Trump Announces Support For Arming Teachers, Backpedals On Gun Purchase Age

The White House announced support Sunday for firearms training for some teachers to protect schools, and has backed off an earlier call by President Donald Trump to raise the age individuals can purchase assault-style weapons from 18 to 21.

The series of proposals generally fall in line with what the National Rifle Association supports in the wake of the massacre last month at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 people.

On Monday morning, Trump reiterated the proposals in a series of tweets. He defended his plan to allow “highly trained expert teachers” in schools, also saying that “armed guards [are] OK,” calling them a “deterrent!”

Regarding raising the minimum gun purchase age to 21, he deferred to state lawmakers, claiming that there is “not much political support (to put it mildly).” The NRA opposes the measure.

The nation’s largest teachers lobby, the National Education Association, is adamantly opposed to Trump and the NRA’s controversial initiative to arm teachers. An armed teacher in Georgia last month fired his handgun after he barricaded himself in a high school classroom, where he was eventually arrested by police. NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre touted arming teachers in a speech last month to the Conservative Political Action Conference. The White House plan would involve funding to provide weapons training for teachers.

Trump’s apparent reversal from proposing to raise the age young people can buy military assault-style weapons like the AR-15 that was used in the Parkland school shooting is a startling turnaround. It comes just weeks after he taunted legislators, saying that they were “afraid of the NRA,” while he was not. Trump specifically asked Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) if the senator had left raising the minimum age for gun purchases out of his bill strengthening background checks because senators “are afraid of the NRA.” 

Last month, Trump said in a meeting with legislators: “Now, this is not a popular thing to say, in terms of the NRA. But I’m saying it anyway. You can’t buy [a handgun until] until you’re 21. But you can buy the kind of weapon used in the school shooting at 18. I think it’s something you have to think about.”

On Friday, Florida Republican Gov. Rick Scott — a longtime NRA member — signed a bill into law raising the minimum age for all gun purchase from 18 to 21. But the NRA almost immediately sued to block the law and protect the “constitutional rights” of would-be gun buyers under the age of 21. The state’s controversial “guardian program” — opposed by the Florida Education Association — will allow some school employees and teachers to carry handguns with law enforcement training if a school district agrees to participate in the program.

The White House guns plan also includes support for a bill, known as the “Fix NICS” measure, designed to improve background checks for gun purchases. But it does not contain universal background checks, which would be far more effective. 

“Fix NICS” is a bill sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) to bolster the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) by improving the flow of information into it from states and various federal agencies. But the measure is far less ambitious than universal background checks, which would include private sales, such as those that often occur at gun shows.

The White House announced that the president is establishing a federal commission on school safety, to be chaired by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, that will explore possible solutions to school shootings. It may consider the age young people can purchase guns, the Washington Post reported Sunday. But nothing in the current White House proposals address raising the minimum age for buyers.

DeVos called the proposals a “pragmatic plan” to increase school safety, the Post reported.

Several Democrats slammed the proposals. “This plan is weak on security and an insult to the victims of gun violence,” Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) said in a statement. “When it comes to keeping our families safe, it’s clear that President Trump and Congressional Republicans are all talk and no action.”


For more news videos visit Yahoo View.

This story has been updated with Trump’s tweets on Monday morning.

  • This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

Source Article from

After FBI Let FL Shooting Happen, Media Now Praising Them for Arming Mentally Ill Man in Fake Attack


In the days after the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, it became painfully clear that the suspected shooter had given both the FBI and local police a number of warning signs that he planned to carry out the attack, and they did nothing. Now the mainstream media is responding by celebrating a fake terrorist attack that was initiated and then foiled by the FBI.

White Supremacist Who Dreamed Of Attack In ‘Spirit of Dylann Roof’ Gets Generous Plea Deal,” The Huffington Post reported, noting that Benjamin Thomas Samuel McDowell, 30, will spend anywhere from 10 months to 3 years in prison for planning an attack inspired by the 2015 Charleston shooting.

