Disclaimer: I fully support Emily Miller in her quest to expose the outrageous process for legally acquiring a firearm in the District if Criminals. That said...
I keep hearing from the Brady's and their ilk that "guns are different". That a little infringement on GUNS should be accepted because $GUNS CAN KILL, and $Guns are different, and gun owners are just looking for arguments to settle permanently. Politicians lap this up because it furthers their goal of aggrandizing more power unto themselves. Makes for good copy and good video to be seen on the side of $PROTECTING THE CHILDREN. But, what now? DC is on their way to One First (SCOTUS) again over their registration process. The DC resident still has no way to BEAR, since KEEP only applies "in the home". And the criminals ignore the laws anyway...
Councilman Mendelson's condescending display of willful ignorance about "market forces" preventing more FFLs in town, and the "lack of desire to acquire guns based on the miniscule number of registrations" since Heller, was so galling I almost broke my TV in anger. He knows damned good and well that the reason there aren't any more FFLs is because DC's zoning makes it IMPOSSIBLE to open a store. And, the registration process is so expensive and onerous as to dissuade all but the most dedicated (and financially well-off) from completing the process. There is a reason why Charles Sykes' office is at MPD. Just ask Alan Gura.
As for the anti-rights crowd trashing Emily Miller? I bet if you asked them to support outlawing abortion, they would recoil in horror at the affront to their Liberal sensibilities. If DC mandated that a woman go through every step that Emily Miller went through in order to obtain an abortion, there would be marches on city hall daily (all covered gleefully by a complicit media) until the laws were changed. A woman has the "constitutional right" (nowhere enumerated) to kill her unborn baby, but has to jump through the hoops Emily Miller jumped through to acquire a firearm (which IS enumerated in the Constitution)? Give me a break.
Emily Miller, a petite woman, is no match for a thug intent on doing her harm. She wants to acquire the means to protect herself, and equalize her odds against said thug, and the Powers That Be block her at every turn. Shameful.
Councilman Mendelson, you should go back to Emily Miller's articles documenting her journey through your morass of red tape. Every time you see the word Gun or Firearm, I want you to substitute the word ABORTION. Every time you see some class, certificate, mandate, or registration hoop, I want you to substitute Abortion Class, Abortion Certificate, Abortion Registration (with renewal every 3 years). I want you to make the young woman get schooled in some guy's basement about Abortions. I want you to require abortion clinic visits prior to allowing a procedure be done. I want you to make the person prove that they know abortion laws. I want you to ensure that the city's zoning laws make it as easy to open an abortion clinic as it now is to open a gun store. Lastly, I want you to have to openly answer for your role in molding "market forces" to make abortions as easy to acquire in DC as guns currently are.
After all, Abortions kill more people in the United States every year than guns do. We should regulate them at least as diligently. Right? Do it for the children.
Newbius
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Monday, January 24, 2011
Ban Medical Licenses!
In response to the shrill calls from the left advocating for infringement of my constitutionally enumerated right to Keep and Bear Arms, I propose instead that we ban medical licenses. If that seems far-fetched, how about we ban abortion as a "right" (a right NOT enumerated in the Constitution) instead?
It is time to face facts. Using 2008 statistics (the data for which is easily cross-referenced), the FACTS show that there were 16,272 murders and non-negligent manslaughter deaths in the USA, NATIONALLY. In Pennsylvania, this number was 701. And, in Philadelphia, the total was 331. Source: FBI Crime Stats (National, State, PA City)
Using 2008 statistics, this time for the state of Pennsylvania only, there were a total of 38,807 abortions performed in that state. Of these, 18,633 were performed in Philadelphia alone (15,377 women were residents of Philly, the rest commuted to kill their child). Source: Pennsylvania Department of Health 2008 Vital Statistics on Induced Abortions (PDF File)
In 2008, Doctors legally killed more children in the City of Philadelphia alone, than the total number of homicides committed nationally.
I wonder how many of those were killed by Dr. Kermit Gosnell? I wonder how many of them were killed AFTER being born? I wonder how many of them were only considered a homicide due to inconvenient timing? Because, as we all know, it isn't REALLY a life until some Liberal says it is...
Of course, if a Democrat Congressperson and her constituents were the victims, then there is justification for all manner of infringements and power grabs by the Elites and the Statists. Just ask them.
