Yes, I just can’t help watching something where the ending sort of chokes me up. Short video, get a Kleenex first.
Ain’t it great? LOL
Originally posted 2020-08-13 08:24:53.
Tag Archives: police
One More Time
I thought I was done with Mr. Mattis, but then I received an email with an attachment from a gentleman who writes for several magazine. I was moved by his article and asked if he minded I use it on the blog and he enthusiastically endorsed the use of it. So, here it is. Enjoy one last spit balls at Mr. Mattis. In case you cannot pick it out, he is a Marine, albeit, a poor one in my eyes, but he is still a Marine.
A Mad Dog’s Lament
By: G. Maresca
When Marine Corps Gen. Jim Mattis was nominated as President Trump’s secretary of defense, he needed a congressional waiver to be confirmed because federal law prohibits former military officers from serving as secretary of defense within seven years of retiring. That waiver came without restraint as Mattis was well-known and respected throughout Capitol Hill.
Many veterans were pleased Mattis would be serving again especially Marines, as one of their own would be at the pinnacle at the Department of Defense. Those who follow the Corps were well acquainted with Mattis and many anticipated he would eventually be named commandant. That was not to be as Mattis’ days were numbered when he rightfully disagreed with President Obama’s dreadful multi billion dollar Iranian nuclear deal.
That only endeared Mattis even more.
Being a hero is no guarantee that one day your ego will not get the best of you. History is littered with such individuals like Alcibiades, Napoleon, and even Benedict Arnold.
Throughout the Corps’ storied history, no Marine has ever served as president, or vice president and only two have been appointed as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff since that rank’s inception in 1949.
Over the past half century, Mattis is likely the most recognized Marine since the legendary, Chesty Puller.
In the latest issue of the Atlantic, a magazine that has scaled the leftist alps for over a decade, Mattis lives up to his Jarhead moniker of “mad dog” going on the offensive criticizing President Trump.
Mattis condemns Trump’s walk to St. John’s, an historic church that was torched the night before that the Washington D.C. mayor refused to stop, “as a bizarre photo op.” Trump’s appearance underscored religious liberty that is enshrined within the Constitution that Mattis once swore to defend against all enemies both foreign and domestic.
Mattis continued: “Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us.”
For eight years Barack Obama fanned the flames of racial enmity in such a way that the media and apparently Mattis advocated.
We are now agonizing through its consequences.
Speaking after the launch of NASA/SpaceX Trump declared: “The death of George Floyd on the streets of Minneapolis was a grave tragedy. It should never have happened. It has filled Americans all over the country with horror, anger, and grief. Yesterday, I spoke to George’s family and expressed the sorrow of our entire nation for their loss. I stand before you as a friend and ally to every American seeking justice and peace and I stand before you in firm opposition to anyone exploiting this tragedy to loot, rob, attack, and menace. Healing, not hatred, justice, not chaos, are the missions at hand.”
Divisive?
Where is Mattis’ condemnation of the Democrats’ condoning riots that has killed and destroyed the businesses of hundreds, if not thousands? Where is his disapproval of the politicization of federal law enforcement agencies arranging clearly false plots against political opponents, including a fellow Gen. Michael Flynn, and a sitting president?
Where is the outrage about such seditious, if not treasonous acts that continues to divide the nation that threatens the constitutional order Mattis professes to revere?
Mattis went on to denounce Trump’s threat to use the military to restore order. Perhaps Mattis is not the historian he claims to be possessing a personal library of over 7,000 books, or that he has no qualms about ignoring how prior presidents utilized the military to quell riots in order to serve his own political agenda.
After all, generals are inherently political as all senior officers are congressional appointees.
Mattis is revealing himself to be another covered and concealed member of the D.C. swamp, who doesn’t want to participate in its demise, maintaining what the last general who called the White House home (Eisenhower) dubbed, “the military industrial complex.”
Mattis resigned as Secretary of Defense because he objected to Trump removing our troops from Syria where Mattis believed the Kurd’s would be decimated, but weren’t.
It appears Mattis and Trump are probably more alike than not with a dominating personality.
Mattis’ diatribe does nothing to heal the nation. Perhaps these former high-ranking military officers need to continue the tradition of self-censorship to maintain the reputation of the armed forces as non-political.
However, it is certainly Mattis’ First Amendment right not to abide.
Mattis might want to undertake Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s advice and “just fade away”. If not, then he needs to stop with the political pontificating, and book writing, and throw his cover in the ring and run for public office.
Bottom line in November: Trump or Biden.
If Mattis believes Biden is the answer, the general has more than his crossed rifles – crossed.
Originally posted 2020-06-11 15:48:46.
Here Comes Another One Mr. Mattis
Gee, it never stops, everyone is coming out of the woodwork. As of this morning, in two days, my blog has gotten over 85,500 hits — gee. In all the years I have been running it, I have never received more that 450 hits on any one blog. It has gone viral. I am having trouble keeping up with the comments as I want all of them — except the vulgar ones — to get their shot at me. If you cannot write something without the “F” word, don’t bother, I will delete it. There are women who belong to this blog and they don’t need to read that trash. I am sure your Mother would not be proud of you for using that language. I know I am old fashion, actually both LOL.
I am also getting tons of personal emails I really cannot keep up with — sorry guys but I will answer you, I promise becasue you matter to me. They are mostly coming from my Marine brothers who chose not to comment on the blog itself for a variety of reasons — ALL have shown support.
