made that terrorists that take up arms against the US cannot use our criminal justice system against us by weighing things down with procedural pitfalls, and faux civil rights issues. As mentioned above our criminal justice system does not exist to hold trials for enemy combatants. Many people complain about our system here and the flaws that exist within the system, but the fact remains that we are still the best game in town. Local, state, and Federal law enforcement must work as one, left of boom as well as right, and there is no room for ego (Ernst, 2014). Those that enter public service should want to serve the public, and if they don’t, they are not being honest with themselves. Equal treatment under the law, without special treatment for elites or their big money donors. Most people have the view that the war on terror started on 9/11, but this conflict has existed for many years, even in this country, and 9/11 was just a significant escalation. Terrorism is a threat to our way of life, and the American dream. The fact that the very fabric of America rests in the balance here, gives our national security agencies a sense of urgency when dealing with this threat. Understanding the modus operandi of terrorists and the groups that they represent must be taken seriously, and this understanding has to include knowledge of, and respect for our constitution and the promise of liberty that America has always offered. Liberty and freedom shouldn’t be recognized as bumper sticker slogans, or words to regurgitate on the 4th of July. These hallmarks of America must continue to have meaning, those promises from our founders must not be forgotten, or go unrecognized. Awareness of the Saint Leo core value of responsible stewardship is necessary as we acknowledge the abundance of resources that God has made available to us, as we are staring evil in the face. We must effectively utilize our sense of morality when these tools are implemented, as not to affect individual rights and/or liberty, as we seek to strengthen our communities and promote safety within those communities.
Dyson, W. E. (2015). Terrorism: an investigators handbook.
Gorka, S. (2016). Defeating Jihad: the winnable war. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, a
division of Salem Media Group.
Lewis, B. (2007). The crisis of Islam holy war and unholy terror. Brisbane: Queensland Braille
Wright, L. (2011). The looming tower: Al-Qaeda and the road to 9/11. New York: Vintage
Ernst, M. (2014, March 20). How local and state cops fit into counterterrorism. Retrieved August
13, 2017, from https://www.policeone.com/police-products/police-technology/biometrics-
Jury nullification is a tool that can be utilized by a panel of jurors, to acquit a defendant that is most certainly guilty, in a case where all the evidence needed to deliver a guilty verdict is present. Some call it anarchy, others call it the purest form of justice, but it provides we the people with opportunity to look tyranny directly in the face, and overcome adversity, in a Constitutionally legal, and non-violent manner. The Federalist papers provide some insight into this little known legal maneuver, and even though the Constitution does not mention it specifically, it allows for it. It has been used throughout history for different reasons, and to different ends, but it is part of our American heritage and our constant struggle against abuse of power at the hands of government.
The US Constitution attempts to limit the power of the government through the delegation of authority to respective branches, while giving individual branches the power to override one another so that control is not centralized. It was a radical idea, that is still frowned upon even today. Some cringe with the thought that individuals would be able to carve their own path in their community, and in history. Many believe that lay people cannot be trusted with making decisions for themselves. But against all odds, the founding fathers fought for and won their independence. This led to a government, and a capitalist system that has been responsible for the highest standard of living, ever known to man. The original intention of the experiment was to avoid a dictatorship or oligarchy, by allowing representatives elected by localities to make policy collectively and giving everyone a voice through the election of individuals that are given the duty, to do the peoples’ work. It is not a perfect system, but it is the best game in town, as our founders put much thought and wisdom into our Constitutional Republican form of government. The judicial branch of the US system has been proven a powerful force in modern times, when it comes to interpreting the Constitution and the extent to which the limitations on government apply, while keeping in mind one’s individual rights and liberty. America’s legal system was founded on natural law, or God’s law, as the founding fathers believed that our rights come from our creator. Most laws however, are not concocted using a theological basis for inspiration. Sometimes there are circumstances that make literal interpretation of law unreasonable, and sometimes seemingly unfair. This can put some verdicts at the mercy of the circumstances surrounding the events in question. Then you have the potential for abuse of power that is always a distinct