NewsBusters (blog) | WATCH: The View Lies About the Second Amendment, Wishes We ... NewsBusters (blog) The View, ABC's morning talk program that elevated Raven-Symone to political punditry, engaged in one of its more oafish rants Thursday on one of the many ... |
Go here to see the original:
WATCH: The View Lies About the Second Amendment, Wishes We ... - NewsBusters (blog)
Thomas Gallatin Jun. 15, 2017
Inevitably and almost immediately after crazed leftist James T. Hodgkinson shot and wounded five, including Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, as they practiced for a baseball game, gun control came up. A reporter asked Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), who had just survived the harrowing attack, Congressman, does this change your views on the gun situation in America? Yep, leftists are once again exploiting an atrocity to trot out the tired, flawed guns are the problem anti-Second Amendment narrative. But Brooks didnt take the bait. In fact, he tactfully and expertly exposed the flaw in the argument against the right to bear arms. Brooks responded:
Not with respect to the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment right to bear arms is to ensure that we always have a republic. And as with any constitutional provision in the Bill of Rights, there are adverse aspects to each of those rights that we enjoy as people. And what we just saw here is one of the bad side effects of someone not exercising those rights properly. But were not going to get rid of freedom of speech because some people say some really ugly things that hurt other peoples feelings. Were not going to get rid of Fourth Amendment search and seizure rights because it allows some criminals to go free who should be behind bars. These rights are there to protect Americans, and while each of them has a negative aspect to them, they are fundamental to our being the greatest nation in world history. So no, Im not changing my position on any of the rights we enjoy as Americans. With respect to this particular shooter, Id really like to know more about him whether he was an ex-felon, by way of example, who should not have had possession of a firearm Id like to know other things about his background before I pass judgement.
If anything, this latest attack proves to illustrate just how important and essential the Second Amendment is to protecting American Liberty. Imagine if the Capitol Police detail had not been there, the carnage and death toll would have been significant, due to the fact that all the congressmen were unarmed. How many Americans have their own police detail following them around offering protection? The obvious answer also points to the foundational purpose of the Second Amendment. See here where Mark Alexander has written extensively on the Second Amendment.
But statists like Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe seem to care little for protecting Americans rights and liberties. Rather he takes this latest horror as an opportunity to find fault and blame American Liberty for the crime rather than the crazed individual. Less than an hour after the attack McAuliffe said, This is not what today is about but there are too many guns on the street. Its not just about politicians, we worry about all of our citizens. Gov. McAuliffe is in need of a history lesson. As Benjamin Franklin stated, They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. And it was James Madison who wrote, The ultimate authority resides in the people alone. The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition. Thankfully, Rep. Brooks understands and embraces these truths.
See the article here:
An Outstanding Post-Attack Defense of the Second Amendment - Patriot Post
By Jeffrey T. Fowler, Ph.D.Faculty Member, School of Security and Global Studies at American Military University
The nations of the European Union and the United States are justifiably concerned about Islamic extremism. At the heart of this dilemma is what has been called a clash of civilizations. While there are certainly many millions of peaceful Muslims in the world, there is also a radical element that seeks to destabilize the EU and ultimately to replace it with a caliphate.
The stated intent of this radical and increasingly powerful minority is the destruction of Western culture in Europe. The causes of the current crisis are rooted in colonial and post-colonial immigration from former colonies into Europe due to war and the continuing instability in the Middle East since 9/11.
One could easily write a large book on European colonialism and its effects. This has been done numerous times. Suffice it to say that in 1914, the European Great Powers ruled a very large part of the world. The colonization of Africa in the 19th and early part of the 20th century was indicative of that trend.
Under that system, the European powers took raw materials from the underdeveloped parts of the world and sold them finished goods. This clearly rapacious system harmed many emerging nations and discouraged immigration from these colonies to Europe.
