Monday, June 13, 2016

Ben Carson / President Obama On Orlando Massacre

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Yesterday morning at 2 AM, a gunman entered the "Pulse," a gay night club in Orlando, and began firing an automatic weapon killing at least 50 and wounding at least 53---some critically wounded.

Yesterday, mid-day, President Obama addressed the nation saying "law enforcement still don't know all the facts," which was and is true. However, it's what "was" known when he spoke and chose not to address that causes concern.

Ben Carson, earlier in the day, also spoke to the issue with much more clarity and transparency.


This was published yesterday as a timeline:

  • Shots rang out early Sunday morning at a gay bar in Orlando, Florida
  • Early reports suggest that approximately 50 people are dead and 50+ more are injured
  • It is the highest body count from a terror attack on American soil since 9/11/01
  • The FBI has suggested that the attacker could have ‘leanings to radical Islamic terrorism’
  • REPORT: Pledged allegiance to the Islamic State
  • Suspect ID’d: Omar Saddiqui Mateen, a U.S. citizen born to Afghan parents
  • This is the deadliest mass shooting in the history of the United States
  • STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED
  • President Obama condemns ‘terror’ and ‘hate,’ does not mention Islam
  • FBI interviewed Mateen in 2013 and 2014 but was not surveilling him currently

Speaking to reporters in the White House briefing room yesterday afternoon, President Obama reminded them that law enforcement officials still don't have all the facts, but, "What is clear is that he [the shooter] was a person filled with hatred."

"And," the president said, "Over the coming days, we'll uncover how and why this happens and we'll go wherever the facts lead us."

However, the president's comments indicate he will not "go wherever the facts lead us."

By the time he spoke, it had been established that the killer had called 911 and very specifically given his name, then pledged allegiance to ISIS minutes before he began to shoot people in the homosexual club.

However, the president avoided any linkage to Islamic terrorism, choosing rather to focus on "hate" and "guns," calling the "Pulse" gay night club a place of "solidarity and empowerment" for the LGBT community to "speak their minds and advocate for their civil rights."

To say that this is a tragedy is an understatement.

Personally, my heart aches for the families of those who were killed and wounded.

I am praying for those families who lost loved ones, and for those who were wounded.

This act is itself the face of evil. No one should ever face this in America or elsewhere.

The homosexuals were executed by the same ideology that has executed Christians in other parts of the world.

The father of the shooter initially told the press that his Muslim son had become enraged when he saw two men kissing in public several weeks ago. That account has generally been omitted from most news coverage.

It is becoming apparent overnight that this horrible massacre will be used by some on the Progressive Left to advance their agenda.

Although promising to "go wherever the facts lead us," President Obama, within hours of the tragedy, was echoing his previous statements regarding gun control, reminding Americans how easy it is for criminals to get guns and calling for more gun control.

If I knew at the time the president spoke that the shooter had acquired the guns legally---and I did, I'm absolutely certain the President of the United States knew.

This person was either inspired by ISIS or directed by ISIS to do what he did. It had nothing to do with gun control. Or gun availability. He would have obtained guns.

The lack of transparency in this current administration is, once again, deeply disappointing. And concerning.

Ben Carson appearing on Fox News Sunday said this is a reminder "of the animosity Muslims have toward homosexuals."

Carson said, "This incident took place at a gay bar. Many people on the left need to understand...they hate gay people...These people need to be looking at that for their own survival...to be so ideologically driven that they can't see that is problematic."

James Kallstrom, former FBI assistant director, agreed with Carson on the threat to homosexuals, saying, "They ought to be petrified. They're the first people they [the terrorists] want to kill or throw off a roof."

Carson said the "political correctness is beyond the pale." Adding, "We welcome any ethnic groups as long as they want to be Americans. If they don't, they ought to stay where they are."

The president has already shown he will not go "where the facts lead."

Last Thursday, the United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit overturned a decision by a three-judge panel of the same court and ruled, "The Second Amendment of the Constitution does not guarantee the right of gun owners to carry concealed weapons in public places."

The New York Times quotes Professor Adam Winkler, professor of constitutional law at University of California: "This is a huge decision. This is a major victory for gun control advocates."

He says, "The most important battleground of the Second Amendment has been whether there is a right to carry guns outside the home," and if there is, to what extent can government "regulate that."

It was President Obama's former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, now mayor of Chicago, who said, "You never let a serious crises go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."

There is no question in my mind the president will seize the moment to attempt to advance his anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment agenda.

I am equally certain that he will seize this moment of tragedy and mourning to pass more so-called homosexual rights policy and legislation--- further restricting what Christians can legally say, do or believe, thus undermining the religious freedom of Christians in regard to biblical teaching on homosexual behavior and so-called same-sex marriage.

As the far Left Progressives try to force gun ownership into the home, then into extinction, the president's efforts will also be directed toward more protections for homosexuals.

This president will not "waste" this crises---this tragedy.

Rather than sincere grieving with those who have lost loved ones, the president will focus the attention of the nation on this tragedy in such a way as to celebrate, affirm and advance the homosexual lifestyle and agenda.

He will focus the national attention away from the truth that the hate and violence was perpetrated by an Islamic terrorist.