possibility when dealing with any government entity. George Washington once said, “government is not reason, it is not eloquence - it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action”. Jury nullification is said to be the last line of defense against the specter of judicial tyranny. Nullification makes sense, when you break it down and use a little logic. The judge cannot direct the jury to a verdict, even if the evidence to convict is overwhelming. This is the degree of autonomy that the jury has, and this independence from the powers that be is constitutionally sound, as Article III gives the court no power to coerce or force the jury to produce a verdict that is pleasing to the judge or the court. Judges already have much influence when it comes to the fate of the accused, especially when adjudicating habeas corpus actions that challenge convictions or sentences. Contemporary reviews of these actions, are evaluated by judges as they conduct judicial inquisitions, resolving disputes without utilization of a jury. The framers of the Constitution had an affinity for jury trials and the right of an individual to be provided such a trial. It would not be likely that the framers would approve of any court proceedings involving one’s rights and liberties, being decided by a lone judge, in the absence of a jury. Some make the case that a panel of jurors, with many minds functioning synergistically, are much more difficult to bribe, payoff, or blackmail, whereas a judge may be corrupted much easier and it can be done in a more expedient manner in order to serve those that pull the strings.
Jury nullification is constitutional given the fact that the powers of the judicial branch are focused and few, and the very concept of a jury trial is based on this juror independence. Article III does not give the court the power to order a guilty verdict, as this would make a jury irrelevant. The jury is to deliver a verdict independently, so even if the evidence is overwhelming and proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant can walk free if the jury disagrees with the way that the law was applied in that case, on moral grounds (Lehman, 1997). In Federalist Paper No. 83, Alexander Hamilton referred to a jury trial as the, “very palladium of free government” as it acts as a tool intended to provide a check on “arbitrary methods of prosecuting pretended offenses” that act as working components of judicial despotism (Hamilton, 1788).
In order to adequately define the argument that favors the use of jury nullification in specific constitutionally relevant scenarios, one must make the case as to why the law does not exist only as a method in which to enforce universal concepts of morality for the good of society, but also as a means to impose an oligarchy’s collective world view on the masses. Those that oppose this legal concept of jury nullification, argue that it undermines the rule of law. Those that advocate for jury nullification argue that it is a last line of defense for those that are taken advantage of by an overfunded, oppressive, out of control, Federal Government that has been lawless, time and time again, with little or no consequences for the perpetrators. The level of judicial activism or legislating from the bench that has occurred in recent years, is becoming a genuine threat, as judicial rulings become an emotional response to a series of events, rather than an interpretation of constitutional law. What do we the people do, when extra-constitutional power is wielded by those that have the ability to rob us of our liberty? One usually assumes that legality is synonymous with morality. The same could be said about illegality being associated with immoral behavior. These generalizations can be misleading. Legality is relative, and law is man-made. What is legal, may be nothing more than a product of a dictator’s world view. If something is legal, it does not mean that it is a good idea, or the right thing to do. Burning an American flag is legal, but it is not generally seen as a wise or respectful move. The terms mala in se, and mala prohibita, provide relevant contrast here as some actions are universally unacceptable (murder, rape, stealing etc.). Aside from the morality standard that may be applied to some instances, there is a matter of unconstitutional laws that were enacted, using means that are at odds with our founding document. An unconstitutional law passed via the legislative process, is not valid any more than a law that is done through usurpation of power by the executive branch or other government entity that attempts to circumvent checks and balances. The supremacy clause, otherwise known as Article VI only applies to laws that are “in pursuance of”, the limitations put forth by the US Constitution, as it does not give congress the power to write legislation that goes beyond the enumerated powers that are outlined in Article I. While jury nullification is not mentioned in our Constitution, the criminal jury and its crucial role in our legal system, shows up twice in our founding document, once in the body, and again in our Bill of Rights. Article III section 2 states that “The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury”. This sixth amendment also references the jury, stating “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury”.
