Thursday, September 22, 2016
KEEP PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES CLEAN-HONEST. CHECK FOR EARPIECES.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Matt Lauer's interview with Hillary Clinton was questionable in regards to "if" Clinton was wearing a covert earpiece during the interview. There are reports from social and certain media organizations that she did wear the hidden earpiece on September 7, 2016. A flesh-colored earpiece can be easily concealed so that Hillary Clinton could receive information, answers, and responses to questions by the moderator.
What's that say about cheating? The opponent, without an earpiece, in any debate, would be at a severe disadvantage. The other person answering questions without the help of someone whispering in their ear versus Clinton being fed stock answers and responses by her campaign staff via a covert earpiece ---WOW!
I would suggest to the sponsors and moderators of the upcoming debate between Clinton and Trump on September 26, 2016, to have each of the candidate's ears checked for earpieces and listening devices before the debate starts and during breaks.
If these candidates cannot speak for themselves, what good is a dog and pony show advertised as a debate? Neither of these presidential candidates should be fed answers and responses to questions in any way, shape or form. Keep the debate clean. And, -- that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, September 11, 2016
CHECK ALL DEBATE PARTICIPANTS FOR COVERT EARPIECES. KEEP ELECTIONS HONEST.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America,and how is the world treating you?
The other day, a television forum was held featuring Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Each candidate took separate turns before the cameras. However, it was insinuated that candidate Hillary Clinton was wearing an earpiece during her interview. What? The Clinton camp denies the accusation but people on the Internet and social media are buzzing with stories that she did wear a listening device.
If, in fact, that is the case, and she was wearing a listening device throughout her interview. I call it "dirty pool." Can you imagine the uproar there would have been from the Clinton campaign if Trump was seen or alleged to have been wearing a listening device?
If she was wearing a listening device she had an enormous advantage. Wow! Her team and staff could feed her answers to the questions being asked by the moderator. They could also instruct her when to sit or stand to emphasize a point in the interview. Fact is, the interview could be manipulated in her favor.
To be on the safe side, I would suggest to the television networks, the moderators and the sponsors of any political forum, town hall or debate to actually check each person taking part in the debate for earpieces or listening devices immediately before the start of any debate or interview. In addition, following each and every break , prior to returning to the stage, each individual should be checked again so as to prevent any one of the debaters from obtaining a listening device during their breaks.
For those doubters that say a person involved in a debate cannot be equipped with such a device. I say, "grow up." As an example, at the present time most news anchors, moderators, and commentator on television already wear very sophisticated earpieces as they report each and every day. Their production directors are always talking in their ear telling them when to break or what to do or say.
Some devices are so small they are near undetectable. And is not unthinkable that aides, handlers, and managers from both the Democrat and Republican campaigns have access to some of the most sophisticated electronics out there. And, I wouldn't put it past either campaign to try to secure an edge in the presidential debates. Hell, the Democrats have already manipulated electronics by setting up secret private servers off and away from governmental sites, altering and destroying electronic emails and destroying Blackberry's and mobile devices, (with hammers.). So what would make a reasonable person think that some of these same people would not try to find a way to manipulate and covertly use other electronic aids.
If in fact, Clinton was wearing a listening device, all she was doing was parroting what some campaign aide was whispering in her ear and telling her what to say in response to the questions being asked. So all Clinton would have been doing was acting like a puppet, with someone else pulling her strings. If that's the case, that's sad -- and it's cheating.
NO ONE taking part in a debate, especially a political or presidential debate, should be allowed to wear an earpiece of any kind during the event. In any political or presidential debate, the viewing audience should be assured and guaranteed that they are hearing only the words coming out of the mouths of the individuals standing on the stage,without the help or assist of anyone else feeding them material.
It is obvious the advantage a person has who may be wearing an earpiece and/or listening device against a person who is not wearing one. So, let's keep our political and presidential debates HONEST and ABOVE BOARD. The audience has an absolute right to know, who, if anyone, is using an earpiece on stage during debates. -- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America,and how is the world treating you?
The other day, a television forum was held featuring Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Each candidate took separate turns before the cameras. However, it was insinuated that candidate Hillary Clinton was wearing an earpiece during her interview. What? The Clinton camp denies the accusation but people on the Internet and social media are buzzing with stories that she did wear a listening device.
If, in fact, that is the case, and she was wearing a listening device throughout her interview. I call it "dirty pool." Can you imagine the uproar there would have been from the Clinton campaign if Trump was seen or alleged to have been wearing a listening device?
If she was wearing a listening device she had an enormous advantage. Wow! Her team and staff could feed her answers to the questions being asked by the moderator. They could also instruct her when to sit or stand to emphasize a point in the interview. Fact is, the interview could be manipulated in her favor.
To be on the safe side, I would suggest to the television networks, the moderators and the sponsors of any political forum, town hall or debate to actually check each person taking part in the debate for earpieces or listening devices immediately before the start of any debate or interview. In addition, following each and every break , prior to returning to the stage, each individual should be checked again so as to prevent any one of the debaters from obtaining a listening device during their breaks.
For those doubters that say a person involved in a debate cannot be equipped with such a device. I say, "grow up." As an example, at the present time most news anchors, moderators, and commentator on television already wear very sophisticated earpieces as they report each and every day. Their production directors are always talking in their ear telling them when to break or what to do or say.
Some devices are so small they are near undetectable. And is not unthinkable that aides, handlers, and managers from both the Democrat and Republican campaigns have access to some of the most sophisticated electronics out there. And, I wouldn't put it past either campaign to try to secure an edge in the presidential debates. Hell, the Democrats have already manipulated electronics by setting up secret private servers off and away from governmental sites, altering and destroying electronic emails and destroying Blackberry's and mobile devices, (with hammers.). So what would make a reasonable person think that some of these same people would not try to find a way to manipulate and covertly use other electronic aids.
If in fact, Clinton was wearing a listening device, all she was doing was parroting what some campaign aide was whispering in her ear and telling her what to say in response to the questions being asked. So all Clinton would have been doing was acting like a puppet, with someone else pulling her strings. If that's the case, that's sad -- and it's cheating.
NO ONE taking part in a debate, especially a political or presidential debate, should be allowed to wear an earpiece of any kind during the event. In any political or presidential debate, the viewing audience should be assured and guaranteed that they are hearing only the words coming out of the mouths of the individuals standing on the stage,without the help or assist of anyone else feeding them material.
It is obvious the advantage a person has who may be wearing an earpiece and/or listening device against a person who is not wearing one. So, let's keep our political and presidential debates HONEST and ABOVE BOARD. The audience has an absolute right to know, who, if anyone, is using an earpiece on stage during debates. -- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, September 1, 2016
FOX NEWS! A RIP-OFF NETWORK: THEY RUN INFOMERCIALS OF COMMERCIALS.
