Some Reflections on the Paris Shootings

The Paris shootings seem to be dominating the mainstream and social media. A few thoughts.

Since both the Russian airliner downed over Sinai and the Paris shootings seem to be tit-for-tat responses to interventions in Syria, isn’t it likely that increased interventions  in Syria will bring further tit-for-tat responses in Europe and the Western world? It seems to me that there could now easily be an epidemic of bombings and shootings in Western capitals, as sleeper cells throughout the Western world are activated.

Also, in what sense does bombing Syria increase Western security, given that sleeper cells are already in place across the Western world, filled with radicalised indigenous Muslims? Most likely the state response to this internal threat will be increased repressive internal security measures of the sort set out here, which will affect everyone:

These soldiers will be granted relatively unprecedented powers as Parliament and President Hollande look to amend the 1955 State of Emergency law, which was last used in 2005 when the government looked to silence anti-police brutality riots. Historically, the law has been used to suppress Muslims in the country, and it’s unlikely the new iteration will prevent this.

Marking only the second time since the Second World War that the law has been enforced, the modifications will grant the French government the right to put entire neighborhoods on lockdown, including strictly enforced curfews, house raids without judicial oversight, weapons seizure, search and arrest of suspicious individuals, and broad powers of censorship. The law will also allow for the closure of theaters and meeting halls, as well as stronger control over France’s borders.

The Paris attacks were launched on unarmed citizens. If, as seems likely, further attacks are also launched on unarmed citizens, might it not be an idea to return to an armed citizenry? If a few of the Paris victims had been armed, they would have been able to fight back, instead of waiting an hour or so for armed police to arrive.

This runs, of course, entirely contrary to the current ‘progressive’ notion of having a completely unarmed citizenry, with all the firepower concentrated in the hands of the state. But I for one am inclined to reverse this example of ‘progress’.

Furthermore, since it’s almost certain that many of the people shot dead sitting outside Paris restaurants were smokers targeted by the Islamic State, wouldn’t one simple protective measure be to simply allow them back inside? Or is secondhand smoke deemed more dangerous to health than jihadist bullets?

Once again, smoking bans are yet another current ‘progressive’ measure that I’m inclined to reverse.

With the whole controlling ‘progressive’ EU project currently in deep jeopardy, it may be that both gun control and tobacco control will soon be jeopardised as well, and we will paradoxically have much to thank the Islamic State for, as lost freedoms are returned.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to Some Reflections on the Paris Shootings

  1. The Blocked Dwarf says:

    , might it not be an idea to return to an armed citizenry?

    Preaching to the converted there, Frank. Posted this here a while back:
    Years ago-well 2003 to be precise- I was sitting in a Micky D’s in South London. Just getting some lunch.

    Place was fairly full, lot of Moms and kids. Suddenly a man came in the door. Two things were obvious about him 1. he was in the middle of argument with God, the cassette in his head stuck on loop-a Care In The Community Case- raging against the haloperidol.

    2. He was armed. His open long greasy coat moved slightly to the side as he came through the doors and I could see from my vantage point-wall at my back and face to the door as taught- a sawn off.

    However it seemed that day wasn’t the day for us all to die and the deranged guy turned and left to continue his row with the Almighty elsewhere.(Yes I did phone the Peelers).

    Point is, as he walked in, my hand went for my gun or my knife…then I remembered I was back in the UK.

    Have you ever tried to scribble a Last Will And Testament on a Mc Donalds’ paper napkin?

    • Frank Davis says:

      I remember reading this.

      I increasingly think that the rationale behind banning guns is very like the rationale behind banning smoking. I suppose they think that in an ideal society everyone would get along fine and nobody would ever need to pack a weapon, and so (and this is where their reasoning gets screwy) if you take away the guns you get an ideal society. Equally, in an ideal society, where nobody is stressed or worried or anxious, maybe nobody would need to smoke cigarettes, and so if you take away the cigarettes you get your ideal society. And then there’s the EU version of this kind of dotty reasoning, which is that wars are fought between sovereign states, and so if you take away the sovereign states you won’t have any more wars.

      We all actually live in non-ideal societies, and they’re probably never going to be ideal societies. Much better, in my view, is to dispense with idealistic thinking, and begin with realities.

      • prog says:

        We might see a repeal of the ban, but they’ll never, ever, allow Joe Public to routinely/legally carry firearms in the UK. Besides, it’s not part of our culture and very few will have grown up knowing how to use and respect them. On the other hand, they’ll probably arm all cops unless things get better soon (which they won’t).