Newbius
|||
It is time to face facts. Using 2008 statistics (the data for which is easily cross-referenced), the FACTS show that there were 16,272 murders and non-negligent manslaughter deaths in the USA, NATIONALLY. In Pennsylvania, this number was 701. And, in Philadelphia, the total was 331. Source: FBI Crime Stats (National, State, PA City)
Using 2008 statistics, this time for the state of Pennsylvania only, there were a total of 38,807 abortions performed in that state. Of these, 18,633 were performed in Philadelphia alone (15,377 women were residents of Philly, the rest commuted to kill their child). Source: Pennsylvania Department of Health 2008 Vital Statistics on Induced Abortions (PDF File)
In 2008, Doctors legally killed more children in the City of Philadelphia alone, than the total number of homicides committed nationally.
I wonder how many of those were killed by Dr. Kermit Gosnell? I wonder how many of them were killed AFTER being born? I wonder how many of them were only considered a homicide due to inconvenient timing? Because, as we all know, it isn't REALLY a life until some Liberal says it is...
Of course, if a Democrat Congressperson and her constituents were the victims, then there is justification for all manner of infringements and power grabs by the Elites and the Statists. Just ask them.
Newbius
|||
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
I can't say something nice
So I am not going to say anything at all about the passing of Edward Kennedy.
Newbius
|||
Newbius
|||
Monday, April 20, 2009
Right Wing Extremist? Maybe...
...sigh.
< Sarcasm alert! >
How come there is never any coverage about Left-Wing extremists? Oh, sorry. The Media doesn't like to self-promote. I forgot.
Anyhoo, former loon Governor of Arizona and current DHS Gadfly in Command, Janet Napolitano, has published the famous hit piece on mainstream Americans entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment". This piece of un-balanced excretia was a swing-and-a-miss from the get-go. It was rushed through to publication, against the advice of the lawyers and advisors with a longer view of things, and hit the distro list just in time for the "TEA Parties".
I am shocked...
I mean, partisan hack-jobs being released immediately prior to a media (non)-event? Whodathunkit? I mean, that kind of stuff NEVER happens in politics, does it?
Nah. That's just paranoia talking, right?
Right?
Or not...
So, the author of the document is listed on page 1 as: "(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division. Coordinated with the FBI."
The Department of Homeland Security has an Extremism and Radicalization Branch? Doesn't that mean that in this branch, they are fomenting radicals and extremists? With the help of the FBI? Wow. If I was one of the tinfoil-hat crowd, I might get concerned.
If you understand what a trial balloon is, you might think that this report was floated just to see WHICH groups jumped. It is kind of like the highway patrolman person Trooper activating the radar gun to see which cars' brake lights illuminate. Can you say "Gotcha"? I knew you could...
I like this next part: "The information is provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States Government sponsorship. (emphasis mine). I read this to mean that the Federal Government has decided that, in an effort directed towards focusing local law-enforcement activities in their preferred manner, this report is designed to influence domestic public opinion overtly.
Transparency was only achieved after this report was leaked publicly...
So, the Department of Homeland Security is advocating that Law Enforcement take pre-emptive measures to "prevent" terrorist attacks against the United States. Remember this line when you read further into the report. It has a VERY chilling effect on your rights as citizens and Americans.
Page two lists in great detail the fact that NO SPECIFIC INFORMATION exists about potential attacks, and then in the next sentence states unequivocally that "rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues."
That takes balls.
So does the lumping together of neo-Nazis and skinheads with the guy down the street who got laid off due to the economic downturn. Yep, if you have just lost your job, you are now a racist hate-monger who is angry that a black man is president. I wonder how that logic squares with the minorities who have lost their jobs due to the economic downturn? Are they now neo-Nazi Skinheads too?
I'm just asking.
Who is playing on whom's fears???
Page two also re-hashes the old canard about Tim McVeigh... C'mon guys! McVeigh was a dirtbag who had militant Islamic ties. Really, he did. Would someone at DHS PLEASE go look it up? Or, at least, go ask someone intelligent and knowledgeable in the FBI? Pretty please?
Oh, Bottom of Page two...all you military types fresh from the front lines. You are now terrorists in the eyes of your government. Sorry. Potential terrorists. Because, you know, you might have seen things that might give you trouble sleeping. Or something. Because, you know, you might be human...or something.
Page three: (paraphrasing here) Just because the President PROMISED his constituents and POSTED on the official White House web page that he intends to take your guns away, doesn't mean that the threat is credible. Really it doesn't. He didn't really mean it when he said it, posted it, stumped on it, talked to the President of Mexico about it, blamed YOU for the problems in Mexico because of it, and promised to ram through a treaty with that effect. Nope. Just smoke and mirrors. So all of you people buying guns for the first (second, fourth, fortieth) time can cut it out already. The police are getting worried that it will be harder to confiscate them now that you bought all of them.
