NRA: Gun blogs, videos, web forums threatened by new Obama regulation
by Paul Bedard
Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a “gag order on firearm-related speech,” the National Rifle Association is warning.
In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.
What? Is the federal government insane? That would essentially outlaw gun blogs, gun magazines or any discussions about firearms.
Which, of course, would help the Obama Leftist Socialist Organization help to rid Americans of firearms — only so that the Proles, the Groundlings, the Serfs would be disarmed and more easily controlled.
Who would possibly put up with this? The push is a governmental assault on the First Amendment itself — again, by the Obama Administration.
According to the NRA, that would include blogs and web forums discussing technical details of common guns and ammunition, the type of info gun owners and ammo reloaders trade all the time.
“Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities,” said the NRA in a blog posting.
Again, all perfectly in keeping with the Obama Administration’s wish to completely disarm the citizens of this nation, a true goal of Leftists globally.
I have always said that when you lose the Second Amendment, you will lose the First Amendment.
In this instance, here is Mr Obama and his Leftists attempting to hobble and denigrate both amendments simultaneously. I couldn’t possibly have conjured that possible. Except that, now, I certainly can. This is certainly nothing if not innovative on behalf of the Obama Left. With this addition: the prohibition also focuses on the internet as well, and seeks to clamp down on the internet. Almost a Perfect Trifecta of prohibitive Leftism.
The NRA agrees.
“This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second,” warned the NRA’s lobbying shop. “Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published,” it added.
What could possibly be the reason for eliminating speech about firearms?
At issue is the internet. State is updating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The rules govern everything from guns to strategic bombers.
Never in my 60+ years on this planet have I seen my country’s freedoms so hideously and naked assaulted by my federal government. I can only conclude one thing: this federal governments ultimately seeks total control and authority over each and every persons within its borders to the point where there can be no pushback, no dissension, no verbal or written disagreement on any level in any venue whatsoever.
For what other purpose would rules and regulations such as this exist?
On Sunday night in Garland, Texas, two avowed Muslim gunmen, at the behest of ISIS (as ISIS is claiming), attempted to kill as many people as possible at the “Draw Muhammad” art contest held at the Curtis Culwell Center. The center is owned by the Garland Independent School District, which took a huge risk in hosting the event. I would suggest the risk was worth the exposure.
This “contest” was held at the behest of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, of which Pamela Geller is president. Pamela Geller has a blog entitled Atlas Shrugs, which she has written for a number of years. She is considered by some to be a hate monger, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (a hotbed of Leftists in any event) classifies her AFDI as an anti-Muslim hate group. PayPal has branded her blog a “hate site.”
Pamela Geller is also the executive in charge of the Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA), which was instrumental in physically halting the planned Muslim “community center” to be built within short sight of 9/11’s ground zero in New York City. This was an attempt, by Islam, to show the rest of the world how powerful it is, bringing down the Twin Towers and erecting a monument to Muslims adjacent.
Though things came out relatively well in Garland — who can fail to enjoy the schadenfreude inherent in sending two Jihadis to their virginal rewards — Geller was resultingly excoriated throughout the media and the nation for daring to hold the event at all.
She insists it’s about the First Amendment.
Many, in response, say she needlessly “poked the bear” and should be removed from public view, at the very least.
To our brothers and sisters fighting for the Sake of Allah, we make dua for you and ask Allah to guide your bullets, terrify your enemies, and establish you in the Land. As our noble brother in the Phillipines said in his bayah, “This is the Golden Era, everyone who believes… is running for Shaheed”.
The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah in the heart of our enemy. Our aim was the khanzeer Pamela Geller and to show her that we don’t care what land she hides in or what sky shields her; we will send all our Lions to achieve her slaughter. This will heal the hearts of our brothers and disperse the ones behind her. To those who protect her: this will be your only warning of housing this woman and her circus show. Everyone who houses her events, gives her a platform to spill her filth are legitimate targets. We have been watching closely who was present at this event and the shooter of our brothers. We knew that the target was protected. Our intention was to show how easy we give our lives for the Sake of Allah.
We have 71 trained soldiers in 15 different states ready at our word to attack any target we desire. Out of the 71 trained soldiers 23 have signed up for missions like Sunday, We are increasing in number bithnillah. Of the 15 states, 5 we will name… Virginia, Maryland, Illinois, California, and Michigan. The disbelievers who shot our brothers think that you killed someone untrained, nay, they gave you their bodies in plain view because we were watching.