      • David Davis says:

        We can allow all Ethnic British Freeholders over the age of about, er say, 55, to Arm Bears. Preference will be given first to those that have served in the Armed Forces, and there will still be a few hundred of these people left even today.

        All weapons up to and including small assault-rifles would be permitted to be carried in public, whether concealed or not, under this dispensation. But I think that to combat the current threat, UZIs, or at a push Stirling 9mm machine-carbines with hollow-point, would be the most useful.

        I’m still working on my blueprints for the “trailer-borne (vehicle) machine-longbow, radar-directed and remotely-operable via iPhone app from (your) cafe-table”, but it will take quite some time.

  2. Joe L. says:

    An email sent today from Mark Donovan, the “Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services” of the University of Illinois at Chicago to all students, faculty and staff:

    The Smoke-free Illinois Act took effect on July 1, 2015 and prohibits smoking in all public places and workplaces. On the UIC campus, not just smoking, but all forms of tobacco are prohibited, including cigarettes, cigars, pipes, water pipes and hookahs, chew, electronic cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products. The Tobacco Free policy applies twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week to everyone on UIC property—students, faculty, staff, contractors and visitors. UIC is committed to maintaining a safe, clean and healthy educational environment.

    Over the next several weeks, additional signage will be installed around campus to remind everyone of the Tobacco Free policy. We will also begin enforcing compliance with the UIC policy and with state law. Individuals in violation will be issued citations and be subject to campus disciplinary measures. Students who are in noncompliance will be referred to the Dean of Students. Employees will be referred to their supervisor, to Academic Human Resources, or to Staff Human Resources, as appropriate. For contractors and subcontractors, noncompliance will be referred to the campus unit responsible for monitoring performance of the contract. Visitors and members of the public who refuse to comply may be asked to leave campus.

    It is our expectation that all will abide by UIC’s Tobacco Free policy and respect its purpose. I invite anyone in the campus community to help us identify strategies to support a culture of good health and develop communication opportunities and ways to encourage voluntary compliance.

    Thank you for helping make UIC a healthy, tobacco-free campus.

    Mark Donovan
    Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services

    Mr. Donovan should consider enrolling himself in the university he administers, because he could use a bit of education…

    First of all, the “Smoke-free Illinois Act,” which prohibits smoking in all public places and workplaces did not take effect on July 1, 2015. Rather, it took effect on January 1, 2008. I had to look up what actually took effect on July 1, 2015, and that is termed the “Smoke-Free Campus Act” of Illinois. I had never even heard of this bill until tonight – sponsored by the American Lung Association, it silently passed through state legislature just over a year ago, in a similar fashion to Illinois’ outdoor smoking ban.

    Secondly, the campus already installed “UIC is a Tobacco-Free Campus” signage on every door of every building in 2013, over two years before this new so-called ‘law’ took effect. What “additional signage” can they possibly add, and what difference will it make? I assume this is simply a warning/threat indicating that they may (will?) finally start enforcing this draconian policy that for the past two years just “looked” like an actual law, but now actually is one.

    Finally, this line speaks for itself:

    “On the UIC campus, not just smoking, but all forms of tobacco are prohibited, including … electronic cigarettes”

    That’s right, folks – all forms of tobacco, including a product that does not contain any tobacco whatsoever are prohibited.

    Feel free to spread this idiot’s drivel everywhere. This regressive Puritanism needs to stop immediately!

  3. John Watson says:

    “might it not be an idea to return to an armed citizenry?” Like The Blocked Dwarf my inclination would be to support the right to bear arms for self defence, as long as there are safeguards to minimise the risks of another Dunblane or Hungerford (even under present legislation another such incident cannot be ruled out).. There is, I recall a statute, still on the books the requires all male citizens of the UK to spend an hour on Sundays practicing with the Longbow in order to maintain a citizen Yeomanry which could be amended to cover firearms allowing owners to become proficient in the handling of firearms.
    While I understand the fears of some, that a small minority may abuse the right to bear arms, be they insane or criminally active there is a point where the government would become negligent in defence of their citizenry especially in light of current cuts to policing and the military.
    The law maintains that a citizen may use reasonable or even equal force to defend life and property, it is equally reasonable that a citizen be able to defend themselves against armed aggressors..

    • Steven says:

      John,I always thought that Toby Martin used reasonable force and look what happened to him.reasonable to one person maybe unreasonable to another.the word reasonable is a useless word.

      • Steven says:

        I meant tony Martin.

