text:
How the US Empire Was Made in North Korea
Hits: 3326
Over the past 15 years, fighting-talk has periodically flared over 'what to do about that alleged "crazy Asian dictator" in North Korea. Today's round of brinkmanship by the US/Western 'deep state' against North Korea will – in all probability – unfold the same way as in previous episodes; it will fizzle out. China is a guarantor of North Korean security, so the US will not go to war with North Korea. Period.
The battle between Trump and the Washington Crazies for control of the reins of empire continues, however, and the 'Krazy Korean' is relevant to that. I hope to get to that in a later article, but in the meantime, take note of the contradictory messages coming from the US.
One minute, US Navy battle-groups are 'en route to North Korea'; the next they're heading in the opposite direction. One minute, THAAD missile systems are 'installed and operational in South Korea'; the next, Trump wants South Korea to pay for them.
One minute, someone on the US National Security Council is telling NBC News that the US is considering 'decapitating the North Korean regime'; the next, Trump announces he'd be honored to meet Kim Jung Un…
All of which has provoked the South Korean and Japanese governments to denounce Trump's confusing and contradictory statements. Is there a method in Trump's apparent madness?
I recently read The China Mirage: The Hidden History of American Disaster in Asia by James Bradley, a breathtaking panorama of US and Chinese trajectories from the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century to the birth of 'Communist' China and 'Pax Americana' a hundred years later. This naturally encompassed US involvement in Korea, so in this article I'd like to share some historical context that is either incomplete or missing from summaries of US-Korean relations I've seen online so far.
The US has a long history of propping up crazy Asian dictators – from imperial Japan to 'Christian' Chiang Kai-shek in 'New' China to Catholic Diem in the short-lived US invention of South Vietnam. 'North' Korea is similarly a US invention. After existing for hundreds of years as a sovereign country, Korea fell under Japanese imperial influence in the late 19th century. The Japanese had by then become the 'Yankees of the Far East' and so accepting were they of civilized Western ways (and Anglo-Saxon values in particular), that the US and British empires were able to convince the Japanese that they should expand their empire as a check against Russian economic expansion in the Far East and as a vehicle through which to 'Americanize' China and the wider region.
In 1882, the US signed a treaty with the Emperor of Korea, declaring that there "shall be perpetual peace between Korea and the US." If Korea was ever threatened by a third party, the US would intervene on its behalf. In the East, such commitments are both legally and morally binding. Not so in the West, however. Behind Korea's back, then-US president Theodore Roosevelt (whose family, like all the US patrician families, got rich illegally smuggling opium into China), gave Japan the green light to take over Korea in 1905 (under the fabricated pretext that if they didn't, the Russians would beat them to it) and use it as a staging ground to launch war on Russia. Bradley recounts this treachery in The China Mirage:
In March of 1905, when wave after wave of Japanese soldiers ran directly into Russian bullets during Japan's victory at the Battle of Mukden, Roosevelt wrote, "The Japanese are the most dashing fighters in the world!" For the first time in modern history, an Asian country was besting a white Western Christian country. Roosevelt wrote [Baron] Kaneko [Japanese envoy to the US] on White House stationery, "Judging by the state of affairs, all is going well and your army is advancing at full speed and power. Banzai!!" When the baron later arrived at the White House for a celebration of the Mukden victory, Roosevelt's "face shone with joy over the unprecedented victory." After his chat with Kaneko, Roosevelt told Secretary of War William Howards Taft, "I heartily agree with the Japanese terms of peace, insofar as they include Japan having the control of Korea." [p.72]
Korea found few advocates. John Ford, the secretary of the American Asiatic Association, a major trade group, defended Japan's takeover of Korea because "the true peril of Asia and of the world is the Muscovite, and not the yellow peril."
The 'yellow peril' refers to the late 19th century realization in Anglo-American power circles that – sooner or later – the vastly more populous East Asia would industrialize and eclipse their Western-led global domination. And yet, it wasn't that which frightened them most – it was imperial Russia, a fear that echoes down to the present time.
Thus began Korea's descent into hell, and Japan's imperial march across the region. Only later would the US have a problem with this; at the time, Japan was being encouraged to apply a 'Japanese Monroe Doctrine for Asia' by Roosevelt – a doctrine that was guaranteed – financially, militarily and politically – by the Anglo-Americans. The Japanese occupied Korea, Nazi-style, for the next 45 years, during which time they also invaded and occupied Manchuria, northeast China, in 1931. They then spread further southwards into China in 1937, slaughtering millions of people as they went (35 million, according to Chinese sources).
By the time WW2 broke out, the Japanese war machine was heavily reliant on Californian oil, which then-US president Franklin Roosevelt (cousin of the first Roosevelt) was loathe to choke off for fear the Japanese would declare war against the US at a time when it was focused on the situation in Europe. To hedge its bets, imperial Japan spread further south into Indochina and Indonesia to take over oil fields and other raw materials.