The next six months will be interesting, To our Amir Al Mu’mineen make dua for us and continue your reign, May Allah enoble your face.
To those Death Bastards I respond: may Allah shite on your face. And by the way, “wiliyah” means an authority. Islam intends to take over the United States. It intends to become the sole authority in the United States. Uber alles.
Please understand: the wonderful thing about Islam is that it tells you precisely what it wants to do and how it means to do it. You have to simply take them at their word. Americans are stupid enough not to get the message. I believe Geller understands the message. Last time I checked, Geller isn’t packing. She isn’t looking for people to kill.
ISIS says they have 71 soldiers in 15 of our states already. Frankly, I don’t doubt it; all they’d have had to do is get their ankles slightly moist, as our southern border — courtesy of Mr Obama — is wide open.
That said, where is it that I happen to stand? A number of people have asked, via phone calls and texts and Twitter and emails. They have said: “where is your post about Garland?”
So: here it is.
For me, it’s pretty simple. I stand for the First Amendment. And I stand for the Second Amendment as, without it, there would be and will be noFirst Amendment.
As an aside, that is why Leftists are doing their very level best to gut the Second Amendment, by attacking private firearm and ammunition ownership on every level, non-stop.
People — Westerners — GOWPs — say we must take the “high ground” with regard to Islam and the kid-gloved handling of same.
I say: Muslims, Islamists, respect nothing but strength and iron will. Anything less invites attack, which is why Islam attacked Bill Clinton and attacked America again under Bush. Because there was no significant response. Clinton had the opportunity to eliminate OBL and passed. Islam learned: Paper Tiger. Islam isn’t stupid.
Does no one realize that Islam was created by men, is lorded by men, commanded by men, directed by men, and barbaric men respect nothing but raw, naked strength? Women mean little in Islam; they are chattel. Islam had its birth in the Middle East, in a challenging physical environment where only the strong survived. Islam had its birth in tribes, in nomads, in bedouins. Western culture isn’t thinking like Muslims; it’s thinking like GOWPs who wish to sit down at an ebon table and have a quiet tea over logical issues.
That’s not how Islam thinks.
Americans think differently. As well they should.
Any American is free to draw any damned thing they want at any time and in any venue. That is why we exist as a nation, why our forebears fought in WWII, and why this nation was founded. Our precious American flag is stepped on and burned. But do we shoot those persons in the head? Are we to be more offended by persons who draw cartoons than those who burn our flag? Nobody tells us what we can draw. Nobody tells us what we can say. We are Americans.
To me, the ability to conduct Free Speech, anywhere, at any time, in these United States, is paramount.
The First Amendment exists not to protect pablum speech, milquetoast speech, convivial speech. It exists to protect challenging speech. The protection of the First Amendment was hard-fought, and it needs to protected by every fiber of our collective bodies.
People accuse: Pamela Geller was trying to be provocative. She was trying to make a point.
I readily admit: yes she was.
And she drew Islam into the spotlight, for those sufficiently cognizant to realize that Islam isn’t a religion, it isn’t a race, it is nothing more than a Death Cult.
She makes her point here:
Even Chris Cuomo, of all people, took the challenge:
In a discussion on the Mohammed Art Exhibit and Contest, Cuomo said to CNN Political Commentator Marc Lamont Hill, “Here’s the criticism on your side is that the left is afraid of saying anything offensive about Islam. You don’t feel like that about Christianity. You attack the Catholic Church all the time.”
Hill responded that this is “different,” because “when you have a critique of the Catholic Church, you say ‘the Catholic Church is x’, that’s a critical analysis. If you say ‘Islam has some issues with patriarch or Islam has some issues with sexuality,’ I think that’s also appropriate. But drawing the Prophet Mohammed for the sole purpose of violating something that is a principle –”
Cuomo interjected, “but you wouldn’t punish somebody for Piss Christ, you wouldn’t do it, but you won’t put, on the media pictures of Mohammed because you don’t want to upset Islam, but you’ll put pictures of Piss Christ.”
Here’s the difference between Christianity and Islam: Christians won’t kill you for the slightest perceived offense.
(CNSNews.com) – Federal Communications Commission (FCC) member Ajit Pai said over the weekend that he foresees a future in which federal regulators will seek to regulate websites based on political content, using the power of the FCC or Federal Elections Commission (FEC). He also revealed that his opposition to “net neutrality” regulations had resulted in personal harassment and threats to his family.
However, Pai said it was only the beginning. In the future, he said, “I could easily see this migrating over to the direction of content… What you’re seeing now is an impulse not just to regulate the roads over which traffic goes, but the traffic itself.”
Continuing, he said, “It is conceivable to me to see the government saying, ‘We think the Drudge Report is having a disproportionate effect on our political discourse. He doesn’t have to file anything with the FEC. The FCC doesn’t have the ability to regulate anything he says, and we want to start tamping down on websites like that.’”
We’ve seen this already from the federal government, in terms of the IRS terrorizing Conservative groups with threats and actions not directed to any other political community.
We’ve seen Holder’s DOJ prosecuting cases based solely on race, at Obama’s direction. Mr Obama and Mr Holder are two of DC’s Racists In Chief. We’ll see how AG Lynch does.
“Is it unthinkable that some government agency would say the marketplace of ideas is too fraught with dissonance? That everything from the Drudge Report to Fox News… is playing unfairly in the online political speech sandbox? I don’t think so,” Pai said.
“The First Amendment means not just the cold parchment that’s in the Constitution. It’s an ongoing cultural commitment, and I sense that among a substantial number of Americans and a disturbing number of regulators here in Washington that online speech is [considered] a dangerous brave new world that needs to be regulated,” he concluded.
Those persons who are ignorant of the world surrounding them would be the first to say “that’s ridiculous, you’re paranoid. Nothing like that could ever happen in the US.”
In response I’d say: “it’s already happened. Where were you?”
The First Amendment and the Second Amendment are interlinked.
Why do you think there is such a push to eliminate the Second Amendment by the federal government, to onerously regulate firearms and ammunition?
Because without the ability to defend ourselves on a civilian level, the federal government, any government, can lay rules and regulations on a population that has no ability to fight back in any manner.
Let me provide further clarity: the Second Amendment, as some think, doesn’t exist solely to enable people to go hunting if they wish. It exists to keep the populace safe from an overbearing government.
The Obama Regime is leaving in a few years, thank the Lord. But if another Demorat steps in, you’ll find your fundamental rights challenged once more. If that occurs, this nation could very well erupt in a fashion no one wants to see or consider.
Former terror suspect well known to the FBI is named as one of two gunmen shot dead by cops after attack on anti-Islam ‘draw Muhammad’ art contest near Dallas
by Wills Robinson and Ted Thornhill and Lydia Warren
Two suspects were gunned down after shooting a guard in the leg outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland
The FBI has named one of the gunmen as Elton Simpson, who was convicted of lying to federal agents about traveling to Africa five years ago – but a judge ruled it could not be proved that he was going to join a terror group
Simpson’s Phoenix, Arizona home has been surrounded and a bomb squad is carrying out a search
The American Freedom Defense Initiative event had offered a $10,000 prize for the best caricature of the prophet; local residents had expressed their concerns about the event but organizers said they were exercising free speech
The security guard who was shot, Bruce Joiner, was taken to hospital in stable condition and has been released
One traffic officer shot both men dead and has been praised by cops for potentially saving many lives
ISIS fighter claimed on Twitter that the shooting was carried out by two pro-ISIS individuals
A former terror suspect has been named as one of the gunmen shot dead by police after two attackers blasted an unarmed security guard in the ankle during an anti-Islam art contest in Texas on Sunday night.
Two men armed with assault rifles and wearing body armor were killed by a quick-thinking traffic officer after opening fire outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Dallas, at around 7pm.
A senior FBI official has identified one of the men as Elton Simpson, who was previously the subject of a terror investigation, according to ABC News.
Simpson, identified in court papers as an American Muslim, had been convicted of lying to federal agents about his plans to travel to Somalia five years ago, but a judge ultimately ruled it could not be proved that he was heading there to join a terror group. He was placed on probation.
The second gunman has not been named but KPNX-TV reported that the two shared an apartment in Phoenix, Arizona.
Was ISIS involved? No one knows quite yet. But ISIS propaganda claimed one of the involved Garland shooters was named “Shariah Is Light,” @atawaakul.
Just who was responsible?
Investigators also searched the car that the two gunmen drove to the scene and found luggage and further ammunition inside. Some of the belongings were destroyed as a precaution but no explosives were found inside the vehicle, Garland Police Officer Joe Harn said on Monday.