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN NEWS.
THE KUHNS REPORT
I refuse to watch FOX NEWS NETWORK anymore. Why? Easy! Because the FOX NEWS NETWORK is nothing but an "Infomercial" sales force. When you watch FOX you are watching an infomercial of "Commercials,", that's all. I'm not an expert with a stopwatch but I have been timing the commercial breaks with my trusty Timex wrist watch.
I dare and challenge anyone that is watching FOX to time the commercial breaks versus the supposed news they offer. I have found over and over again, night after night, that FOX shows, O'Reilly, Kelly File, Hannity, and Justice start their hour with FIVE MINUTES of commentary/news, etc. then, FIVE minutes later they say, "We'll be right back." "Stay with us."Guess what? They run FIVE minutes of commercials. In that, five minutes of commercials they run approximately TEN commercials, sometimes more. Then the shows host returns and talks to guests or rattles on themselves for another FIVE minutes. Then again, FIVE minutes worth of commercials. And folks, this goes on like this throughout the entire hour show. "FIVE MINUTES of supposed news or commentary and FIVE minutes of commercials. So, out of the entire hour we viewers only get THIRTY minutes of events, news, etc.
And, if you notice, FIVE minutes before the show ends, at the top of the hour, the host, (for example,) HANNITY always says something like this, "Well be right back, stay with us. We need your help." Then it goes to commercial for four-and- a- half-minutes, or 4-minutes, forty-five seconds . Again approximately TEN commercials are run and he comes back about 15 seconds before the hour and says, "That's all the time we have, thanks for watching. O'Reilly Kelly and the other hosts do the same thing.
When I first caught on to this commercial rip-off, I thought it was a fluke, but after watching for a couple weeks I found it was the norm for FOX news. In fact, you can hear Kelly, O'Reilly, or Eric (his fill-in host), or the Judge, often say to the guest. ":We have to go, we have a hard break coming up. And sometimes the guests and host are automatically cut off mid-sentence for the commercial breaks. Apparently, the network has the commercials set on a computer.
People, I REFUSE to watch "infomercials" of commercials. If FOX or any other network wants to saturate us viewers with commercials, they should PAY us to watch them.
____
I'm old enough to remember when cable shows came on the scene. Back then all TV viewers had to watch was ABC, NBC, and CBS. When the cable companies asked us television viewers to pay for cable, we asked, "WHY, should we pay to watch television?" The cable companies answer, "Because there are no commercials. Cable is commercial free."And, that, folks, is what people paid cable companies for - commercial free television programming. Now look how things have gotten out of hand.
Through the years, the cable companies greased the hands of politicians, special interests, and lobbyists and began running commercials on cable shows.
Even when commercials were being run on the major networks and cable shows the viewer could watch FIFTEEN MINUTES of the show, Example: In a half -hour show when they broke for commercial, the commercial was only three minutes in length, then the show returned to allow us to watch the remainder of the half-hour show. If it were an hour show, the commercials were approximately THREE minutes, every FIFTEEN minutes of the show.
However, through the years, the television networks, in collusion with their sponsors, now have TEN MINUTES of the actual show followed by a full FIVE minutes of commercials. So, in a half-hour show we only see 20 minutes of the show. TEN minutes of commercials. In an hour show, we see only 40 minutes of the show and a LONG, LONG 20 minutes of commercials. That's wrong folks. But it appears that is the norm for television programs now. TEN minutes of show, FIVE minutes of commercials (approximately TEN) commercials.
BUT REMEMBER- The GREEDY FOX NETWORK only wants the viewer to have FIVE minutes of a supposed show and FIVE minutes of commercials (Ten or more commercials in that FIVE minutes.)
So, that is why I am boycotting and refusing to watch FOX NEWS. In the past their shows like O'Reilly and, Hannity were good informative platforms, but now, these hosts just fill in FIVE-minute segments with a bunch of babble, just to get to the FIVE minutes of commercials. RIP OFF! You bet.
I submit, what informative information can you, the viewer get in a FIVE-minute segment, especially when they have three guests at once yelling and talking over one another, offering their party line. And sometimes the host of the FOX show joins in trying to be heard over the other three shouting guests. That leaves the viewer with a bunch of garbage.
I thought moderators and/or the host's job was to have control of the show but instead of telling each guest, "You'll all get equal time and get your turn," these nitwits allow the guests to run amok. And then the hosts have the arrogance to say, "Great debate." Are you kidding me! Debate? What FOX is offering is not a debate. All Fox guests do is offer an "opinion" and give a dissertation on the party line of whatever party they represent. What a joke. And, if you watch carefully, you'll see the same old worn out talking heads most every night and you know in advance what they're going to say before they say it because FOX puts the same ol', same ol' on the show most every day.
If you, the television viewer feels like I do about commercials being rammed down our throats by greedy FOX NEWS, I would suggest you get your news and information from other sources like I am doing now. I have always read newspapers and magazines,(at least in those venues you can skip the ads and only read the important events,) You can read your tablet or phone, like I do. And, you can listen to radio for your news. A side note: Even on my tablet I refuse to click or tap on items that have a video with a commercial attached.
Folks, the TV networks, and cable companies make billions of dollars. The sponsors putting out these commercials make billions. I suggest that what the networks and cable companies should do is charge the sponsors more money to place their ads on the television shows and then, --- give us viewers back out viewing time (FIFTEEN MINUTES OF SHOW and THREE MINUTES of commercial.)
If there is a reason for the people of this country to protest and march on Washington I would say it is this issue. Television is the only entertainment some households can afford. They should not have to be exposed to over-saturation of commercials interrupting their viewing pleasures.
When the average television household is paying well over ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS a month to watch TV , commercials should be at a minimum. Fact is, if these cable companies and networks want the viewers to watch commercials, THEY SHOULD BE PAYING US.
I mention FOX because I have been watching that network throughout the election cycle, But enough is enough. NO MORE! I haven't taken the time to time CNN and other cable channels but I do suspect they too are cheating us television viewers. It's bad enough watching most networks that offer TEN minutes of the television show and then FIVE minutes of commercials (which amount to TEN or more.)
Now that I refuse to watch FOX NEWS I'll look at other shows to see which ones I'll cease to watch. I am also going to contact my Congressman and would suggest those that share my views about these greedy networks, sponsors, and cable companies do the same. It's about time our representatives step up and protect us from this outrageous gouging. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
You can reach doctor Kuhns at bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN NEWS.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America and how is the world treating you?
I refuse to watch FOX NEWS NETWORK anymore. Why? Easy! Because the FOX NEWS NETWORK is nothing but an "Infomercial" sales force. When you watch FOX you are watching an infomercial of "Commercials,", that's all. I'm not an expert with a stopwatch but I have been timing the commercial breaks with my trusty Timex wrist watch.
