Friday, November 15, 2013

Some Of The Best Military Videos On Youtube - In My Opinion...

I wanted to share some of the best military videos I've seen on YouTube. This isn't an all-inclusive list. It's just some of the best that I've watched recently.

This first video is a pretty intensive look at the daily life, attention to detail, respect, and honor of the "Old Guard" at Arlington National Cemetery. This is a glimpse into their daily regiment and it's very satisfying to me that our country still grows men of this caliber. These guys give me hope for the future of this country. This video is from 2011.

Below is the description underneath this video on YouTube:
A unique look behind the scenes of the Old Guard as they protect the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, bury heroes at Arlington National Cemetery and do other unique duties. This is one of the most professional units in the military. Watch as they go through all the preparation for a day of work and honor. Very inspiring and makes you proud they are one of our units.

A day in the Life of the Old Guard, the Army's oldest unit (51:16):

USMC Silent Drill Platoon - At Houston Texans Stadium (8:04):

From National Geographic - Arlington: Field of Honor (55:29):

Old Guard, US Army Rifle Team performs at Spirit of America (28:53):

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier-Changing of the Guard-Arlington National Cemetery (10:18):

That's enough for today.

Thank you, soldiers.

If you wish to be notified of my future blog posts, please subscribe to my blog via the “Follow by email” box near the top of this page.

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Attempted "Honor Killing" In Lincoln, NE - Enforcement of Sharia Law

This is honor killings allowed.

So, in Lincoln, Nebraska there was an attempt at an "honor killing" yet, there is no charge for attempted murder? Nor was there any mention in local media of this being an attempted "honor killing". Based on the information in both of the stories I've included below, that makes no sense. Ahmed Tuma stated he wanted to kill his sister, he tried to kill his sister (by swinging at her with a crowbar and attempting to force the car in which she was escaping his attempt to murder her into oncoming traffic), and he failed to kill his sister. That's attempted murder. And, in this case, it's also a failed "honor killing" (because of his statement, according to police, that her being gay is "shameful to their family and against their Muslim beliefs").

There's nothing more, specifically, that the police could have charged Tuma with for this being an attempt at an "honor killing", but it would sure be nice if the Nebraska media wasn't so ignorant about it. And, if KLKN and the Lincoln Journal Star are simply attempting to be "politically correct" in this case by FAILING to mention that this crime, as they each reported it, is THE DEFINITION of an attempt at an "honor killing" then, shame on them. They've failed to fully inform their viewers and readers. Neither KLKN nor the Lincoln Journal Star fail to mention the "anti-gay" aspect of this crime, yet both leave out the fact that this is also an attempted "honor killing".

For more about honor killings, go HERE (WARNING: Graphic images).

Video from KLKN TV:
News, Weather and Sports for Lincoln, NE;

From KLKN TV (emphasis mine):
November 8, 2013

Lincoln Police arrested two men they say were involved in a hate crime Thursday evening. It happened around 5 p.m. near 27th & M Streets in Lincoln.

Police say 20-yr-old Ahmed Tuma was angry with his sister because she is in a relationship with a woman. Police say Tuma said it is shameful to their family and against Muslim beliefs.

Police say Tuma's sister and her fiancee arrived at home near 27th & M when he and a friend, 20-year-old Nathan Marks ran up to them. Police say Tuma tried to hit her with a crow bar. The couple escaped into their car, but police say Tuma repeatedly hit the car with the crowbar.

"They were in fear for their lives, he had made some verbal threats to kill the sister," Officer Katie Flood with the Lincoln Police Dept. said.

Police say the couple drove off, but Marks and Tuma got into Marks' pickup and followed, ramming them from behind nearly into oncoming traffic on S. 27th Street. The couple were able to get away and call police.

Tuma was arrested for attempted 2nd degree assault, criminal mischief, two counts of terroristic threats and use of a weapon to commit a felony. All of the charges except use of a weapon carry a hate crime enhancement.

Marks was arrested for aiding and abetting terroristic threats and aiding and abetting use of a weapon to commit a felony.

The two appeared in a bond hearing Friday, and will be arraigned next week.

From the Lincoln Journal Star:

November 8, 2013

A 20-year-old man allegedly attacked a relative with a crowbar Thursday evening because she’s marrying a woman, Lincoln police said.

Ahmed Mohammed Tuma, 5312 Tipperary Trail, and a friend went to the woman's home near 27th and O streets at about 5 to confront her about being engaged to a woman, Officer Katie Flood said.


As the woman and her 28-year-old fiancée got out of their car, Tuma ran up and tried to bash the relative in the head with a crowbar.

She managed to get back into the car and lock the door.

Tuma beat the window and windshield eight to 10 times, but did not break through, Flood said.


They got away and called 911.

No one was hurt, but the fiancée's 2003 Toyota Celica sustained $2,500 damage, Flood said.

Officers pulled Tuma and Marks over at about 2:30 Friday morning in south Lincoln and arrested Tuma on suspicion of attempted second-degree assault, criminal mischief and two counts of terroristic threats, all of them with a hate crime enhancement, which allows for a stiffer sentence.

They also cited Tuma on suspicion of using a deadly weapon to commit a felony.

They arrested Marks on suspicion of aiding and abetting two crimes: making terroristic threats and using a weapon to commit a felony.

Read the whole story from the Lincoln Journal Star HERE.