And that's where it crossed the Anglo-Americans' red line: the Japanese were eyeing up key resources in Western colonies. In a move they knew would collar Japan's regional ambitions, and thus likely be interpreted by the Japanese as a declaration of war, the so-called 'wise men' around Roosevelt (who we might today recognize as actors of the 'deep state') went behind his back to embargo oil shipments to Japan, which hadn't yet secured much-needed resources in South-East Asia, triggering its decision to attack the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. There is some debate as to whether or not Japan's surprise Pearl Harbor really surprised the Americans, but in any event, history records that once the US military entered the west Pacific, it planned to stay there.
While the rest of the world celebrated the end of the second 'war to end all wars', US elites watched aghast as 'dirty commie' Mao Zedong took control of all China by 1949, forcing their crazy Asian dictator (the actual Chinese one, Chiang Kai-shek) to flee to Taiwan, which the US then recognized as 'the real China'.
This brings us to the second US 'sell-out' of Korea. After the US invited the USSR to defeat the remnants of the Japanese military in N.E. China on its behalf ('better their boys do the fighting than ours'), the Soviets pushed the Japanese into the Korean peninsula, but only as far south as 38 degrees north, an arbitrary line drawn by the US that split Korea in two. As Bradley points out,
"no one in the US thought to consult the Korean people about this division of their ancient land."
'Wise Man', by the way, is a moniker for the handful of US strategists at the State Department and elsewhere who did the most to chart American foreign (really, imperial) policy during and after WW2. These are the 'geniuses' who came up with the plans to 'contain' the USSR away from western Europe, and likewise China from its neighbors by re-instituting Japan as the region's dominant power. Bradley continues:
Koreans were even more outraged to learn that US officials would govern South Korea with help from the Koreans' former Japanese colonial masters. North Koreans watched uneasily as South Koreans who had cooperated with the Japanese occupation now helped the US gain influence on the Korean Peninsula. Koreans had just suffered 40 years of Nazi-like domination by the Japanese. North Korean leader Kim Il Sung had begun his military career fighting the Japanese in the spring of 1932, and his government was first of all, and above all else, anti-Japanese.
A major concern of Dean Acheson's [then US Secretary of State] was reinvigorating the world economy after the devastation of WW2. In Europe, the US would adopt a program of economic aid called the Marshall Plan; in Asia it was known as Policy for Asia, National Security Council document 48/2. According to NSC-48/2, Japan would become Asia's industrial economy, fired by US companies. Washington would 'connect up' other Asian economies to Japan's industrial machine and as markets for Japanese goods (thus isolating and containing China). […] Their plan called for Korea, Vietnam, and other Asian countries to be the supply/consumption machines within the US-Japanese orbit. The American military would provide an umbrella of security for Japan and keep the other Asian countries in line.
The Wise Men didn't understand that their Policy for Asia looked to many Asians alarmingly like imperial Japan's recent attempts at empire. To them, it was as if the US was green-lighting another era of Japanese dominance with American backing. When North Korean leaders realized that Washington wanted Japan to once again dominate Korea, they perceived a mortal threat. […]
A good friend of English economist John Maynard Keynes, Acheson wondered if a huge Keynesian expansion of US military spending could prime the worldwide pump.
Acheson's top secret policy was laid out in National Security Council document 68, which called for something new in American history: an enormous US military encircling the globe to protect 'war-making capabilities' of its allies, a euphemism referring to countries with resources that American industry needed to manufacture arms to contain Communism worldwide. […]
Acheson urged Truman not only to go to war in Korea with no congressional consultation, but also to send covert military aid to the French in Indochina for their war against Ho Chi Minh. With no debate – and none was sought – a Wise Man, rattled by events in Asia he little understood, committed the US to current and future wars. [p.344]
One of the great ironies of this set-up to 'contain China' is that Mao wanted his country to be included in US post-WW2 development plans; he wanted US industry and capital to develop China, something that wouldn't begin until Henry Kissinger 'saw the light' in 1972.
Kim Il Sung realized that the reanimation of his arch enemy (Japan) meant that the imaginary war-time line would become a permanent hard border. It's well-known that North Korean troops invaded (liberated from Japanese collaborators, in their view) the South, sparking the Korean War of 1950-1953. Left out of the narrative is the nature of the 'good guys' that the US rushed to defend. Australian human rights lawyer James O'Neil writes:
The US felt able to leave South Korea in 1948 because they had installed the US-educated Syngman Rhee as dictator. He ruled as dictators do, killing, jailing or driving into exile tens of thousands of his political opponents. Rhee was finally overthrown in a popular revolution in 1960. In scenes later to be replicated in Saigon in 1975, he was plucked from his palace by a CIA helicopter who ferried him to safety while the crowds converged on the palace.