What the president refuses to acknowledge publicly is that while true biblical Christians stand firmly and fight legally and politically to defend our right to religious freedom...and to protect marriage and the sanctity of life, we do not advocate or practice violence.

While the president is quick to define what he sees as "hate" and "bigotry" on the part of anyone who disagrees with the far Left Progressive agenda, he is unwilling to distinguish the difference between Christianity and Islam.

And that difference is significant.

In fact, he is unwilling to link Islam with terror.

Note what the president and his surrogates say today and tomorrow about this horrible tragedy in Orlando.

Unfortunately, within the first 24-hours, he has already shown that he intends to exploit it.

Sadly, the exploitation will likely continue in the coming days, linking anyone who disagrees with the homosexual agenda with the horrible hate and violence expressed by the terrorist Omar Mateen.

The coming days may well be a bit difficult for those who stand for biblical teaching.

David wrote in Psalm 31, "You are my rock and my protection...Set me free from the trap they set for me, because you are my protection."

Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Faithful.


21 comments:

  1. Obama wanted something like a "no fly list" for gun purchases of people like Omar Mateen (the Orlando shooter)... But nooooooo. The NRA and the Republicans stopped it. The FBI would have loved to put Mateen on a no gun purchase list but were not allowed to do so because there is no list allowed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Orlando shooter would've obtained those guns illegally to do this horrific act, even if he was on a "no fly list" for gun purchases. That said, if he knew that people in that event had guns, he probably would've given it more thought and not commit this terror; but since guns weren't allowed, it was "target rich" environment.

      Delete
    2. How was the shooter able to obtain a machine gun (an automatic weapon)? The BATF(E) must clear the purchaser before the weapon can be purchased (legally). Does Florida even allow machine gun ownership? Washington state does not, regardless of Federal law.

      Delete
    3. How was the shooter able to obtain a machine gun (an automatic weapon)? The BATF(E) must clear the purchaser before the weapon can be purchased (legally). Does Florida even allow machine gun ownership? Washington state (for example) does not, regardless of Federal law.

      Anyone with any sense would know that as soon as any Muslim were to be denied any right for whatever reason, they, their fiends in the media, as well as our current president would be up in arms about their rights being denied them.

      Delete
    4. 11:00 That's a big assumption and a feeble defense of blocking that law. That law may have prevented this, but we'll never know - we didn't even try.
      11:41 It wasn't auto, it was the semi version. Quite legal. Anyone with any sense would realize that when Obama advocated this law, he knew it would affect Muslims among others. Seriously.

      Delete
    5. First paragraph of this article indicates it was "an automatic weapon". We all know that criminals and people with criminal intent obey any and all laws forbidding them from obtaining or possessing firearms. Any half-wit with access to a machine shop can build a gun.

      Delete
    6. 'First paragraph of this article indicates it was "an automatic weapon"'.

      Gary is not known for accuracy. Just sayin'

      Delete
  2. You can best believe that the President and his buddies in the press would be stumbling all over themselves to identify, connect and link any act of violence done by a 'Christian' to all of Christendom, and especially to 'the Christian right', 'the Republican right', and Republican Christian extremists of the sort that believe in the God of the Bible and believe in sexual sin, including homosexual sin.

    Yeah, it'd be allover the news nonstop. But this president can't say the words Islamic extremism, nor Islamic terrorism, and neither can his buddies in the press.

    And this is the world, and the country we currently live in. And climate change protagonists want to say people are denying the truth? Puuuhlease...is it any wonder that people are glad about Trump for at least the reason that he's cutting through the politically correct thought police rubbish?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. Scary world we live in. Peace in knowing how it all ends.

      Delete
  3. Senate Republicans rejected a bill that would have stopped suspected terrorists from legally buying guns. The vote came one day after the San Bernardino massacre.

    Forty-five senators voted for the bill and 54 voted against it. One Democrat, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, and one Republican, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, crossed party lines.

    The measure would have denied people on the terrorist watch list the ability to buy guns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We should link to that bill as I bet it was broad enough to include people from groups with 'tea' and 'party' in their names, given the ridiculous actions of the IRS recently. Wrote a better bill, and get it passed. Quit playing games, and get it passed. By the way, was this Omar dude on any lists even, given his clearances, and Clinton's State Department's clearance of his radical mosque?