There are many that feel jury nullification is a form of judicial anarchy, and that it is allows for the guilty to walk free (Conrad, 2014). Let’s look at this from a different perspective, through a prosecutor’s eyes. Do prosecutors have the ability to choose whether or not to bring charges against a defendant in cases where evidence shows proof of guilt? Of course they do, as this prosecutorial discretion is a major component of our justice system. Why should a jury made up of we the people, not have this tool at their disposal? There are a handful of states that have chosen to recognize the autonomy of a jury and their power to nullify. Georgia, Maryland, Indiana, and Oregon all have acknowledged in their state constitutions, that the jury has the power, but not the right to acquit a guilty man, and also states that jurors should not be informed by the court in advance that they can do so. The key here is that a judge cannot direct a verdict even when the evidence is present. A reversible error occurs if a judge directs a guilty verdict over an objection from the defendant.
To better understand how jury nullification applies to real life cases, one must look at instances where it was used successfully. Probably the most recent high-profile case that involved utilization of jury nullification was the Bundy Ranch standoff, where Americans came to the aid of a rancher in Nevada when the Bureau of Land Management sent armed agents to Cliven Bundy’s home and killed a portion of his cattle. Even though these Americans had taken up arms against a Federal agency, and driven them from Bundy’s land, they were acquitted because the jury refused to put up with tyranny (Ritter, 2017). Looking further back, another example of jury nullification can be found during prohibition, when about 60 percent of alcohol control laws were affected by nullification (Zubair, 2013).
Bushel’s Case, (1670) 124 E.R. 1006, is a great example of a jury that stood strong to nullify in the face of adversity. The jury would not convict Penn, even when Lord Mayo threatened to starve them if they did not deliver the verdict that he ordered. Law and legality walk a very fine moral line, and as mentioned above, legal does not always equal moral, so when a people collectively decide as a jury that there is a moral argument to be made contrary to the written law, they must act as one to uphold moral order. This means staying true to the pledge to be honest, just, and consistent in their word and deed, to exude commitment and adherence to the core value of integrity.
Just like the checks and balances that are programmed into our government system here in America, jury nullification acts as an alternative check on oppression and tyranny, that can be used by the citizenry in cases of extreme government overreach, or abuse of power. James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper No. 51, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself “(Madison, 1788). The framers knew that government would need to be on a leash, and that if an inch was given, a mile would be taken. We have seen this creep strategy over the last 100 + years in congress, the executive branch, and the judicial branch. Legislating from the bench has become quite common and the lasting repercussions regarding the rule of law can be catastrophic. Jury trials are a major component of our Constitution, our justice system, and our overall way of life as a society. One must keep in mind that if the Constitution does not give the Federal Government the power to do something or to enforce something, then that authority is automatically delegated to the individual sovereign states. Anything over and above these limitations are unlawful and should be deemed as such. The Constitution restricts government, and does not attempt to control people or restrict their actions. The American experiment, as it was realized by our founding fathers, has changed very much and Federal agencies, and bureaucrats are not hesitant to prosecute anyone if they perceive a threat to the government’s credibility or sustainability, even in cases where Uncle Sam is in the wrong. The U.S government can sometimes appear omnipotent, in that it has influence over every aspect of our lives, from our wallets, to the education of our children, and the products that we have access to when we go the grocery store. We the people, must stay vigilant and be educated as to our God given rights protected under the U. S. Constitution, and know that there will always be nefarious forces at work, trying to deny us those rights.