This goes double for you returning vets with combat experience. Because, you know, unlike us poor civilian boobs, you guys and gals actually know how to use guns and you have the overseers a wee bit worried that you won't forget those skills any time soon.
The rest of page three is some PSH about how the Zionists are running things now and so we are arming up...or something like that.
Page four: If you oppose Gun Control efforts, Free Trade agreements with the Mexican Narco-State, Abortion, Same-sex Marriage, and "inter-racial crime", you might be aredneck Right Wing Extremist. (Although, parsing this, I guess inter-racial crime means crimes by members of one racial group against members of another. I am opposed to crimes against persons, regardless of race. Does this count?)
Bottom of page four: "(U//FOUO) Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."
They took four sentences to say one word: WACO. They are trying to self-fulfill a prophesy of their own creation...and will blame you just like they blamed Koresh and his followers.
Ummm. Hmmmm. If the economy collapses because we pumped a couple of trillion dollars into it without the production to back it up and caused hyper-inflation, you are branded an extremist if you prepared for it by putting aside food, weapons, and ammunition. To provide for your family, should it be required. To protect them, should it be required. To survive a very bad time, should it come to that. The Government (in all of its iterations) has absolutely no duty to protect an individual. This is established fact, cemented in the case law of the country. If Government has no duty to protect you, shouldn't you be prepared to if you have to? I am just asking...
As an aside: If the sun sets in the west and a million people watch it, did they conspire to achieve twilight? Or, did they look at their watches, see the time, read the signs, and prepare to witness it? Just because more than one person can read the signs of the times does not mean that they are a conspiratorial cabal. Really. You dim-witted horse's asses (with apologies to horses worldwide).
Page five: If you are against illegal immigration, you might be an extremist. If you are for it, you might be in Congress...
Page five: If you are against infringements against your Second Amendment rights, you are an extremist (no "maybe" here).
See above screed about page three.
Of course, just because the government wishes to foment violence against gun owners, prompting a response by the "three percenters", doesn't mean that they are wrong. Waco rules are in-effect, you know.
It says so, right at the bottom of page five and the top of page six.
Also at the top of page six is this gem: "On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging and registration of ammunition."
Just so we can be clear here (all sarcasm aside): Registration schemes have been the prelude to ALL civilian disarmament efforts ever undertaken. Civilian disarmament has been the prelude to EVERY GENOCIDE IN THE 20TH CENTURY. In my mind, this means that EVERY CONGRESSMAN WHO PROPOSES GUN REGISTRATION IS PROPOSING THE MEANS TO EFFECT GENOCIDE IN THE UNITED STATES. Logically, If A leads to B, and B leads to C, then A leads to C. This is not hard. If you look at the facts objectively, like THIS reporter did HERE, the facts are inescapable.
Extreme? HELL YES! My life is MINE to live, NOT yours to run.
Back to the sarcasm...
Page six continues with more Zionist diatribes, and some fear-mongering about Russia (cuddly-bear would never use petro-muscle as an extortion tool, would they?), China (Tibet? Hong Kong? Taiwan? No worries!), and India ("thank you for calling the -yourcompanynamehere- help desk, my name is "Bob", how can I help?") using their rising influence on the world stage, as well as some drivel about the fact that treaties have the effect of over-riding and diluting our Constitution. Nothing to see here. Really. Oh, and that decade-old treaty about Inter-American Arms Control something-or-other doesn't really mean anything. Keep moving.
Look!!! Shiny!!!!
(Warning, extreme sarcasm below. With apologies to the true heroes serving in our fine armed forces. You guys and gals deserve every possible benefit that a free society can accord to you.)
Page seven. More military extremism. You guys know you are terrorists. Sorry, "Potential terrorists". (Abu Ghraib.) No problem. (Haditha.) We don't really mean to tar you guys with the broad brush...you know, like saying that you are "going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not..." (John Kerry, CBS Face the Nation, 12/04/2005, transcript pages 3 and 4). Really we don't. The DHS is an understanding agency with absolutely no bias against our military, except for pointing out that you guys might be good if you ever fought with us.
Not that you would.
Or something.
We hope.
Page eight. Rehash of the McVeigh crapola on ice.
Janet! Get an editor. Really. Brevity counts for something.