Rhee also had ambitions to forcefully bring about the reunification of the two parts of Korea. Thanks to the scholarship revealed in Professor Bruce Cumings' two volume history of the Korean War we now know that the standard Western line about the Korean War starting with an invasion of the South by troops from the North is at best an approximation of the true history of the conflict. The truth is considerably more complicated.
For years preceding the Northern troops crossing the border in July 1950, Rhee had been staging incursions into the north, carrying out killings, sabotage and other forms of asymmetrical warfare. On the island of Cheju-do for example, as many as 60,000 people were murdered by Rhee's military forces.
Reflecting the 'game theory' paranoia of the time, the US elite misread the North's invasion as a plot hatched in Moscow and Beijing to 'test' America's new global strategy and 'break out of containment'. Acheson was sure it was a ruse to distract from an imminent invasion of western Europe by Stalin. It wasn't. It was just the Koreans wanting their country whole again – and foreigners' influence gone from their peninsula.
In the summer of 1950, the North Koreans quickly overran nearly all of the South. The US raised a hue and cry, organized its first 'UN coalition of the willing', and countered with a combined force of over 1.7 million troops to defend the brutal regime of Syngman Rhee. They just as quickly pushed the North Koreans all the way back up the peninsula, past the 38th parallel, and approached the Chinese border. Despite being exhausted by decades of civil war and fighting the Japanese, 2 million Chinese troops – with a relatively small air force and no nuclear weapons – entered North Korea and pushed General Douglas MacArthur's troops out of North Korea, returning the status quo of the north-south divide by 1951.
O'Neill explains what this first 'war against communism' did to North Korea:
What is scarcely acknowledged in the West was the devastation the Korean War wrought upon the North. The US-led UN Command dropped more bombs on the North than the US had dropped in the whole Pacific theatre in World War 2.This included the dropping of 20,000 tonnes of napalm, a particularly gruesome way of killing people. This method was later used to equally horrific effect in Vietnam.
We now also know that the US waged bacteriological warfare, building upon Japanese expertise garnered in their war on China and further developed by US scientists at Fort Detrick.
An estimated two million people, or 20% of the total population, were killed.The bombing flattened every city in the country. In addition, the bombing targeted irrigation dams on the Yalu River. The intention was to destroy the rice crop and thereby starve the population into submission. Only emergency assistance from, among others, the Soviet Union and China prevented widespread famine and death.
All 78 North Korean cities were leveled, along with thousands of villages. The US quite literally wiped 'North Korea' from the face of the Earth. Another estimate puts the loss of North Korean lives at one third of the population – so, about 3 million dead. So the Korean War was hell for Koreans, but for the US deep state, North Korea's invasion of South Korea 'confirmed' to them that their policy of containing China was correct, and was the catalyst for transforming the US into a global empire. The Wise Men had powerful incentives to read the situation their way: if this was a global Communist plot to 'break out of containment', then both containment theory and practice were correct, justifying the reconfiguration of US military and industry to a permanent, global war-footing. Bradley continues:
The irrational fear of worldwide communism as a result of the Wise Men's misunderstanding of a small Asian civil war persuaded Congress to dramatically increase funding for the military. Martin Walker wrote,
The first defense budget presented by President Truman after the war began was for $50 billion, the precise figure Acheson had hoped for. The US Army doubled, to over 3 million men. The number of Air Groups doubled to 95, and were deployed to new bases in Britain, Libya, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Everything changed with Korea. American diplomacy, defense budgets and military reach exploded across the globe.
Bruce Cummings concludes,
The Korean War was the crisis that finally got the Japanese and West German economies growing strongly, and vastly stimulated the US economy. American defense industries hardly knew that Kim Il Sung would come along and save them either, but he inadvertently rescued a bunch of big-ticket projects. […]
The Korean conflict would transform the US into a very different country than it had ever been before: one with hundreds of permanent military bases abroad, a large standing army and a permanent national security state at home.
Survivors of a bombed out North Korean village
US Air Force bombers destroy warehouses and dock facilities in Wonsan, North Korea, 1951. Source: US Dept of Defense – USIA
US Air Force attacking railroads south of Wonsan on the eastern coast of North Korea
Now we understand why North Korea distrusts the US so much. The message behind its apparent belligerence is simply: 'Stay Away!'
On the other side of the Pacific, through the distortion field of US 'strategic thinking', you see why North Korea is the 'gift that keeps on giving': from their perspective, it's the place that 'made America great'.
Today's situation, where a prosperous and westernized South Korea stands in stark contrast to an impoverished North, was exactly the reverse until relatively recently. 'Communist' North Korea rebuilt after the Korean war and was the economic success story. For all its secrecy, isolation, and 'weird ways', North Korea is still a pretty highly developed country.
