Spies in mosques

The question has come up about putting undercover police officers or informants in mosques. The Left says it is a violation of the First Amendment to put informants in mosques because it restricts the free exercise of the Islamic faith. Sorry, there is legal precedent showing that matters of national security out way parts of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Don't believe it? During the fight against the Ku Klux Klan, the Federal Bureau do Investigation (FBI) placed informants in in locations where there were likely gathering of Klan members. The FBI slipped informants in to Southern churches to root out Klansmen. It worked. During the 70s and 80s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Alcohol, Tobacco & firearms(ATF) and Drug Enforcement Agency(DEA) placed agents and informants in several of the white supremacy organizations with religious leaders and churches. With the information gained white supremacist were arrested, charged and convicted from infiltration of religious organizations.

So, what's the difference? Since the federal law enforcement agencies have infiltrated Christian, I use the word loosely, churches they sure can infiltrate Muslim centers of worship. I have no problem with agents and informants being placed in places of worship. These infiltrators do not cause problems in the "churches." They are members of the faith they mix with and worship as everyone else. They just collect information and pass it on. No harm, no foul.

Where it's been legally done before, it can be legally done again.

Socialist take over of America.

The Socialists (what I call Democrats) have introduced the Assault Weapons Ban of 2015.  Its a bill full of ignorant blather. Using the recent mass shootings across the country, these Socialists are using fear and scare tactics to undermine the Constitution and the  Bill of Rights.Their idea is that the Second Amendment is no longer relevant in modern society. Socialists know that after the nation has been deprived of multi-round, semi-automatic rifles, the stage is set for them to further their agenda. Turning America into a Socialist state.

If the Second Amendment is relevant, how long will it take for these Socialists to decide that parts of the First Amendment are no longer relevant. It's easy to see that, too. Already is free speech curtailed. You cannot express your opinion if it does not agree with those with Socialist agendas. Several of the amendments are threatened. Due process has been under attack.

Don't think this is happening? Do you think I'm crazy? If you ask those two questions, then you have already been spoofed by the Socialists. I can, and I will, show you how it works. The Socialist agenda includes marginalize groups of people and then set them at odds with each other. Set class tension by making the rich people villains while making lower and middle classes heroes. Marginalize people who disagree with the Socialist; playing them for fools. Set the current government as evil and out of touch with the citizens then set the Socialist agenda as the friends of the mobs and people. Restrict the ownership of firearms making the citizens unable to defend themselves. The Soviets did this to form the communist in Russia. The Nazis followed the same plan when they took control of the German government. All you have to do is read Marx and the other Socialist authors to see what I'm talking about.



As a personal note: My spelling is not perfect and neither is my grammar. I express my concerns as best as I can.

So Over Sandy Hook

Let me preface this by saying that I have never lost a child.

The attack on the Sandy Hook school was horrible. There are other words to describe what happened in 2012. There are so many questions still left unanswered. There are some that will never be answered. The blame game that continues will not solve the puzzles.

I am so over Sandy Hook! This coming December it will be three years. You would think that the Sandy Hook community would be trying to move on and put the shootings to rest, as best they could. Oh no! The victim's parents and others are finding ingenious reasons to file law suits. They had the Lanza home demolished. After suing the Connecticut Board of Education, Newtown Board of Education, Bushmaster firearms, and now they are suing the estate of Nancy Lanza, Adam Lanza's mother. Who will be next victim of the legal express train?

What are we supposed to think? For me, I think that continue the legal processes are trying to get money to ease their pain. Or, they are simply wanting revenge! I wonder how much News for the parents, your lawyers are making a killing!. Besides, how much grief can be erased for $100,00? A million?

Sniper in Ferguson

Back a few weeks ago someone mentioned that snipers in combat were cowards. There was a great outcry over this because military snipers have an important roll in combat. They provide cover for advancing troops, the provide protection for dignitaries, and observe enemy movement.Their rolls are vital to combat since the  late 19th century. Law enforcement snipers serve the same roll.