Page nine: Contact US!
(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9685 or by e-mail at NOC.Fusion@dhs.gov. For information affecting the private sector and critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at NICC@dhs.gov. The FBI regional phone numbers can be found online at http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/fo.htm. When available, each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated point of contact.
(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov.
So, If you are concerned about the direction that the Republicans and Democrats have taken us during the last, say, 20 years...you just might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you are concerned that, despite the assertions of the Democrats who have stated publicly they wish to disarm us, they might actually wish to disarm us. You might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you are concerned that uncontrolled illegal immigration of unknown persons coming over our border from a failed narco-state might have the potential to harm our country, you might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you oppose killing unborn babies, almost-newly born babies, or actual newborn babies, you might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you have ACTUALLY BOMBED Federal buildings, Conspired to bomb Federal buildings, or married someone who has actually done so...you might be William Ayers, a trusted friend and neighbor of the President. Meaning, you are definitely NOT a domestic terrorist.
Go figure.
< /sarcasm>
Pax,
Newbius
|||
< Sarcasm alert! >
How come there is never any coverage about Left-Wing extremists? Oh, sorry. The Media doesn't like to self-promote. I forgot.
Anyhoo, former loon Governor of Arizona and current DHS Gadfly in Command, Janet Napolitano, has published the famous hit piece on mainstream Americans entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment". This piece of un-balanced excretia was a swing-and-a-miss from the get-go. It was rushed through to publication, against the advice of the lawyers and advisors with a longer view of things, and hit the distro list just in time for the "TEA Parties".
I am shocked...
I mean, partisan hack-jobs being released immediately prior to a media (non)-event? Whodathunkit? I mean, that kind of stuff NEVER happens in politics, does it?
Nah. That's just paranoia talking, right?
Right?
Or not...
So, the author of the document is listed on page 1 as: "(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division. Coordinated with the FBI."
The Department of Homeland Security has an Extremism and Radicalization Branch? Doesn't that mean that in this branch, they are fomenting radicals and extremists? With the help of the FBI? Wow. If I was one of the tinfoil-hat crowd, I might get concerned.
If you understand what a trial balloon is, you might think that this report was floated just to see WHICH groups jumped. It is kind of like the highway patrol
I like this next part: "The information is provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States Government sponsorship. (emphasis mine). I read this to mean that the Federal Government has decided that, in an effort directed towards focusing local law-enforcement activities in their preferred manner, this report is designed to influence domestic public opinion overtly.
Transparency was only achieved after this report was leaked publicly...
So, the Department of Homeland Security is advocating that Law Enforcement take pre-emptive measures to "prevent" terrorist attacks against the United States. Remember this line when you read further into the report. It has a VERY chilling effect on your rights as citizens and Americans.
Page two lists in great detail the fact that NO SPECIFIC INFORMATION exists about potential attacks, and then in the next sentence states unequivocally that "rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues."
That takes balls.
So does the lumping together of neo-Nazis and skinheads with the guy down the street who got laid off due to the economic downturn. Yep, if you have just lost your job, you are now a racist hate-monger who is angry that a black man is president. I wonder how that logic squares with the minorities who have lost their jobs due to the economic downturn? Are they now neo-Nazi Skinheads too?
I'm just asking.
Who is playing on whom's fears???
Page two also re-hashes the old canard about Tim McVeigh... C'mon guys! McVeigh was a dirtbag who had militant Islamic ties. Really, he did. Would someone at DHS PLEASE go look it up? Or, at least, go ask someone intelligent and knowledgeable in the FBI? Pretty please?
Oh, Bottom of Page two...all you military types fresh from the front lines. You are now terrorists in the eyes of your government. Sorry. Potential terrorists. Because, you know, you might have seen things that might give you trouble sleeping. Or something. Because, you know, you might be human...or something.
Page three: (paraphrasing here) Just because the President PROMISED his constituents and POSTED on the official White House web page that he intends to take your guns away, doesn't mean that the threat is credible. Really it doesn't. He didn't really mean it when he said it, posted it, stumped on it, talked to the President of Mexico about it, blamed YOU for the problems in Mexico because of it, and promised to ram through a treaty with that effect. Nope. Just smoke and mirrors. So all of you people buying guns for the first (second, fourth, fortieth) time can cut it out already. The police are getting worried that it will be harder to confiscate them now that you bought all of them.