It was only after South Korea removed its (actual) crazy Asian dictator in 1960 and became one of the 'Asian Tiger' economies by industrializing that foreign investment, development and 'democratization' took place in the South. In conjunction with later US-led international sanctions on the North, the Koreas' trajectories switched directions. The South today does best according to all the indicators of economic orthodoxy, but there's room for debate as to which population enjoys the better quality of life. The South may have wealthy elites and plenty of consumer goods, but it also has an overworked, stressed-out workforce, and based on numerous visitors' testimonies in recent years, North Koreans' love of country is substantially more genuine than 'forced'.
On May 9th, South Koreans go to the polls. If you remember back during the battle between Trump and Clinton for the US presidency, massive rallies took place at that time against the South Korean president, Park, after it emerged that she had assembled some weird clique conducting 'dark arts' to chart her government's course. Now Park has been impeached, triggering snap elections.
The upshot of the Park scandal last November's and the current election campaign is that after 10 years of very pro-US rule in Seoul, the political climate in South Korea has swung back to seeking friendly neighborly relations with the North rather than continual antagonism. The leading contender for the leadership of South Korea is calling for the installation of THAAD to be delayed until after the election, which is why the US urgently wants it installed, before a new South Korean government can change its mind.
Others have written about the intrigues surrounding the installation of US missile systems in South Korea. The upshot of it is that it's happening – with or without a liberal, pro-peace government in Seoul, and regardless of who pays for it. Just as everyone knows that US missile systems in eastern Europe to 'defend Europe from Iran' were actually there to 'contain' Russia, everyone knows that US missile systems in eastern Asia to 'defend it from North Korea' are actually there to 'contain' China.
It's the same old 70-year-long US 'Policy for Asia'. And, judging by China's meteoric rise, it's still not working, and isn't ever going to work. But North Korea holds fond memories for the US 'wise men' of today, because their New World Order was born amid the charred corpses of millions of North Koreans.
Originally published on 2017-05-06
About the author: Niall Bradley has a background in political science and media consulting, and has been an editor and contributing writer at SOTT.net for 8 years. His articles are cross-posted on his personal blog, NiallBradley.net. Niall is co-host of the 'Behind the Headlines' radio show on the Sott Radio Network and co-authored Manufactured Terror: The Boston Marathon Bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora Shooting and Other False-Flag Terror Attacks with Joe Quinn.
Source: Signs of the Times
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection & Pinterest.
Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!
Donate to Support Us
We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.
[wpedon id="4696″ align="left"]


text:
Only a handful of people are actually wearing the single hottest fashion item for Spring 2010. It's not being mass-produced. It's barely sold in stores. It'll run you up to $10,000, and that's if you can get your hands on a pair. Which you can't.
Alexander McQueen's "armadillo boots," those giant claw-like pedi-crustaceans that lifted models a foot off his Paris catwalk last fall, are unquestionably the oddest and most brilliant thing to come out of couture in recent memory. Beer heiress and Steven Klein muse Daphne Guinness has a pair. So does Barbie. Lady Gaga, who first wore the gem-encrusted hooves in her "Bad Romance" video, can't seem to take them off.
In its sheer exorbitant inimitability, the armadillo is the Avatar of shoes.
Not since Jean Paul Gaultier strapped his infamous cone bra on Madonna in the 1990s has such a defiantly impractical wardrobe item become a cultural touchstone.
At a time when most news out of the fashion world revolves around the ill effects of a down economy—labels folding, stores closing, once-great houses like Christian Lacroix now struggling to survive—it's nice to see a designer make something that towers so high above the bottomline. Who cares if you can't buy or walk in them? This is art.
"It's almost like having a Brancusi on your feet," says Guinness, who wore a tan-colored set to a party in November celebrating the 15th anniversary of NARS cosmetics. They were four sizes too big, she says, but surprisingly comfortable. "I know it sounds bizarre. They look difficult but they aren't. They're not heavy. They're very, very deceptive and very clever." The editors of British Vogue disagreed, blogging about their efforts to take a stroll in the boots, which ended when they "miserably failed to make it further than the Vogue fashion cupboard."
McQueen, a London-based designer who has always had a flair for the avant garde, debuted the shoes in a collection called "Plato's Atlantis" and inspired by Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, among other sources. An early Twitter adopter, McQueen teased the shoes for weeks with dispatches lobbed out from earlier stages of the creative process: "HUBBLE PALLET," "NEBULA," "MEDUSA," he tweeted in rapid succession on Sept. 21; "The Creationist?" on September 22; and finally, on September 24, "Today we Christened…The Armadillo." The world finally got a look at the mammoth boots when McQueen became the first major designer to live-stream his runway show on October 6. It was the ultimate democratic experience of high fashion: Everyone could see them, no one could have them.