I wonder if “he” has seen it? I hope so. And hopefully Mr. Kelly and Mr. Allen have seen it also. I did not know Mattis or Kelly in the Corps, I was quite a few years ahead of them. But I did know Allen as a captain. I’ll bet his battalion commander, who I knew very well, we were Cpl DI’s together, is cringing at Allen’s current attitude and the station in life he has chosen. Shame on them all.
Anyway, I have not done a critical analysis of the count, but a quick check, I’d say the vast majority have been in support of the blog, about 20 to 1. Oh, there have been those who spew the party line with all the standard talking points about how horrible Trump is, how he is a racist, and he has divided the country. Of course his predecessor was clean in that regard. Of course I jest. We all know better.
I have to laugh at some who accused me of being passed over for general which is why I had almost as much time in the Corps as Mattis and was therefore jealous. That’s a hoot. Marines and other service members know why that is, but I shall not try and educate liberal civilians as to the reason — let them think they are right.
I have found with so many hits I have tired of trying to answer the liberal talking points over and mover again. So I have decided my time is more valuable than that.
Anyway, now to the point of this post. Another much more revealing criticism of Mr. Mattis’ asinine oped, specially given the timing where police are being murdered on our streets, millions looted from destroyed stored, civilians being maimed and killed all according to Mr. Mattis’ it’s only a few lawless people. Please click on the link below and listen to another sounding the alarm about Mattis’ hypocrisy and untimely and unwarranted oped.
murdock-urges-mattis-to-read-some-history-books-before-denouncing-trump-rs-dm
Originally posted 2020-06-07 14:30:06.
Shoot?
I had some very limited training in my Marine career in what we called Close Quarter Battle (CQB), I think they still call it by that name. I am by no means an expert in this field, but that training certainly opened my eyes to the split second decision process. These naysayers who make comments like some in this article about “why didn’t he shoot the gun out of his hand,” need to go to the pistol range just once. They haven’t a clue, they are fools who know not what they are saying. And the problem is some are from the MSM and lots of Americans follow like sheep.
The woman with the advanced Harvard degree says, “Why did the cops shoot him so many times? Why not just wound him?”
The sophisticated lawyer, describing a mentally ill man charging the police with a knife asks, “Why didn’t they just shoot the knife out of his hand like they used to?” The guy at the gym says, “But he had his hands up!” The “expert” tells an audience of police officers, “It was just a small screwdriver.”
Unfortunately for officers on the line, thousands of comments like these are made by untrained civilians who are educated by what they see in the news, movies, TV and social media. Too often, reporters, politicians, community leaders and activists who assume they know what happened leap to judgment, immediately proclaiming officers as trigger-happy, racist or failing to resolve the situation
Too often overlooked in all the furor and outrage are the facts of the incident, the reality of human dynamics and how police are trained. Ninety-five percent of officers go through their entire careers without discharging their weapons. Contrary to public image, officers do not wish to be in a deadly-force incident and do everything in their power to avoid it at all costs, often times to their own peril. There are about 34,000 arrests each day in this country and well over 10 million a year, and in many of those arrests suspects are taken into custody safely even when many are extremely violent. Only a very small number result in shots fired.
Is it possible for us to pause and consider the realities for our police officers when they are involved in a shooting incident? Our book “Shots Fired: The Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, and Myths about Police Shootings” was written to provide citizens with a glimpse into the police world and the experience of officers in deadly force encounters.
Among those myths:
Hands up, don’t shoot? Police officers are trained — training that is quickly reinforced by the realities of the job — to be cautious of the subject with hands in the air. What may look like surrender to an untrained observer is frequently a ploy to lure the officer close enough for an attack. Or, when gunshots are exchanged, what looks like surrender may be the involuntary response of a subject who has been shot.
Why not just wound? In the world of policing, officers shoot not to kill and not to wound but to stop the threat. That threat is rarely stopped by a single bullet. Rarely, except in the world of fiction, does a single bullet knock someone down. Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the Boston Marathon bombers, had been shot nine times, several of those wounds fatal, and he continued to toss bombs and shoot at the Watertown police. A person who has been knocked down remains a threat. Those who would have the officer “just shoot him in the knee” miss an important fact. Even assuming the officer can successfully hit that small, moving target, the subject still has both hands free to continue shooting.
As for shooting that weapon out of a subject’s hands? Many shooting events are sudden, surprising and evolve in seconds. In those seconds, while the subject has a weapon out and is shooting, the responding officer has to form the intention to respond, draw the weapon, ascertain that there are no innocents in the line of fire and then return fire — often while being fired upon. Those subjects are often fueled by drugs, rage, adrenaline and mental illness. Individuals do not stand there and present themselves like a silhouette. A twisting, turning, violent human being makes it impossible to just shoot someone in the leg or arm.
As for the assertion that an unarmed person isn’t dangerous? ‘Unarmed’ doesn’t have the same meaning to a police officer. Nearly 40,000 police officers were assaulted in 2015 with hands, fists or feet. More than 3,000 people are killed every year by unarmed assailants. Eleven percent of all officers murdered in the line of duty from 2013 to 2015 were killed by unarmed persons. And far too often overlooked? In every encounter with a police officer, unarmed simply doesn’t apply — the officer’s gun is always available.
Let’s bring the facts into clear focus to create better understandings nationwide about the police and the realities they face, often in impossible situations. Before jumping to conclusions about a deadly force incident, consider the police officers’ reality and their perspective.
Joseph K. Loughlin is a former assistant chief of police in Portland, Maine. Kate Clark Flora writes true crime and police procedurals. Their book “Shots Fired: The Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, and Myths about Police Shootings” (Skyhorse Publishing) is out Tuesday.
Originally posted 2017-10-25 09:05:05.