      • John Watson says:

        You may well be right Steven, however the term ‘reasonable force’ is as written in the revelent acts, as a general rule, if the force used is sufficient to deter or stop the application of force against you then such force is reasonable, for example if someone strikes you with their fist then punching him back is reasonable force up to the point where he cannot do so, if at the point where he cannot strike back you continue to punch him then at that point reasonable force becomes excessive force and liable to prosecution., Having said that, it is dependent upon what a jury believes as to what point reasonable force becomes excessive force and juries can be very unpredictable.

    • Frank Davis says:

      Regardless of what the law is, if people start to feel under threat, they’re going to arm themselves, probably at first with weapons that don’t look like weapons.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        The law of survival is the highest law in the land ask any politician in office.

        But if you have a local machine shop worth his salt he can make you any gun you want.

        If anyone remembers the Taliban and several other groupsBack in the 1980s they made their own weapons in mudd hut machine shops using the crudest of machine tools.

        What they did was go to India or Pakistan and find a ship that was being torn apart for salvage. Theyd buy 1-2 inch thick steel plating and tote it back to the mountains and then using the proper thicknes cut out 45 cal 1911 pistol frams and ak-47s then crudely mill them to tolerrances and voila instant armory.

        I saw this on a BBC documentary back about 1987 or so.

        • nisakiman says:

          They were at it long before that, Harley; well before any of the troubles in the region. I travelled through the Khyber Pass many times in the late sixties / early seventies, and the village of Landi Kotal was full of gun makers busy making copies of well known firearms. You would constantly see customers standing outside a shop firing into the air to check that the mechanism worked.

          Landi Kotal was also well known for its hashish wholesalers. I was invited into one shop for a smoke, and the walls were lined floor to ceiling with blocks of black hash. There must have been at the very least a couple of tons of the stuff. And good quality, too! :)

        • Harleyrider1978 says:

          Ya unfortunately I was military police in the 1980s and was forced to bust a few that tried to bring back top quality hash to the states. One guy had 5 kilos made into a camel saddle to hide the dope. He would a got away except the damn drug dog hit on it

      • John Watson says:

        Yes that is very much the case, court cases where people have picked up the nearest thing to hand and used it as a weapon are legion, even household items like ashtrays, lamps, chairs, et al have been entered into evidence as offensive weapons, as have grooming items such as steel combs!

  4. waltc says:

    : Smokers will never be allowed back inside as this was never about saving smokers’ lives but about protecting nonsmokers from… I dunno, ever having to wash their hair. As such, smokers are much more deady than terrorists to the cherished nonsmokers who, indoors, are also safe(r) from terrorists. Win-win. And if outdoor smokers happen to get killed, well, what the hell, they deserve it, don’t they, for continuing to smoke, for exhaling their killer fumes and besides that, listen, they’re killing themselves anyway and this way it saves a lot of health care money.

    Sure, the right to bear arms. Amen. But the concert audience was mostly teens and twenties, likely products of progrssive schooling and not likely to have packed, even if it were legal. But a couple of armed bodyguards for the band might have helped. Soccer fans much more likely to be armed providing it was legal but otoh, a door frisk would have likely kept them out.

    As for this being retaliation for western moves in Syria or even the region, nah. This war started long long before any of that happened. These are the same people–same ilk at any rate– that the middle east dictators themselves were suppressing and for the same reason. it’s an irrational ideology that needs no rationale, no rational excuse. They only respect force not Christian cheek-turning which is merely encouragement. I suppose you could say that Sadaam and Qadaffi, if still in place, would have squelched them by force if we hadn’t thrown them over but that’d be the most. Should we not have fought back over Pearl Harbor? When Hitler invaded Czeckoslovakia did not fighting back accomplish something good?

    The only reason I see for why bombing these guys in Syria etc is good is that it’s part of psy war:– they lose luster and face and points as a recruiting tool if they’re whipped. And on a practical level, they also lose training camps, routes and supplies. It’s necessary but you’re absolutely right, not sufficient; they’ve already planted themselves in the west which is too pc to do anything about it, and by now, ironically, even our governments are technically outstripped by, of all things, commercial Playstations.

    • Frank Davis says:

      But the concert audience was mostly teens and twenties

      Actually, judging by the photos I’ve seen of them so far, they were in their twenties, thirties, and forties, and perhaps even older. They were people who were holding down jobs, like engineers and film directors. I’ve yet to see a single teen among them. Not my idea of heavy metal fans at all, but what would I know?

      As for this being retaliation for western moves in Syria or even the region, nah.