In all, 21 pairs of the shoes exist—20 from the runway show and one additional—and good luck if you want a pair. According to a McQueen press officer, most have already been sold to private collectors, "people who understood they are pieces of art rather than just 'shoes.'" The company has been inundated with requests and is now considering auctioning off what few pairs remain, "for charity purposes." They range in price from $3,900 to $10,000, depending on the material and embroidery, according to a clerk at the New York McQueen store.
Each pair of armadillos was hand-made in Italy, in an elaborate process that spanned five days and involved 30 people, using material from three suppliers and passing through three factories. The heel is 24 cm high, or nearly 10 inches. They are, in the words of a representative for one down-market shoe company that does a healthy business "adapting" high-end styles just beyond the reach of copyright law, "not knock-offable." In its sheer exorbitant inimitability, the armadillo is the Avatar of shoes.
(And McQueen knows from knock-offs. Two days after debuting the armadillo, he filed a lawsuit against Steven Madden Ltd., accusing the mass-market shoe purveyor of ripping off the Faithful bootie from his fall collection.)
In the months since their debut, the shoes have had a polarizing effect, drawing jeers from some who find them offensively impractical and raves from most corners of the fashion world. The New York Times called them a case in which "form topples function." New York Magazine found them to be "beautiful hooflike monsters." Women's Wear Daily had one word: "scary." That no models fell during the runway show was generally taken as a miracle.
"To me, it's beauty and the beast," says Beth Dincuff Charleston, a fashion historian at Parsons The New School for Design. "It's almost like they're orthopedic or corrective. It's scientific. It's fashion design but it takes into account an awareness of the body that's beyond even most brilliant designers." She compares the armadillo's current cultural moment to Yves Saint Laurent's groundbreaking use of see-through fabrics in the 1970s and Issey Miyake's molded plastic bustiers.
None of this is to say the boot is remotely sexy. But neither is natural selection, the melting of the polar ice caps, the return of humanity to the same primordial sea from which we emerged. After his show, McQueen told The New York Times that he had no interest in "playing it safe" in these uncertain times, that "the world needs fantasy, not reality." That he gave us a $10,000 dystopian fantasy about the outer limits of evolution is of a piece with his usual genius. That these crazy shoes have become a hit with a 23-year-old pop princess and her legions of admirers should be taken as a good sign: Not everything is cheap or cute, not even now.
"My boyfriend does not like that sort of thing, and I think that is where there are clothes that please men or conservative tastes, and there are these other explorations," Guinness says. "I imagine the conflict with these types of pieces lies in the question, 'Is fashion art?' To which I would reply, 'Yes.'"
Plus: Check out more of the latest entertainment, fashion, and culture coverage on Sexy Beast—photos, videos, features, and Tweets.
Rebecca Dana is a senior correspondent for The Daily Beast. A former editor and reporter for The Wall Street Journal, she has also written for The New York Times, The New York Observer, Rolling Stone and Slate, among other publications.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|# This is the official list of people who can contribute
|# (and typically have contributed) code to the repository.
|# The AUTHORS file lists the copyright holders; this file
|# lists people. For example, Google employees are listed here
|# but not in AUTHORS, because Google holds the copyright.
|# The submission process automatically checks to make sure
|# that people submitting code are listed in this file (by email address).
|# Names should be added to this file only after verifying that
|# the individual or the individual's organization has agreed to
|# the appropriate Contributor License Agreement, found here:
|# https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual
|# https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-corporate
|# The CLA can be filled out on the web:
|# https://cla.developers.google.com/
|# When adding J Random Contributor's name to this file,
|# either J's name or J's organization's name should be
|# added to the AUTHORS file, depending on whether the
|# individual or corporate CLA was used.
|# Names should be added to this file like so:
|# Name <email address>
|# An entry with two email addresses specifies that the
|# first address should be used in the submit logs and
|# that the second address should be recognized as the
|# same person when interacting with Rietveld.
|# Please keep the list sorted.
|Alain Vongsouvanhalainv <email@example.com>
|Andrew Gerrand <email@example.com>
|Brad Fitzpatrick <email@example.com>
|Eric Koleda <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Francesc Campoy <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Garrick Evans <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Glenn Lewis <email@example.com>
|Ivan Krasin <email@example.com>
|Jason Hall <email@example.com>
|Johan Euphrosine <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Kostik Shtoyk <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Michael McGreevy <firstname.lastname@example.com>
|Nick Craig-Wood <email@example.com>
|Ross Light <email@example.com>
|Sarah Adams <email@example.com>
|Scott Van Woudenberg <email@example.com>
|Takashi Matsuo <firstname.lastname@example.com>


text:
This community is the most resistant I've ever seen it be, and it's bullish AF☁ Hype/ Fluff(self)
Honestly, this community is peaking.
One little, $1.5B, mistake was immediately spotted. People asked Fudelity the right questions, and when they showed their cards, apes knew what was going on.
An astounding number of shares were already DRS'd, and the Fudelity 'glitch' caused a second wave of apes DRSing.
