BY FLORIDA BILL
The Attorney General has announced that the federal government has decided to resume executions of individuals who have been sentenced to death in a court of law.
Certainly at the top or near the top of those on death row is Major Nidal Hasan, the army psychiatrist who killed 13 persons, including 12 fellow soldiers, and wounded 32 others in an explosion of Islamic rage on November 6, 2009, at Fort Hood, Texas.
As the massacre was being carried out, Major Hasan, a medical doctor, screamed "Allahu Akbar (Allah is the greatest) as he fired his gun and watched the soldiers and civilians fall like dominoes. After he had fired scores of rounds, he was taken down by gunfire from an American soldier.
Now 49, Hasan, a paraplegic as a result of a bullet which hit his spine, has been incarcerated and cared for in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, since the shooting and his trial and conviction in a military tribunal four years later.
The former army major and doctor who had been trained at government expense, has admitted the killings which he has said in interviews gave him a "good" feeling, and he looks forward to martyrdom as a SoA, (Soldier of Allah). .
Confined to a wheelchair, Hasan has written countless letters. Among his missives was a letter to ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi informing him that it would be "his honor" to join the Islamic caliphate; and another missive to Pope Francis in which he praised Islamic Jihad. He always signed his letters using his SoA acronym.
In an interview with the NYT, he said he did not regret the massacre and that his actions would help atone for the sins of his mother who once operated a small store and sold alcohol in contradiction to the command of Allah.
The government has now lifted the prohibition to the death penalty which had been in effect for several years. The ban on implementing the penalty had been ordered because of the fear that an innocent defendant might be executed in error. With Hasan, there is no doubt that he is a murderer.
The U.S. military has executed 135 persons since 1916. The last was the execution of army Pvt. John Bennett in 1961 for rape and attempted murder.
In Hasan's case, he acknowledges his violence and his Islamic rage; and the screams of "Allahu Akbar" were witnessed and heard by scores of fellow soldiers and civilians. Hasan has earned the penalty of death and there will be no misgivings when it is carried out. The hope of Americans and of the relatives of victims of his rage is that execution of this madman will take place without further delays.
xxx
By Florida Bill
That Democratic-controlled stronghold, otherwise known as the House of Representatives, has voted to condemn as "racist" President Trumps tweets about his female "squad" of detractors. These "women of color," all recently elected to Congress, have become the latest media sweethearts.
There is nothing unusual or unexpected here, since Democrats and this obtuse quartet of congresswomen find "racism" in all aspects of Republican discourse and policies. They have learned well from the Rev. Al Sharpton who has been shouting racism and finding it under every stone for about 40 years. Any critical comment aimed at any bone-headed politician who happens to be African American is per se "racist." These newly elected representatives, making up "the squad," are "women of color," and therefore, any criticism is racially motivated, and the speaker is a bigot, and that is that. Vote to condemn.
Factually, there is nothing "racist" about the President's tweets and his responses to the squad who have denounced his policies as "garbage;" have insulted him with foul language, (to wit "Impeach the Motherfucker;") and called him a racist, a bigot and a white nationalist (like a Nazi) seeking to divide this country and make it white again. Fair minded Americans do not blame President Trump for firing back at this dopey foursome and his tweet is on target, but it is not "racist," despite the contrived emotion of Democrats and the tethered media which has abandoned all journalistic fairness and objectivity..
Trump is not the type that turns his cheek when he is disrespected and accused of inept leadership and of being a "racist." He will fire back at anyone, color irrelevant, who insults him and hurls dishonest charges at him. He will never sit still for that, and Americans, and all fair minded Democrats as well as Republicans, agree. So what did the President say in his response to the representatives which has set off this fictional firestorm:
"So interesting to see progressive Democrat congresswomen who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst and most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world...., now loudly and viciously telling the people of the USA, the greatest and most powerful nation on earth, how our government is to be run.
"Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done.
"W hen will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said. So many people are angry at them and their horrible and disgusting actions"
The four congresswomen,elected last November, are American citizens, but their comments suggest that they are really anti-American. They are Alexandria Occasio Cortez of New York; Ilhan Omar of Minnesota; Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. They have been called "The Squad" by Speaker Pelosi, who appears not to like them, yet praises them for their aggressive and progressive posture in attacking the nation's 45th President.
The four use the "F" word regularly to make their points. They call themselves socialists and apparently believe that vulgarities strengthen their rhetoric for their life saving plan, the Green New Deal, which, unless quickly implemented, will allow the planet to be destroyed in 12 short years. The New Deal will provide for the elimination of all air travel and airplanes; and possible construction of roads to Hawaii and Europe; and for the rebuilding of 99% of all structures in the country. And along with this, there will be free college tuition and medical care for everyone. Reparations are a must, apparently with checks of several thousand dollars for each and everyone of color--although details on reparations for the slave era have not yet been disclosed by the squad. The bottom line cost will be in the tens of trillions, or more, but then,who's counting.
The squad's Green New Deal is nutty and impossible, yet it has been endorsed by virtually every Democrat candidate running for president to replace Trump.
Democrats say that they know a racist remark 'when they hear one." President Trump says that he is not a racist and never has been one. But he says he knows anti American rhetoric when he hears it, and he has heard plenty of it from the "squad" and other Democrats.
xxx
I
T
BY FLORIDA BILL
Ex-CIA director John Owen Brennan was and is perhaps President Trump's fiercest accuser. In recent years he has sashayed from news station to news station, and to interviews, excoriating the nation's 45th President as paranoid, a charlatan and a traitor who is in "Putin's pocket."
