Glock or Beretta? Typical Journalistic mis-reporting.

You might wonder why I'm a stickler for such details. In an earlier blog, I questioned initial reports that a "Glock 9mm" pistol and an "AR-15" were used by the Navy Yard shooter, Aaron Alexis. I had no information to the contrary, but I know how reporters think. Too often, they don't.

"Glock" seems to have become the commonplace name for any semi automatic handgun. Never mind that there are countless other brands, one of which is the standard issue handgun for the U.S. military, the Beretta M-9 (the civilian version is the model 92F).

It was only a day or so before police confirmed that the shooter did NOT use a rifle of any kind, including the AR-15. He came armed with a pump action shotgun, one that the FBI now says was "modified" by cutting off a length of the barrel and some of the stock. Presumably, this was done to make it easier to sneak it aboard the base in a bag.

And, pretty much as I expected, the pistol he took from a security officer he shot was, indeed, a 9mm Beretta. Not a Glock.

So, again you may ask, what's the big deal. Or, like ex-Secretary of State Clinton said, what difference does it make. Not much, really. Except, to people like me, who question credibility. Many of us have growing concerns over our president's credibility. A lack of that essential element makes some of us wary of anything the president says. It's becoming increasingly difficult to trust him, and that makes me sad. That is the apparent reasoning behind the negativity coming from the U.S. House of Representatives. And, I understand it. Journalists, those folks we should be able to trust to bring us facts, those we depend on to maintain some balance in this world...well, let me say that it's becoming ever more difficult to believe what they say when obvious factual mistakes have become so commonplace. What difference does it make, indeed.

I've yet to hear those network reporters "clarify" (they'll never "correct" anything) their rush to report misinformation about the AR-15 they were so quick to jump on. And, I don't recall hearing any journalist take Rep. Feinstein to task for her never ending assault weapons ban plan, even while the still warm bodies of 12 people lay in Building 197 at the Navy Yard.

Shame on one. Shame on all. Though I expect nothing less from pundits like Feinstein, I certainly expect a higher degree of factual professionalism from our journalists. You should be more than glad that you're not working for me. Your careers would likely be cut very short.   

POTUS, Mr. Obama. It's high time you listen to We The People, and stop being a jerk.

Sometimes, it’s hard to read people. Sometimes, that’s because what those people are saying is neither loud nor clear. We’ve all dealt with wishy-washy folks, those who just can’t say what they mean. Often, they speak “mush”. Maybe, just maybe, it’s because they’re not actually sure what they mean.

That certainly wasn’t the case with the President’s desire to send “warning missiles” into Syria. The people spoke, Congress heard what they were saying, and apparently POTUS picked up on our wishes and called off the air strikes. He said he would take his case to Congress, claiming that was his intent all along.

Uh. Right.   

So, why is it so difficult for President Obama to understand that We The People do not like his forced health care plan, better known as Obama-Care? Can you imagine how Obama-Care would have changed the course of history had it been scheduled to take effect in October 2012, a month before the election? I dare say that there would be a different man sitting in the White House today.

Congress is threatening to defund the program, something that for some reason I don’t understand is suppose to shut down our government’s business. I’m not sure that would actually be a bad thing. But, realistically-speaking, is there anyone out there who actually believes that our government will cease operating? That just won’t happen. What’s irritating is that Obama and his democrat hoodlums are already blaming the republican-controlled congress, hoping that strongarm Chicago tactics will work.

You can bet that, by the 11^th hour, someone will give. Likely, there will be either a compromise plan presented, or a delay for implementing the current plan. Either way, We The People are not likely to win. And, either way, we will likely never understand the plan. It is somewhat akin to IRS tax laws. No one seems to understand them, but we all know what the penalties are if we don’t pay up. And, you should all be aware that the IRS will be hiring an additional 16,000 agents to enforce Obama-Care. Oh, goody.

What part of We The People does Obama and his goons not understand? We are speaking out, we’re loud and we’re very clear, but our desires are falling, apparently, on deaf ears. Or, perhaps there’s an ulterior motive that We haven’t discovered. Yet.

Congress is forcing the issue. Thank goodness for that. The problem, once again, is that regardless of what Congress decides, POTUS can overrule their actions with a stroke of his veto pen. And, Mr. Obama is threatening to do just that. He has, for one reason or another, decided that he knows what’s best for us. His experience, you’ll recall, is that he was a community organizer, an Illinois state senator, and a US senator representing Illinois. One that voted, most of the time, as present, taking no stand on the issues on the table. What’s even worse is that he has surrounded himself with people who have pretty much the same level of inexperience.

We The People are getting tired, Mr. President. We don’t want a dictator. We want you to listen to us, pay attention to our needs and desires. In other words, Barry, stop being the pompous jerk that you appear to be.