More and more apes are coming to the realization that DRSing their shares is in their best interest.
Shills were once again trying to create false expectations for the upcoming earnings release. And apes immediately slammed down this obvious attempt to create FUD.
Apes have been diligently buying the recent dip at dirt cheap prices (<$180).
Apes are expecting a dip on earnings release.
The mods were transparent about corporate media contacting them. Mods presented this information to apes. Apes said corporate media can fuck off.
/r/Superstonk surpassed 700k subscribers.
I was privileged to help 5 new people get on board.
There are regular posts of whales with >$500k invested in GME DRSing their shares.
Gamestop is on the verge of announcing their NFT marketplace in collaboration with Loopring.
It is a travesty that such a small group of wealthy organizations are capable of having this much control over the price of a stock.
Soon, the whole world can't ignore it. This movement group of individual investors will be written about in the history books.
What a time to be alive. Love you all ❤. Buy & HODL & DRS.
Edit: Movement -> group of individual investors
That's what she says to Grandpa after spraying her love juice.


text:
One of the most counterintuively anticipated cars to debut at this year's Chicago Auto Show is the 2014 Chevy Cruze TD. The basic idea of the car is this: Take a Cruze Eco, add few new aerodynamic tricks, load in the 2LT upgrade interior package, and drop in 2.0 liter turbodiesel that cranks out 148 hp but an impressive 258 lb-ft of torque at just 2,000 rpm. Better yet there's an overboost feature that lets the turbo spool up to help develop 280 lb-ft of grunt for 10 seconds.
The engine can run on B20 biodiesel and scrubs emissions clean with a diesel particulate filter and urea injection. Mated up to a six speed automatic transmission, GM is offering an "extremely conservative" highway fuel economy estimate of 42 mpg. Company officals stated off the record they expect real world driving will far exceed the EPA window stick figures. We're looking at this car as something of a do-or-die moment for diesel passenger cars in the US. The Germans have dominated the segment for a long time, but the Cruze offers a strong alternative. We'll see how the sales figures hash out. The Cruze TD comes with a 100,000 mile warranty, 2 years of complimentary maintenance, and a $25,695 starting price aimed right at the Jetta TDI.


text:
READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Coming up this evening at 9, Piers Morgan welcomes a pair of political power-players, each anxious to share their respective insights on some of the most divisive issues facing the nation.
On the heels of Tuesday's speech by Barack Obama – in which the president pledged to support a "comprehensive overhaul of U.S. immigration laws" – tonight Governor Jan Brewer will return to "Piers Morgan Tonight," offering her reaction to a topic that literally lives in her backyard.
A Republican from Arizona, Brewer is a returning guest of the program, in the past using her platform to celebrate Mitt Romney winning her border state as part of the Republican primaries.
In addition to Brewer, tonight the host will also welcome Chris Murphy for a live interview expected to focus on firearms, in particular the Senator's recent report on the National Rifle Association.
On Tuesday, the Democrat from Connecticut released a document in which he downplayed the political power behind the NRA, suggesting much of the organization presumed influence is based on myths.
Also scheduled to appear on the primetime program are Neil Heslin, who will address reports of being taunted in the aftermath of losing his son in the Newtown school shooting, political analyst Dana Loesch, as well as Ray Anderson and Ben Austro who will address the "controversy regarding the grading system for the officials and the assignments for Super Bowl XLVII."
Tune in tonight at 9 as Morgan and his collection of guests touch upon all the topics currently weaving their way into the fabric of American political and popular culture.
» Follow Piers Morgan Tonight on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Hi Everybody,
Lately, I have heard a lot of examples of gun violence victims, but what about the other side of the coin? How about stories of people that have been saved by guns? There's many such stories.
I'm not an NRA member, but I have read it's publication, "The American Rifleman." And, inside that publication is a section called "Armed Citizen," which has stories of people saving their lives with guns.
Here's a link to some of these stories...
That is advertisement for the NRA. I don't need to read it when I see 20 innocent children killed. The next one maybe mine. How many children have to die before we stand up to the NRA?
Please do some research on "Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs)". There have been about 13 non-NRA studies on DGUs that estimate between 800,000 and 2,500,000 (depending on what study you read) instances occur each year where someone has stopped a criminal act, either from commencing or completing, with the threat of or actual use of a gun.
How many children have to Die before we do whats right, ARM ourself and protect our child, i carry and i carry on school gounds when i pick up my daughter, because i can and will protect my daughter or any other child for that matter. what would you do if you cam up on a gun man at your childs school, Scream and run or though your keys at him or her.
All of the school shooting and movie shootings all have something in common, can you guess NO LAW STOPPED it, Laws are for law abiding citizens not criminals,,,,,,, See its prople like you that are actually Dangerous to Society
Just a comment on this thread it is a fantasy created by our TV/Hollywood addicted american minds that carrying guns makes our children safer; in fact more children die from accidents and suicide at home by guns obtained from their "law abiding" family members (whatever that means) than are protected from mass shootings. There are strong figures on this, look it up. That's why the american academy of pediatrics states that "the safest home for children and teens is one without guns".