Conrad, C. S. (2014). Jury nullification: the evolution of a doctrine. Washington, D.C.: Cato
Hamilton, A. (n.d.). The Federalist #83. Retrieved October 01, 2017, from
Lehman, G. D. (1997). We the jury...: the impact of jurors on our basic freedoms. Amherst, NY:
Madison, J. (n.d.). The Federalist #51. Retrieved October 01, 2017, from
Press, K. R. (2017, August 22). Jury refuses to convict in Bundy ranch standoff. Retrieved
October 01, 2017, from https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/aug/22/jury-refuses-to-convict-
Zubair. (2013, April). Famous Jury Nullification Cases. Retrieved October 01, 2017, from
script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js">
I am disgusted with the PC culture that has taken root in this country. LGBT pride being stuffed down everyone’s throat, Black Lives Matter (BLM) setting fire to private businesses, destroying police cars, and being permitted to do so while local law enforcement is asked to stand down. Baltimore’s murder rate is through the roof right now because this PC culture has swallowed their community. Lawlessness has been given a green light, and has been embraced by establishment politicians, the so called mainstream media, and ultra-left wing hate groups like BLM that receive funding from Billionaire agitators like George Soros that are looking to destroy the American way of life.
Capitulation to immorality and barbarism, in the name of acceptance has created a major vulnerability in America. Islamic terrorism has able to take advantage of this weakness, and they are beating us over the head with it, every day. First of all, Islam is not peaceful, as Quranic scripture does not convey a message that allows for peace with non-Muslims. Open up to almost any page in this, sick, twisted, manual of hate, and you will not find a mention of peace. Compassion is only to be given to fellow Muslims, and the infidels are to convert, pay a tax (Jizya), or be killed. The Quran also has instructions for men, on how to beat their wives, and women are seen as nothing more than an object in which a man is to plant his seed for the purpose of procreation. Funny how the leftists in this country tend to come to the defense of Islam at every turn, but they ignore the real “war on women”, that is being waged by Muslims. That’s Islam and Muslims, with no need to attach the extremist or radical labels. The term radical Muslim is redundant, as Islam is inherently radical and extreme. Their willingness to commit unthinkable acts of violence, and the fact that the so called “moderate” Islamic leaders that reside in this country refuse to come out as one voice and condemn these violent acts right of boom, and in general, leads a reasonable person to believe that Muslims are working together to subvert the US Constitution, and impose Islamic law on the west, in a systematic manner. Europe and America are helping them do it as we allow political correctness to invade every aspect of our lives which in turn allows the Islamists to control aspects of our lives. Why do leftists get upset in America, when people protest Shariah law? It appears that this selective outrage, is a subtle way of showing support for the persecution of women, the murder of homosexuals, and the cold blooded killing of innocents, when they don't bow down to Islam and Islamic law. Aren't these a few of the things that leftists despise the most? The term hypocrite comes to mind.
Why are we not fighting fire with fire, and using counter-propaganda to get into the terrorists head? Why not leak a video to Al Jazeera, of US soldiers pouring blood from a freshly slaughtered pig over a mountain of .50 cal rounds? Why are we not unleashing psychological warfare on these 7th century psychopaths? From what we are told, it is because such action would go against our American values. Are we talking about the same American values that make it legal to murder infants in the womb? Or the values found in our Universities, that shut down free speech, and allow Antifa thugs to set fire to things and physically assault people that support the President? How about the values of the media, academia, Washington DC, and other leftist lead institutions that encourage transgenderism, and homosexuality by normalizing it and making it seem interesting and appealing. What about the values held by the Democrat party, that collectively booed God and the Israeli capital of Jerusalem at the DNC convention in 2012 when they added both to the DNC platform? We can’t mess with the heads of the terrorists because it goes against our values? Who are we kidding? What portion of our closely held American values, obligates us to roll over and expose our underbelly to terrorists and their violent tendencies? As an American, I am offended by anyone that suggests we should bow down to Islam to avoid ruffling any feathers. Oh, but when it comes to offending people, those of us that love freedom and liberty don’t count because we are bigots, islamophobes, xenophobes, etc. Give me a break! Funny that politicians get all self-righteous when the time comes to really go out and kick some butt, without any inhibitions in cases where it is the right thing to do. We tend to ignore the call to action, when action is needed, but when it comes to fighting for abortion, or gay rights, we are more than willing to offend anyone and everyone that may think differently. This selective outrage is inconsistent, hypocritical, and dangerous.