This goes double for you returning vets with combat experience. Because, you know, unlike us poor civilian boobs, you guys and gals actually know how to use guns and you have the overseers a wee bit worried that you won't forget those skills any time soon.
The rest of page three is some PSH about how the Zionists are running things now and so we are arming up...or something like that.
Page four: If you oppose Gun Control efforts, Free Trade agreements with the Mexican Narco-State, Abortion, Same-sex Marriage, and "inter-racial crime", you might be a
Bottom of page four: "(U//FOUO) Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."
They took four sentences to say one word: WACO. They are trying to self-fulfill a prophesy of their own creation...and will blame you just like they blamed Koresh and his followers.
Ummm. Hmmmm. If the economy collapses because we pumped a couple of trillion dollars into it without the production to back it up and caused hyper-inflation, you are branded an extremist if you prepared for it by putting aside food, weapons, and ammunition. To provide for your family, should it be required. To protect them, should it be required. To survive a very bad time, should it come to that. The Government (in all of its iterations) has absolutely no duty to protect an individual. This is established fact, cemented in the case law of the country. If Government has no duty to protect you, shouldn't you be prepared to if you have to? I am just asking...
As an aside: If the sun sets in the west and a million people watch it, did they conspire to achieve twilight? Or, did they look at their watches, see the time, read the signs, and prepare to witness it? Just because more than one person can read the signs of the times does not mean that they are a conspiratorial cabal. Really. You dim-witted horse's asses (with apologies to horses worldwide).
Page five: If you are against illegal immigration, you might be an extremist. If you are for it, you might be in Congress...
Page five: If you are against infringements against your Second Amendment rights, you are an extremist (no "maybe" here).
See above screed about page three.
Of course, just because the government wishes to foment violence against gun owners, prompting a response by the "three percenters", doesn't mean that they are wrong. Waco rules are in-effect, you know.
It says so, right at the bottom of page five and the top of page six.
Also at the top of page six is this gem: "On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging and registration of ammunition."
Just so we can be clear here (all sarcasm aside): Registration schemes have been the prelude to ALL civilian disarmament efforts ever undertaken. Civilian disarmament has been the prelude to EVERY GENOCIDE IN THE 20TH CENTURY. In my mind, this means that EVERY CONGRESSMAN WHO PROPOSES GUN REGISTRATION IS PROPOSING THE MEANS TO EFFECT GENOCIDE IN THE UNITED STATES. Logically, If A leads to B, and B leads to C, then A leads to C. This is not hard. If you look at the facts objectively, like THIS reporter did HERE, the facts are inescapable.
Extreme? HELL YES! My life is MINE to live, NOT yours to run.
Back to the sarcasm...
Page six continues with more Zionist diatribes, and some fear-mongering about Russia (cuddly-bear would never use petro-muscle as an extortion tool, would they?), China (Tibet? Hong Kong? Taiwan? No worries!), and India ("thank you for calling the -yourcompanynamehere- help desk, my name is "Bob", how can I help?") using their rising influence on the world stage, as well as some drivel about the fact that treaties have the effect of over-riding and diluting our Constitution. Nothing to see here. Really. Oh, and that decade-old treaty about Inter-American Arms Control something-or-other doesn't really mean anything. Keep moving.
Look!!! Shiny!!!!
(Warning, extreme sarcasm below. With apologies to the true heroes serving in our fine armed forces. You guys and gals deserve every possible benefit that a free society can accord to you.)
Page seven. More military extremism. You guys know you are terrorists. Sorry, "Potential terrorists". (Abu Ghraib.) No problem. (Haditha.) We don't really mean to tar you guys with the broad brush...you know, like saying that you are "going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not..." (John Kerry, CBS Face the Nation, 12/04/2005, transcript pages 3 and 4). Really we don't. The DHS is an understanding agency with absolutely no bias against our military, except for pointing out that you guys might be good if you ever fought with us.
Not that you would.
Or something.
We hope.
Page eight. Rehash of the McVeigh crapola on ice.
Janet! Get an editor. Really. Brevity counts for something.
Page nine: Contact US!
(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9685 or by e-mail at NOC.Fusion@dhs.gov. For information affecting the private sector and critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at NICC@dhs.gov. The FBI regional phone numbers can be found online at http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/fo.htm. When available, each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated point of contact.
(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov.