FJR you actually are wrong and didnt state the truth, it is the accidental shootings which is LOW, because of the guns not being locked up proper and the lack of training to children, Sorry but that is a bunch of BS that a safer home is a home without guns and you and that statistic is probably from the same people that belive you disipline is a time out in the corner, see when i was a kid at school we didnt have these issues most families had guns and the school could paddle you if needed, HMMMMM make you think the problem might be the lack of attention and disapline of todays kids plays a big role. your facts are crap i have looked and studied a lot of them.
Please advise how many people have been "saved" by guns compared to how many have been slaughtered by guns. Get real.
Why hi there Mr Mcfairyland, please tell us a story of the great democracy of America where the love their guns more than their kids.
I offer some info for Piers to use to continue gun debate. I am a 75 yr. old retired republican with strong beliefs in the 2nd amendment. I have owned and hunted and target shot with a variety of guns all of my life. I stand firmly against assualt rifles and large capacity magazines. Interesting twist on probably the most common gun in homes, the shotgun. Can be double barreled (side by side or over and under). Most are single barreled with a single tubular magazine which come from the factory with 7 shot capacity and a wooden dowel plug the length of 4 shells. Most states (Il. for sure)only allow 3 shots in the gun when hunting game. i.e. ducks , geese, rabbits, pheasants,quail. etc. All hunters obey this and conservation officers always check to see if plug is in place. Now at my advanced age my several shotguns set in home defense with plug out and 7 shots in the magazine. Not breaking any laws. Can transport in auto trunk, in a case, unloaded, but ready to accept 7 shells. Thus I can hunt game with 3 shot limit and if I choose to hunt PEOPLE and can legally arm the guin with 7 shells. Just fuel for the fire. If my shotgun is limited to 3 sheels to hunt game and that's all I can do with it legally, why does the gun have a 7 shot capacity?
Hey Dana Loesch, oooops, looks like the cat is out of the bag.... uh-oh.
"CONARC sponsored the development of a .22 military rifle and asked Winchester and Armalite to come up with designs for a high-velocity, full and semi auto fire, 20 shot magazine, 6lbs loaded, able to penetrate both sides of a standard Army helmet at 500 meters rifle. The competing rifles were:"
"The Armalite Division of the Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, Costa Mesa, CA was established in 1954 for the sole purpose of developing military firearms using the latest in plastics and non-ferrous materials. It's team of Eugene M. Stoner – key designer, Robert Fremont – prototype manufacturing supervisor, and L. James Sullivan – who oversaw drafting work had been they key developers of the AR-15."
Bravo for American ingenuity! They took 120 year old technology and created a firearm design that has saved 100s of thousands of lives throughout the world. Well done Armalite! Thank you Mr Stoner and Mr Fremont!
Absolutely, when it's in the hands of those it was intended for.... Military Personnel in a War Zone!
You have no understanding of firearms.. just another ignorant liberal who wants to impose YOUR idea of whats right on the rest of us.
That was for YOU Seth.. THe "looks" of a firearm has nothing to do with it's lethality. The problem with you igorant liberals like Piers, Pelosi, Frakenstein I mean Feinstein and others, is in thinking that by banning something you will stop an activity. You prove time and again what fools you are. So what happens, you ban any gun you don't think looks like you think it should and when a criminal murders a mass of people next with a revolver, they will then become the new assault weapon? How about you consider punishing crimnals with the death penaly who use guns in crime, oh wait, you think it's better to let criminals free because their crimes weren't their fault, they were the result of an unfair society, right? Or better yet, Bush's fault. Go educate yourself on matters instead of remaining as ignorant as the politicians you send into Washington.
Waiting for the Red Herring responses referring to automobiles, cigarettes, old age, etc....
How about things less dramatic that are responsible DIRECTLY for far more deaths than AR15s ... crack cocaine, drunk driving.. you know those "banned" things that people still do?
Until you liberals start thinking logically and with some reason, the problems you seek to solve will never be solved. Actions are PERSONAL things. Not caused by objects. Choosing to take PCP or smoke crack cocaine is a PERSONAL choice, just like killling another human being. Each of them are supposed to have consequences. Now ask yourself if you can actually be truthful with your beliefs, who is it that dismisses behavior and responsibility of people in the decisions they make more ? Stop pointing the finger. Get a grip on reality.
I couldn't agree with you more. The majority of gun crimes are committed by repeat offender felons who can't purchase these weapons legally in the first place. Hand guns are responsible for roughly 98% of gun crimes not magazine fed rifles! Assault rifles is a misnomer because they are not fully automatic, its just the aesthetics of how it looks. The M1 Garand looks like a hunting rifle but people focus on the Armalite and Bushmaster because its identical to the M4. No matter what laws you pass there will always be that element of society that breaks the law. I live in Washington DC and they average 2 to 3 murders a week; where handguns are illegal I might add. Address the real issue, people with mental illness with access to any firearms.