      And I think it actually was retaliation. One of the gunmen in the Bataclan said it was because of something Hollande had done, although I don’t know what. The Russian airliner was more obviously retaliation, weeks after Russian cruise missiles started landing in Syria.

      • margo says:

        Yes, I think it was retaliation. Whatever their situation was before, they never used to bomb foreign cities, did they?

      • Joe L. says:

        Eagles of Death Metal are not actually a heavy metal band. They are more along the lines of a blues-rock band. Their name is deceiving; it stemmed from an inside joke about, “What would The Eagles sound like if they played Death Metal music?” Twenties to forties sounds about right as the majority of the fanbase.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      It started with the overthrow of the SHAW of Iran and the installation of the clerics……….that’s when the new round of jihad started.

  5. harleyrider1978 says:

    With the whole controlling ‘progressive’ EU project currently in deep jeopardy, it may be that both gun control and tobacco control will soon be jeopardised as well, and we will paradoxically have much to thank the Islamic State for, as lost freedoms are returned.

    Applause Frank. France just cut all austerity ties the EU had imposed,screaming we are at war said France. Lets hope this ends the EU experiment its an utter failure politically and economically.

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    Second thoughts on second-hand smoke

    Defending Agriculture

    Studies like this never make the evening news!

    Published on: November 17, 2015

    We find no evidence that legislated U.S. smoking bans were associated with short term reductions in hospital admissions for [heart attack] acute myocardial infarction or other diseases in the elderly, children or working-age adults.”

    This startling conclusion comes from four authors in the Congressional Budget Office, RAND Corporation, Center for Primary Care – Stanford University, and University of Wisconsin. These conclusions come from the National Bureau of Economic Research and the disclaimer declares the conclusions of the study are solely of those of the authors.

    We know state and local governments have virtually banned smoking in public places including workplaces, restaurants and bars. Smoking bans have been implemented in every U.S. community, and we have all been bombarded with studies in medical literature claiming smoking bans lead to healthier communities, affect hospitalization and impact mortality rates

    This study, undertaken in 2009, reviewed how environmental tobacco smoke (also known as second-hand smoke) is related to health outcomes, the history and effects of smoking bans in the U.S. and around the world. The study does not conclude smoking is good for a person or that secondhand smoke is helpful but it offers a useful perspective and facts.

    Many studies suggest that smoking bans lead to decreases in heart attacks. A heart attack occurs due to the sudden deprivation of circulating blood in the heart.

    The authors claim that previous published studies on health effects of smoking bans in public places only compared outcomes in a single community that had passed a smoking ban with nearby communities which had not passed smoking bans in public places. We have all read and heard from the U.S. Surgeon General that numerous epidemiologic and laboratory studies have linked second-hand smoke to increased rates of cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness, and lung cancer. In fact, the studies’ authors declare “A smoking ban could plausibly reduce AMI (heart attack) incidents and mortality as early as the first year after a ban if it eliminates even relatively minor exposure.”

    Note the word “plausibly.”

    Some states, such as California, have banned smoking in workplaces, restaurants and bars because the bans were politically popular. Studies have suggested heart attack rates decreased approximately 40% in Helena, MT and 27% in Pueblo, CO following the ban of second-hand smoke. This study, interestingly, points out studies finding increased rates of vehicular deaths following the enactment of smoking bans. The theory being that drivers were smoking more in their vehicles and it is a distraction to their driving. It is believed that bans on second-hand smoke have lead to “impressive public health gains” and that “public smoking bans would demonstrably improve U.S. public health.”

    The authors criticized these conclusions and prior U.S. studies, which they claim were small in scale, examined only a few U.S. regions, and the regions were not representative of typical U.S. communities. The study indicates “It is unknown whether public [smoking] bans effectively reduce exposure to second-hand smoke and whether the reduced exposure leads to clinically significant cardiovascular risk reduction.” The authors also conclude it is “…unclear whether government restrictions affect public health substantially, or simply codify existing workplace practice.”

    The paper details the data sets and sources for health outcomes. It also looked at impact of workplace smoking bans might have on the elderly and children although it was assumed these two data sets would primarily be exposed to workplace second-hand smoke as customers. The study also looked at the effects of private restrictions businesses enacted or enforced prior to government bans and accordingly were excluded from the final conclusions.

    The conclusions of this study were interesting: “Workplace smoking restrictions are unrelated to changes in all-cause mortality or mortality due to other AMI in all age groups.” This study also found “We similarly find no evidence of reduction in [hospital] admissions for other diseases in any age group, though smoking restrictions of all sorts are associated with statistically insignificant increases in asthma…among children.”