McDowell apparently attracted the attention of an undercover FBI agent when he made a series of posts in a white supremacist group online. The informant claimed that he fostered a connection with McDowell, who said he wanted to “do something on a fucking big scale.”

“I got the heart to do that shit, but I don’t have the good training,” McDowell reportedly told the informant. “I seen what Dylann Roof did and in my heart I reckon I got a little bit of hatred and I… I want to do that shit. Like, I got desire… not for nobody else… it just… I want something where I can say, ‘I fucking did that’… me personally… If I could do something on a fucking big scale and write on the fucking building or whatever, ‘In the spirit of Dylann Roof.’”

When the informant offered to sell McDowell a firearm for a future attack, and McDowell agreed, the FBI interfered and arrested him. The Post also noted that McDowell is mentally disabled and he has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder. A previous mental health evaluation determined that McDowell’s “cognitive functioning is very low” and his intellectual ability is “significantly below average.”

The questions remain—would McDowell have actually attempted to purchase a firearm, and if he obtained a firearm from an individual in the group, would he have used it to commit mass murder? Or was he just saying all of the right things and trying to impress an FBI informant who he believed was an influential white supremacist?

While the FBI appears to have intentionally sought out McDowell and used one of their informants to encourage him to carry out an attack, their agents chose to ignore several reports about a suspect who was actually planning an attack.

The FBI received multiple credible reports that Nikolas Cruz was planning to commit mass murder in the months before the Parkland shooting. Less than six weeks before the shooting, someone the FBI described as “a person close to” Cruz reached out to the agency and desperately pleaded for their help. The person reported Cruz’s “gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.” 

Local police also received at least “20 calls for services in the last few years” regarding Cruz, and police were called to the Cruz family home 39 times in the last seven years over reports of  a “mentally ill person,” “child/elderly abuse,” “domestic disturbance,” and “missing person.”

While the FBI was clearly negligent in its treatment of Cruz, the mainstream media has chosen instead to focus on the fake terrorist attacks the FBI initiates and then stops. A similar instance occurred in December when the media praised the FBI for stopping a man from carrying out an ISIS-inspired attack. In reality, the man was coerced by an FBI informant and when he refused to carry out the attack, he was still painted as a “terrorist,” and he now faces up to 20 years in prison.

Source Article from

America’s Ironcially Arming Vietnam Against a Chinese Attack

In a show of force against potential Chinese imperialism, the United States has sent an aircraft carrier to Vietnam. Vietnam has been the target of many Chinese military threats in recent times stemming over the dispute in the South China Sea regarding the ongoing freedom of the seas issue. The US is beginning to arm Vietnam through third party sources in preparation for a Chinese attack.


For more stories like these, visit The Common Sense Show

Please donate to offset the costs of The Common Sense Show




 Dave Hodges is a satisfied customer.  Listeners to The Common Sense Show will receive 10% off their next order by mentioning “Hodges10” in the coupon code box.  Don’t wait until it is too late. Click Here for more information.


If the bad guy has night vision and you don't he wins. Don't be a victim, find out more by CLICKING HERE

If the bad guy has night vision and you don’t he wins. Don’t be a victim, find out more by  CLICKING HERE  


From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at Take 5% off the cost of your order with coupon code DAVE5

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at 



Source Article from

US promises Turkey to stop arming Syrian Kurds – media

Turkish Presidential Spokesman Ibrahim Kalin and US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster held a phone call on Friday evening, Anadolu news agency said. McMaster confirmed that Washington would no longer provide weapons to fighters of the Kurdish People’s Protection units (YPG) and the Democratic Union Party (PYD). 

Later on Saturday Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said that Washington should immediately withdraw from northern Syria’s Manbij region, located some 100 km from Afrin. Speaking to reporters, the top official said that the US should take steps to end its support of the Syrian Kurdish YPG militia.

