Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »

Gunslinger201

Profile Information

Name: Mike
Gender: Male
Member since: Tue May 20, 2014, 12:32 PM
Number of posts: 43,913

About Me

US Navy Retired, Aerospace worker. All around good Dude. Eternal Foe of the work ethic

Journal Archives

Deadly export: Canadian Muslims responsible for hundreds of Islamic terrorism deaths and injuries



And alt-left Trudeau gifts these slaughters with millions. This is the sharia era, in which your life can be destroyed by a blasphemous tweet, a wrong joke, a free opinion.

DEADLY EXPORT: CANADIANS RESPONSIBLE FOR HUNDREDS OF TERRORISM DEATHS AND INJURIES OVERSEAS

Canadian terrorists are responsible for significant loss of life in other countries, but experts said that was often overlooked in the public debate about Canadian extremism.

A suicide bomber from Calgary strikes near Baghdad. A Windsor man masterminds the torture and killing of foreigners at a Dhaka bakery. Two London, Ont., gunmen take hostages at a gas plant in the Algerian desert.

Canadian terrorists have killed and injured more than 300 in other countries since 2012, according to figures compiled by Global News that document the victims of so-called extremist travellers.

Fatal attacks in Algeria, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Iraq, Russia, Somalia and Syria were attributed to Canadians during that time. An attack in Michigan resulted in no deaths but seriously injured a police officer.

Citizens of 19 countries were killed in attacks involving Canadian perpetrators, including locals and British, Colombian, French, Indian, Israeli, Italian, Filipino, Japanese, Malaysian, Norwegian, Romanian and U.S. nationals.

The majority of killings were claimed by the so-called Islamic State, while others were the work of Al Qaeda affiliates and Hezbollah, but attacks by Al Qaeda-aligned groups were more deadly.

The figures are an attempt to tally overseas terrorism casualties attributed to Canadians from the time that numbers of extremist travellers began to spike in 2012 until the territorial defeat of ISIS last month.

Global News compiled the data from the Global Terrorism Database, Canadian Terrorism Incident Database, government documents, interviews, news reports and releases by terrorist groups. Included were attacks in which Canadians were direct participants or accomplices.

A total of 127 victims reportedly died in the attacks, and 195 were injured. Fifty-five attackers also died.

Four of the attacks killed more than a dozen victims and were worse than any mass murder in Canada since the 1985 Air Indian bombings by Sikh extremists. Injuries included stab wounds, burns and cuts caused by flying glass.

“While Canadians are right to think that terrorism generally happens less in our country, we also need to keep in mind that we export a lot of terrorism in different forms all over the world,” said Toronto-based terrorism researcher Prof. Amarnath Amarasingam.

Canadians have long been active in foreign terrorist groups, but their numbers increased sharply following the start of the Syrian conflict. In 2013 alone, overseas attacks in which Canadians played key roles killed 90 and wounded 98.

A February 2014 RCMP document noted the “growing” participation of Canadians in foreign conflicts and acts of terrorism and called preventing “high-risk individuals” from leaving the country a “challenging but important task.”

The government subsequently ramped up efforts against extremist travellers — placing them on the no-fly list, arresting them at airports, seizing their passports and having them intercepted as they transited through Turkey.

But some were still able to find their way to foreign terrorist groups.

“Unless there is some legitimate reason to prevent people from traveling to conflict zones, the rights of mobility contained in Section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply,” the RCMP wrote in “Foreign Fighters: Preventing the Security Threat in Canada and Abroad.”

WATCH: Former CSIS analyst discusses the priorities of security agencies and preventing terrorists from leaving CanadaFormer Canadian Security Intelligence Service analyst Phil Gurski said government agencies struggled at times to come up with solid evidence proving that someone preparing to travel intended to participate in terrorism.

“We may know that you’re completely radicalized and that you’re possibly open to the idea of taking part in an attack but we don’t necessarily know your intent,” said the former intelligence official.

Another challenge is that those prevented from travelling may conduct attacks in Canada instead. In 2014, such attacks left two dead, and in 2016, a suicide bomber was killed and his cab driver injured.

“So it’s almost like you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t,” Gurski added.

Meanwhile, the foreign conflicts that have attracted Canadian extremists remain mostly unresolved, and Al Qaeda and ISIS affiliates continue to operate from West Africa to Southeast Asia.