Political correctness is killing America and until we learn to do the right thing, without worrying about stepping on the toes of special interests and manufactured sub-groups of victims, we cannot hope to be secure in within our own borders. Sad, but true.
James Comey has turned out to be quite an interesting figure. He is a man of mystery, with the chameleon like ability to change political colors, when it is convenient for him to do so, to further his own interests, and desires. This man of a thousand faces has managed to create a love/hate relationship with Democrats and Republicans alike. Last year during the election, Comey was the hero to Trump supporters everywhere, as he was conducting an investigation, or as Loretta Lynch likes to call it, a “matter”, into Hillary’s negligent mishandling of classified information. Then July 5, 2016 came around and Comey stood in front of America and acknowledged that Hillary had been in violation of Federal Law many times over, and described these violations with great specificity. Then after laying out a list of the most damning federal charges imaginable, he comes out with, oh, never mind. His reasoning was that “no reasonable prosecutor” would take up such as case under these circumstances, and that he was trying to uphold the image and the integrity of the FBI. In my honest opinion, I think that he was protecting his own rear end, because he didn’t want to become a statistic, and part of the Clinton body count. The Republicans fumed, and hated him, while the Democrats cheered. Fast forward to late October 2016, Comey reopens the case into the emails, and the Republicans cheer once again, and the Democrats are livid. Not long after, Comey turns around, and brings the investigation to an end, once again. The Republicans are upset, and the Democrats cheer. Then the 2016 election happens, and we have President Trump. Comey starts into this Russian collusion investigation based on nothing but accusations by the crooked media, and the Republicans recognize his incompetence as the FBI director, and a poor leader in general. Comey is then Democrats’ BFF.
At the recent hearing where Comey testified, he spoke of President Trump, just as a small child would speak of the monster under his bed. That Trump is just way to scary to be left alone with. These statements about Trump being a such a horrible person, come straight out of the deep state’s playbook. And he takes it a step further by saying that he never felt the need to take any notes when he met with President Bush, or President Obama, but he needed to be cautious with Trump, as he continued to push the narrative that Trump can’t be trusted. He also admitted to the fact that he alone was responsible for 9 of the infamous “leaks” that have been making news as they come out of the White House. And the Icing on the cake came when Comey said that AG Lynch had suggested that he refer to the Hillary email scandal as a “matter”, not an investigation, and convinced him to do so. He is trying to justify, calling out Trump for an alleged request to go easy on Michael Flynn, while saying that Loretta Lynch was able to convince him to ease up on Hillary’s emails by making a similar suggestion. He ignored Trump’s alleged requests and is now trying to dismantle him politically. However, Loretta Lynch asked the same of Director Comey, and he did not question, he complied. Is anyone else seeing the hypocrisy here? Will the real James Comey please stand up? We hadn’t had this kind of shadiness and corruption in the FBI since J. Edgar Hoover. I am convinced after the events that have taken place the last few days, that James Comey is a double agent of the deep state, and he is now completely morphed into an inside the beltway political swamp thing. His credibility is shot and he will not recover. He had better head for a country that we do not currently have an extradition treaty with, Qatar maybe. One other elephant in the room here, is the fact that both parties are overrun with hypocrisy, and political opportunism. This is evident when you observe the reaction from each party when someone acts in a political manner, and watching how they change their mind as the political wind shifts direction. No conviction, no principles, nothing but a sense of self preservation.
I felt the need to write a little something on the thought that I had yesterday when I saw the news reports, that there was a terrorist attack in Paris where a man attacked Paris police with a hammer. This thought popped into my head just after I had heard that they locked a bunch of people in Notre Dame Cathedral in a panic, after police gave the warning to the public to stay away from the Cathedral. My thought was that they just condemned these people to a potential death trap, when they locked the doors. Anyone that has studied terrorism, and the terror tactics used by those that perpetrate these atrocities, knows that they always try to inflict the greatest number of casualties that they can. They are looking for shock factor, and gore. Even if the victims do not die of their injuries, they want to see a bloody mess that the TV cameras can capture and report on.