This system continued until the end of World War II when it crumbled as more and more colonial entities began to choose independence from their European masters. Once countries in Asia, Africa and other parts of the world were free, immigration to Europe increased as emigrants left poverty and corrupt governments in hopes of finding a better life abroad.
Unfortunately, many immigrants to Europe seeking advancement and a better life lacked the skills necessary to ensure their success in a highly industrialized society. The socialist states of Europe provided the immigrants with the basic life necessities, which only encouraged more immigration. The civil war in Syria and the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) spurred the most recent wave of immigrants to the EU.
The main topic of debate on refugee immigration to Europe today is the question of assimilation or deliberate separation? Historically, in both the U.S. and Europe, immigrants sought to assimilate into the host culture while maintaining their cultural and language heritage. Maintaining ones heritage and assimilation into a host culture are not opposing goals.
The threat to Western societies comes from those who immigrate to the EU with no intention of assimilating, those who wish to enforce a deliberate separation from the host culture. This immigrant population (small in number, but ruthless and increasingly powerful) seeks to overthrow the existing host culture and replace it with its own views on ethics, religion and justice that are far removed from Western norms. This is a problem with militant migrants today particularly in the UK, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and Sweden.
With the exception of Switzerland and Hungary, few European countries have taken truly decisive action to quell migrant extremism.
What to do about mass migration and radicalization of some immigrants living in the EU has been debated for years. The Pew Foundation broke down European views on the refugee crisis into a series of five charts.
The Left claims that globalism and cultural relativism teach us that societies must embrace all people. This perspective, as well as the opposing mainly isolationist view, have been extensively debated in Europe. Some Europeans who wish to keep immigration at a high level, even though there are many problems, have been labeled as apologists. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been accused of this position.
Others have been labelled right-wing extremists for taking the opposing view. Some might consider the Polish EU Member of Parliament Janusz Korwin-Mikke, a rightwing extremist. Then there are those who changed their minds on the issue due to events such as British Prime Minister Theresa May. At first she was quite supportive of the Muslim population in Britain. However, the Manchester bombing and the London Bridge attack seem to have changed her mind somewhat. Having been roundly defeated in last weeks snap election, we dont know what her next steps will be, if she manages to retain power.
Recent research by the Pew Research Center suggests that much of the European body politic is not pleased with how the EU has managed the refugee crisis. But there are no easy solutions. There are three primary perspectives on how to solve the problem. As noted above, there is the view of the liberal left, the view of the conservative right, and those who hold to a more moderate stance.
One of the disturbing issues is that the terms nationalism and populism are seen as negatives in the immigration debate. While Europe has a very long history of nation-state conflicts, there is certainly nothing wrong in love of ones country and culture, and wishing to preserve them. Populism is also necessary at times.
In the U.S., the recent presidential election highlighted that perhaps a sizable portion of American voters were simply tired of what they saw as cultural elitist stances by both the Republican and Democratic parties. Populism can disturb the status quo, as weve seen in Senator Bernie Sanders 2016 populist campaign in the U.S. presidential election and the recent victorious campaign by President Emmanuel Macron in France.
Indeed, populism can lead to positive changes either by replacing traditional parties or causing those parties to modify their positions for the public good. Only time will tell how the immigration crisis in the EU will be decided. But if history is any indicator, there will be an end to it one day.
About the Author
Jeffrey T. Fowler, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the School of Security and Global Studies at American Military University. He holds a B.A. in law enforcement from Marshall University, an M.A. in military history from Vermont College of Norwich University and a Ph.D. in business administration with a concentration in criminal justice from Northcentral University. Jeffrey is also a published author, a former New York deputy sheriff and a retired Army Captain, having served over 20 years in the U.S. Army. He teaches both graduate and undergraduate classes on global terrorism.
comments
Sign up now to receive the InHomelandSecurity eNewsletter.