So, If you are concerned about the direction that the Republicans and Democrats have taken us during the last, say, 20 years...you just might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you are concerned that, despite the assertions of the Democrats who have stated publicly they wish to disarm us, they might actually wish to disarm us. You might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you are concerned that uncontrolled illegal immigration of unknown persons coming over our border from a failed narco-state might have the potential to harm our country, you might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you oppose killing unborn babies, almost-newly born babies, or actual newborn babies, you might be a terrorist. Domestic, of course.
If you have ACTUALLY BOMBED Federal buildings, Conspired to bomb Federal buildings, or married someone who has actually done so...you might be William Ayers, a trusted friend and neighbor of the President. Meaning, you are definitely NOT a domestic terrorist.
Go figure.
< /sarcasm>
Pax,
Newbius
|||
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Since you asked...
Jean Poole (wonderful blog, check it out here) asked this question in response to this post. The question was: "what kills more people? Guns or abortions?".
Jean, the answer is abortions.
Most thinking people won't be surprised by this but I thought I would back up the assertion with some actual statistics. You Liberal readers of my blog (both of you) can whine all you want but the numbers speak for themselves.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, there were a total of 30,694 firearms-related deaths in 2005 (the latest year for which statistics are available). Of these, 1,490 were under the age of 18 (the legal definition of a "child" in the US).
Let's look at motor vehicles by comparison: That same year, there were a total of 45,520 motor-vehicle-related deaths. Of these, 4,527 were under the age of 18. I did not drill down to see how many were passengers and how many were driving, but the curve DOES spike upward around age 15-16. So, 3 times as many children are killed by/in cars each year than by firearms.
Now let's look at worldwide numbers for firearms deaths. According to Amnesty International, whose numbers were the highest reported of all of the sites I dug through, there were between 350,000 and 500,000 firearms related deaths (including "conflict" or war-related deaths) in 2005.
By comparison, deaths in 2005 due to abortion, in the United States alone, were 820,151.
Put it another way: 173,753 people died in the United States in 2005 (all causes, natural and unnatural). 820,151 "people" died unborn due to a "choice".
If the desire is to prevent needless death by banning dangerous weapons, perhaps the most effective weapon of all to ban would be the abortion provider.
By most reasonable estimates, there are about 300,000,000 firearms in the United States today. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are about 633,000 physicians of all types in the US (as of 2005-2006), of which 5.5% are Ob/Gyns (or, 34,815). Abortion providers are an even smaller subset constituting 1,787 nationwide (Guttmacher Institute Data).
300,000,000 guns in the US caused 30,694 deaths, of which 1,490 were under age 18.
1,787 Abortion providers in the US caused 820,151 deaths, of which ALL were under 18.
It kind of makes you wonder what the priorities are of the people advocating abortion as "good public policy".
Pax,
Newbius
Jean, the answer is abortions.
Most thinking people won't be surprised by this but I thought I would back up the assertion with some actual statistics. You Liberal readers of my blog (both of you) can whine all you want but the numbers speak for themselves.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, there were a total of 30,694 firearms-related deaths in 2005 (the latest year for which statistics are available). Of these, 1,490 were under the age of 18 (the legal definition of a "child" in the US).
Let's look at motor vehicles by comparison: That same year, there were a total of 45,520 motor-vehicle-related deaths. Of these, 4,527 were under the age of 18. I did not drill down to see how many were passengers and how many were driving, but the curve DOES spike upward around age 15-16. So, 3 times as many children are killed by/in cars each year than by firearms.
Now let's look at worldwide numbers for firearms deaths. According to Amnesty International, whose numbers were the highest reported of all of the sites I dug through, there were between 350,000 and 500,000 firearms related deaths (including "conflict" or war-related deaths) in 2005.
By comparison, deaths in 2005 due to abortion, in the United States alone, were 820,151.
Put it another way: 173,753 people died in the United States in 2005 (all causes, natural and unnatural). 820,151 "people" died unborn due to a "choice".
If the desire is to prevent needless death by banning dangerous weapons, perhaps the most effective weapon of all to ban would be the abortion provider.
By most reasonable estimates, there are about 300,000,000 firearms in the United States today. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are about 633,000 physicians of all types in the US (as of 2005-2006), of which 5.5% are Ob/Gyns (or, 34,815). Abortion providers are an even smaller subset constituting 1,787 nationwide (Guttmacher Institute Data).
300,000,000 guns in the US caused 30,694 deaths, of which 1,490 were under age 18.
1,787 Abortion providers in the US caused 820,151 deaths, of which ALL were under 18.
It kind of makes you wonder what the priorities are of the people advocating abortion as "good public policy".
Pax,
Newbius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)