I dare and challenge anyone that is watching FOX to time the commercial breaks versus the supposed news they offer. I have found over and over again, night after night, that FOX shows, O'Reilly, Kelly File, Hannity, and Justice start their hour with FIVE MINUTES of commentary/news, etc. then, FIVE minutes later they say, "We'll be right back." "Stay with us."Guess what? They run FIVE minutes of commercials. In that, five minutes of commercials they run approximately TEN commercials, sometimes more. Then the shows host returns and talks to guests or rattles on themselves for another FIVE minutes. Then again, FIVE minutes worth of commercials. And folks, this goes on like this throughout the entire hour show. "FIVE MINUTES of supposed news or commentary and FIVE minutes of commercials. So, out of the entire hour we viewers only get THIRTY minutes of events, news, etc.
And, if you notice, FIVE minutes before the show ends, at the top of the hour, the host, (for example,) HANNITY always says something like this, "Well be right back, stay with us. We need your help." Then it goes to commercial for four-and- a- half-minutes, or 4-minutes, forty-five seconds . Again approximately TEN commercials are run and he comes back about 15 seconds before the hour and says, "That's all the time we have, thanks for watching. O'Reilly Kelly and the other hosts do the same thing.
When I first caught on to this commercial rip-off, I thought it was a fluke, but after watching for a couple weeks I found it was the norm for FOX news. In fact, you can hear Kelly, O'Reilly, or Eric (his fill-in host), or the Judge, often say to the guest. ":We have to go, we have a hard break coming up. And sometimes the guests and host are automatically cut off mid-sentence for the commercial breaks. Apparently, the network has the commercials set on a computer.
People, I REFUSE to watch "infomercials" of commercials. If FOX or any other network wants to saturate us viewers with commercials, they should PAY us to watch them.
____
I'm old enough to remember when cable shows came on the scene. Back then all TV viewers had to watch was ABC, NBC, and CBS. When the cable companies asked us television viewers to pay for cable, we asked, "WHY, should we pay to watch television?" The cable companies answer, "Because there are no commercials. Cable is commercial free."And, that, folks, is what people paid cable companies for - commercial free television programming. Now look how things have gotten out of hand.
Through the years, the cable companies greased the hands of politicians, special interests, and lobbyists and began running commercials on cable shows.
Even when commercials were being run on the major networks and cable shows the viewer could watch FIFTEEN MINUTES of the show, Example: In a half -hour show when they broke for commercial, the commercial was only three minutes in length, then the show returned to allow us to watch the remainder of the half-hour show. If it were an hour show, the commercials were approximately THREE minutes, every FIFTEEN minutes of the show.
However, through the years, the television networks, in collusion with their sponsors, now have TEN MINUTES of the actual show followed by a full FIVE minutes of commercials. So, in a half-hour show we only see 20 minutes of the show. TEN minutes of commercials. In an hour show, we see only 40 minutes of the show and a LONG, LONG 20 minutes of commercials. That's wrong folks. But it appears that is the norm for television programs now. TEN minutes of show, FIVE minutes of commercials (approximately TEN) commercials.
BUT REMEMBER- The GREEDY FOX NETWORK only wants the viewer to have FIVE minutes of a supposed show and FIVE minutes of commercials (Ten or more commercials in that FIVE minutes.)
So, that is why I am boycotting and refusing to watch FOX NEWS. In the past their shows like O'Reilly and, Hannity were good informative platforms, but now, these hosts just fill in FIVE-minute segments with a bunch of babble, just to get to the FIVE minutes of commercials. RIP OFF! You bet.
I submit, what informative information can you, the viewer get in a FIVE-minute segment, especially when they have three guests at once yelling and talking over one another, offering their party line. And sometimes the host of the FOX show joins in trying to be heard over the other three shouting guests. That leaves the viewer with a bunch of garbage.
I thought moderators and/or the host's job was to have control of the show but instead of telling each guest, "You'll all get equal time and get your turn," these nitwits allow the guests to run amok. And then the hosts have the arrogance to say, "Great debate." Are you kidding me! Debate? What FOX is offering is not a debate. All Fox guests do is offer an "opinion" and give a dissertation on the party line of whatever party they represent. What a joke. And, if you watch carefully, you'll see the same old worn out talking heads most every night and you know in advance what they're going to say before they say it because FOX puts the same ol', same ol' on the show most every day.
If you, the television viewer feels like I do about commercials being rammed down our throats by greedy FOX NEWS, I would suggest you get your news and information from other sources like I am doing now. I have always read newspapers and magazines,(at least in those venues you can skip the ads and only read the important events,) You can read your tablet or phone, like I do. And, you can listen to radio for your news. A side note: Even on my tablet I refuse to click or tap on items that have a video with a commercial attached.
Folks, the TV networks, and cable companies make billions of dollars. The sponsors putting out these commercials make billions. I suggest that what the networks and cable companies should do is charge the sponsors more money to place their ads on the television shows and then, --- give us viewers back out viewing time (FIFTEEN MINUTES OF SHOW and THREE MINUTES of commercial.)
If there is a reason for the people of this country to protest and march on Washington I would say it is this issue. Television is the only entertainment some households can afford. They should not have to be exposed to over-saturation of commercials interrupting their viewing pleasures.
When the average television household is paying well over ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS a month to watch TV , commercials should be at a minimum. Fact is, if these cable companies and networks want the viewers to watch commercials, THEY SHOULD BE PAYING US.
I mention FOX because I have been watching that network throughout the election cycle, But enough is enough. NO MORE! I haven't taken the time to time CNN and other cable channels but I do suspect they too are cheating us television viewers. It's bad enough watching most networks that offer TEN minutes of the television show and then FIVE minutes of commercials (which amount to TEN or more.)
Now that I refuse to watch FOX NEWS I'll look at other shows to see which ones I'll cease to watch. I am also going to contact my Congressman and would suggest those that share my views about these greedy networks, sponsors, and cable companies do the same. It's about time our representatives step up and protect us from this outrageous gouging. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
You can reach doctor Kuhns at bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, May 8, 2016
PAUL RYAN, PRIEBUS AND WASHINGTON ESTABLISHMENT LIE.
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The Republican party elite has been doing everything in its power to sabotage Donald Trump and his march to the presidency.
The inappropriate remarks from Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan is disgusting. He says he is not ready to support Donald Trump. Really? Where's the unity of the party. This failed vice-presidential clown in his now high ranking position should be the first to support Trump. He has to begin unifying the party, not Trump. Trump unified millions and millions of voters and brought millions into the Republican party. If that's not unity on Trump's part, I don't know what is.