Another madman, on a rampage, killing people. Let's not let another tragedy slip away without taking advantage of it.

Once again, a gunman opens fire in public, killing a dozen and wounding others. His targets, according to the president, were specific. “He targeted military and civilians”, so said President Obama a couple hours after Aaron Alexis went on his rampage at the Navy Yard in Washington. “Targeted”? What does he mean by that? Once again, without benefit of paid writers and no teleprompter, POTUS is confused about facts. But, let's not let a good tragedy go to waste.

He’s not the only one. Reporters, young and old, experienced and newbies, are only interested in relaying anything they hear. I'd like to hear one, just one gutsy reporter, question and challenge what is told them. “Never mind the facts, they just get in the way of a good story”, seems to be the order of the day. And, unfortunately, it often is.

Loved some of the general reporter comments and questions. How can anyone sneak a gun onto a military base? Really? Is there a realistic person out there who thinks that our bases are surrounded by 20 foot tall prison walls, with razor wire running along the top, and high voltage wires to keep unauthorized people out?

The shooter came to the base with a high-powered rifle capable of bringing down a helicopter, a shotgun and a pistol. “High powered rifle capable of bringing down a helicopter”? It was a .223 caliber rifle, an assault rifle. An anti-personnel gun, for goodness sakes. Good for hunting small game, not the best choice for deer, and a laughable choice as an anti-aircraft weapon. And, the pistol. Reports say it was a 9mm Glock. Factual reports are that Alexis brought a shotgun to the base, then “acquired” the rifle and pistol from one or more people once the attack began. I have unanswered questions about two things here. Who said the weapons were the semi automatic civilian AR-15 and the Glock 9mm handgun? I would have thought the guns on the post would have been standard issue M-16 rifles and Beretta M-9 handguns. But, I haven’t seen an investigator’s report, yet, and both descriptions could be accurate. Until the press became familiar with the AR-15, by the way, any gun that “looked like” an M-16 (something the press was familiar with) was called an M-16. “Glocks” are like Kleenex. Any semi automatic handgun is called a Glock, just like any tissue is called a Kleenex. Again, I’ll await the facts before assuming too much.

CNN’s Resident Alien Idiot, Piers Morgan, “reported” that Alexis brought all three guns to the Navy Yard. Even when he was given updated information, he ignored the facts. They just got in the way of his story.

Now, some truths of a general nature. Most any military installation in the United States can be breeched. From neighboring woods or rivers or oceans, all are vulnerable. Legal military ID’s will get you on board, as will legal civilian contractor ID’s. Visitors at many, if not all, military bases must stop for passes before being admitted. In the case of Camp Lejeune, a visitor must have a sponsor and that would be a person who has clearance and access on board. There are special events passes available, but they are strictly regulated. And, if any journalist thinks that it’s possible to check the 35,000 cars that enter Camp Lejeune every day for weapons or unauthorized people, then I want to make sure I’m not breathing in your happy dust.

So, why would a rational person pick a military base, a place where there are hundreds if not thousands of armed soldiers, marines, airmen or sailors running around, to carry out a massacre such as the one at the Navy Yard? Another truth for you. There are fewer ARMED servicemen and women at a stateside base than there are civilians shopping in most any city where concealed carry is authorized. Remember Bill Clinton? In 1993, he signed an order prohibiting anyone from carrying privately owned firearms on military bases. Military weapons are locked away in armories. Only those military personnel on duty and charged with security or law enforcement duties can carry guns. Military bases, stateside, are gun-free zones, for the most part. A limited number of personnel are armed at any given time.

Remember this other gun grabbing guy, this one from the 19^th century, a lawman named Wyatt Earp? Famous for cleaning up Tombstone? Yeah, that’s the guy. He did not allow citizens to have guns when they were in his town. He and his deputies were the only ones, supposedly, who could pack hardware. Movies and TV shows have shown him as the hero, the guy who cleaned up the town. Facts paint a different picture of this gun grabber. He was a flim-flam man, a cheat, and a cold blooded killer. Much like Adolph Hitler, he did not want anyone to be able to challenge his dictatorial authority, therefore he took away their guns.

If Clinton and Obama are so anti-gun oriented, then let them disarm the secret service agents who provide them protection. That’s as likely to happen as Obama is to accept the health care plan that he’s cramming down our throats.

One commonality in all these mass killings is finally getting a smattering of attention. It’s mental illness. To date, every individual involved has suffered one form of mental instability of another. Only a few responsible reporters have addressed this issue. It’s not politically correct, of course, because those people “are sick” and special. It’s better, many think, to deny the constitutional rights of 300-million law abiding sane people than it is to lock away nut cases.