READ MORE: ‘Operation Olive Branch’: Key points of Turkish military campaign against Syrian Kurds

This is not the first time the US has promised to stop supporting Kurdish militias in Syria with arms: In December 2017, US Defense Secretary James Mattis made a statement to similar effect. Asked if the US indeed intends to halt its arming of the Kurdish forces in Syria, Mattis said, “Yes.” However, at that time Washington did not release any clear statement of the White House’s position on that matter.

The military operation launched by Turkey in and around Afrin follows Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s promise to “strangle” the new Border Security Force (BSF) in Syria. Earlier in January the US-led coalition announced that it would help create the 30,000-strong BSF, half of which would be comprised of the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) alliance.

Turkey was angered by the fact that the major force behind the SDF is the Kurdish People’s Protection units (YPG), linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) which is designated as terrorist by Turkey.

Shortly after the operation in Afrin was launched, Erdogan turned on Ankara’s allies, insinuating that the US in particular was providing massive military support to Kurdish YPG in Syria. “Now, apart from 5,000 trucks, there are weapons and ammunition from around 2,000 planes.” the Turkish leader said.

During the week-long operation in northern Syria, Turkey has repeatedly urged the US to stop arming Kurdish militias. “Those who support the terrorist organization will become a target in this battle,” Turkish deputy prime minister Bekir Bozdag said on Thursday. “The United States needs to review its soldiers and elements giving support to terrorists on the ground in a way to avoid a confrontation with Turkey.”

The US and Turkey have long argued over the status and future of Syria’s Kurds. Ankara has repeatedly slammed Washington for delivering military supplies to Kurds in Syria. According to a Hurriyet Daily News report from December 2017, US President Donald Trump approved arming the Syrian Kurds, including with anti-tank, anti-aircraft and mortar weapons, due to be delivered in 2018. The US authorities didn’t comment on the report.

Source Article from

Sweden Arming Itself Against Islamist Terror With Gender-Equal Concrete Lions


Sweden’s Security Service has warned of a risk of a new Islamist terrorist attack in the country in 2018. Despite repeated warnings from the nation’s leading terror expert of jihadists operating freely, Stockholm’s anti-terror preparations have mostly revolved around concrete lions serving as roadblocks.

Sweden’s Security Police SÄPO reinstated the terror threat level to “elevated,” citing the high risk of a repeat terrorist attack against the country by Islamists.

The increased threat level is based on data from the National Center for Terrorism Threat Assessment (NCT), which includes SÄPO, the National Defense Radio Establishment (FRA) and Military Intelligence and Security Service (MUST). This corresponds to three on a five-degree scale, a level Sweden has had since the failed terrorist attack in Stockholm in December 2010.

“This means that there is a risk of a terrorist attack,” SÄPO chief Anders Thornberg told the Metro newspaper, venturing that violent Islamist extremism posed the greatest threat, in which an individual resorts to simple yet deadly means to carry out the attack, as was the case of the Stockholm truck attack in April 2017.

Meanwhile, Sweden’s leading terrorism researcher Magnus Ranstorp of the National Defense College argued that groups spreading jihadist messages face almost no resistance in Sweden.

“Today they can seem to operate completely unrestrained,” Ranstorp told the newspaper Aftonbladet.

According to Ranstorp radicalization amid the return of Sweden’s “foreign fighters” who joined Daesh (ISIS/ISIL) remains a major cause of concern. Ranstorp argued that Sweden’s prevention efforts to stop the dissemination of the extremist agenda have been “too bad.”

“It is spread by groups seeking to limit women’s rights and freedoms. It is they who promote anti-democratic and violent messages,” Ranstorp said, citing mosques and Quran schools that promote extremist agenda. He also ventured that they undermine integration by disrupting individuals’ contact with the majority community.

A 2017 SÄPO report identified 2,000 Islamist extremists in Sweden, which also generated some 300 jihadists to the Middle East. Ranstorp ventured that Sweden’s lenient take on extremism led to further segregation and the spread of violence, calling for a clearer emphasis on preventive action.