When the election first got under way he said he would support the nominee. So, he lies? Another individual, Reince Priebus, the Republican Party Chairman is waffling also. I suggest that it is up to these high ranking mucky-mucks to get out front and begin the unification by telling all of their colleagues that: "Trump is the nominee and we have to do everything within our power to get him elected."
Both of these men said they would support the nominee but for a number of reasons decided to change their minds and torpedo Trumps chances.
It was no secret that when the race first began,all of the candidates swore to support the Republican nominee, as did Priebus and Ryan and numerous Republican elites in Congress. Fact is, they continued to pressure Trump into the pledge of supporting the Republican nominee and insisted that he not try an Independent run for the office. Trump signed the pledge and kept his word. Now these Washington insiders refuse to keep their word. What does that tell you, folks?
Sarah Palin came out today and said that Paul Ryan is toast. I agree. First, if you can't trust the Speaker of the House and his word, what can you believe from him when he says he will look out for the people of the United States.
I agree partly with Palin's view that this guy is looking to be President in the near future and is pandering to his Washington colleagues. But if you can't trust this guys word, why would anyone want him as president. After his lie, I wouldn't vote for him if he were running for dog catcher. I guess he caught a dose of "Clinton-citis,"and you can't believe anything he says.
I also believe that like many Republican establishment wanna-be's Ryan has another reason to deep-six Trump. Remember, he was running mate with his good ol' buddy, Mitt Romney, and when Romney started to blast Trump with all the negative ads and unwarranted statements, Ryan jumped on board Romney's wagon. These two, along with many in the Republican party seem to have a "Liwinsky" type relationship with each other. These politico idiots, who are ruining the Republican party are so close you couldn't pry them apart with a butter knife.
The current Washington representatives who are supposedly looking out for our best interests has lost touch with the American people. They live in their own crazy little dysfunctional world, in the Washington Beltway, only looking to enrich themselves, family and friends.
The entrenched Republicans who have been running Washington brought this situation on themselves. Why? Because they held the majority in Washington but failed to act. They wouldn't challenge Obama and his policies. They wouldn't say" no" to Obama. These morons gave Obama a free hand and buckled under to Obama's whims at every turn. The Republicans gave the store away for eight years - - and they can't get it though their head why people are angry.
Even though it was them that screwed up, they do not want to lose their status in Washington. They want to carry on the same way they have been. These goof-ups are afraid that" the will of the people,"by putting Trump in Washington, will turn their world up-side-down. And, should Trump become president, he should shake up the system.
Remember, Trump owes these mental cases "nothing." He is a billionaire, money to burn. He doesn't have to take money from special interests, lobbyists, or politicians. He doesn't have to play the Washington game of one-hand-washes the other.
I predict that if Trump gets to the White House he will surround himself with some of the best knowledgeable people around in various areas that need addressed, such as, military, education, economy, foreign affairs etc. - -
Hell, Trump can't do any worse that Obama. Obama, never held a job in his life before becoming president and he was never in the military - -yet, he is commander-in-chief our military forces and he sticks his nose in most every aspect of government, like he's an expert on everything. The only claim to fame of Obama is, he was a "street organizer" in Chicago. So, I say if those credentials qualify him for the highest office in the land, Trump has him beat by a mile.
These fat cat politicians should give Trump a chance. If he fouls it up, we dump Trump after his first term. But I predict that change will come, change will be good, if they get on board the "Trump Train."
Kudo's to Senator John McCain. Apparently he came out today saying he supports Trump as nominee. He, McCain, should take his colleagues to task for lying to the American people by telling us they would support the Republican nominee and then doing an "about face."
All of these old school, over the hill, "has been's" running Washington should be relegated to the trash heap. We the people asked for change, we need change, and Trump is change.
Finally, Trump and his campaign staff should replay statements of Ryan, Priebus, and all of the other candidates and their Washington friends that promised to support the nominee. He should remind them that he signed his pledge to do that but the other people's signed pledge is not worth the paper it's written on.
And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
CALIF: Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The Republican party elite has been doing everything in its power to sabotage Donald Trump and his march to the presidency.
The inappropriate remarks from Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan is disgusting. He says he is not ready to support Donald Trump. Really? Where's the unity of the party. This failed vice-presidential clown in his now high ranking position should be the first to support Trump. He has to begin unifying the party, not Trump. Trump unified millions and millions of voters and brought millions into the Republican party. If that's not unity on Trump's part, I don't know what is.
When the election first got under way he said he would support the nominee. So, he lies? Another individual, Reince Priebus, the Republican Party Chairman is waffling also. I suggest that it is up to these high ranking mucky-mucks to get out front and begin the unification by telling all of their colleagues that: "Trump is the nominee and we have to do everything within our power to get him elected."
Both of these men said they would support the nominee but for a number of reasons decided to change their minds and torpedo Trumps chances.
It was no secret that when the race first began,all of the candidates swore to support the Republican nominee, as did Priebus and Ryan and numerous Republican elites in Congress. Fact is, they continued to pressure Trump into the pledge of supporting the Republican nominee and insisted that he not try an Independent run for the office. Trump signed the pledge and kept his word. Now these Washington insiders refuse to keep their word. What does that tell you, folks?
Sarah Palin came out today and said that Paul Ryan is toast. I agree. First, if you can't trust the Speaker of the House and his word, what can you believe from him when he says he will look out for the people of the United States.
I agree partly with Palin's view that this guy is looking to be President in the near future and is pandering to his Washington colleagues. But if you can't trust this guys word, why would anyone want him as president. After his lie, I wouldn't vote for him if he were running for dog catcher. I guess he caught a dose of "Clinton-citis,"and you can't believe anything he says.
I also believe that like many Republican establishment wanna-be's Ryan has another reason to deep-six Trump. Remember, he was running mate with his good ol' buddy, Mitt Romney, and when Romney started to blast Trump with all the negative ads and unwarranted statements, Ryan jumped on board Romney's wagon. These two, along with many in the Republican party seem to have a "Liwinsky" type relationship with each other. These politico idiots, who are ruining the Republican party are so close you couldn't pry them apart with a butter knife.
The current Washington representatives who are supposedly looking out for our best interests has lost touch with the American people. They live in their own crazy little dysfunctional world, in the Washington Beltway, only looking to enrich themselves, family and friends.
The entrenched Republicans who have been running Washington brought this situation on themselves. Why? Because they held the majority in Washington but failed to act. They wouldn't challenge Obama and his policies. They wouldn't say" no" to Obama. These morons gave Obama a free hand and buckled under to Obama's whims at every turn. The Republicans gave the store away for eight years - - and they can't get it though their head why people are angry.
