Thread: San Bernardino

So, good ol Geraldo is effectively acknowledging that A) the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to own a gun. B) that the right is all but absolute, and C) that he opposes this right. As the right to own a gun is predicated on one's right to defend one's life, freedom and property from both criminals AND from an out of control government, Geraldo is acknowledging that he believes we have no right to self defense, to our own life, or to our own property.

He is saying that we have no right to oppose either an out of control government or even a common criminal. Geraldo is saying our lives are not our own, and we exist only by permission. Thanks Geraldo, for making this clear.

You wanna get rid of the 2nd, bud? Give it a shot, you totalitarian pig. Start a campaign for a Constitutional Amendment, beaatch

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...ndment-stupid/

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

So, good ol Geraldo is effectively acknowledging that A) the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to own a gun. B) that the right is all but absolute, and C) that he opposes this right. As the right to own a gun is predicated on one's right to defend one's life, freedom and property from both criminals AND from an out of control government, Geraldo is acknowledging that he believes we have no right to self defense, to our own life, or to our own property.

He is saying that we have no right to oppose either an out of control government or even a common criminal. Geraldo is saying our lives are not our own, and we exist only by permission. Thanks Geraldo, for making this clear.

You wanna get rid of the 2nd, bud? Give it a shot, you totalitarian pig. Start a campaign for a Constitutional Amendment, beaatch

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...ndment-stupid/

I remember when this happened... no one could believe that he was *that* stupid...

Military kicks Geraldo out of Iraq
From Chris Plante
Monday, March 31, 2003 Posted: 5:05 PM EST (2205 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Fox News Channel correspondent Geraldo Rivera is being expelled from Iraq for broadcasting details about future U.S. troop movements in the country, according to the Pentagon. A primary obligation of the hundreds of reporters traveling with coalition forces in Iraq is to refrain from disclosing sensitive information about military operations.

The veteran correspondent, who was temporarily accompanying the Army's 101st Airborne Division, violated the rule during a live broadcast on Fox television. "He was with a (U.S.) military unit in the field and the commander felt that he had compromised operational information by reporting the position and movements of troops," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told Reuters.

After the disclosure, members of the 101st Airborne were in the process of escorting Rivera out of the combat zone, a Pentagon official told CNN. "He will be dropped at the Kuwaiti border," the official said.

Fox News in New York had no immediate comment, according to Reuters.

In the broadcast, Rivera instructed his photographer to tilt the camera down to the sand in front of his feet so that he could draw a map.

The Fox correspondent then outlined a map of Iraq, and showed the relative location of Baghdad and his location with the 101st Airborne unit. Rivera then continued with his sandy diagram to illustrate where the 101st would be going next. "He went down in the sand and drew where the forces are going," said a stunned senior military official. "He gave away the big picture stuff."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...j.irq.geraldo/

lmao... what do you expect from a Liberal?

Just like if you are elected President, what are your detailed plans to the...
Yep, I'll vote idiot who tells his/her detailed plans, I want the enemy WARNED.

http://www.redstate.com/2015/12/04/c...-widow-asking/

Obama White House: Terrorists Will Stop Attacking If We Pass Gun Control Laws
Published December 4, 2015
Paul Joseph Watson

The Obama administration reacted to yesterday’s shooting in San Bernardino – likely carried out by a Muslim terrorist – by insisting that “common sense” gun laws will deter jihadists who are planning attacks.

Reporter Peter Doocy asked White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest: “Does the President really think that common sense gun laws would deter terrorists now that he has admitted that these two may have been terrorists?”

Video at link
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/12/03...n-control-laws

Obama’s Attorney General Just Exposed the Entire Liberal Agenda With These Two Chilling Words
Bill Callen

In the wake of the slaughter of 14 people at a Christmas party in California by Islamic extremists — liberals have gone to great lengths to politicize the massacre, even as many of the wounded remain in critical condition.

The first responses of all three Democrat presidential candidates immediately called for stricter gun control measures, while offering no solace — let alone prayers —for the victims of the deadly massacre and their families .

It comes as no surprise that Barack Obama, too, utilized the occasion to once again tout his agenda for infringing on the second amendment, stating:

“The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world.”

The sick irony of his remark lies in the fact that that he had just left Paris, where ISIS terrorists had recently slaughtered 132 people — with guns as well as with bombs.