As a result, governments need to be cautious about reducing their focus on Islamist extremism as they tackle the emerging threat of right-wing extremism, Gurski said.

https://gellerreport.com/2019/04/deadly-export-canadian-muslims-responsible-for-hundreds-of-islamic-terrorism-deaths-and-injuries-overseas.html/

How long do we keep pretending Islam isn't at War with the Non Islamic World? We are stupid enough to let them in our Government. The Only reason there is any "Right Wing Threat" at all is the Citizens aren't going to stand around and let them Behead us

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun Apr 14, 2019, 03:34 PM (2 replies)

Border Patrol Union President says its absolutely Legal to drop Illegals off in sanctuary cities




National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd claimed Sunday that it is “absolutely legal” for the federal government to transport illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities.

Judd argued during a “Fox & Friends” segment that President Donald Trump’s proposed plan to do just that was “brilliant” and should have been cheered by people on both sides.

“It’s absolutely legal,” Judd explained. “But I’m going to get beaten up by the hard left for this comment. But this is actually a brilliant move on the president’s part.”

Judd went on to detail the “two layers” he saw at work in the proposed plan.

“If he’s doing it for humanitarian purposes, he should be praised,” Judd began. “These are cities that the city councils have consciously made a decision they’re going to accept the illegal aliens into their cities to protect them.”

But then Judd addressed the flip side, saying, “If he’s doing it for political reasons, this is brilliant. These people have to be released for one reason or another. And if we’re going to have to release them, why not show the sanctuary cities the same pressure that other cities are feeling.”

“From those two layers, this is a brilliant move,” Judd concluded.

Reports surfaced last week that the White House had proposed transporting detained illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities once the legal 20-day detention period had lapsed, but that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had rejected the plan over public relations concerns.

Following the public reaction to those reports — particularly the response from Democrats who suddenly appeared to oppose an influx of illegal immigrants into the cities they touted as welcoming to all — Trump has doubled down on the idea, saying that his administration is now seriously considering the option.
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun Apr 14, 2019, 01:26 PM (5 replies)

Dan Crenshaw reaches across the aisle....Slaps the stupid off some Democrats

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1116817144006750209

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1116859387199533057

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1116855482038272000

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1116848329776934912

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1116896225876377600

That Boy is pretty awesome
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun Apr 14, 2019, 09:51 AM (4 replies)

Official School Records Support Claims That Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) Married Her Brother



Minnesota state Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-60B) currently leads the race to fill the federal House seat being vacated by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN). Immediately after being elected to her current seat in 2016, Omar faced allegations -- soon backed by a remarkable amount of evidence -- that she had married her own brother in 2009, and was still legally his wife. They officially divorced in December 2017.

The motivation for the marriage remains unclear. However, the totality of the evidence points to possible immigration fraud and student loan fraud.

Rep. Omar has stated that she did marry "British citizen" Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009, though the allegation that he is her brother is "absurd and offensive."

Below, exclusive new evidence -- from official archived high school records and corroborating sources -- strongly supports the claim that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi is indeed her brother.

As this implicates Rep. Omar in multiple state and federal felonies, I have contacted the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota to submit all other information uncovered during our investigation.

According to official student enrollment records archived by St. Paul Public Schools and the state of Minnesota, an “Ahmed N. Elmi” was enrolled as a senior in the Class of 2003 at Arlington Senior High School in St. Paul, MN, from September 6, 2002, until June 10, 2003. He graduated and received a diploma.

The enrollment record states that “Ahmed N. Elmi” was born on April 4, 1985.

Both Ilhan Omar’s 2009 marriage documents and her 2017 divorce proceedings state that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi was born on April 4, 1985.

After an extensive background search, I have not been able to find any other person named “Ahmed Nur Said Elmi,” “Ahmed N. Elmi,” or even “Ahmed Elmi” with the birthdate April 4, 1985. The man Ilhan Omar married and the 17- to 18-year-old who attended Arlington Senior High School in St. Paul, MN, in 2002-2003 are one and the same.

https://pjmedia.com/davidsteinberg/official-school-records-support-claims-that-rep-ilhan-omar-d-mn-married-her-brother/

Don't expect anything out of Minnesota's Attorney General. He's a POS Muslim too who committs domestic Violence. Yay Sharia
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sat Apr 13, 2019, 07:56 PM (30 replies)

Law of Self Defense, was McDonalds Guard justified going for his Gun?



There’s a video making the internet rounds of an apparent security guard outside a McDonald’s being attacked by two young black men, and I’m being asked if the guard pointing his gun at the two was a lawful threat of deadly defensive force, on the one hand, or a crime, on the other.

Before we begin with the analysis, here’s the video:


Five Elements of a Self-Defense Claim

As I always tell folks this kind of use-of-force analysis isn’t rocket science—there are only five elements of a claim of self-defense: Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, Avoidance, and Reasonableness. Every element is required (unless legally waived), and if any required element is missing, the claim of self-defense fails.