Ahead of the attack on Sunday evening, several Twitter messages were sent out, and authorities believe Simpson was behind them. The last one was shared just half an hour before the attack.
Followers of ISIS had been calling for an attack online for more than a week after learning that the competition in Garland would feature a ‘draw Muhammad’ art contest, with a prize of $10,000 for the best caricature.
After the attack, the SITE Intelligence Group reported that an Islamic State fighter claimed on Twitter that the shooting was carried out by two pro-Isis individuals.
Frankly, I believe that ISIS elements are in fact within our borders. It would be quite stupid to think otherwise, considering our porous borders under quisling Barack Hussein Obama, lover of most things Islamic, eschewer of most things Christian.
The Garland Independent School district, who own the cultural center, allowed the event to go ahead despite criticism from residents and local Muslims that it was a risk to public safety.
To that I say: major kudos to the Garland Independent School District for deciding to support the First Amendment here in the United States. They made a decision that few other school districts would have had the balls to make: support American foundational documents and do so with bravery, clarity and honesty.
The additional take out of all of this? It will not be the Feds nor FEMA who will “save you” as a First Responder. It will be your local cops, plain and simple.
[And shame — MASSIVE SHAME — upon those “law enforcement officers” (you deserve to be in quotes) who took part in those raids.
You knowwho you are and you know you conducted yourselves improperly, no matter what you say or how you attempt to justify your actions publicly. You still cannot sleep well at night. As well you shouldn’t. You violated your fundamental Constitutional oaths.]
If you donated to or voted for Scott Walker in Wisconsin, you were brought under the gunsights of Democrat District Attorney John Chisholm and Leftist Democrat Judge Barbara Kluka, who signed off on every piece of paper proffered before her by Chisholm.
This was nothing more than criminalizing Conservatism.
Something of which all my consistently loyal readers could be accused: being Conservative. Not even Republican, but at their base: Conservative.
Like myself. I am no longer a Republican, I am an Independent voter. I tossed the GOP to the curb over five years ago.
I am an Independent Conservative. And I’m a law enforcement officer.
That said, police SWAT teams were, literally, utilized by Leftist, Demorat forces in order to frighten, harass and intimidate loyal American taxpayers who did nothing more than exercise their rights as guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Wisconsin’s Shame: ‘I Thought It Was a Home Invasion’
by David French
Cindy Archer, one of the lead architects of Wisconsin’s Act 10 — also called the “Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill,” it limited public-employee benefits and altered collective-bargaining rules for public-employee unions — was jolted awake by yelling, loud pounding at the door, and her dogs’ frantic barking. The entire house — the windows and walls — was shaking. She looked outside to see up to a dozen police officers, yelling to open the door. They were carrying a battering ram.
What had she done?
She had been a Conservative. That is all.
Then they left, carrying with them only a cellphone and a laptop.
Certainly that required a SWAT response, dogs, gearing up, a SWAT call-up, overtime, call-up time, backup units, a tactical plan, did it not?
It was indeed a home invasion, but the people who were pouring in were Wisconsin law-enforcement officers. Armed, uniformed police swarmed into the house. Plainclothes investigators cornered her and her newly awakened family. Soon, state officials were seizing the family’s personal property, including each person’s computer and smartphone, filled with the most intimate family information.
And what were the Archer’s told? They were told to shut up.
Why were the police at Anne’s home? She had no answers. The police were treating them the way they’d seen police treat drug dealers on television. In fact, TV or movies were their only points of reference, because they weren’t criminals. They were law-abiding. They didn’t buy or sell drugs. They weren’t violent. They weren’t a danger to anyone. Yet there were cops — surrounding their house on the outside, swarming the house on the inside. They even taunted the family as if they were mere “perps.”
As if the home invasion, the appropriation of private property, and the verbal abuse weren’t enough, next came ominous warnings. Don’t call your lawyer. Don’t tell anyone about this raid. Not even your mother, your father, or your closest friends.
What triggered these horrendous CIVILIAN raids?
For dozens of conservatives, the years since Scott Walker’s first election as governor of Wisconsin transformed the state — known for pro-football championships, good cheese, and a population with a reputation for being unfailingly polite — into a place where conservatives have faced early-morning raids, multi-year secretive criminal investigations, slanderous and selective leaks to sympathetic media, and intrusive electronic snooping.