    The study also claims that workplace smoking bans “…on heart attack admissions is close to zero…” Studies like this never make the evening news!

    The opinions of Gary Baise are not necessarily those of Farm Futures or the Penton Farm Progress Group.

  7. harleyrider1978 says:

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      • harleyrider1978 says:

      • garyk30 says:

        Obama and other leftists say that most refugees are women and children and only 2% are ‘military age’ single males and possible terrorists.

        Women and children are used as suicide bombers.
        Women can do very well indeed when it comes to shooting weapons.
        My sons were proficient with guns before their teen years.
        Harley and I are living proof that ‘old farts’ can do quite well with all different types of weapons.

        Any Muslim can be a terrorist, regardless of age, sex, or amount of military training.

  8. margo says:

    Tricky, the gun ownership thing. I wouldn’t be happy with people in the UK having them unless they’d learnt how to use them properly. I’ve never even seen a gun close up, and I imagine that goes for a lot of people over here.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Margo Ive been trained in just about all small arms and cruise serve weapons in the military at one time or another. They actually all work pretty much the same way. Gas operating systems and trigger assemblies are a bit differing depending on the type weapon. But gas recharge for automatic has always been the means for semi auto or full auto the change comes in the blot back system tied into the trigger assembly.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        blow back system and someused the flyback recoil system like the lugar or sten I believe it had.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Of course its been about 23 years since I was last working in the armory on base.
          Even then it was only for a few weeks at a time being trained as a cruise serve weapons instructor.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Damn auto correct,its CREWS SERVE WEAPONS TRAINING

    • Joe L. says:

      “I’ve never even seen a gun close up, and I imagine that goes for a lot of people over here.

      I’m surprised by this, Margo. For me, living in Chicago, with some of the strictest gun laws in the U.S., I only ever see a gun up close when I walk past a police officer, and that gun is a pistol that is holstered to his/her side. However, the last time I was in Europe (July 2013) I couldn’t help but notice that there were a great deal of what looked like military men walking around the city streets with automatic rifles strapped across their chests, with their hand on the stock/grip at all times like they were ready to fire at a moment’s notice. It made me feel a little uneasy. I saw more of them in Paris, but a saw a decent handful walking about London, as well. From that experience, I would think you are actually exposed to a greater deal of scarier guns in the U.K.

    • The Blocked Dwarf says:

      unless they’d learnt how to use them properly-margo

      Well Margo I was an armed criminal not a soldier nor a LEO. Never learned how to use a gun ‘properly’ but, to refer back to my first comment today, I could have emptied my browning hi-power or any other gun I had into that ‘stick a stamp on him cos he’s going postal’ guy.

      Guns have to be idiot proof simple to use, come on, soldiers have to use them. Takes about 10 minutes to learn how to unlock and load the bloody things, cock and shoot. . Learning to shoot well takes a lifetime but emptying a clip requires no tuition. Just get the round end as close to the person as you can and then keep pulling the trigger until nothing more happens. Plus points if you use both hands to stop the gun jumping up.

      Double plus points if you point the slide away from your face cos nothing says ‘gangsta’ like a 9mm casing facial branding.

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    These idiots just cant stay on the same page. Yesteday they claimed it dropped to 17.6% now its 14.8%…………………

    U.S. adult smoking rate dips below 15 percent

    Then this year alone smoking product sales rose 12% and were still climbing,meaning CDC has lied across the board.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Guys let you in on a secret. IOWA was the first to notice last year during sign ups for zerocare that the amount of non smokers was unusually high compared to actual smoking rates according to recent polls. CDC discovered the same thing and then went full blown propagandist and spent another few million o do an emergency poll nationwide knowing people would lie and they did it quick because Big tobacco was just about ready to announce smoking sales were up 12% and growing thru this last year. 2 weeks after CDC released their fraudulent findings the new sales were released and CDC still hasnt answered up how their numbers stack up against hard sales figures.

      12% rise would mean there are an additional 10 million smokers in america or more puting the official number closer to 21-22 percent rather than that bogus 15% they claim.If we add up bootleg sales it could climb to 30% real quick.

      Oh the reason for lying was the 50% surcharge for being a smoker.

      Another thing to remember is the state obamacare exchanges can easily cross data check phone numbers from previous polls and find out who was lying.

      But they wont do that as then that info would destroy their precious claims.

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Oxygen users safety warning here with Butane lighters and child safety covers on the strikers.