Last night, two police officers in Ferguson were shot, both  in critical condition. They weren't killed close up or in  a fight with protesters. They were shot in cold blood by a sniper. Civilian snipers are not the same as those in the  military. Civilian snipers are cowards. They are not brave! They do not have honor! They are criminals. There is no  other way to define their actions as justified.

Cowards! Devils! Bastards!

I refuse to be politically correct.

People are wearing so much crap on their shirt sleeves. Everything offends them. I am tired of trying to think of what I want to say before I say it. It's rather confusing trying figure out what to say and how to say it without hurting someones feelings.

The worst offenders in the PC world are politicians, Facebook users, Twitter users and the news media. With President Obama refusing to call ISIS terrorists or Islamic extremists is allowing ISIS to do as the please. A company is New Zealand or Australia had to redo labeling because the care instructions included a statement telling the man to take to a woman. It was very tongue-in-cheek but it hurt someones feelings. I'm not even going to state on the greatest offenders,..Democrats. I am not afraid of calling them Socialist.

I am not saying I will throw away politeness or just plain rude, Yes, you should always be nice. There was a time in America when plain talk to regarded as a plus in anyone's character. Beating around the bush was considered shifty and untrustworthy. We need to bring back plain language. Stop all this pussy footing around.

If I have offended anyone, tough shit.

Gun Nuts?

"Gun nuts" is a phrase that is tossed around a lot by people wanting to severely curtail gun ownership in the United States. You have to ask, "What is a gun nut?" To me a gun nut is someone who has owned, trained, maintained firearms. In that I am a gun nut. I suppose when the gun control freaks talk about gun nuts they are referring to people who own hundreds of guns, millions of rounds of ammunition and carry a dozen or so on their persons. Kinda makes me think of Tackelberry from Police Academy. I hate to break it to those folks, but there are 10,000 people of my definition of gun nut to one person of the gun control freaks definition.

Who I am? I own a few guns. I've hunted for a great many years of my life; started from my pre-teens. I'm also a former police officer. I am also a veteran of the War in Iraq. There are literally thousands of people just like me. Have I ever threatened to shoot someone? Other than in a professional capacity I have never threatened anyone with a gun. So, I'm a gun nut.

You don't like me being a gun nut? Sorry, you can kiss my ass.

Judge not

How often have you been talking to a fellow Christian and something comes up about their conduct and they respond with “judge not lest ye be judged?” Frequently, you will have a non-Christian say that. They know that one phrase so well! And yes, it is true. At any rate, that response usually ends that conversation. Occasionally, the conversation ends with hurting toes and feelings. Why?

All of us have a tendency to take one phrase and take it to be all encompassing. An example is given above.  There is much, much more to it. As an instruction manual, the Bible sometimes leaves us confused, scratching our heads. While the Bible is a “how-to” book, you have to look through pages and pages until we understand the point. The instructions of Christ in Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that ye be not judged” seem pretty straightforward. It suggests that we should never tell another Christian when they are doing something wrong. Is that what it means? Is that all there is too it? No. And, no.

Paul’s teaching in Galatians and 2nd Timothy follows up on Matthew 7:1. Galatians 6:1, “…if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.” I look at this to mean that if you see someone committing a sin, show their sin, but do not be tempted to do so in a overbearing, superior fashion. Softly, privately, tell them their error in a loving, concerned way without being critical. This is not judging.

When pressed with explain the contradiction to Matthew 7:1, I refer to 2 Timothy 3:16-17:  “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” Does this make it acceptable to correct a fellow Christian? I say, “yes.” “Yes,” as long as you do it in the proper manner. Do not laud over those in error. Do not act superior or oppressive.

It is the responsibility of Christians to take care of each other. This extends to telling a fellow Christian they are sinning. As a Christian, you Salvation does not hinge on being helpful to others in this manner. In the long run, however when you stand in front of the Judge, it will not be mark of error. I think the opposite is true. Failing to help another Christian and causing a third person from seeking Salvation will be a mark that requires answering.

Help another Christian if you see them in error, but do not do so in error.