Sacrificed On The Altar of Political Demagoguery

Last week saw the worst Islamic terrorist attack on US soil since the Twin Towers went down on 9/11, and it creates a confluence of political issues of immense proportions: the national gun control debate and Obama’s foreign policy failures.

San Berdoo terrsTwo Islamic jihadists stormed a social services center in San Bernardino, California, at which the employees were throwing a holiday party, and opened fire with a variety of guns, both long guns and handguns, killing 14 people and wounding 21 others. They were also armed with pipe bombs, and when the police finally searched their house they found many more pipe bombs as well as a “pipe bomb factory”. The pair had acquired their guns legally; the long guns had been illegally altered.

Syed Rizwan Farook, the male, was a native-born citizen of the US of Pakistani extraction, and a Muslim. He had visited Saudi Arabia several times, as late as 2013. His wife, Tashfeen Malik, was a Pakistani citizen, in the country on a fiancée visa, and also a Muslim, with ties to terrorist organizations. Her visa application to enter this country listed a non-existent Pakistan address.

Those are the facts. Now to the issues.

Gun Control

Literally before the bodies had even cooled Obama was swooping down on this event, like some deranged vulture, to exploit it for political purposes, in this case to advance his agenda for further restrictive gun control laws. He was immediately and enthusiastically joined by his Dem/socialist comrades in Congress, as well here in California by the Dem/socialists who run the state legislature.  It’s been a morbid and disgusting display of cynical political manipulation, an attempt to exploit the nation’s natural revulsion to this horrific event in the hope of severely restricting gun rights.

But the policies Obama & Company have proposed – such as expanded background checks – are already in place in California where this event took place; in fact, California has the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, and is often held up by Dem/socialists as the example to which the nation as a whole should aspire.

pipe bombOn top of that, Farook and Malik were also using pipe bombs, which are completely banned under Federal law.

So how would any new restrictions have prevented an attack like this? The plain and simple fact is they won’t, just as logic and common sense tells us, and just as this attack proves, as it took place in the state that has enacted the Dem/socialists’ wish list of gun restrictions, and included destructive devices already completely banned under Federal law.

This event simply proved the old maxim that criminals, by definition, don’t obey laws. Therefore further restrictive gun laws are only going to affect law-abiding citizens. Have drug laws kept drugs out of the hands of illicit users, or immigration laws kept illegal aliens out of the country? Of course not. Why would anyone with an ounce of sense think things would be any different with guns?

There’s another maxim that applies: the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

But laws that deprive the good guys of the tools they need to stop the bad guys are obviously only going to make the situation even worse. I know that if I’m at a party and some nut comes in shooting, I’d sure like something in my hand more suitable for defending myself than a Dixie cup full of beer.

There’s one law that would be effective in addressing the dangers of these attacks: a law that makes it mandatory that any law-abiding citizen who applies for a permit to carry a concealed weapon be issued that permit.

The plain fact of the matter is that the police aren’t bodyguards. Theychalk outline respond to crimes after they’ve already taken place. It’s up to each of us as individuals to protect and defend ourselves as well as we can until the cops show up. The cops are the ones who draw the chalk lines around the bodies; it’s up to us to determine whether it’s us or the other guy who gets outlined.

Will an armed citizenry absolutely prevent these occurrences in the future? Probably not all of them, but have you noticed that these things always take place in venues at which everyone is unarmed? Have you ever heard of a mass shooting at a gun range, or gun shop, where a lot of people are armed? Of course not.

And even if such an event does take place, I’m sure we could anticipate much lower body counts; fewer casualties. If only one or two of the people in San Bernardino had been carrying guns, and able to deploy them, the rampage would have been very quickly curtailed, either by the shooters’ retreat or deaths.

Foreign Policy and “Refugees”

From the Arab Spring to Benghazi to the rise of ISIS, Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East has been an unmitigated disaster. He seems to have absolutely no grasp of the issues or players involved, nor understand the consequences of his actions, or failures to act when appropriate.

He’s declared al Qaida as being “on the run”, and just recently characterized ISIS as the “JV team”. The reality is far different.

ISIS territoryNot only are both still active, but there are many splinter groups of both scattered around the world. ISIS alone has captured and consolidated enough geographical territory to qualify as a minor nation-state, though a rogue one. They’ve developed an economic infrastructure that revolves around oil exports as well as agricultural production. Contrary to Obama’s blind assurances, they’re developing into a regional power able to export their terrorism to the world stage.

For years there’s been a steady emigration from the region, primarily into Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, and Europe. But the recent intensification of the conflict with ISIS, primarily in Syria and Iraq, has led to sudden surge in the number of people—again primarily from Syria – seeking to relocate, and has been labeled by the media as a “refugee crisis”. There’s no estimated number of how many people are seeking to relocate, as it’s an ongoing situation. Several countries have pledged to take in varied numbers of these refugees, and interestingly enough several countries in the region have decided not to take in any: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, and Oman.

Obama has pledged to import 85,000 of these refugees, with 10,000 of them to be admitted this fiscal year. In all his grand pomposity, he’s lashed out at those opposing his scheme, using terms such as “offensive” and “hysterical”. The problem for Obama is that there’s plenty to oppose in bringing those people into this country, particularly in such large numbers, and so quickly.