Even though it was them that screwed up, they do not want to lose their status in Washington. They want to carry on the same way they have been. These goof-ups are afraid that" the will of the people,"by putting Trump in Washington, will turn their world up-side-down. And, should Trump become president, he should shake up the system.
Remember, Trump owes these mental cases "nothing." He is a billionaire, money to burn. He doesn't have to take money from special interests, lobbyists, or politicians. He doesn't have to play the Washington game of one-hand-washes the other.
I predict that if Trump gets to the White House he will surround himself with some of the best knowledgeable people around in various areas that need addressed, such as, military, education, economy, foreign affairs etc. - -
Hell, Trump can't do any worse that Obama. Obama, never held a job in his life before becoming president and he was never in the military - -yet, he is commander-in-chief our military forces and he sticks his nose in most every aspect of government, like he's an expert on everything. The only claim to fame of Obama is, he was a "street organizer" in Chicago. So, I say if those credentials qualify him for the highest office in the land, Trump has him beat by a mile.
These fat cat politicians should give Trump a chance. If he fouls it up, we dump Trump after his first term. But I predict that change will come, change will be good, if they get on board the "Trump Train."
Kudo's to Senator John McCain. Apparently he came out today saying he supports Trump as nominee. He, McCain, should take his colleagues to task for lying to the American people by telling us they would support the Republican nominee and then doing an "about face."
All of these old school, over the hill, "has been's" running Washington should be relegated to the trash heap. We the people asked for change, we need change, and Trump is change.
Finally, Trump and his campaign staff should replay statements of Ryan, Priebus, and all of the other candidates and their Washington friends that promised to support the nominee. He should remind them that he signed his pledge to do that but the other people's signed pledge is not worth the paper it's written on.
And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, January 10, 2016
THE OREGON STANDOFF SHOULD BE PUT DOWN, NOW! DON'T REPEAT THE 2014 FIASCO. LAWBREAKERS ARE LAWBREAKERS
THE KUHNS REPORT
LAS VEGAS - Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The seizure of the Federal Wildlife Preserve in Oregon by ARMED anti-government extremists is unwarranted. These idiots are nothing but a bunch of radicals trying to provoke the federal government into an armed confrontation. All of these malcontents who ILLEGALLY took over the wildlife refuge by brandishing rifles, sidearms and other weapon, who try to act macho implying that they will use the weapons against federal officers and other law enforcement people is ludicrous.
This groups first excuse was that they didn't want the Hammond father and son (TWO ARSONISTS) to go to prison. When the two arsonists reported to prison to serve their sentence this group of anti-government armed radicals then decided to continue to occupy the wildlife refuge saying they're fighting for all of our rights. What a crock!
Once the Hammond clan went to prison the local sheriff asked the Bundy family and their toughies to leave the Oregon county and go back home to Nevada and where ever else they resided. But Ammon Bundy refused to do so and said he and his motley crew is going to stay and occupy the wildlife refuge.
Folks this situation all started when Cliven Bundy from Nevada failed to pay at least a million dollars in fees to the federal government. The government made a move to confiscate the Bundy families cattle in 2014. The move resulted in the Bundy family and others organizing, taking up weapons and threatening to fight off any law enforcement that took their cattle. Because these idiots were armed the federal officers and local law enforcement backed down and refused to confiscate the law breaking Bundy families cattle. What did that do? That emboldened this wannabe soldier group to look for other excuses to act out in other parts of the country. Fact is, many of the same people now in Oregon who are occupying the wildlife refuge were involved in the Cliven Bundy fiasco in 2014.
If these armed militia people really wanted to get their point across they should follow the laws of the land. They can contact their senators, contact congress people, contact local and state lawmakers, use the court system, etc., - - these anti-government people could also start internet petitions, use the social media to gather support and network through media. BUT, they SHOULD NOT arm themselves, invade and occupy government and/or local properties.
These men and women who like to threaten people with guns,who forcefully take over and occupy property that they have no right to do should be taken to task. At the time of the Bundy family stand off in 2014 here in Nevada I predicted that the government should have not backed down against this rag tag group of lawbreakers. I said that if the government DID NOT prosecute some of the Bundy family members and many of the armed radicals who openly threatened to use lethal force against law enforcement this same group would rear their ugly head again some place else in the near future. WELL! Was I right? You bet. People, the feds should have scooped up the Bundy family cattle, sold them at auction and sent Cliven Bundy to prison. That would have put an end to this families urge to confront the federal government and local law enforcement with weapons.
Since the federal government turned tail and ran away from what should have been a lawful, legal arrest of the Bundy family and cohorts in 2014, we now have this INSURRECTION playing out in a small town in Oregon. This shouldn't have happened folks but because these make believe soldiers who claim to be a militia got away with having the feds and local law enforcement back down a couple years ago they think they have the right to pull the same crap again. Thus, Ammon and Ryan Bundy decided to call on their fake army of idiots to occupy the wildlife refuge in Oregon.
Folks, if you or I owed the federal government a MILLION DOLLARS in fees, taxes, etc., how long do you think it would be before they would have us sitting out many years in prison? But this Bundy clan failed to pay the government a million dollars for about TWENTY YEARS. Go figure. Fact is, the father of the Bundy family is still a very free man - -and to date has not paid the money he owes the federal government.
My position is that when the federal government chickened out, backed down and failed to enforce the law at gunpoint, it gave the group of radicals the energy to push their crazy movement.
Do these radical bums really think that they will actually shoot at and try to kill federal agents or local law enforcement? If they do, they are crazier than I think they are.They like to be brag and flash guns around and make implied threats that they will use the guns against law enforcement but when it comes to dying, will they? I doubt it. The feds and local law enforcement should call their bluff. The authorities should give these anti-government idiots a short time frame to pack up and leave ---else, they will be taken into custody and arrested. The authorities should not repeat the same tactics they did in the 2014 Bundy fiasco and back down. - -again, I say - -PROSECUTE. After spending a few years in prison I'm sure some of these pretend soldiers, militia, patriots, (whatever they call themselves) will have an entirely different outlook of using weapons and threats to occupy property.
If, in the event one of these crazy idiots does decide to fire a weapon at federal agents or local law enforcement, the authorities should respond in kind and shoot, maim and kill a few of these lawbreakers. I would predict that the group would then turn tail and scurry back home. However, I tend to believe that the Bundy brothers and their band of misfits in Oregon want to provoke the feds and local law enforcement into a confrontation. I say - -,so be it. The authorities should take these clowns on. First thing is to arrest the people who are occupying the wildlife refuge -- see if they resist. If they do and it comes to armed force the authorities shouldn't hesitate. Do the job.
Another concern of mine is why the local sheriff is coddling this bunch of losers. He asked them to leave, they should have left, but didn't. I'm also sure there's many laws on the books in Oregon that the sheriff could use to place these occupiers in custody. Come on! Trespass; Civil Disobedience; Disturbing the Peace . Hey, even spitting on the ground. My point--there is a law somewhere on the books to take action against these people. Use it.
