Hillary Clinton’s Past Catching Up With Her

Apparently, Hillary Clinton’s past remains tainted as hell.  She’s just done a good job of hiding it.

Hillary Clinton
What does it matter? IT MATTERS TO US.

The very long history of Hillary’s lying past is surfacing.  Turns out, she has NEVER supported our Constitution, even when she was lying under oath that she did.  As it turns out, she’s no stranger to lying, a fact even CBS highlighted, after Hillary lied about her trip to Tuzla, Bosnia, in 1996 as First Lady.

Interestingly enough, I flew in and out of Tuzla on many trips in 1996.  While security was tight, we weren’t under sniper fire, either.  I found her comments incredible (as in unbelievable), a fact confirmed by the CBS new video, found here.

So, I’m revising my earlier assessment that we should simply cut her some slack if she gave up Obama.  Now I’m wondering if she didn’t orchestrate the whole Benghazi affair and should be held at least as accountable as Obama himself.

On top of that, the recent allegations from her former employer, Zeifman, who fired her for serious ethical violations, are damning.  So why WAS she fired?

Let’s ask her boss: “Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.”  Source:  Watergate-era Judiciary chief of staff: Hillary Clinton fired for lies, unethical behavior

Wow.  That’s damning.  But why?

““Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.””

And if anyone gets the idea I’m making this up, consider this quote:  “Zeifman says he was urged by top committee members to keep a diary of everything that was happening. He did so, and still has the diary if anyone wants to check the veracity of his story. Certainly, he could not have known in 1974 that diary entries about a young lawyer named Hillary Rodham would be of interest to anyone 34 years later.”

And perhaps we need to re-open the investigations into the 20+ deaths of those folks who were connected with her and her husband’s rise to power back in the mid-1990s.

Well, I guess I’d better check to make sure my firearm is ready to go, that my food and water have not been tampered with, and that I avoid getting with within arms length or blowgun microdot  distance (carrier or poisons, bio-toxins, etc.) of any stranger for a couple of years…

Yikes! If all of you share this, however, I’ll be off the hook. Make sure you copy the links, too.  In fact, don’t just link to this, as they can shut it down.  Copy EVERYTHING.  They can’t kill us all, at least not without creating a huge uproar.

Thankfully, this has already been shared well over a dozen times. 🙂

Gun Free Zones – Fact vs Fallacy – A Letter…

gun free zones
What we see; what they see

A few days ago, following the recent tragedy in yet another of America’s many gun free zones, I examined every shooting spree since the end of WW II.  Of the 52 massacres over the last 65 years, ten were rejected because they didn’t fit the typical shooting spree and involved things such as deliberately set fires, bombings, and situations where the public was never in a position to return fire (such as the Kent State Massacre).

gun free zones
There’s only ONE way to stop a shooting spree…

The results with respect to the 42 remaining shooting sprees will astound you.  More than 75% of them occurred in so-called “Gun Free Zones,” which occupy less than 10% of areas frequented by the average citizen on any given day.  Statistically speaking, your average citizen is THREE TIMES more likely to die of a shooting spree in a Gun Free Zone than they are to die of a shooting spree in an area where people are allowed to keep and bear arms.

It’s clear that the whole idea of creating a “Gun Free Zone” does not protect citizens from firearms.  Far from it.  Establishing such “Gun Free Zones” actually triples the danger to the lives of those who must frequent those zones, whether they be children or mall employees.  The following graphic tells story of how the United Kingdom (UK) opened the door wide to violent crime by disarming its citizens.  Click on the graphic to see the details in the full-sized version:

gun free zone

Let’s face it:  The nutcases who conduct these shooting sprees may be insane, but they’re not stupid.  The media itself has clearly revealed the amount of planning that goes into most shooting sprees and the conclusion is inarguable:  Most perpetrators specifically target Gun Free Zones, almost certainly because they believe no one will be shooting back at them.

On a similar note, more than 50% of all shooting sprees are stopped, not by cops, but by law-abiding citizens, two-thirds of whom are armed.

Gun Free ZonesSo again, the question of why we’re disarming law-abiding citizens (less safe) and creating Gun Free Zones (WAY less safe) MUST be called into question at every level.

Nothing highlights the fallacy of gun control more than “Gun Free Zones.”  They’re the epitome of control, yet the most dangerous knee-jerk response by far.  Clearly, more control is not the answer.  Never in the history of America has gun control ever reduced crime.  In fact, Muslimtime and time again we see the same repeating pattern:  When gun control in an area is relaxed, crime drops.  When gun control in an area is increased, crime rises.

Jan 1, 2014 Update:  Ever since a federal court forced Chicago to process concealed carry applications, crime dropped.  In less than six months, it has dropped by more than 30%.  That’s MASSIVE.

These are facts, people.  I’m asking to you remain cognizant of these facts, and to base your decisions upon the facts, rather than siding with a bunch of hysterical, nonsensical, and ignorant rhetoric lifted from the whiny ramblings of a few emotionally-driven special interest groups.

Siding with FACTS will help keep American citizens safe.  Siding with ignorant rhetoric will not.  For the sake and safety of ourselves and our loved ones, let us please stick with the facts.

Thank you.

Addendum:  The following letter from a man in Australia was supposedly debunked by the liberal rag SNOPES, but was confirmed to be true by a friend of mine who was born and raised in Australia and who lives there to this very day.  Like the statistics gleaned from the UK’s disarmament mess, the Australian government has learning the hard way that gun-free zones do not work, and when you try to create one big gun-free zone for your entire country, well, that’s just particularly stupid:

Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in:
* Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent …
* Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent …
* Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady
decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in ‘successfully ridding Australian society of guns …’

You won’t see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.