Innocence

We don’t know how the confrontation started, but for purposes of this discussion, I’m going to assume that the two young men were the initial aggressors, rather than the guard. Check this element in favor of the guard.

Imminence

A threat needs to be at least imminent, about to happen right now, in order for defensive force to be justified, but a fight that’s actually in progress clearly qualifies as well. Check this element in favor of the guard.

Proportionality

The guard ended up threatening the two men with deadly force—his pistol—and the law generally requires that the guard be facing a deadly force threat in order to be justified in using or threatening deadly defensive force. This, as well as the element of Reasonableness, are the key elements of this case, so we’ll cover this in more depth in a bit.

Avoidance

Even in the minority of states that impose a generalized legal duty to retreat, that duty is imposed only if a completely safe avenue of retreat is practically available. The nature and setting of this attack suggest that the guard had no practical means of completely safe retreat when he presented his handgun, so no legal duty to retreat would have applied even in a duty-to-retreat state.

In most states, of course, there is no generalized legal duty to retreat before defending yourself against an unlawful attack. Regardless of the jurisdiction in this case, then, we’ll check this element in favor of the guard.

Reasonableness

As mentioned, this element of Reasonableness, as well as Proportionality, are the key issues of this case, so we’ll cover them in more detail now


https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/04/law-of-self-defense-was-mcdonalds-guard-justified-in-going-to-his-gun/

This Guy was right on in the Trayvon case, he’s a real expert

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sat Apr 13, 2019, 06:35 PM (10 replies)

The Coalition to get Ilhan Omar off the Foreign Relations Committee



Schumer will throw New York under the Bus

A group called The Coalition to Get Ilhan Omar off the Foreign Affairs Committee is holding a rally on May 19 titled “Operation: Schumer’s Doorstep.”

The group states: “The Coalition seeks to mobilize Americans of all political, ethnic and religious backgrounds who are concerned about Rep. Ilhan Omar’s continuing presence on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The Coalition’s first goal is to enlist (through all reasonable means of persuasion granted by the Constitution) Senator Schumer in the cause. The event will be part peaceful protest, prayer vigil, and press conference.”

The rally will be held outside Schumer’s building by Prospect Park in Brooklyn.

The group counsels, “We’d like people of faith to lead a prayer calling for Schumer to gain the courage of his convictions so that from this moment on, the senator will fight with every fiber of his being to drive Omar off the committee. We pray for him to become the Shomer he has always said he is.”

Schumer has boasted in the past that he is a “Shomer,” which is the Hebrew word for guardian. In 2010, he told a Jewish radio show, “My name, as you know, comes from a Hebrew word. It comes from the word shomer, which means guardian. My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov and I believe Hashem (God), actually, gave me name as one of my roles that is very important in the United States Senate to be a shomer for Israel and I will continue to be that with every bone in my body.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/45935/group-planning-ny-rally-urging-schumer-get-ilhan-hank-berrien

I think Omar, Tlaib and AOC are dragging the Dems under. Good

White Death



Too funny

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sat Apr 13, 2019, 12:25 PM (1 replies)

Ocasio-Cortez Appears On 'The Price Is Right,' Guesses Everything Is Free



HOLLYWOOD, CA—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was pumped to attend a taping of The Price Is Right in Hollywood this week. The special guest introduced herself as a U.S. representative and rising star of the Democratic Party. Things got interesting when the game began and every time it was her turn to estimate the price of an item her answer was "free."



Items included a set of Italian leather handbags, an all expenses paid trip to the Bahamas, and a brand new 2019 BMW 330i, at all of which Ocasio-Cortez shouted, "FREE!"

When host Drew Carey asked if Ocasio-Cortez understood the game's rules, she told Carey not to cat-call her and then responded, "Don't hate me cause you ain't me."

She went on to guess that diamond earrings, a set of jet skis, and even a giant pile of cash were all free. Carey unveiled a package containing world-class healthcare and she said, "Definitely free." She was at one point puzzled by a stack of croissants but eventually guessed that they also were free.