One may remember San Bernardino, when a terrorist couple went to a Christmas party and opened fire on the guests there. One thing that was not broadcast as much as it should have been, is the fact that there were explosives planted in alternate locations that were designed to explode at the time EMS showed up on scene to tend to the mass casualties. It was a trap that they set for those looking to give care to the others that were wounded by gunfire. Luckily, those explosives never went off but they were there and rigged to explode. This is a signature move by Islamic terrorists, in an attempt to cause more casualties and inflict maximum destruction and to create fear among the masses. Fear is the ultimate goal of terror as it is used to take away one’s freedom and also to coerce some into capitulation to Islam. Ignorance of these terror calling cards, or just the willingness to disregard them, puts peoples’ lives in danger, especially when the public officials that we trust to protect us, are the ones displaying this ignorance and denial. One more important factor in all of this, is that terrorists study us, they study law enforcement, the way they conduct investigations, and how first responders operate when it comes to mass casualty events.
So, back to Paris. Now with what the terrorists have seen in Paris, they now know that they can cause a panic with a single attacker, in an area with large buildings that are not unlike Notre Dame Cathedral. The response yesterday has shown the willingness of Paris police to lock the doors of that large building with the people inside. This shows the terrorists that aside from the diversion that is created with the single attacker, they only need to place a suicide bomber inside one of these large buildings, and when they lock the doors, the worst case scenario becomes evident. A suicide bomber locked inside of a building with a bunch of people that can’t go anywhere.
My question here is, do the authorities in Paris recognize the fact that they are showing their hand here? If so, are they going to fix it? These are the intricate parts of counterterrorism that these authorities that law enforcement must recognize, and respond to. Putting more military armed police and military on the streets does nothing, it only adds the optics. These optics are designed to deceive the people, by showing them a ramping up of the European police state. While this might make some feel better, it gives them a false sense of security, as those in charge of security policy, are not changing a thing. The whole world needs to wake up!
Islam is not peaceful, as the Quran represents the antithesis of all that is peaceful. No one will ever convince me that the origin of Islam is peaceful, especially those that have never studied the Quran or ever bothered to read a single hateful passage. There are two questions that I have started asking these cable news watching lemmings, that try to legitimize this suicidal death cult. First, I ask them to reference any hadiths (traditions) that come to mind, that support the claim that Islam is peaceful in nature. Second, I ask them to explain how one comes to a point of reconciliation regarding Muhammad’s violent nature, conquest ideology, raping of women including girls as young as 9, and belief that non-Muslims must convert, pay a Islamic tax (Jizya), or be killed. Naturally, I get that deer in the headlights look from them as they search for words. In this day and age of the internet, and the reality that we as free human beings can have access to any amount of desired information at any given time, we as Americans are only ignorant if we choose to be. There is no excuse anymore for not knowing, there is only the excuse for being too lazy to look it up.
I will tell you what the most telling indicator is, that Islam was created to be a cult of death and destruction. Where is the condemnation of these violent attacks, from the so called “moderate” Muslims? Let’s take a closer look at this fact by examining exactly what we hear after an attack from Muslims leaders, and Muslim organizations. We hear things like, “Muslims will be blamed for this”, or “These acts have nothing to do with the teachings of Islam”, and don’t forget “Those terrorists are not Muslims, and they do not represent Islam”. Why all of the attempts to deflect the blame, and why do people that tout the existence of peaceful Islam, have the right to tell people that are following the Quran literally, and to the letter, that they are not practicing the “real” Islam? The so-called extremists, are acting just as the Quran preaches and follows the teachings of the so called, “prophet” Muhammad. Where is the condemnation of these so called peaceful Muslims? If the extremists are a fraction of a fraction of a percent minority, as the mainstream media claims, where is this thunderous voice of the majority that should be adamantly speaking out against these atrocities? This is what scares me about Islam, the reluctance of these Muslims to denounce the evil that is written in their Quranic scripture. They spend so much time trying to distance themselves from terror, but they will not firmly come out against it. The only conclusion that I can come to, while observing this lack of willingness of the Muslim community to speak out against terror as one voice, is that they are complicit with these attack, or the best case scenario, would be that they sympathize with the terrorists’ plight. This is what keeps me up at night. I’m concerned that we have tens if not hundreds of thousands of Muslims in America that are playing the part of peaceful Muslim, until the caliphate gives the green light. At that point, its game over.