But the creme de la creme of comments which belie the liberal agenda came from U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, when she addressed the shooting in a Thursday afternoon address.

She referred to the mass shooting as an “unspeakable crime,” and stated, “Whatever the result of the investigation — we don’t know a lot right now. But one thing is clear, that violence like this has no place in this country.” Lynch added, ” This is not what we stand for, this is not what we do, this is not what we work for, it’s not what we live for. It’s antithetical to our values.”

But that’s not the zinger. In further commenting, she let this telling remark slip:



“We’re at the point where these issues have come together really like never before in law enforcement thought and in our nation’s history and it gives us a wonderful opportunity and a wonderful moment to really make significant change.”

Think about that.

The head of the U.S. Justice Department referred to the death of 14 innocent people as a “wonderful opportunity” and a “wonderful moment.” No matter how you spin that, it says everything that one needs to know about progressives and how much they care for the citizens of America. It’s all about their agenda, and they will never let a serious crisis go to waste in order to further it.

http://toprightnews.com/obamas-attor...hilling-words/

AG LYNCH WILL ARREST YOU FOR TALKING TRASH ABOUT ISLAM
*VIDEO*

December 4, 2015

The day after a horrific shooting spree by a “radicalized” Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a group of Muslim activists that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used “anti-Muslim rhetoric” that “edges toward violence.”
loretta lynch muslim
Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her “greatest fear” is the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric” in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech. She said:

[b]The fear that you have just mentioned is in fact my greatest fear as a prosecutor, as someone who is sworn to the protection of all of the American people, which is that the rhetoric will be accompanied by acts of violence. My message to not just the Muslim community but to the entire American community is: we cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on.

Assuring the pro-Muslim group that “we stand with you,” Lynch said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from “violence” and discrimination.

Claiming that violence against Muslims is on the rise and citing France’s clamp down on potentially radicalized mosques, Lynch suggested the Constitution does not protect “actions predicated on violent talk” and pledged to prosecute those responsible for such actions.

“When we talk about the First Amendment we [must] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American,” said Lynch. “They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted.”

“My message not just to the Muslim community but to all Americans is ‘We cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on,'” said Lynch.

It is painfully clear that, like her predecessor Eric Holder, Lynch is far more concerned with promoting the social justice agenda than protecting the Constitutional rights of American citizens.

What exactly is speech that “edges toward violence”?

What exactly are “actions predicated on violent talk”?

In the end, it is whatever she decides it to mean.

Partial transcript via BuzzFeed. http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton/...usl#.kl5vQdNOg


http://overpassesforamerica.com/?p=20857

Before you prosecute anyone, perhaps you should take a look at the rhetoric by the black lives matter group. they are threatening to kill cops (encouraging them to actually) and white people. Start with them first.

Signs That The San Bernardino Shooters May Not Have Been Acting Alone
f reports floating around the investigation of the San Bernardino massacre are true, there is good reason to suspect that the Muslim terrorists who perpetrated the atrocity were not acting alone. Here are five signs that indicate there might be more to the massacre than just two people who acted on their own whims:

1. Workers near the Redlands home where Syed Farook’s mother and sister reputedly lived said they noticed Middle Eastern men going in and out of the home for weeks. One said, “We sat around lunch thinking, ‘What were they doing around the neighborhood?' We’d see them leave where they’re raiding the apartment.”

2. Reports surfaced that Farook had been communicating with someone on the FBI terror watch list. The FBI said that there were no other suspects under arrest, "but it is possible that there may be in the future.” David Bowdich, assistant director of the FBI's Los Angeles office, said, "At least one of the suspects was in telephonic communication with at least one other subject of investigation."

3. Tashfeen Malik posted on Facebook a declaration of allegiance to ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi either during or immediately prior to the attack.

4. Days before the massacre, Farook and Malik began deleting email accounts, disposing of hard drives and smashing their cellphones. That could have been to protect their contacts with a wider terrorist network.

5. According to a U.S. intelligence official, Farook had been in contact with known Islamic extremists on social media.
It is possible, of course, that the couple acted alone. But it is also possible that they were part of a wider network that gave them the motivation to carry out their murderous assault

http://www.dailywire.com/news/1620/t...e-hank-berrien

San Bernardino Jihad Home: They RELEASED the Crime Scene?
ByPamela Geller
December 4, 2015

Have you EVER seen a crime scene released so early?