Final though folks, do you think for one moment that if this group of WHITE agitators, who seem to hate the government with a passion were a group of ARMED BLACKS, HISPANICS, ASIANS, or even MUSLIMS, who illegally took over and occupied a government facility they would still be allowed to occupy the premises for days at a time. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. I say that if it were anybody but this WHITE group of so-called patriots in Oregon, there would be armed federal agents and armed local law enforcement surrounding the compound, helicopters buzzing the area, armored vehicles in position and snipers at the ready. People, if these occupiers =ere anybody but WHITE (so-called patriots) it would be a situation like Ruby Ridge or Waco, Texas. The situation would be treated like a fire fight in Chicago streets.
My suggestion to the federal and local government authorities: Order the group to leave; if they don't -- arrest the entire group and prosecute this time around. If worse comes to worse and these crazies decide to take up arms against law enforcement - -take them out, period. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, December 24, 2015
"JUMP FOR TRUMP"- HE'S WORTH YOUR CONSIDERATION
THE KUHNS REPORT
LAS VEGAS-Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
When Donald Trump first entered the race for president I predicted he would quickly jump to the head of the pack of Republican candidates. And, WOW! He did just that. My prediction was not based on him having a reality show and being a well known TV personality but instead, based on the type of man he appeared to be.
The man is very intelligent, a business mogul that clearly knows how to run and administer a business empire second to none-WORLD WIDE. Trump employs millions of people of diverse ethnicity from around the globe. He has contacts with numerous leaders of other nations. Other countries have no problem dealing with the Trump organization and continue to build Trumps projects in their countries. You can bet none of the other Republican candidates can claim the same bragging rights.
It appears when Trump sets his sights on a project he takes it on and follows it through to completion and from all of the information I can garner, he is a man of his word. So when he tells Americans that he will build a wall on the Southern border to manage our immigration problem I take him at his word. When her tells us Americans that he will surround himself with some of the best minds in the country as advisers to manage the economy and infrastructure of the United States, I take hi at his word. I truly believe Trump" says what he means and means what he says.
Some of the talking heads in the media on cable and television networks along with the Democratic party continually try to make Trump look foolish. They joke and laugh about his comments and actions. They play "gotcha" with much of what Trump says. Fact is, much of the media today are not reporting news, instead they tend to inject themselves and their opinions into a story segment and tend to take sides when reporting political news.
Example: Trump originally was leading the polls in Iowa and some news outlets began to question Trump's religious values and pit them against other Republican candidates religious values. Some of the other Republican candidates went into Iowa and implied that Trump was not as "religious" a person as they were. The candidates wanted to capture the Evangelical vote and degrade Trumps momentum in Iowa.What a joke.
I'm sure many people in Iowa believe in clean living, family values, virtue and success and I believe Trump is the epitome of that. Lets compare him to some of the politicians and entertainers that have been found to be corrupt, who have been caught doing illegal acts and who did prison time for their wrongdoing. On the other hand, Trump is a well respected business titan. As a family man he raised his children under a doctrine of clean living to be honest intelligent exceptional people in their own right who now enjoy their own careers. To my knowledge there has never been even a hint of scandal surrounding Trump. That to me, speaks volumes as to the character and integrity of a person and how that person approaches life and faces challenges that may confront them.
Some plus points for Trump, in my view: He's financing his own campaign for the presidency. He is beholden to no one for money. I think at one time he said that if he becomes president he will not take a salary. He has good family values and a fine family unit. To me it appears that Trump (an outsider, non-politician) actually wants to try to clean up the mess in this country that was dumped on we Americans by both the Democratic and Republican politicians who continue to fight among themselves for their own vested interests and agendas.
Folks, it's time for a change in Washington. Enough of the old school politicians that waste away in their power seats in Washington for 5,6, 7 and 8 terms or more. I would suggest that America give an outsider, an upstanding business man who has some good ideas to bring America back form the brink a shot at fixing the problem(s). Hey, if he doesn't produce as advertised - - VOTE him out after only four.years. Any new blood in Washington will be better than what is there now. Any new blood and ideas in Washington CAN'T be any worse than what has been occurring in the past seven years.
As I've been telling people here in Nevada and where ever I travel: "JUMP FOR TRUMP." Would that make a great slogan? You Bet. Also, if you're on the fence about what candidate might actually do what they say they will do: "JUMP TO TRUMP."- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
LAS VEGAS-Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
When Donald Trump first entered the race for president I predicted he would quickly jump to the head of the pack of Republican candidates. And, WOW! He did just that. My prediction was not based on him having a reality show and being a well known TV personality but instead, based on the type of man he appeared to be.
The man is very intelligent, a business mogul that clearly knows how to run and administer a business empire second to none-WORLD WIDE. Trump employs millions of people of diverse ethnicity from around the globe. He has contacts with numerous leaders of other nations. Other countries have no problem dealing with the Trump organization and continue to build Trumps projects in their countries. You can bet none of the other Republican candidates can claim the same bragging rights.
It appears when Trump sets his sights on a project he takes it on and follows it through to completion and from all of the information I can garner, he is a man of his word. So when he tells Americans that he will build a wall on the Southern border to manage our immigration problem I take him at his word. When her tells us Americans that he will surround himself with some of the best minds in the country as advisers to manage the economy and infrastructure of the United States, I take hi at his word. I truly believe Trump" says what he means and means what he says.
Some of the talking heads in the media on cable and television networks along with the Democratic party continually try to make Trump look foolish. They joke and laugh about his comments and actions. They play "gotcha" with much of what Trump says. Fact is, much of the media today are not reporting news, instead they tend to inject themselves and their opinions into a story segment and tend to take sides when reporting political news.
Example: Trump originally was leading the polls in Iowa and some news outlets began to question Trump's religious values and pit them against other Republican candidates religious values. Some of the other Republican candidates went into Iowa and implied that Trump was not as "religious" a person as they were. The candidates wanted to capture the Evangelical vote and degrade Trumps momentum in Iowa.What a joke.
I'm sure many people in Iowa believe in clean living, family values, virtue and success and I believe Trump is the epitome of that. Lets compare him to some of the politicians and entertainers that have been found to be corrupt, who have been caught doing illegal acts and who did prison time for their wrongdoing. On the other hand, Trump is a well respected business titan. As a family man he raised his children under a doctrine of clean living to be honest intelligent exceptional people in their own right who now enjoy their own careers. To my knowledge there has never been even a hint of scandal surrounding Trump. That to me, speaks volumes as to the character and integrity of a person and how that person approaches life and faces challenges that may confront them.