Yes, Wisconsin, the cradle of the progressive movement and home of the “Wisconsin idea” — the marriage of state governments and state universities to govern through technocratic reform — was giving birth to a new progressive idea, the use of law enforcement as a political instrument, as a weapon to attempt to undo election results, shame opponents, and ruin lives. Most Americans have never heard of these raids, or of the lengthy criminal investigations of Wisconsin conservatives. For good reason. Bound by comprehensive secrecy orders, conservatives were left to suffer in silence as leaks ruined their reputations, as neighbors, looking through windows and dismayed at the massive police presence, the lights shining down on targets’ homes, wondered, no doubt, What on earth did that family do?
Except for now. Americans have heard now, the reason for this post.
Our First Amendment, our very freedom is threatened.
But there’s more about DA John Chisholm and his Socialist Shop:
At the same time that the public protests were raging, so were private — but important — protests in the Chisholm home and workplace. As a former prosecutor told journalist Stuart Taylor, Chisholm’s wife was a teachers’-union shop steward who was distraught over Act 10’s union reforms. He said Chisholm “felt it was his personal duty” to stop them.
Meanwhile, according to this whistleblower, the district attorney’s offices were festooned with the “blue fist” poster of the labor-union movement, indicating that Chisholm’s employees were very much invested in the political fight
So it would appear Chisholm staged his own personal vendetta — because he could — as his wife, a union shop steward, hated Scott Walker’s union stance. Perfect: wielding the office of District Attorney as a political sledgehammer against Conservatives.
Of course, DA Chisholm had Leftist help in the local court:
But with another election looming — this time Walker’s campaign for reelection — Chisholm wasn’t finished. He launched yet another John Doe investigation, “supervised” by Judge Barbara Kluka. Kluka proved to be capable of superhuman efficiency — approving “every petition, subpoena, and search warrant in the case” in a total of one day’s work.
Here is where Chisholm’s Gestapo went to work:
Empowered by a rubber-stamp judge, partisan investigators ran amok. They subpoenaed and obtained (without the conservative targets’ knowledge) massive amounts of electronic data, including virtually all the targets’ personal e-mails and other electronic messages from outside e-mail vendors and communications companies.
The investigations exploded into the open with a coordinated series of raids on October 3, 2013. These were home invasions, including those described above. Chisholm’s office refused to comment on the raid tactics (or any other aspect of the John Doe investigations), but witness accounts regarding the two John Doe investigations are remarkably similar: early-morning intrusions, police rushing through the house, and stern commands to remain silent and tell no one about what had occurred.
With Gestapo tactics comes fear.
O’Keefe, who has been in contact with multiple targeted families, says, “Every family I know of that endured a home raid has been shaken to its core, and the fate of marriages and families still hangs in the balance in some cases.”
Anne also describes a new fear of the police: “I used to support the police, to believe they were here to protect us. Now, when I see an officer, I’ll cross the street. I’m afraid of them. I know what they’re capable of.”
Cindy says, “I lock my doors and I close my shades. I don’t answer the door unless I am expecting someone. My heart races when I see a police car sitting in front of my house or following me in the car. The raid was so public. I’ve been harassed. My house has been vandalized. [She did not identify suspects.] I no longer feel safe, and I don’t think I ever will.”
Rachel talks about the effect on her children. “I tried to create a home where the kids always feel safe. Now they know they’re not. They know men with guns can come in their house, and there’s nothing we can do.” Every knock on the door brings anxiety. Every call to the house is screened. In the back of her mind is a single, unsettling thought: These people will never stop.
This is one reason, among many, that I am an Oathkeeper. Just as I have feared, law enforcement is being utilized as a gross political tool for Leftists. I repeat:
Shame — MASSIVE SHAME — upon those “law enforcement officers” (you deserve to be in quotes) who took part in those raids.
You knowwho you are and you know you conducted yourselves improperly, no matter what you say or how you attempt to justify your actions publicly. You still cannot sleep well at night. As well you shouldn’t. You violated your fundamental Constitutional oaths.
You make me sick to my heart, you alleged “police officers” who took part in those raids of lawful citizens. You wound me, and all other LEOs who seek nothing more than to conduct their business professionally and within the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Have you no soul? Have you no conscience? Moreover, have you no intellect, no sense of questioning, no grasp of our foundational documents? Are you truly that filled with fear of your supervisors?
How could you not at least ask questions?
Is this actually my country? Is this truly the United States of America?