    Even when they claim an elderly person on oxygen blew up it wasnt due to smoking it was due to a faulty bic/propane lighter valve leaking into the mask because of he child safety band they put over the striker to the flint. What happens is the mask is open while they wear it to lite a smoke,it becomes an enclosed space as the butane rises in the mask mixed with oxygen. The person strikes the lighter 4-6 times before it ignites the lighter,by then the mask has a large leaked in fuel source and all thst need then is a heat source and KABOOM. So if anyone is reading this its very easy to remove the child proof band over the striker with just a pocket knife,simply pull up at the top and back it will fly out without damaging the lighter. THATS A SAFETY TIP they wont tell you about at the local fire marshalls office.

    • nisakiman says:

      I always remove those stupid things as soon as I buy a lighter. They really are a pain in the arse. You end up with a raw thumb just trying to light a ciggy. And being a roll-ups man, I tend to light one cigarette several times. I’d have no thumb left if I didn’t remove them.

      • RdM says:

        I really have no idea what you guys are talking about! ;=}) Got a link or pic reference?
        Bic, we have here, also many other types, but I don’t recall a “”child proof brand”! (?)
        The very cheap ones with a serrated metal wheel wear out the thumb a bit, or jam on the flint well before the gas is gone, but a second lighter to provide the spark can save that.
        I keep meaning to go back to the clean gas flame refill-able types, too cheap to lately!
        But must… windproof too.

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    France Moves To Strip Citizens Of Civil Liberties After Paris Attacks

    French President Francois Hollande proposed constitutional amendments and a three-month extension of state of emergency measures Monday that will severely…

  12. harleyrider1978 says:

    Heres one for Holiday fun

  13. garyk30 says:

    “I’ve never even seen a gun close up, and I imagine that goes for a lot of people over here.”

    Most Muslim women/ teen suicide bombers are like that too; but, they still make good terrorists.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The answer lies in the 1997 Supreme Court case of Printz v. United States and its progeny. In Printz, the Supreme Court held that the federal government could not compel states to carry out its initiatives. The states are free to voluntarily comply, and the federal government may provide a carrot or stick to encourage the states to participate. But the federal government cannot force the hand of the states on these matters.

      So, in essence, Abbott’s letter was saying to the federal government, “We know you have the authority over such matters, but Texas will not use any of its time, personnel or resources to aid in the effort.” This stance makes it exponentially harder for the federal government to carry out its mission. And if you add 26 other states to the equation, you can see how difficult it becomes for the Obama administration.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        In simle language if the states say no to refugees theres not much the federal gvmnt can do about it. Save go in and take a piece of federal land and tunr it into a refugee camp since the states wont offer any housing for the refugees or even aide. It makes putting these scumbags into our cities and towns almost impossible. Of course Obama was offering cities that took them in millions in grants/bribes to do it. Yet the states are saying no by the day and congress is now blocking any moneys for refugee assistance from the federal level. You have to remember obama was stealing money from already authorized programs like the veterans administration to push these bums off on us.

  14. beobrigitte says:

    Since both the Russian airliner downed over Sinai and the Paris shootings seem to be tit-for-tat responses to interventions in Syria, isn’t it likely that increased interventions in Syria will bring further tit-for-tat responses in Europe and the Western world?

    Hang on. Didn’t we all hear months ago that ISIS told it’s new recruits to stay put as they were aiding their cause by blowing themselves (and many others) up in the European countries?

    In many ways this reminds me of the Baader-Meinhof years. As a citizen you could get on a motorway easily. Getting off it was a nightmare. You looked down a massive rifle’s barrel until they had checked EVERYTHING. The fall of the RAF (Baader’s suicide) coincided with my little brother’s death (road traffic accident) – as a good catholic my mother insisted on black clothing – each time we were stopped we had to PROVE (!!!) that we were no relatives of Andreas Baader…
    I do not recall how many times we were stopped but I do remember this becoming “normal” for us…..
    I guess, Deborah Arnott’s attacks on the tobacco industry (and indirectly the tobacco industry’s customers) have become something so “normal” that we learned to live with it.
    Food for thought….

  15. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    ” …completely unarmed citizenry, with all the firepower concentrated in the hands of the state.”

    And the criminals and terrorists, and sometimes it is difficult to distinguish the police from these two groups. The only group not to have firearms are honest people.

    I wonder why? Is it because our beloved government is more afraid of honest people than of criminals and terrorists?

    Or is it because they regard criminals and terrorists as allies?

    Or both?


No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s