CNN’s law enforcement analysts appeared shocked by what CNN’s reporters (and other reporters) are doing. They have never seen a crime scene of this magnitude released so early. This was an Islamic cell with many people involved. Who gave the order to release the scene? Obama? One MSNBC reporter was seen examining items left on the suspects’ desk, at one point picking up a child-rearing book. CNN journalists described seeing licenses, social security cards and shredded documents inside the residence. One took photos of the couple’s six-month-old baby’s crib. Another opened the refrigerator and peered inside.

I have been watching CNN — yes, unbelievable (a first), but the failings of FOX are too big to stomach. So imagine my horror when I switched it on and saw swarms of reporters inside the home of Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik. Qurans everywhere, passports, drivers licenses of family members are strewn about. They released the crime scene? There were no fingerprint forensics anywhere. How do they know who came and went into that apartment? The FBI did this?

A spokesperson for FBI Los Angeles seemed shocked when Mashable asked about the scene and if the FBI was permitting the public to enter the apartment. “I do not believe so but I can check,” she said. “My understanding is it is still an ongoing investigation.” -

http://pamelageller.com/2015/12/san-....ox96chnC.dpuf

Landlord Lets Reporters Into San Bernardino Suspects’ Home
By RICK ROJASDEC. 4, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/us...apartment.html

Reporters on the scene would not tell Breitbart News if they had permission to dig through the apartment. During a press briefing, the F.B.I. spokesman said they had cleared the scene.

One of the most bizarre and possibly irresponsible and craven scenes in media history just unfurled on MSNBC and CNN as reporters from both networks (and a handful of others), during a live broadcast, toured the apartment of the San Bernardino Islamic terrorists. While a MSNBC reporter rummaged through the deceased terrorists’ closets and boxes and photo albums, Andrea Mitchell reassured viewers that the disturbing scene was okay. “The landlord told us authorities were done with the crime scene,” she said.

According to the landlord, though, this was not the case. When he opened the door, reporters rushed into the apartment, possibly contaminating one of the most important crime scenes in years.
One of the most bizarre and possibly irresponsible and craven scenes in media history just unfurled on MSNBC and CNN as reporters from both networks (and a handful of others), during a live broadcast, toured the apartment of the San Bernardino Islamic terrorists. While a MSNBC reporter rummaged through the deceased terrorists’ closets and boxes and photo albums, Andrea Mitchell reassured viewers that the disturbing scene was okay. “The landlord told us authorities were done with the crime scene,” she said.

According to the landlord, though, this was not the case. When he opened the door, reporters rushed into the apartment, possibly contaminating one of the most important crime scenes in years.



http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...sts-apartment/

Why were reporters let inside the shooters' apartment

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/12...-home-elam.cnn

San Bernardino Terrorist’s Lawyer: Stop Saying “Muslim Shooters” Because It’s Intolerant
05 Dec, 2015 - by John Hawkins

Yes, the terrorists who murdered people in San Bernardino is a Muslim. Additionally, they did murder people because they believed it was their religious duty to do so, but you better not say so or you’re intolerant!

A lawyer for the suspected Islamic husband-wife duo responsible for killing 14 people in California chided the press to stop referring to them as “Muslim shooters” Friday afternoon.

“Until there is absolute clear evidence, every headline doesn’t have to say ‘Muslim massacre’ or ‘Muslim shooters,’” Syed Farook’s family attorney David Chesley said. “Because it’s going to cause intolerance and what we need right now is forgiveness. I think although there were Muslim people and Muslim families involved in this incident, as a primarily Christian nation, I think we’re a people of mercy and forgiveness, and I think we need to avoid bigotry, stereotyping.”

…However, the massacre in San Bernardino is being investigated by the FBI as an act of terrorism. The New York Times reported Farook’s wife Tashfeen Malik pledged allegiance to the Islamic State terrorist organization the same day they carried out their rampage.

Sure, his clients may have murdered people, but you’re the bad guy if you point out that they’re Muslims who killed because of their faith.

http://rightwingnews.com/islam/san-b...ts-intolerant/

http://rightwingnews.com/islam/san-b...ts-intolerant/