After all, he had a top security clearance and the phony journalists at CNN, MSNBC and NBC and of course, Morning Joe, were always ebullient and obsequious when he would grace their mikes and rip into the nation's 45th President.
But now the jury is in and Special Counsel Mueller reports that President Trump never conspired or colluded with Russians for help in winning the 2016 election.
Brennan is still around and about, but he has toned down his rhetoric a bit telling Morning Joe that "I suspected that there was more than there actually was" concerning Trump's behavior. Despite Brennan's lying and irresponsible conduct, he isn't particularly red faced or about to apologize for his statements, and will likely be continuing to express his public disdain for the President .
President Trump has now stripped the 63-year-old Brennan of his elite security clearance for lying amid reports that Brennan is being targeted by the Attorney General in his investigation into dishonest FBI and government intelligence officials who promoted the bogus charges of "collusion" against Trump following his unexpected win over Hillary Clinton.
With Brennan, one might wonder how he ever rose to become the head of the nation's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in view of his background and strong support of Communism during the cold war years and in view of charges by an FBI agent that he was untrustworthy because of his unabashed support of Muslims.
In 1976, Brennan, fresh out of college, endorsed and voted for Gus Hall, Communist candidate for President, over Democrat Jimmy Carter, and the incumbent Republican Gerald Ford. Incredibly, four years later, despite his call for a radical change of government in the USA, he applied for and was accepted for a position in the (CIA.
He was a member of that spy circle for 25-plus years. He worked in the Middle East, near east and in south Asia, and as an analyst and a station chief in Saudi Arabia. and became fluent in the Arabic language. Also, he served as director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center. He was an assistant to President Obama for Homeland Security from 2009 to January, 2013, when Obama selected him to be CIA chief in January, 2013.
Some members of the FBI balked strongly at his appointment as CIA boss. James Guandolo who was an FBI agent and a terrorist analyst in the Middle East from 1996 to 2008 lobbied against his appointment as head of the CIA, complaining that Brennan simply could not be trusted.
Guandolo said that Brennan, with whom he had worked, had become fluent in the Arabic language and had converted to Islam in 2008. The fact that Brennan was a "closet" Muslim was not really the issue; the concern was one of trust and his allegiance to the USA, he said. Brennan kept urging President Obama to appoint members of the Muslim brotherhood to top positions in his administration, he charged.
Brennan, the agent said, had been persuaded by the Saudi King to convert to Islam and he did so while assigned in the Middle East. He subsequently fulfilled his Islamic duty by making the pilgrimage to Mecca which is a requirement and a privilege to be exercised only by pious Muslims.
In February, 2013, the Senate, by a vote of 63 to 34, confirmed Brennan as CIA chief. But, skepticism over his character and loyalty inside the intelligence agency did not end with confirmation. In fact, it intensified when he declined to be sworn into office by placing his hand on the Bible. Instead, Brennan insisted on using an 1787 version of the Constitution which did not contain the entire Bill of Rights on which to pledge his loyalty. The complete Constitution, used today, was approved in 1791, and replaced the 1787 draft.
The abbreviated version selected by Brennan did not contain Amendments 1,4,5 and 6 and in effect technically debunked his obligation to "protect and defend" those civil rights guaranteed in the amendments. Those amendments guarantee to citizens rights of free speech, religion and press; and provide protections against government arrest and prosecution.
No one really knows the core values of John Brennan, and of his fealty to the United States; but they are suspect. When an appointee to a high office declines taking his oath with a hand on the bible; and when an FBI agent and former Marine officer who worked closely with Brennan in Saudi and in other parts of the Middle East says that he cannot be trusted, it should be taken seriously.
XXX
BY FLORIDA BILL
During the recent Democratic debates, Bernie Sanders asserted that women have a "constitutional right to an abortion." Sanders who has declared himself a candidate for President, knows, or should know, that he is factually wrong, and is as much of a "liar" as he accuses President Trump of being.
The fact is that a woman has a "right to choose" pursuant to a finding in the 1973 Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade. The court did not find that the Constitution provided a woman a right to an abortion; it ruled that a woman had a right of privacy from which flows her right to choose with regard to her own body. The right of privacy is not stated outright in the constitution but exists, justices said, in the arching penumbra of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the constitution.
Roe v Wade is considered by legal scholars to be a poorly reasoned decision. That being the case, critics of the decision and pro-life conservatives are pushing the high court to revisit that decision and to overrule it, or determine what rights the developing fetus is entitled to.
The right to choose by a woman to terminate her pregnancy ignores any rights to be accorded the fetus, no matter how far along the baby has been alive in the mother's womb. The fetus is not a "person" under the U.S. Constitution, and only a "person" is entitled to protection as is set forth in the 14th amendment.
The Supreme Court has in the past declined to made a determination as to when a fetus becomes a person. Is it at the moment of conception or when there is a heartbeat detected? Is it when that fetus can survive and live outside the womb, at, say, four, five or six months? Currently. a fetus becomes a person with constitutional protection upon birth, and correspondingly a woman's right to choose allows for destruction of the fetus at any time prior to birth.
In recent months there has been discussion of terminating a baby's life, even after birth, if that is the mother's desire in consultation with her doctor. Such acts would constitute infanticide and would certainly subject the doctor and the mother, or perhaps both, to prosecution for murder. Nevertheless, some liberal Democrats have said that such actions should be the subject of conversation.
If the court decides that a fetus is a "person" at some point during the gestational period, that fetus, at that moment, will receive constitutional protection, and subsequent abortion of that "person" will be prohibited. The prohibition however, would very likely be subject to exceptions such as the need to protect the life of the mother.
xxx