The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note Americans, before it’s too late!

Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre

Yesterday, yet another firearms-related tragedy occurred at the Sandy Hook Element School in Connecticut.  It was the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, after the 2007 Virginia Tech Massacre.

As graduate of Virginia Tech, I’d like to say how sad I am for the family, friends, and colleagues of those who were lost or injured.  Your grief must be overpowering, and the only words of comfort and hope I can provide is to say, hold on.  Don’t try to go this alone.  Go ahead and lean on those who love you — that’s why they’re there.  Accept whatever help is offered, and seek help whenever you need it.

As a retired military officer, I’d like to add some additional thoughts about how easily this tragedy could have been prevented.  Not by ever more strict gun control or by locking down the school and scanning everyone who enters, but by employing the most effective deterrent ever envisioned by any government.

Before you let your mayors, city or county counsel members, governors, Congressmen, or the President react in typical knee-jerk political fashion, please remember this well-known axiom, at least among law-enforcement professionals such as those who maintain the FBI’s Crime Statistics database:  GUN CONTROL LAWS DO NOT WORK!

They never have, and they never will, and for one simple reason:  Criminals do no obey the law.  Because of this, the only effect of gun control laws are to disarm the honest, law-abiding citizens who have proven time and time again throughout human history they’re more than capable of both deterring and stopping crime.  Meanwhile, gun control laws do not stop, much less deter either criminals or the criminally insane.

What if a teacher were armed?  Why do you think they ramped up the Federal Air Marshal program?  How many successful mid-air hijackings have we had since 9/11?

Let’s briefly examine all the major firearms massacres in the United States over the last 50 years, and ask just two questions:  Were the victims armed, or NOT ARMED?  How many people died?

– The teachers at Sandy Hook:  NOT ARMED.
– The students at Virginia Tech: NOT ARMED.
– Giffords and her enterouge: NOT ARMED.
– The vacationers on that Island in Norway: NOT ARMED.
– The shoppers at the mall in Oregon: NOT ARMED.
– The crew and passengers aboard AA Flt 11, UA Flt 175, AA Flt 77, and UA Flt 93:  NOT ARMED.
– The students at Texas A&M: NOT ARMED.
– The moviegoers at the theater in Aurora: NOT ARMED.

Two Notable Exceptions include the Fort Hood massacre, where the only person who WAS armed was the one who stopped the massacre, and the Fairchild Air Force Base massacre, where the only person who WAS armed was the one who stopped the massacre.

Do you see the pattern, here?  The pattern is that the only way to stop a shooting spree is to take down the shooter.  Tackling them is extremely risky, and is very likely to get you killed.  Shooting the shooter, on the other hand, is fairly quick, and any competent marksman armed with a decent caliber can stop an unlawful shooter hell-bent on a shooting spree.

Were you aware that of all criminal activity stopped in progress that more than 50% of it is stopped by a private citizen?  It’s true.  And were you aware that more than 2/3 of those private citizens were armed?  It’s sad that less than 5% of Americans are armed!  If more of us were armed, we’d have a LOT less crime!

I would also like you to consider what The People are saying in response to articles on this and other shootings.  The overwhelmingly vast majority of them are calling for decreases in gun control laws, and for one good reason:  So they can defend themselves!  I’m sure you’ve heard the addages:  I carry a gun because I can’t carry a cop; A firearm on every hip is far less expensive than a cop on every street corner; and When seconds count, cops are just minutes away.

Consider this:  There are approximately 1,400 accidental deaths due to firearms here in America each year, despite there being at least as many firearms as there are motor vehicles.  Yet we have 35,000 accidental deaths due to motor vehicles.  That’s TWENTY-FIVE TIMES GREATER!  Yet do we outlaw motor vehicles?  Heck no.  So, can we be rational about this?  Please?

Here’s the kicker:  Approximately 168,000 crimes are thwarted each year by ARMED citizens.  Put simply, armed citizens STOP crime 857 times more often than the occurrence of accidental deaths due to firearms.  Similarly, crimes are stopped by armed, law-abiding citizens 18 times more often than firearms are used in murders (9,369).  So, are we to disarm law-abiding citizens and allow those 168,000 crimes to run amok?  Really?  How in the world does that make any sense whatsoever?

Source:  FBI Crime Statistics.

So which political idiots are proposing the elimination of the most highly effective anti-crime tool in the history of the world?  Obama?  Hickenlooper?  Are you seriously trying to tell myself and the rest of the American people that you want to disarm honest, law-abiding citizens when their effectiveness rates of stopping crime is so incredibly high?  Do you honestly expect me or any rantional, intelligent, logical person to believe your disarmament model, proven a dismal failure at Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Giffords speech, the Norwegian Island, the Oregon mall, Texas A&M, and the Aurora theater, is prudent?  That it actually deters or prevent crimes?

If so, you really are an idiot.  Disarmament neither deters nor prevents crimes!  Disarmament only ENCOURAGES crimes.  It leaves honest, law-abiding citizens vulnerable to criminal activity, and unable to defend themselves.  It turns what could be your best deterrent or most readily available means of stopping a massacre into nothing more than rich targets of opportunity.

Fifty years of FBI crime statistics have PROVEN there’s a strong correlation between increasing gun control and increasing crime. They also PROVE there’s a strong correlation between relaxing gun control and relaxing crime.

So, folks!  PLEASE write your mayors, your city counsel members, your governors, your state legislators, and your Congressmen, and tell them to STOP AND THINK about REALITY before they knee-jerk your town, city, county state, or country into HIGHER crime rates.

Yes – I’m praying for the families of the casualties, as should we all.