Cortez was never able to advance to the game proper, and as the credits rolled she appeared visibly upset. A hot mic picked up comments she made in frustration, claiming that the game was rigged by capitalism and that "everybody knows giant piles of money are free, that's like basic economics 101".

https://babylonbee.com/news/ocasio-cortez-appears-on-price-is-right-guesses-everything-is-free?fbclid=IwAR1CfnGEbrkBfjNKUz_cMlzDGXg-s8c0scu2rlGD6_xODTFhfxRxTd0NliI

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sat Apr 13, 2019, 04:18 AM (5 replies)

Loser of the year





Learn to Code

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Fri Apr 12, 2019, 03:41 PM (7 replies)

Barr brings accountability




Trump’s foes call it ‘stunning and scary.’ Here’s what they have to be scared about

The most inadvertently honest reaction to Attorney General William Barr’s congressional testimony this week came from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Mr. Barr had bluntly called out the Federal Bureau of Investigation for “spying” on the Trump campaign in 2016. Mr. Clapper said that was both “stunning and scary.” Indeed.

No doubt a lot of former Obama administration and Hillary Clinton campaign officials, opposition guns for hire, and media members are stunned and scared that the Justice Department finally has a leader willing to address the FBI’s behavior in 2016. They worked very hard to make sure such an accounting never happened. Only in that context can we understand the frantic new Democratic-media campaign to tar the attorney general.

Mr. Barr told the Senate Wednesday that one question he wants answered is why nobody at the FBI briefed the Trump campaign about concerns that low-level aides might have had inappropriate contacts with Russians. That’s “normally” what happens, Mr. Barr said, and the Trump campaign had two obvious people to brief—Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie, both former federal prosecutors.

It wasn’t only the Trump campaign that the FBI kept in the dark. The bureau routinely briefs Congress on sensitive counterintelligence operations. Yet former Director James Comey admits he deliberately hid his work from both the House and the Senate. And the FBI kept information from yet another overseer, the judicial branch, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee had paid for the dossier it presented as a basis for a surveillance warrant against Carter Page, a U.S. citizen.

Why the secrecy? Mr. Comey testified that the Trump probe was simply too sensitive for members of congressional intelligence committees to know about—an unbelievable statement given the heavy publicity he gave the investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s improper handling of classified information. Here’s a more plausible explanation: Mr. Comey and his crew have also testified that they were all convinced Mrs. Clinton would win the election. That would have meant that no politician other than the incoming Democratic president would have known the FBI had spied on the Trump team. Nor would the public. A Clinton presidency would have ensured no accountability.

Mr. Trump’s victory destroyed that scenario, and it became clear that the new Republican president would soon know that the former Democratic administration had surveilled his campaign on the basis of information from his rival. At that point two things happened. Neither was accidental, and both were aimed, again, at forestalling accountability.

First, Mr. Comey and other intelligence officials, including Mr. Clapper, engineered the public release of all the scandalous claims against Mr. Trump, to provide some cover. As liberal commentator Matt Taibbi notes in his new book, “Hate Inc.” Mr. Comey’s Jan. 6, 2017, briefing of the president-elect about the dossier was a classic Washington “trick.” It served as the “pretext” to get the details out, a “news hook” to allow the press to publish the dossier—with its salacious fictions about prostitutes and Moscow hotel rooms—and go wild.

Democrats used the furor in their successful push for a special counsel, which gave greater legitimacy to the FBI’s probe. The appointment of a special counsel also froze other oversight. Congress can’t have access to certain documents or ask witnesses certain questions, since that might interfere with the probe. The White House can’t demand answers, because that too would interfere. Mr. Trump’s adversaries got to hide behind Robert Mueller for nearly two years.

Second, Democrats mobilized against the other big threat, incoming Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had the authority to conduct an internal review. Don’t forget, the dossier wasn’t delivered only to the FBI. Its ultimate owners were the Clinton campaign and the DNC. And one huge outstanding question is just how many Democrats pushing for Mr. Sessions’ recusal in early 2017 did so with full knowledge of the FBI-Clinton tie-up. Certainly no Republicans were aware, and thus they were clueless to the bigger consequences of the unnecessary Sessions recusal.

Namely, that no outsider would take a hard look at the FBI. The Russia question fell to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, an institutionalist who would go on to sign the final application for a surveillance warrant against Mr. Page. Again, no accountability. Meantime, wonder why Democrats tried so hard to mau-mau Mr. Barr into also recusing himself? The goal all along has been to deep-six any discovery until a Democrat returns to the White House.

Mr. Barr didn’t merely refuse to recuse; he’s made clear he plans to plumb the FBI’s actions thoroughly. That makes him Threat No. 1 to everyone who participated in these abuses, and it’s why the liberal media establishment is now disparaging his integrity. They are stunned and scared—that accountability has returned to the Justice Department.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/barr-brings-accountability-11555022792

The “investigation” part is over, this is the reveal. The Awakening. Enjoy the show
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Fri Apr 12, 2019, 07:40 AM (16 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »