Family Security Matters
by AMIL IMANI
Islam has spawned many sects that are master practitioners of the art of double standards. As far as Muslims are concerned, what is good for Muslims is not good for the non-Muslims; and what is bad for Muslims is good for non-Muslims.
What complicates matters is that there is no way of knowing which of the dozens of at-each-other’s-throat sects is the legitimate Islam. As soon as Muhammad died, his religion of peace became a house of internal war: jockeying for power and leadership started, sects formed and splintered into sub-sects, and bloodletting began in earnest.
The internal infighting in Islam is presently playing in full color – in red – most dramatically, in Iraq and Afghanistan and other Islamic theaters. Shiite raid Sunni civilians, slaughter them like sheep, and toss their bodies like trash in the streets or the rivers. The Sunnis return the favor with just as much viciousness and savagery.
Question: If this is the way these Muslims treat each other, how would they deal with the infidels if they had the chance?
Yet another mass shooting has taken place in America – followed by all too predictable cries to ban the AR-15 rifle.
The pure ignorance of the people bleating for a ban on America’s most popular rifle is appalling. With few exceptions, most of the calls to ban the AR-15 come from liberal, urban women and metrosexual men whose knowledge of firearms comes entirely from watching Rambo movies or playing “Call of Duty.”
Even some in professional law enforcement know not of what they speak. A local radio station interviewed a retired FBI agent who stated that he “could not understand” why people would want such a rifle.
I’ve shot service rifle competitions for nearly 20 years and held the classification of “Master” for nearly eleven. I’ve probably put 20,000 rounds through AR-15 rifles. Though I’ve never been in the military, I have more familiarity and proficiency with the weapon than most active-duty soldiers. So I think I am as qualified as anybody to dispel the common myths about the AR-15.
First, the AR-15 is not a machine-gun or an “assault weapon.” The AR-15 is a semi-automatic version of the M-16, which is a machine gun. However, in Vietnam, the military found that troops with early versions of the M-16 were using fully-automatic “spray and pray” fire – and often failing to hit the enemy. So when the M-16 was redesigned in the early 1980s, its fully automatic rate of fire was reduced to three-shot bursts, forcing troops to actually aim rather than hip-fire. But any fully-automatic fire is simply not an option for the civilian AR-15.
by Victor Joecks
Being a shooting victim doesn’t make you an expert on ending gun violence. But you wouldn’t know that from watching CNN.
It’s been a week since a monster killed 17 people at a Florida high school. The calls for gun control have been reflexive and ambiguous, but the media have found a new mouthpiece — shooting survivors.
“Students seize control of gun debate” blared a MSNBC caption. An organization portraying itself as being made up of students announced a March 24 rally in D.C. and other cities called “March For Our Lives.” Some students say they won’t return to class until gun-control “legislation has been passed.” Videos of shooting survivors calling for gun control have gone viral.
Interviewing shooting survivors makes for compelling television, but it’s a horrible way to conduct a reasoned debate. Experiencing a tragic event doesn’t transform you into an expert, in the same way having a brain injury doesn’t make you a brain surgeon.
(Excerpt) Read more at reviewjournal.com …
Is it a surprise to find a Stalin apologist at the center of the Steele dossier scandal?
Gotta hand it to Special Counsel Robert Mueller: He knows how to set off a stick of dynamite. I refer, of course, to his office’s recent indictment of thirteen Russians in Russia, which we are now to chase after, yelling “Pearl Harbor!” on the Left and “No collusion!” on the Right, forgetting all about the coalescing revelations of corruption and conspiracy and, yes, Russian influence, to elect Hillary Clinton in 2016, and, failing that, to destroy the Trump presidency.
The key is still in the “dossier” spying scandal.
Nellie Ohr is the “dossier” spying scandal’s woman in the middle.
To one side of Ohr, there is the Fusion GPS team, including fellow contractor Christopher Steele. To the other, there is husband Bruce Ohr, who, until his “dossier”-related demotion, was No. 4 man at the Department of Justice, and a key contact there for Steele.
Family Security Matters
There were many damning revelations in the Nunes memo released by a House Intelligence Committee vote. But the most damning of them all doesn’t raise questions about process, but about motive.
The memo told us that the FISA application would not have happened without the Steele dossier. The document known as the Steele dossier was a work product of the Clinton campaign. Not only was Christopher Steele, the former British intel agent who purportedly produced the document, working for an organization hired by the Clinton campaign, but he shared a memo with the FBI from Cody Shearer, a Clinton operative, listing some of the same allegations as the ones in his dossier. That memo has raised questions about whether Steele had been doing original research or just dressing up a smear by Shearer.
A redacted memo by Senate Judiciary Committee members Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham also states that there was a second Steele memo based on information that Steele had received from the State Department and which had been passed along by “a friend of the Clintons.” Victoria Nuland, a Clinton protégé and top State Department official who helped cover up the Benghazi attack, recently went on a media tour in which she revealed that Steele had passed along his material to State.
Shearer and Nuland are both Clinton associates. Under President Clinton, Nuland had been Strobe Talbott’s Chief of Staff. Shearer was Strobe Talbott’s brother-in-law and his connection to the Clintons.
Not only was the Steele dossier a work product of the Clinton campaign, but the State Department, which had been run by Hillary Clinton and staffed by many of her loyalists at the top, had been used to route information to Steele from the Clintons, and then route information back from Steele. Clintonworld had not only paid for the Steele dossier, but influenced its content and passed it around.
Calling it the Steele dossier is a mistake. It’s the Clinton dossier. At best, it’s the Clinton-Steele dossier.
Last week, I tripped across a very interesting article from the Middle East Forum. It’s written by Joseph M. Humire of the Gatestone Institute, where I also saw it. It’s very well written and I recommend both sites. It caught my eye because it covers a topic that has bothered me for a long time militarily… Venezuela.
At issue here is the fact that Iran, Russia and China have moved into Venezuela and are looking to use it as a military vantage point. They also want the oil there. Caught in the middle are the starving people of a once prosperous nation. They are pawns in a geopolitical chess match. Rex Tillerson just finished a tour of Latin America where he invoked the Monroe Doctrine, which Obama tried to kill off. He suggested the Venezuelan military could manage a “peaceful transition” from the authoritarian leader Nicolás Maduro. Once again, this raised the specter of the US using a “military option” for Venezuela, where we would step in to stop the country from collapsing. Iran, China and Russia are sure to take a dim view of any move by the US and we should be aware they are there. Tillerson mentioned both Russia and China, but failed to mention Iran.