Following the Stockholm attack, however, the city council has installed 17 concrete lions on the Drottningsgatan pedestrian street, where the deadly attack occurred. In 2018, Stockholm City will place another 80 lions, equally distributed as males and females, as roadblocks to prevent vehicular terrorism. After criticism that the lions were too flimsy, there are also plans to procure some bigger ones — three times larger and heavier than existing ones, the Mitt i news outlet reported.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

Trump Now Arming Ukrainian Neo-Nazi Regime—Expect Russia to Retaliate & Escalate


Washington, D.C. – Last week, the Trump administration, reversed its previous position and announced they had agreed to supply advanced lethal defensive weapons to the Ukrainian government — including the likely delivery of Javelin anti-tank weapons — which could decimate Russian armor. This is a move sure to be seen in Moscow as a drastic escalation that will almost certainly precipitate a Russian retaliation.

Russian officials denounced President Trump’s authorization of lethal equipment to the Ukrainians as an aggressive act meant to deliberately sabotage the Minsk peace process.

“The United States has crossed a line by announcing its intention to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Saturday. “U.S. weapons are capable of leading to new casualties in our neighboring country, and we cannot remain indifferent to that.”

The decision was framed by the State Department as one of assisting Ukraine to fight back against Russian “aggression” and was lauded by Congressional war hawks as a necessary step to confront what many neocons and Cold War relics see as an expansionist Russian foreign policy.

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the weapons were, “part of our effort to help Ukraine build its long-term defense capacity, to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to deter further aggression.”

Proponents of sending the Ukrainian government advanced US weapons believe that if they can exact a harsh enough death toll on Russian soldiers assisting separatists in the Donbas, it will force Putin to withdraw support for the separatists.

The insane logic being employed by the West shows little understanding of the psychology of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It is simply wishful thinking to believe that a war of attrition, on the border of Russia, will force Putin to retreat. Instead, it will precipitate a drastic escalation in Russian support. One need simply analyze the past few years of war in Eastern Ukraine to clearly see that Moscow is willing to take undertake whatever economic, political or military consequences are necessary to prevent the defeat of anti-Kiev separatists in the Donbas.

In 2014 and 2015, when Ukrainian soldiers and pro-government neo-Nazi battalions were engaging Ukrainian separatists in fierce door-to-door, house-to-house fighting, Russia didn’t back down – instead, they escalated and forcefully stepped up support – as they supplied not only personnel, but tanks, supplies, and reinforcements to stop Kiev’s advances.

According to Daniel DePetris, a fellow at Defense Priorities, a Washington, D.C. thinktank:

In Putin’s mind, allowing Ukraine to retake strategic territory was an unthinkable prospect that would lead Kiev to believe that it could squash the rebellion militarily. The infusion of Russian troops stopped Ukrainian territorial advances in their tracks, at considerable human cost to Kiev.


In other words, whenever pro-Russian militants were losing ground or at risk, Moscow turned on the spigot of assistance to prevent a humiliating defeat or retreat. This is one of the biggest reminders to the world community that Ukraine’s political disposition is ultimately far more important to Russia’s strategic interests than it is to Washington’s. No amount of U.S. military equipment or heavy weapons systems is likely to eclipse what the Russians will provide to the other side.


To believe Russia will be intimidated into withdrawing its troops from Ukrainian territory or suing for a peace with a government Moscow sees as a puppet of the West just because a few more of its soldiers have been killed is to place hope over the reality of Putin’s track record throughout the war.


Whether we in the United States or Western Europe accept it as legitimate or not, Putin is highly motivated to preserve Russian influence and freedom of movement in a country that shares a 1,426-mile border with the Russian Federation. To allow Ukraine to drift fully into Europe’s orbit on his watch would be nothing short of a personal political humiliation for Putin and, more important, a geopolitical catastrophe for a Russia whose political elites remain incredibly nervous about a shrinking Near Abroad and any hint of political revolution in the former Soviet space.

The decision to provide advanced lethal weaponry to Ukraine will be used by Moscow as an excuse to increase its support to Ukrainian proxies in the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The Russian government has operated in virtual lockstep with proxy forces since the Western coup to depose then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Although made to look like a spontaneous revolution of the people of Ukraine, further study in the wake of the Euromaidan revealed a plethora of oligarchic forces called Fatherland, neo-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists, and shadowy intelligence forces operating in concert with Western intelligence agencies to create a perfect storm for a “popular revolution” in Ukraine.

What appeared on the face to be a popular uprising was, in reality, nothing more than a well-scripted coup attempt meant to install a pro-Western government in Ukraine. The Eastern regions of Ukraine, with large Russian speaking populations, refused to recognize this illegitimate government and requested federalization as to maintain a semblance of autonomy from the pro-Western regime that took power. However, the new pro-West government refused and instead sent in military forces to occupy the region. This precipitated local resistance and Russian assistance to the local Ukrainian forces fighting to defend their home from the newly installed regime in Kiev.

President Trump’s choice to deepen U.S. engagement in a conflict that involves a non-NATO country and whose political positioning is largely irrelevant to U.S. policy in Europe is a bad decision that has frightening implications regarding the increased potential for conflict with another nuclear superpower.

In an article for Breaking Defense, DePetris posited numerous, compelling, unanswered questions that reveal the extremely shortsighted nature of the Trump administration’s decision:

What, for instance, is the U.S. objective in Ukraine other than simply trying to bleed the Russians in a proxy conflict? When — not if — Russia escalates, what would the Trump administration do to counter it? How far is the U.S. willing to go to frustrate Moscow’s ambitions in a country it sees as an extension of its former Soviet glory? What if Putin, in his desire to respond to what he regards as American aggression in his own backyard, seeks to expand the conflict by stirring up pro-Moscow sentiment among the Russian-speaking populations of the Baltics? What would NATO do in that situation? Is NATO even prepared for such a contingency? And if they are not, how is any other Eastern European nation supposed to have any confidence in NATO when the transatlantic alliance can’t even defend its own members?

As Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, commented on Twitter:

Aside from the obtuse goal of “containing Russia,” involving the U.S. in an ethnonational conflict between two peoples/states with a long and complicated history is an extremely dangerous proposition that could potentially result in a greater likelihood of direct conflict between the United States and Russia – something no sane person ever hopes to see.

Source Article from

Hello Big Brother: How The Israelis Are Arming the World With Sophisticated Cyber-weapons

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,795 other followers

Source Article from

Russia is arming the Islamic world with State of the Art Weapons


While we have been quite defensive of Russia for being a sovereign state minding their own business what they are doing now is totally unacceptable and scandalous!

After arming Syria with state of the art S-300 missile defense systems, they then went on and armed Iran with the same weapons despite a UN ban prohibiting Russia from selling such powerful weapons to Iran.

Now guess what Putin is doing! He is now arming Turkey which is a strong anti-European country threatening to conquer Europe with S-400 missiles and perhaps even S-500!!! These are the most powerful missile defense systems in the world.

Sure they are for defense, not for attack, YET has Russia so easily forgotten when Turkey downed their SU-24 bomber in Syria and refused to issue a simple apology?

Has Russia already forgotten about the Russo-Turkish war from 1877-1878 that ended the Ottoman Empire and their imperialism in Eastern Europe? Russia was a Christian liberator back then, now they seem obsessed with befriending Muslims.

Now shortly after Turkey, Russia is looking to arm Saudi Arabia with S-400 missiles of all places, a Wahhabi country in which no one has any rights, especially women.

What the hell is wrong with Vladimir Putin? Why is he arming all those Muslims who then come to Europe and conduct terrorist attacks?

Putin is arming all those Islamic states and he is proud of his country’s friendship with them, all while at the same time he is at open conflict with America and the European Union who are naturally Russia’s brother countries who share the same Christian religion, the same traditions, cultures and the same white European race of people.

Why does Russia has to be the black sheep all the freaking time? Just 50 years ago while the entire world was democratic they were communists, now they are Muslim supporters. Unbelievable!

Instead of being friends with Europe and America, Putin is their enemy. Why is Russia arming all those Muslim countries who are opposing the white Christian world?

Someone most stop Putin and these weapons must not reach the hands of those evil barbarians!


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

Washington is Arming ISIS and Nusra Front Terrorists in Syria

image-SAA Confiscate US Weapons Destined to Nusra Front in Idlib
SAA Confiscate US Weapons Destined to Nusra Front in Idlib

Syrian authorities seized, again, another shipment of weapons on 9 October 2017 which was on its way to the terrorist groups in the south of Idlib, al-Nusra Front (al-Qaeda Levant aka HTS) and its affiliated terrorist groups.

The head of operations department in the Syrian Arab Army General Ali al-Ali said that the United States is arming the terrorists in Syria, not the ‘moderate rebels’. The weapons were coming from the west to the terrorist groups, most of it was American, French and Belgian made weapons.

A spokesman for the Pentagon, the War Ministry of the United States, alleged in last May that the United States is sending weapons to the ‘Syrian Democratic Forces’ (HSD) to help liberate Raqqa from ISIS terrorist organization.

SAA General al-Ali said: we know about the US arming terrorist groups, the United States has supplied those terrorist groups by weapons in the period between 5th of June through 15 September 2017 with 1421 trucks filled with weapons and military equipment.

The US has maintained a narrative that these weapons were to fight terrorist groups, however, these weapons ended up in the hands of terrorists in al-Nusra Front and ISIS! The west is transferring these weapons to the radicals in the

The West is transferring these weapons to the radicals in the Middle East across the sea, and it reaches those radical terrorists in Syria across the border which are not under the Syrian government control.

These weapons were bought by the US and other western companies like Orbital ATK, and Chemring. According to the Pentagon’s program to support the US ‘ allies!

— Afraa Dagher

Source Article from

US claims that Russia is arming Taliban are smokescreen for own mistakes in Afghanistan – Moscow

“The US generals continue the vicious practice of keeping afloat the issue of mythical Russian assistance to the militants from the Taliban movement,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement, adding that the American accusations “are not backed with any proof at all.”

“This gives the clear impression that the US attempts to slander Russia in the Afghan context are being undertaken in order to divert the attention of the international community away from its own numerous mistakes, committed during the 16-year stay in Afghanistan,” the Ministry’s statement reads.

Moscow’s comments come after US Defense Secretary, James Mattis, again raised the issue during his trip to Kabul earlier this week, warning Russia against supplying arms to the Taliban. 

The ministry underlined that  NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who was present at Mattis’s press-conference in the Afghan capital, “had already stated publicly that the block has no evidence of any assistance from Moscow to the Taliban movement.”

Russia has labeled the accusations by Mattis “inappropriate,” saying the Americans themselves have a lot to clarify regarding their alleged cooperation with militants in Afghanistan.

“At the same time, our questions regarding the flights of ‘unidentified’ aircraft in the US- and NATO-controlled airspace of Afghanistan in the interests of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL] and other militant groupings remain unanswered,” the statement read.

Accusations that Russia might be arming the Taliban first surfaced in spring, voiced by several American generals, including the commander of alliance forces in Europe, Curtis Scaparrotti, and head of US troops in Afghanistan, John W. Nicholson Jr.

READ MORE: Zakharova: ‘Alleged arming of Taliban by Russia part of US media disinformation campaign’

In July, CNN released videos of Taliban factions in various parts of Afghanistan claiming to be in possession of weapons that they said originated from Russian government sources.

However, the US broadcaster acknowledged that “the videos don’t provide incontrovertible proof” that Moscow has been dealing with the Taliban.

Moscow has repeatedly denied unsubstantiated US claims, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova saying earlier that it was nothing but a deliberate “disinformation campaign.”

Source Article from