Some plus points for Trump, in my view: He's financing his own campaign for the presidency. He is beholden to no one for money. I think at one time he said that if he becomes president he will not take a salary. He has good family values and a fine family unit. To me it appears that Trump (an outsider, non-politician) actually wants to try to clean up the mess in this country that was dumped on we Americans by both the Democratic and Republican politicians who continue to fight among themselves for their own vested interests and agendas.
Folks, it's time for a change in Washington. Enough of the old school politicians that waste away in their power seats in Washington for 5,6, 7 and 8 terms or more. I would suggest that America give an outsider, an upstanding business man who has some good ideas to bring America back form the brink a shot at fixing the problem(s). Hey, if he doesn't produce as advertised - - VOTE him out after only four.years. Any new blood in Washington will be better than what is there now. Any new blood and ideas in Washington CAN'T be any worse than what has been occurring in the past seven years.
As I've been telling people here in Nevada and where ever I travel: "JUMP FOR TRUMP." Would that make a great slogan? You Bet. Also, if you're on the fence about what candidate might actually do what they say they will do: "JUMP TO TRUMP."- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, November 19, 2015
OBAMA'S WANTS SYRIAN REFUGEES IN USA-I SAY NO!
THE KUHNS REPORT
LAS VEGAS - Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Obama wants to allow tens of thousands of Syrian refugees come to America. I believe it's a very bad idea. Why? One reason is because the Paris terrorists entered France by mingling with other refugees pretending to be one of the displaced people. France let the terorists in. Another reason is because the Iraq intelligence service had credible information that there was going to be a terrorist attack in France, specifically the city of Paris. Did officials in France heed the warning? No. Did they take any preventive actions against attack? No.
What's scary about Obama's take on the refugees resettlement to the USA is: Just hours, on Friday morning before the news of the horrific attack splashed across the world that terrorists killed over 100 people and injured many, many more in multiple blood soaked attacks in Paris, President Obama told us Americans this - -"we have contained" the advance of the Islamic State. Obama's judgement clearly needs questioned. A few days ago Obama mockingly said some in Congress are afraid to let grandmothers and three-year-olds into America. Today Democratic Pelosi said the same thing parroting Obama's rhetoric.
Where the hell has Obama, Pelosi and the other refugee lovers been over the past decades. Didn't they read history and/or keep up with what occurred during past wars. Fact, in World War II, the Germans and Japanese were using women and children strapped with bombs and grenades to "blow" up our soldiers. The women and children were used JUST BECAUSE they were women, grandmothers and children. The same thing happened in the Korea conflict and it was usually an every day occurrence in Vietnam. I urge Obama , Pelosi and their ilk to check with some of the disabled Nam vets and/or the dead vets families that were either maimed or killed by small children and grandmothers. Christ, the enemy used the women and children knowing that some of out soldiers wouldn't check them out.
As to current day events, present day: - as of a few days ago a terrorist organization group used a 13-year-old girl and an 18-year-old girl to be suicide bombers in the Nigerian city of a Kano at a marketplace
Just yesterday it was confirmed that the most wanted man in the world (the Islamic terrorist-Abdelhamid Abaroud, 27) who masterminded the Paris attacks was killed and his female cousin (the first European female suicide bomber) Hasna Aitboulahce, blew herself up in an act of suicide bombing. Has ISIS used both women and children to act as suicide bombers? The answer is "YES."So yes, we Americans should be concerned that grandmothers, women and small children can and probably will be used as suicide bombers at one time or another here in the United States. The customs, culture an ideology of the terrorists preach this practice, condone this practice and carries out this practice (using women and children) as suicide bombers.
Obama and his people say that the thousands of refugees will be vetted and that he has security measures in place to assure the American people there will not be any terrorists among the massive influx of the refugees being brought to America. Question: How can our government people run background checks on these refugees when they don't even know anything about them, who the person actually is, where they specifically came from, etc.--my answer is: They CAN'T. Fact is, the vetting plan the Obama administration has in place now can take up to TWO YEARS to complete. That's stupid! A lot of damage can be done in TWO YEARS.
My take on Obama's refugee stance is that we, in America, should question this dysfunctional administration who wants to welcome tens and hundreds of thousands of people from the Middle East without actually knowing who each of them are.
Folks, currently Obama and his administration CANNOT even locate people from other countries that have come to America and OVERSTAYED their visa's. Fact is, that's how some of the 9/11 terrorists got into and stayed in the United States prior to them committing the tragic, devastating terrorist attack on 9/11. It's no secret that our nation has been battling an "illegal immigration" problem for decades. There is an estimated ELEVEN MILLION illegal aliens already living in the United States and as Donald Trump rightly pointed out, MANY (not all) are dangerous criminals who clearly commit rapes, murder,robbery, etc.
The Obama administration and past administrations have failed miserably in securing our borders. The people entering America "illegally" grows each and every day but apparently for the sake of votes lawmakers choose to refuse to deport or control the illegal alien and immigrant problem.
Hell, even Homeland Security refuses to abide by the laws and deport "illegal aliens" they have files on, courtesy of this administration. Our TSA people at ports of entry and the airports fail to recognize illegal entrants. The TSA officers at ports of entry into the United States fail over and over again to detect weapons, explosives, chemicals and other dangerous items that could cause extreme damage to facilities and the people in America. So, I ask you? How can you expect these same government employees to protect you from a sleeper or covert terrorist intent on harming America?
It's these same government officials and lawmakers that refuse to SECURE our borders that want to allow the mass immigration of possible terrorists into the USA. Remember, terrorists have no respect for International borders. Look at the European Union now - - Europe wanted a ONE WORLD ORDER, using ONE CURRENCY,with no borders, no frontiers.. They wanted people to come and go throughout Europe freely. Well, now you see how that is working out. Terrorist are coming and going all over Europe and immigrants are overwhelming a number of countries wanting to be taken care of.
I would suggest that BEFORE any refugees from these war torn countries, particularly Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa are allowed on our soil the American people insist that our borders be COMPLETELY secured with fences/walls; E-Verify identification methods be utilized on every entrant coming into the U.S.; each individual (man, woman and/or child ) will have to provide complete documentation as to date of birth, place of birth, prior residences, employment records, military service completed, prior travel records throughout the world, history of all relatives and where the relatives are living at the time that person applies for entry into the United States. That is just some ( not all) of the information I would require a person to provide before entry into our country. If any of the information is found to be fabricated, forged or the person made misrepresentations or LIED on any of the documents they will immediately sent back to their country of origin.
