Thursday, January 30, 2014

Feinstein: Vets Are Dangerous!

Vets all have PTSD; Don't Let Them Have Guns!                                                   [TonyRogers.com]


Click here for related article
[InfoWars.com]

In the wake of Mr obama's 2014 State of the Union speech, Conservatives [and even Joe Biden] were stunned that the President could stand before the world and attempt to lie so eloquently that his audience would not notice.  But, the Congressional audience of Democrat Congresspersons and Senators appeared positively in rapture, as they swooned and appeared almost orgasmic as they cheered each new phrase that the reincarnation of Jim Jones read from his teleprompters.

But, subsequently, analysts began picking his speech apart, identifying all the fabrications in the speech, but we'll let you read through those at this link.

In the meantime, Conservatives, in preparation for the 2014 elections, are preparing a list of positions and statements by prominent Democrats which may enlighten voters about the dangers posed by these charlatans.

In this post, we highlight Senator Diane Feinstein's declaration that our Military Veterans, who include myself and other members of my family, are by her definition, mentally unfit and thus should not be allowed to own guns of any sort.

She was/is concerned that our Vets are all impaired by PTSD, a unique disorder arising from the perils of war, which include seeing their comrades wounded, maimed, and or killed, or, participating in the wounding, maiming, and/or killing of enemies or even innocent by-standers in combat.

Tom Lea's The Thousand Yard Stare
As one Vet advised, Democrats have relabeled a temporary [and sometimes permanent] condition which has been around since Man first waged battle against others.  In past wars, there were other labels, such as battle fatigue or the thousand-yard stare, etc.  PTSD results from exposure to the brutality of war; having experienced war, Vets tend to seek a non-violent resolution to conflict.  They leave it to Democrats to seek violent solutions.


Folks, War ain't pretty. 
Hollywood's version of war - which the Democrats promote - is that soldiers take a bullet, clutch their chest, and murmer "Momma" and die quietly.  Or, they hold their hand over the hole in their side and gamely say, "Don't worry about me, I'll be ok!" and then they miraculously recover-- which makes it easy for politicians who are not Vets to approve limited actions or "interventions", etc., and to approve the appointment of political hacks such as Leon Panetta to make strategic decisions involving our troops and diplomats.

What Hollywood omits, of course, is all the shrieking, crying, scrambling, shaking, crawling and wailing as combat victims announce to their comrades that they have just lost an arm, a leg, an eye, or their lower jaw to a bullet or shrapnel, or try to stop the blood spurting from severed arteries, and their comrades attempt, often helplessly, to respond in any manner, often in more shock than their injured comrades.  Witnessing the impact of heavy weaponry is also a fairly devastating event, such as watching live humans shriek while they melt in front of you after being covered with a fresh coat of flaming napalm, or, as in Rwanda, watching locals butcher each other with machetes, or being ground into the mud by passing UN tanks.

These are scenes the average American, particularly Senator Feinstein, is likely not going to witness in a lifetime, but, the average combat Veteran will more than likely witness, or become a part of, during his or her Service deployment.

Let's keep in mind that it is the politician, like Feinstein and her Democrat colleagues, who have been so anxious to send our troops into combat -- most recently, we witnessed their eagerness to engage in Syria.  And, once we deploy, it is difficult to convince our politicians to recall our troops from combat since these politicians get so many campaign contributions from our very patriotic Defense Contracting Community [populated with so many Academy grads], so very anxious to generate profits from weaponry and services to support these wars -- the objectives of which have been so elusive to those who study them.

We have sacrificed thousands of our troops in Iraq to return Kuwait's oil wells, and then to overthrow Saddam, who dared to threaten our rather questionable ally in the Middle East, and then to replace our highly effective A-Teams in Afghanistan with a huge US/NATO presence to hunt down Osama bin Laden [who actually died many years ago] with a massive military presence which has indiscriminately killed thousands of Afghans and Pakistanis.

Of late, our fearless Leader From Behind ordered the invasion of Libya to overthrow Qaddafi [once an enemy, but more recently the purveyor of useful intelligence on terrorist organizations -- but immune from Saudi influence] most recently declared the need to send in US troops to Syria to ally them with al Qaeda -- our sworn enemy, against a dictator who is waging a war against his citizens.

Now, we thought that nonsense had been put to rest, but, we've learned that, even after a massive protest by the American people against such a deployment, the Administration is now supplying weapons to al Qaeda rebels, and sending in "advisors" to assist them in overthrowing the Syrian dictator -- who, by the way, the Saudis are interested in displacing.

And, after all that expense and human sacrifice, the Iraqis hate us, the Afghans hate us, the Libyans hate us, and now, the Egyptians - our strongest supporters and allies in the Middle East distrust us because Mr obama supported and manipulated the successful election of President Morsi with the assistance of the Muslim Brotherhood -- represented in key positions throughout this Administration, to include [former] Secretary of State Clinton's personal advisor.

But, we've digressed.
Feinstein, Boxer, and Pelosi         [ThreatQuality.com]


Returning to Senator Feinstein, we think the voters of California [at least those who are registered and US citizens] should take note of the utterings of this hateful shrew and her cohorts [Pelosi and Boxer] who gather with her to stir the cauldron of hate so appropriately depicted in that memorable scene from MacBeth.







No, Senator, we disagree with you and your repeated Gun Control proposals, and particularly your declarations that all our Veterans likely suffer from PTSD and should therefore be barred from purchasing or owning a firearm.

We suggest instead you resign your seat in the Senate and spend some time as a volunteer at a VA hospital to learn first-hand from Veterans what PTSD is, and what the effects of war are.  You'll find very few Vets with violent tendencies -- well, at least not as violent as yourself or Hillary Clinton.