      Delete
  4. Gary, I have read elsewhere that it was not an automatic weapon. Automatics rifles are not available to the general public. The AR15 (AR stands for: Armalite Rifle (wikipedia it), not the so called "assault rifle"--of which there is not such thing, except in the minds of folks who don't know much about firearms) rifles are semi-automatic, meaning one trigger pull results in one round fired. Please verify and update your article as needed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You can't fly if you might be a terrorist, but you can buy an assault rifle.... huh?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The best remedy against terrorism in a nation is for a large number of that population to have and carry their own personal firearms, and to be against terrorism. America needs strength on both of these fronts, and these two fronts are our strength. That is how to win over terrorism, along with all the rest, strict border security, law enforcement, good intelligence, surveillance, etc. People in our government should be encouraging all Americans who believe they can learn the art of using a hand gun effectively and safely, to go ahead and get one, practice often, take classes, become proficient, learn the laws, abide by them, and then carry. We need the mentality of shepherds over a flock. There is no greater love than a man laying down his life for his brother, a concept Jesus did and taught, which is absolutely contrary to terrorism.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Let's remember that many more people were killed by razor blades than by guns in America by terrorists. (9/11) Guns are not killing America, our government is. The greatest number of people killing each other by guns is in cities where unemployment is the greatest. If we want to know the real number of what unemployment is, we should be looking at the number of deaths due to gun violence in large cities. Those numbers are connected. Our jobs have been sent overseas, and it's killing us. Our government is killing us. It's not so much guns. Having less guns is not the answer for America. Less government is the answer. It's basic math.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Interesting how some people are so ready and willing to give up "due process" and prohibit people from purchasing guns or even flying. If they haven't done anything illegal, then how to you keep someone from exercising their rights? We have protections in place such that people can't be denied rights without due process. To do otherwise isn't much different than just throwing people in jail without a trial. What if the government decided that anyone who is known to purchase alcoholic beverages (or marijuana, now that it's legal here in OR/WA), be put on a list that denies them the right to purchase a car because they might drive intoxicated? Good idea? What if the government actually engaged in full-on tyranny at some point, like the kind of England did? I guess the government could just put you on a list and prevent you from obtaining any means to resist? It always seems unlikely that something like that could happen, until it does, and history shows it has happened countless times.

    As for there being "no such thing as assault rifles," that's not true. There is such a thing as an assault rifle:

    "
    In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

    -It must be an individual weapon

    -It must be capable of selective fire

    -It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle

    -Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine[5]

    -It should have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards)

    Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles, despite frequently being called such.
    "

    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

    That said, the rifle used in the Orlando shooting was, as I've heard, an AR-15, which looks nearly identical to M16 or M4 variants (and sometimes referred to as an "M-Forgery" ;-), but which is only semi-automatic, and thus, not technically as assault rifle; It does not have select fire (i.e. the ability to fire fully-automatically or multi-round bursts with a single pull of the trigger.)

    Just a technicality, yes, but I'm fine with using correct/accurate terms when discussing things, and a select-fire weapon likely could do more damage, more quickly than a semi-automatic rifle like the AR-15. That said, yes, the AR-15 is a very capable rifle and its intended use is killing (or at least disabling) threats. I've been hearing "Why should civilians have them?" a number of times, and here's why:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

    ReplyDelete
  9. 8:10 Gary is well known for accuracy. That's why I read him. Many initial news reports were calling it an "automatic weapon." Get a life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Accurate information about the weapon was well out there among reliable news sources. An honorable man would have corrected his incorrect and misleading post.

      Delete
  10. Thanks Gary for getting the facts right day in and day out. Keep up the good work. Much appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Interesting how some people are so ready and willing to give up "due process" and prohibit people from purchasing guns or even flying. If they haven't done anything illegal, then how to you keep someone from exercising their rights? We have protections in place such that people can't be denied rights without due process. To do otherwise isn't much different than just throwing people in jail without a trial. What if the government decided that anyone who is known to purchase alcoholic beverages (or marijuana, now that it's legal here in OR/WA), be put on a list that denies them the right to purchase a car because they might drive intoxicated? Good idea? What if the government actually engaged in full-on tyranny at some point, like the kind of England did? I guess the government could just put you on a list and prevent you from obtaining any means to resist? It always seems unlikely that something like that could happen, until it does, and history shows it has happened countless times.

    As for there being "no such thing as assault rifles," that's not true. There is such a thing as an assault rifle:

    "
    In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

    -It must be an individual weapon

    -It must be capable of selective fire

    -It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle

    -Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine[5]

    -It should have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards)

    Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles, despite frequently being called such.
    "


    That said, the rifle used in the Orlando shooting was, as I've heard, an AR-15, which looks nearly identical to M16 or M4 variants (and sometimes referred to as an "M-Forgery" ;-), but which is only semi-automatic, and thus, not technically as assault rifle; It does not have select fire (i.e. the ability to fire fully-automatically or multi-round bursts with a single pull of the trigger.)

    Just a technicality, yes, but I'm fine with using correct/accurate terms when discussing things, and a select-fire weapon likely could do more damage, more quickly than a semi-automatic rifle like the AR-15. That said, yes, the AR-15 is a very capable rifle and its intended use is killing (or at least disabling) threats. I've been hearing "Why should civilians have them?" a number of times, and here's why:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

    ReplyDelete
  12. President should mention Islam, encourage people to make good use of their 2nd amendment rights and get permits to carry, and carry after they are proficient in the use of hand guns for personal protection, and to defend against ISLAMIC (or any kind actually) terrorist attacks. Such are the reasons for our 2nd amendment rights. (Please don't carry if you can not hit the broad side of a barn. Only do so if you can become proficient, safe, and have the disciplined mentality of being a shepherd, or something.) Learn the gun laws. The president should vow support for our constitution. I wonder if he made a vow of support for Islam or something. Is so, this might explain what we are getting from him, like now, we have to all think and act like he does or something, which is nutso.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.