The war on terror needs a makeover. Why is it, every time America goes to war with something or someone, the American people seem to be the ones that take the hit? The war on drugs, decades later and probably trillions in taxpayer money gone, and where are we at? Now we are supposedly at war with the so called opioid epidemic, because drugs are bad, right? Why can there not be a little objectivity, when deciding on solutions to society’s ills? Drugs are not good for you, that’s a given, but isn’t alcohol a drug? What about nicotine? Where are the calls to ban alcohol, oh that’s right we have been there and done that? Most of what you buy at the grocery store these days, is bad for your health. Preservatives, excess amounts of sodium, high fructose corn syrup, and the list goes on. Where are the calls to ban any of these items? The real issue of the day however, seems to be terrorism, and that is another thorn in America’s side that we have yet to remove. Our government is run by a bunch of idiots, and worse than that they are idiots that have been consumed by corruption and political correctness. Most Americans are sick of hearing Uncle Sam say, “well we knew this guy was a problem, but we can’t arrest him if he hasn’t done anything wrong”. This is the excuse that our Homeland security officials use, to justify doing nothing until we have a pile of innocent dead bodies lying around that have fallen at the hands of a Muslim whack job, hell bent on jihad. The government that continues to tell us that they need mass surveillance so that they can spy on everyone, apparently has no power to do anything to stop an attack until after the attack happens, according to those calling the shots. So, what is the purpose of the mass collection of metadata, that tells the Federal Government everything that you do from the time you get up, until the time you go to bed? For those of you that are familiar with the criminal justice system and American rule of law, why not use Federal Conspiracy charges to preempt an attack in its planning stages, rather than waiting for the gunfire and explosions to begin? Why is it that Ammon Bundy and his friends were hit with Federal Conspiracy charges for occupying “Public” land, but you can’t charge someone plotting to set off a nail bomb, or fill a soft target and its occupants full of bullet holes, because they are Muslim? Was it because Ammon Bundy and company were a safe bet, when looking to make examples of opposition forces to Federal overreach. Would it have been handled differently if it were a group of black lives matter protesters or a group of jihadists that had taken over the refuge? Would the FBI had been so blatant about gunning down Lavoy Finicum, if Lavoy was a BLM supporter or a Muslim?
Why don’t we use an evidence based approach, just like we do in other aspects of law enforcement. Let’s pull the information that we have on all terror attacks in the US and abroad, that occurred after 9/11, and take note of the constant factors in these attacks, or in other words, what seems to be repetitive. This will do two things, first it will give us evidence based justification for charging members of certain groups or that have specific ties to groups, by utilizing these legal tools that are available in ideal circumstances. Second, it will take away the argument from organizations like CAIR that like to defend these Jihadists, by filing discrimination lawsuits, while invoking Islamophobia. The data collected from this surgical analysis of intelligence, could be used in court to shut down these frivolous lawsuits by proving that data was used in the decision to charge, and that religion was not a factor. In addition, any terrorist attack that happens from this day forward and the intelligence associated with the suspects, and the network in which they operate is documented and cross referenced in real time as to keep the process up to date, find any similarities to past events, and link individuals that that may be involved that we have in our terrorist database.