And, that's just one more thing that frosts my backside.  

Ok, here we go. Midday 09-17-2013 update. Questions remain as to whether the AR-15 found at the scene was actually used by Alexis. A semi auto handgun, also found, was likely taken from a security officer. The investigation is on-going, and like I wrote earlier, too many people...reporters and politicians...have jumped to too many conclusions too early.
Stay tuned. More egg on the face coming for Feinstein and others.  

Let's Re-Think Syria. Are we tainted by other foreign failures? Maybe I'm wrong.

Like a majority of Americans, I have been opposed to an attack on the government of Syria ever since President Obama said it would be a good idea. After all, any good idea coming from this administration can't really be good, can it?

What got me having second thoughts is the fact that a majority of Americans feel the same way I do. A majority, albeit a small majority, elected Obama for a second term, right? I certainly wasn't part of that crowd. In fact, in most situations, I am not part of the vocal majority, while maintaining my membership in the silent majority crowd.

So, what's different about this issue? 100,000 Syrians had already been killed by rockets, bombs, missiles and bullets during the reign of terror by the Assad Regime. Was that ok? After all, the majority of Syrians voted to give Assad the presidency. A bunch of rebellious protestors decided they didn't want him to be their leader any longer, and instead of waiting for the next election, they organized and decided to use force to kick him out.

As it is with many rebel organizations, they were outgunned by Assad's Syrian military. Seeing an opportunity, a bunch of terrorists, known to us as Al Qaeda, joined the rebel protestors, and together, they were wreaking havoc with Syrian government forces.

Then, it is alleged (a word I almost never use because it is, for all practical purposes, a useless word) that the Assadians (I like this new word that I created) unleashed some poison gas, chemical weapons, on the protestors. The sarin gas attack in late August left 1400 dead. And, as has been pointed out by every newsman with a computer, and every politician from sea to shining sea, almost 500 of the dead were children.

Being a skeptic of the Obama Administration, I questioned, and will continue to question, every claim any person associated with Obama makes. For that, I do not apologize. Perhaps all of us should do that, to some extent, with EVERY political leader we have. I question whether Assad actually used the chemicals. What did he have to gain? 1500 dead people? He had already killed 100,000. And, we didn't bat an eye. After all, that was a civil war, and we didn't have a dog in that fight. The battle remains an internal war, but now it's claimed that those dreaded chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction, were used. The same type of weapons of mass destruction that Hussein used against his own people.

I ask again, as so many other Americans, why would Assad do this? Is it some desire to draw the United States into a war? Is it an effort to lure our ships and men within range of the sophisticated Russian P800 anti-ship missiles he has? Or, is it, perhaps, an Al Qaeda plot to get the US (and, perhaps other nations) to help them out by attacking and weakening the Assadians?

I need hard evidence.

Why can't I trust our president? That's the core question for me. George W. Bush may not have been the brightest light bulb in the hardware store, but I trusted him. He made his share of mistakes, but I do not believe he needed a war to add to his accomplishments. That was a hand he was dealt, and those cards were on the table prior to his presidency. I still believe that Hussein had a lot of weapons of mass destruction, just as the intelligence communities (ours and others) said. Our mistake was warning Hussein that we were coming to get those weapons unless he turned them over. And, lo and behold, we couldn't find them when we arrived.

So, again, I ask myself. Why can't I trust this president?

Maybe, just maybe, it's because of his lack of experience in the real world. Maybe it's that he has no military experience. Maybe it's because his staff of experts don't appear to have a lot of expertise. Or, maybe...just maybe...I am still miffed about the attack on our embassy in Benghazi a year ago, an attack that today remains un-avenged. We have arrested no one. We have killed no one. We have... well, the Obama administration lied to the American people, it lied to the world.

It is well known that once a cop gets caught lying on the witness stand, his future appearances on the witness stand will come with a question from the defense attorney: Mr. Officer, have you ever lied before? Of course, that will be followed up with, Mr. Officer, why should this court, why should this jury, believe you now?

Mr. President, Ms. Susan Price, why should we, the American public, believe you today? How can we trust you? Or, should I...and the rest of real Americans...decide that for the good of society, for the good of the world, it is better to back the president's efforts to take the wind out of the sails of what is obviously an evil man, a man named Assad. Maybe it is time to take action. Maybe it's time for Americans to get behind the president, and hope that, this time, he's got it right, that he's telling us the whole truth, and that his intentions are not political.

Personally speaking, though it's too late now, I would have preferred that we had used the 1960 and 1970 tactics of the guys at Langley. One well-placed hunk of lead and it would have been "situation resolved". And, no one would have been able to trace it back to any specific nation.

Mr. President, just some advice for future use.