View post:
There's No Solution in Sight to the Migrant Crisis in the European Union - In Homeland Security
By Anna Momigliano By Anna Momigliano June 15 at 9:16 AM
Two months ago Giusi Nicolini, the mayor of a small Italian island with a population of 6,000, received the prestigious UNESCO Peace Prize. Lampedusa, the island 70 miles from the Tunisian coast that she has been governing since 2012, has experienced an influx of refugees over the past few years, and Nicolini got the award because of the boundless humanity and unwavering commitment with which she managed the refugee crisis.
In the past few years, Nicolini had become a national symbol of Lampedusa's willingness to help those fleeing war and poverty: When President Obama hosted a state dinner in honor of then-Prime Minister Matteo Renzi in 2016, Renzi brought her along as one of the people who represented the best of Italy.
Yet Nicolini failed to get reelected when local elections were held last Sunday. Not only that, she did not even come second, losing disastrously to an opponent who, during the campaign, famously said that he cannot stand seeing migrants swarming everywhere.
So, does Nicolini's defeat mean that being nice to migrants could cost a politician their seat?
People on the right were quick to celebrate the election results as proof that Italians are tired of helping out immigrants and asylum-seekers.
Matteo Salvini, the leader of the anti-immigration Northern League, mocked Nicolini for what he described as feel-good propaganda that cost her the election. Conservative activists joyfully posted altered images representing the former mayor as an illegal immigrant expelled from the country and memes claiming she is an agent of George Soros, the liberal tycoon whom conspiracy theorists accuse of being behind the wave of African immigration to Europe.
In an interview with The Washington Post, Nicolini said she has been insulted for the national and international attention she got because of the migrant crisis: They called me 'ladra di medaglie,' medals thief, and accused me of talking too much to the media. But I was just trying to promote the image of the island.
Lampedusa's economy revolves around fishing and tourism and Nicolini said that, during her tenure, she tried to balance the moral duty to welcome migrants and the need to keep the island appealing for tourists and with good results: the tourism business grew 36 percent.
It's true that the new mayor, Salvatore Tot Martello, had used harsher language about migrants. Martello, who, like Nicolini, belongs to the center-left Democratic Party, won the election focusing his campaign on the promise of obtaining financial compensation for fishermen whose business is allegedly hurt by the shipwrecks of migrants boats. He contends that the presence of sunken ships in that area of the Mediterranean is damaging the fishermen's nets.
However, after the elections, he immediately toned down his approach, expressing his respect for migrants who risk their lives at sea.
Alessandro Puglia, a freelance journalist who did extensive work on Lampedusa and authored a documentary about the island, is skeptical that the election results had anything to do with the migrant crisis. He noted in an interview that Lampedusa's residents have demonstrated their solidarity throughout the decades: Migrants have been coming to the island since the 1990s and locals have always offered them food and blankets. Moreover, it was often the fishermen of Lampedusa who rescued migrants at sea.
If anything, said Puglia, some of the locals resented the fact that the mayor was getting all the attention, while their work remained largely unknown to the wider world.
Nicolini acknowledges the migrant crisis was just one of the factors, claiming that her policy of sustainable growth made her enemies among investors and developers less concerned with the environment.
But whether the migrant crisis was a determining factor in the local elections of this small island remains debatable, it is pretty clear that it is becoming a hot-button issue nationally. With elections scheduled next year, two of the country's major parties, the Five Star Movement and the Northern League, are heavily campaigning against immigration the latter openly using Nicolini as a target. According to a recent poll, 62 percent of Italians would favor a stricter immigration policy.
Original post:
An Italian mayor won an international award for helping migrants. Then she lost her job. - Washington Post
Forbes | An Expensive Escape Hatch For U.S. Illegal Immigrants Fearing ... Forbes What to do when staying in the U.S. is no longer assured but your home country is war-torn or an economic basket case? For illegal immigrants with the money, ... Obama Voters Switched to Trump over Immigration, Says Poll ICE chief says illegal aliens should have fear of being deported Business pushes Rauner to sign bill to protect immigrants |
See the article here:
An Expensive Escape Hatch For U.S. Illegal Immigrants Fearing ... - Forbes