It is one thing to say that we are going to ditch political correctness, it is another to deal with the firestorm that will come from the direction of academia, the media, and political mercenaries in the form of lobbyists, and elected politicians inside the beltway, that line their pockets with cash from George Soros, and other progressive billionaires, with skin in this globalist game of thrones. Our national security operation needs a serious makeover, and it is best if we try to make it happen sooner rather than later, as the deep state is playing for keeps.
Political Ideology, partisanship, and lack of objectivity, these are all contributing factors in the divide that exists in America and across the globe. Why are these things destroying the very fabric of civilization? Let’s take a look at a couple of things that support this theory and its potential effects on society. People don’t like to admit it, but we are politically ideological creatures. Most people will say, “I hate politics”, when in reality it is part of our DNA. What happens in the political arena, can be detrimental, or beneficial to our lives, and while almost half of the country chooses not to cast a ballot come election time, Washington DC effects 100% of the US population. If someone chooses to forfeit this right to have their voice heard, that does not exempt them from the consequences that result from the outcome of an election.
Partisan bickering and hateful, non-objective ideology, has put us in a tough spot. Most people cannot form an objective opinion on a subject, which is not heavily influenced by their world view or ideological biases. Even when they are given objective data that shoots holes through some of their personal beliefs, they are still reluctant to start questioning closely held opinions or beliefs, and they ignore the opportunity that presents itself in these situations, the opportunity to strengthen your feelings on the subject as you are forced to explain your side of the argument to someone that disagrees with you. We only learn when we surround ourselves with those that think differently than we do. If you always converse with people that resemble your ideological equal, then your mind will never be challenged, and your arguments become weak because there is no contrast with an opposing point of view. You cannot have light without darkness, nor can you have darkness without light. This Yin/Yang principle is crucial in understanding contrast, balance, and how these things relate to the freedom of expression that is outlined in the 1st amendment of the US Constitution.
In some cases, it goes beyond ideology and focuses on an influential person that appears to wield a great deal of power. This allows people to change their feelings on an issue, in order to align with someone that meets this criteria. This illusion of power, causes some people to avoid developing their own set of principles, therefor limiting their ability to stand up and fight. In these cases, you have no genuine position on anything, you only seek to be in lock step with the person that you adore. This person could be a Hollywood celebrity, or a politician that you are looking to vote for. Someone that you will follow right off of a cliff. This is why objectivism in politics is so important.
A great example of this exists in the recent firing of Jim Comey, the now former Director of the FBI. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, admitted to the fact that she would have been in full support of Comey’s firing if Hillary Clinton would have done it as President, but she is adamantly against it because it was carried out by President Donald Trump. She is basically saying that she has no position on the matter, and that it only matters as to who pulls the trigger. As the old saying goes, perception is reality. We the people cannot accept this as the new norm, and if we choose to do so as a society, then we acknowledge that there is no absolute reality or truth, only individuals perceiving reality in whatever way they choose. This is the societal dynamic that allows the media get away with the falsehoods, and blatant lies that they regurgitate every day of the week. It also encourages those that wish to warp reality, in the name of equality or by manufacturing a state of victimhood for a specific group or movement that is co-opted, and turned into a political movement, as the useful idiots hand power over to their new best friend and partner in crime, whoever that may be.
This is why our country is divided, and as Abraham Lincoln once said while quoting the Bible, “A house divided against itself cannot stand”. We are spending more time fighting each other, than we are on solving the problems that we face on a daily basis. We are wasting our time on accusations of racism, bigotry, narcissism, selfishness, hate, the list goes on. It is a disgrace to witness what this country has become, we have went from tolerance, to blatant hate and intolerance while those who are showing the lack of tolerance, invoke the Constitution as their inspiration for equality. We need to have a sharp change of direction in America or we are toast. Tolerance is key, especially in cases where someone does not agree with us. We have to be happy with agreeing to disagree, rather than demonizing each other for not being the same.