Readers, there are a number of Governor's of states in our country who oppose Obama's plan and refuse to accept any of the refugees Obama and his posse want resettled in America. Personally I can't blame the Governor's for not wanting possible terrorists in their state. However, there are a lot of nanny-kissing people that say it's okay to allow these refugees into America because it's the right thing to do. Really? I say it is not the right thing to do. I predict that in the event of any massive resettlement of the refugees there will be a number of them that, like in France,will con, lie and fake their way into America. Further, I will say that it's not a question of IF a terrorist attack will take down a mall, theater, school or university or other soft targets like concerts, stadiums, sports arenas, parades, conventions and department stores here in America but WHEN. Mark my words folks. it will happen and I also predict it will be discovered that the terrorist(s) did in fact enter our country under the guise of a crying, suffering refugee. - And, that's mu opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
THE KUHNS REPORT
LAS VEGAS - Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Obama wants to allow tens of thousands of Syrian refugees come to America. I believe it's a very bad idea. Why? One reason is because the Paris terrorists entered France by mingling with other refugees pretending to be one of the displaced people. France let the terorists in. Another reason is because the Iraq intelligence service had credible information that there was going to be a terrorist attack in France, specifically the city of Paris. Did officials in France heed the warning? No. Did they take any preventive actions against attack? No.
What's scary about Obama's take on the refugees resettlement to the USA is: Just hours, on Friday morning before the news of the horrific attack splashed across the world that terrorists killed over 100 people and injured many, many more in multiple blood soaked attacks in Paris, President Obama told us Americans this - -"we have contained" the advance of the Islamic State. Obama's judgement clearly needs questioned. A few days ago Obama mockingly said some in Congress are afraid to let grandmothers and three-year-olds into America. Today Democratic Pelosi said the same thing parroting Obama's rhetoric.
Where the hell has Obama, Pelosi and the other refugee lovers been over the past decades. Didn't they read history and/or keep up with what occurred during past wars. Fact, in World War II, the Germans and Japanese were using women and children strapped with bombs and grenades to "blow" up our soldiers. The women and children were used JUST BECAUSE they were women, grandmothers and children. The same thing happened in the Korea conflict and it was usually an every day occurrence in Vietnam. I urge Obama , Pelosi and their ilk to check with some of the disabled Nam vets and/or the dead vets families that were either maimed or killed by small children and grandmothers. Christ, the enemy used the women and children knowing that some of out soldiers wouldn't check them out.
As to current day events, present day: - as of a few days ago a terrorist organization group used a 13-year-old girl and an 18-year-old girl to be suicide bombers in the Nigerian city of a Kano at a marketplace
Just yesterday it was confirmed that the most wanted man in the world (the Islamic terrorist-Abdelhamid Abaroud, 27) who masterminded the Paris attacks was killed and his female cousin (the first European female suicide bomber) Hasna Aitboulahce, blew herself up in an act of suicide bombing. Has ISIS used both women and children to act as suicide bombers? The answer is "YES."So yes, we Americans should be concerned that grandmothers, women and small children can and probably will be used as suicide bombers at one time or another here in the United States. The customs, culture an ideology of the terrorists preach this practice, condone this practice and carries out this practice (using women and children) as suicide bombers.
Obama and his people say that the thousands of refugees will be vetted and that he has security measures in place to assure the American people there will not be any terrorists among the massive influx of the refugees being brought to America. Question: How can our government people run background checks on these refugees when they don't even know anything about them, who the person actually is, where they specifically came from, etc.--my answer is: They CAN'T. Fact is, the vetting plan the Obama administration has in place now can take up to TWO YEARS to complete. That's stupid! A lot of damage can be done in TWO YEARS.
My take on Obama's refugee stance is that we, in America, should question this dysfunctional administration who wants to welcome tens and hundreds of thousands of people from the Middle East without actually knowing who each of them are.
Folks, currently Obama and his administration CANNOT even locate people from other countries that have come to America and OVERSTAYED their visa's. Fact is, that's how some of the 9/11 terrorists got into and stayed in the United States prior to them committing the tragic, devastating terrorist attack on 9/11. It's no secret that our nation has been battling an "illegal immigration" problem for decades. There is an estimated ELEVEN MILLION illegal aliens already living in the United States and as Donald Trump rightly pointed out, MANY (not all) are dangerous criminals who clearly commit rapes, murder,robbery, etc.
The Obama administration and past administrations have failed miserably in securing our borders. The people entering America "illegally" grows each and every day but apparently for the sake of votes lawmakers choose to refuse to deport or control the illegal alien and immigrant problem.
Hell, even Homeland Security refuses to abide by the laws and deport "illegal aliens" they have files on, courtesy of this administration. Our TSA people at ports of entry and the airports fail to recognize illegal entrants. The TSA officers at ports of entry into the United States fail over and over again to detect weapons, explosives, chemicals and other dangerous items that could cause extreme damage to facilities and the people in America. So, I ask you? How can you expect these same government employees to protect you from a sleeper or covert terrorist intent on harming America?
It's these same government officials and lawmakers that refuse to SECURE our borders that want to allow the mass immigration of possible terrorists into the USA. Remember, terrorists have no respect for International borders. Look at the European Union now - - Europe wanted a ONE WORLD ORDER, using ONE CURRENCY,with no borders, no frontiers.. They wanted people to come and go throughout Europe freely. Well, now you see how that is working out. Terrorist are coming and going all over Europe and immigrants are overwhelming a number of countries wanting to be taken care of.
I would suggest that BEFORE any refugees from these war torn countries, particularly Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa are allowed on our soil the American people insist that our borders be COMPLETELY secured with fences/walls; E-Verify identification methods be utilized on every entrant coming into the U.S.; each individual (man, woman and/or child ) will have to provide complete documentation as to date of birth, place of birth, prior residences, employment records, military service completed, prior travel records throughout the world, history of all relatives and where the relatives are living at the time that person applies for entry into the United States. That is just some ( not all) of the information I would require a person to provide before entry into our country. If any of the information is found to be fabricated, forged or the person made misrepresentations or LIED on any of the documents they will immediately sent back to their country of origin.
Readers, there are a number of Governor's of states in our country who oppose Obama's plan and refuse to accept any of the refugees Obama and his posse want resettled in America. Personally I can't blame the Governor's for not wanting possible terrorists in their state. However, there are a lot of nanny-kissing people that say it's okay to allow these refugees into America because it's the right thing to do. Really? I say it is not the right thing to do. I predict that in the event of any massive resettlement of the refugees there will be a number of them that, like in France,will con, lie and fake their way into America. Further, I will say that it's not a question of IF a terrorist attack will take down a mall, theater, school or university or other soft targets like concerts, stadiums, sports arenas, parades, conventions and department stores here in America but WHEN. Mark my words folks. it will happen and I also predict it will be discovered that the terrorist(s) did in fact enter our country under the guise of a crying, suffering refugee. - And, that's mu opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
BRADLEY W. KUHNS, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by email at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)