If you wish to be notified of my future blog posts, please subscribe to my blog via the “Follow by email” box near the top of this page.

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

House Members Filing Articles Of Impeachment Against AG Eric Holder On Thursday

Well...this story from is "fun"...but, it won't go anywhere because it is in the SENATE where a conviction for impeachment takes place. Dems control the Senate. This will go nowhere because "The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict..." I don't believe that there are enough clear-thinking Democrats within the Senate body who would set-aside their politics and vote to matter how justified the merit of the charges brought forth.

From this story on

A group of fed-up House Republicans who say they are tired of being stonewalled by Attorney General Eric Holder plan to formally introduce articles of impeachment on Thursday in a bid to remove the nation’s top law enforcement officer from office.

Several GOP congressmen have been drafting articles of impeachment over a number of controversies relating to the U.S. Department of Justice. The lawmakers’ grievances include Holder’s refusal to turn over documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious, the DOJ’s habit of selectively enforcing federal laws, and the department’s refusal to prosecute IRS officials who accessed confidential taxpayer information, among other things.

The articles of impeachment also accuse Holder of providing false testimony to Congress, which is a “clear violation” of the law.

If you'd like to know more about the role of the United States Senate during impeachment proceedings, go HERE. (Or keep reading...)

The Senate's Impeachment Role

The United States Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" (Article I, section 2) and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments .... [but] no person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present" (Article I, section 3). The president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment.

The concept of impeachment originated in England and was adopted by many of the American colonial governments and state constitutions. At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the framers considered several possibilities before deciding that the Senate should try impeachments.

Impeachment is a very serious affair. This power of Congress is the ultimate weapon against officials of the federal government, and is a fundamental component of the constitutional system of “checks and balances.” In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate Chamber serves as the courtroom. The Senate becomes jury and judge, except in the case of presidential impeachment trials when the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official is removal from office. In some cases, disqualification from holding future offices is also imposed. There is no appeal.

If you wish to be notified of my future blog posts, please subscribe to my blog via the “Follow by email” box near the top of this page.

Sunday, November 3, 2013 Censoring YouTube Comments - Allows "Teabagger" Comment

HEALTHCARE.GOV .gov! .G O V! DOT GOV!!! (Which is GOVERNMENT-RUN hence, the ".gov" web domain.) They're NOT allowing all comments under their (YOUR) YouTube videos! A government-run entity is NOT allowing people to post comments without approval on YouTube. I'm not embedding one of their videos here because in order to see this in motion you have to actually go to YouTube to see what I'm talking about.

Click on the links to the videos below, then when you're on YouTube, click in the comment box as you would do to post a comment. After you click in the comment box, beneath it you'll see the phrase "Comments may be held for uploader approval" appear underneath the comment box...which means whoever is in charge of this YouTube channel is screening ALL comments posted under that video. (I run several YouTube channels - I know what that comment means and what settings you have to choose to MAKE that comment appear. "May be held for uploader approval" means "ARE BEING HELD for uploader approval". Period.)

This video was published to YouTube on October 21, 2013, has 17,713 views and has ONE COMMENT under it. (It's actually kind of a snotty comment, too - from the uploader's perspective, that is.) Here's the crap video - brought to you BY YOUR GOVERNMENT:
"Deborah's Covered. You Can Be Covered Too!"

At the time of this blog post that video has 9 "likes" and 123 "dislikes" on YouTube. The number of nasty comments's videos are probably receiving daily must be a staggering number. Oddly, that video only has ONE COMMENT after being viewed more than 17K times.

You're not only paying for other people's healthcare, now you're paying for the production of crappy videos and you CAN'T EVEN COMMENT ON THEM!!!

Below is a screen shot from the video on YouTube: censoring comments on YouTube.

I looked at a few of the other videos posted on the YouTube channel to see if they're censoring the comments on other videos as well. I looked at about 10 of their other videos and ALL of them that I checked were being censored.

Apparently "teabaggers" is a term that is APPROVED of by, as the picture below shows. The "teabagger" comment in the screen shot below was approved "one year ago".
"Teabaggers" is apparently approved of by

The "teabagger" comment can be found under this video on's YouTube channel:
"People with Disabilities and the Affordable Care Act"

The following picture shows you that someone from has REMOVED a comment that was either posted BEFORE comments were being approved OR removed by one person from AFTER another person had approved it. At the bottom of this screen shot, I clicked on "Show the comment" underneath the comment from "iris7eye" which was in reply to the comment by "electronicoffee". The comment made by "electronicoffee" no longer exists (because someone from removed it). removing comments

This is the video from which the above comment was removed:
"MyCare: Abby S. in Minneapolis, MN"

Anyone who operates a YouTube channel has the ability and right to censor the comments that appear on their videos or on their channel. I do it on my own videos because I'm tired of reading the filthy comments that are often left on my videos and I figure others may get sick and tired of reading that junk, too. Here's the kicker: I'm not being paid by taxpayers to provide a service, like the people who run the Healthcare.GOV YouTube channel are. I don't get paid by anyone, much less by the taxpayers. The American taxpayer has just as much of a RIGHT to BITCH to federal government as the losers that are accepting all the new government handouts have a RIGHT to THANK and PRAISE the federal government for all their new toys. (Although, the losers SHOULD be thanking the American taxpayers...all 53% of you.)

If you wish to be notified of my future blog posts, please subscribe to my blog via the “Follow by email” box near the top of this page.