First, the usual screening time for approval of an entry visa is anywhere from 18 to 24 months, on an individual basis. And as we can see from Malik’s successful entry into the country, even then it’s not a foolproof system (to say the least). But what happens when the system is suddenly jammed up with tens of thousands of applicants from the same region all being entered into the system at the same time?

Gridlock, that’s what. Even the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has admitted that this is going to be very problematic. And I think we can easily assume that if these “refugees” are being rushed through the system in order to meet Obama’s political agenda, that screening will be haphazard at best.

Further, the myth that radical Muslims are a very small minority is just that: a myth. Sources vary, but the percentage of Muslims who support radical Islam is anywhere from 10% to 80% depending on locale, with the worldwide average estimated as 10% – 15%: (Breitbart) and (Answers.com).

Using an even more conservative figure of 2% to represent those who would actively participate in, or actively provide support to, terrorist acts at some point, means that for every 10,000 “refugees” we let into the country, we’re also importing 200 jihadists. Obama’s complete plan for importing 85,000 of them means we’ll be bringing in 1,700 jihadists and spreading them all around the country, a very bad idea. It strikes me as being akin to playing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded revolver.

There are those, starting right at the top with Obama, who call keeping those people out of the country “inhumane” and “racist” and “xenophobic”. Do those terms also apply to the six countries – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, and Oman – that are in the region and of the same religion that are also keeping them out? Or do they know something that Obama et al are simply failing to acknowledge?

Further, our legal immigration system has always used one primary guideline as the basis for admittance into this country: the prospective immigrant has to be able to positively contribute to our society. In whatCAIR way will these “refugees” do that? Since when did this country become a dumping ground for the planet’s dispossessed? Don’t we have enough balkanization at home already, with CAIR and #BlackLivesMatter and MALDEF other special interest groups raising a ruckus all the time at the drop of a hat? And what about the United Nations, that idol of the Left? Why aren’t they setting up some kind of “safe zone” for those people over there, in the region? Yet more proof of why they’ve earned the sobriquet “Useless Nations”.

Further, we as a country have to stop denying that Muslims as a group present a potential for violent activity unprecedented in our history. We have to face reality, and adapt to that reality. Muslims who are already in this country enjoy constitutional protections, and rightly so. Even then, as illustrated by the actions of Farook specifically, we already have a problem on our hands. The writing has been on the wall for quite a while; all one had to do was look at what was happening in Europe to see what was in store for us.

But why import even more in a large group that’s virtually impossible to screen properly? Does that make any sense whatsoever? Because once we let them into our country, they, too, enjoy constitutional protections. Better to keep them out as a preventive measure.

In Conclusion

It’s clear to me that the safety and security of this country and its people are under a concerted two-pronged attack by Obama and the Dem/socialist establishment. Whether it’s intentional or the result of sheer, willful blindness to reality I’ll leave for others to determine.

But for this country to be importing tens of thousands of people, among whom, without doubt, there will be Islamic fanatics intent on doing harm to us and our country, while at the same time crippling our ability to adequately defend ourselves, is a national disgrace.

 

©Brian Baker 2015

 

Advertisements

16 comments on “Sacrificed On The Altar of Political Demagoguery

  1. captbogus2 says:

    Obama, the Democrats et al are already plotting our inability to defend ourselves. As far as those extremists who have already gained citizenship we have precedent for dealing with them as well. A naturalized American was found out to have been a NAZI guard in a concentration camp. He was stripped of his citizenship and deported post haste.

    • BrianR says:

      Yes, but that applies to any naturalized citizen who commits certain crimes. But don’t forget: Farook was native-born right here in this country.

  2. clyde says:

    Excellent analysis. No question Obama is looking for anything to get the issue of his abysmal record out of the sunlight. These assholes who are clamoring for more gun laws N-E-V-E-R get it that these criminals are that precisely because they obey NO laws. Another issue is the complete asininity of the left in blocking any attempt at curbing these immigrants from coming in from ANY muslim area. While Trump may have the sublety of a battering ram, he is right about blocking them out until some COHERENT policy is made. And we know THAT is not happening until Stupid is gone. Just a wandering thought here. Since we just passed Pearl Harbor Day, am I correct in stating the Germans, and the Japanese have attacked NO ONE since the end of WW2 ? Militant Islam needs to be treated in the same fashion. WHUP their asses hard and long, and send the message this kind of shit will simply NOT be tolerated.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Clyde.

      There’s another aspect of history that everyone seems to forget. The militant Muslims are always bleating about the Crusades… and yet neither they, nor anyone else, ever seems to mention WHY the Crusades took place to begin with.

      In the 8th Century the Moors had invaded and conquered quite a bit of Europe, and by the 9th and 10th Centuries the Turks were trying to do it again, which prompted the Pope to declare the Crusades. So in reality, the Crusades were a response to Muslim expansionism in the first place.

      Muslim attempts at world domination are nothing new. They’re almost as old as Islam itself.

      Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it, as Santayana noted, but Obozo and his ilk don’t seem to give a damn.

  3. gunnyginalaska says:

    “It’s clear to me that the safety and security of this country and its people are under a concerted two-pronged attack by Obama and the Dem/socialist establishment.”

    Solid gold. If we had a Congress worth a damn, these bums would be impeached and on trial.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Gunny.

      I couldn’t agree more. Congress ISN’T worth a damn, and things don’t seem to have improved with gutless Ryan replacing the Tan Man Boozer.

      • captbogus2 says:

        I knew Ryan was just Boehner in a different suit from the get-go and he just proved it by opening his mouth to spout the crap against Trump. Yeah, yeah, I know you ain’t a Trump fan but he is definitely not PC and that is driving the PC crowd up a wall because no matter how they try they cannot tear him down from his high ratings. What they AND the GOPe just can’t seem to get through their thick skulls is it is not Trump that is so popular but the fact someone is sayin’ what the people are thinkin’ and so long as that is the problem he will be around. Ryan just proved his total ignorance by speaking against the muslim ban. After all, Didn’t Carter ban muslims??

      • BrianR says:

        Buck, I may not like Trump — and I don’t — but I agree with you about Ryan: by doing that he only ended up proving his Establishment GOP credentials.

        Actually, Carter didn’t ban Muslims; he prevented anyone entering the country from Iran after they took over the Embassy there.

  4. Nee says:

    Brian-
    Oh,how the handwringing and simultaneous denial that a problem exists frustrates me. When 25% of the Muslims in this country believe it’s okay to initiate violence against someone they believe to have committed an offense against Islam, Houston, there’s a problem.
    Read the link…I know the guys at the CSP and even though the SPLC calls Gaffney an Islamophobe, heh, I beg to differ. He just uses common sense…well, and some polling.

    FDR did it and so did Carter with the Iranians. And the left insists that “invalidating a visa” is not the same as stopping immigration…in essence, it did. How many more San Bernardinos have to happen before we DO something worthwhile? Impeachment should have happened on many levels. And even then, it’s not enough. Paul Ryan is a huge disappointment. This is spot-on naturally. I may post it to my left minded thinker sites!:)

    https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/

    • BrianR says:

      That’s a great link, Nee, and supports the data I provided in the blog essay. Thanks for posting it.

      Of course the SPLC calls Gaffney an Islamophobe. They’re a far-left spokeshole organization, and all they EVER have to try to counter facts is to call people names. Notice that their website DOESN’T list CAIR as a “hate group”, and that tells the story right there.

      • Nee says:

        Brian…It’s just always going to astound me how stuck on stupid people are willing to be– The left minded fools who are now on board with Banning Trump insist that this sample and the statistics are bogus because they…wait for it…come from a “right wing think tank”!!! Statistical variations aside, and duly noted….if 600 Muslims answer a survey that shows 39% supported Sharia Law over the US Constitution, we have got a problem. And if we were to go ANY Mosque and ask that single question and 1 in 4 would initiate violence against a deemed offense to Islam– at what point are they going to begin being vigilant since fear is not an option for them????? I am so tired of the head in the sand mentality of these people and I am tired of the same idiots thinking global warming is THE threat. Which is going to kill faster? A terrorist with a gun or…cough…globalfuckingwarming??????

      • BrianR says:

        Nee, shooting the messenger is SOP for Dem/socialists, as you know, and one of their standard tactics is to try to discredit any and all sources that disagree with their fascism. “Oh, Faux News…”. How many times have you heard THAT one?

        Head in the sand is right, when they don’t have them shoved up their asses.

        Your example of the “climate change” hysteria is a perfect example. They try to sell the snake oil that somehow “solving” climate change — as if that’s at all possible — somehow solves every other problem in the world. That kind of “thinking” would get you an “F” in any high school science class.

  5. Kathy says:

    Great piece, Brian, and excellent comments one and all. You guys covered everything, and you’ve seen enough of my rants to know that I think O is a muslim, so he’s doing exactly what we would expect for a muslim president. The ones I’m the angriest with is Congress because they have the stopping power and refuse to use it.

    Our founders went to great lengths to create a government system for us that would have prevented much of what O’s done, but the system has been so bent & twisted since conception that today it’s barely recognizable – just like our country will be when he gets through with it.

    • BrianR says:

      Thank you, Kathy, for the kind words.

      Yes, Congress IS almost as bad as the girly-man president. All I want for Christmas is for the GOP to grow some balls.

      Hear me, Santa?

  6. captbogus2 says:

    Which Reminds Me…
    The Donald said he’d deport the illegals. Or, in so many words he said they’d deport themselves. Jeb said you can’t deport 11 million people. The Donald said he’d put a hiatus on muslim immigration, visas and refugees until we can sort out the good guys from the bad guys. Jeb said you can’t discriminate against muslims.
    I think the people are damn tired of politicians who campaign by telling you what they cannot do.
    After all. Trump is around 35% and Jeb is at 5%….

    • BrianR says:

      LOL!

      I think Jebbie’s throwing his last gasps around. He’s pretty much toast and knows it. Good riddance. No more Bushes!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s