And there's my red herring!
Look, controlled substances are ILLEGAL, thank heavens! If they weren't, they would be much more of a problem than they currently are.
The AR15 and the like need to be treated like controlled substances, ILLEGAL! To reduce their negative effect on our society.
Oh good. Let's exploit the death of a person son to promote your agenda focused on guns. As long as we are all distracted with the gun issue, we are not going to stop the next attack. We need to focus on the suspect and what caused him to do this. We already know how it did it, but the why is more important. There is always going to be a way to find out how, but the why will put an end to the problem. This whole debate is politically motivated without regard to stopping the violence.
That's typical Liberal SOP... ignorant Americans and sheeple just drink whatever koolaid their masters pour them and next thing you know we're living in the former great US of A.
Not so. If the kid didn't have access to the weapons, the children would be alive today.
Don't minimize this and try to shift the focus off of the problem, accessibility to high-efficiency killing tools.
Try building a house with a hammer versus a pneumatic nail gun, you see the parallel?
How could you possibly know that? You don't think the pistols were every bit as deadly? Have you even researched reports regarding the incident that came out AFTER several days that indicated the rifle wasn't even in the building? How about the fact there were 4 pistols found in the school instead of 2, how about the fact of no security cam video showing the guy breaking into the school? How about the fact the mother was NOT a teacher or even affiliated with the school? How about the other "facts" you take for granted because you're so accustomed to being brainwashed with what to think, without even questioning or learning for yourself? Is anyone less dead if they get killed with a knife, or a revolver, or an icepick? What about the gun that killed Kennedy? It was a BOLT action (that means one round and reload), but it WAS a milittary weapon. What about an M1? It's an old WW2 rifle with the same technology as an AR15 but it looks different, so you idiot liberals don't care about it, even though the cartridge is much more deadly. Again, go away, you liberal fools talk too much about things you know nothing about.
They were killed with pistols the rifle was left in the car I dont see where all this is coming from
Everyone knows that the officials have published facts that an AR 15 was used at Sandy Hook. NRA people keep trying to spin some other story.
Jackie, excuse us for distracting you, what?!! the death of a child is a destraction for you? What if it was your child? Then what would you say? There always will be crazy people and the key point is not to snap all crazy people and put them away because it is impossible, but to get rid of weapons of mass destruction, the slaughter machines that kill so many innnocent people at a time. I am so disgusted with America and those who use 2nd Amendment as an excuse to clling to the assault weapons. Why the hell you need such weapons? why the hell? for pleasure? if there is even 1% chance that not having access to such weapons could result in less number of children murdered or allowed teachers to intervene while the gunman reloaded then it is WORTH IT! AND TO ALL THOSE WHO PROTECT 2ND AMENDMENT, JUST IMAGINE FOR A SECOND THAT YOUR CHILD IS SLAUGHTERED LIKE THIS, JUST PICTURE IT FOR A SECOND AND THEN HAVE THE GUTS TO WRITE ALL THE CRAP THAT YOU ARE WRITING ABOUT CIGARETTES AND CARS, PEOPLE KILLING PEOPLE NOt GUNS KILLING PEOPLE, these are all excuses.. don't look for excuses.. look for ways to avoid this ever happenING again to innocent children!!! TAKE ACTION! BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS, BAN HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES!! My heart and thoughts are with you dear Jessie's father, You are a great man, courageous man!! you are not alone, your family may have become even smaller but people pray for your son and for you.. God Bless you, God give you strength to continue your fight. I am sure there are many people who will stand with you. Though I have never been involved with this stuff in the past, now as children are affected, it is different, it feels different.. Republicans, NRA – get ready for the assault – we will crush you even though we don't have assault weapons! we will crush you with the wills of our hearts! get ready- this time you will not get away with your crap arguments about 2nd amendment protecting your rights to own slaughter machines..e
40% of guns sold do not perform background checks on the buyer. These are acquired illegally through online gun sales, gun shows, etc.
@electedface What garbage. "hese are acquired illegally through online gun sales, gun shows, etc" This is the problem with ignorant people sucking down the koolaid of other ignorant people who happen to not only have an agenda but also have a position of influence. What it makes you is a SHEEPLE.
There are no online gun sales. Guns cannot be shipped to individuals legally, as all sales across state lines must go thru dealers. Even dealers can't sell guns to individuals online! Nor can anyone buy a gun from a dealer without a background check. If you're referring to individuals selling to individuals, then I would agree there needs to be a background check, but it's not illegal for one person to sell to another. If anything should be done it should be to require background checks for all gun sales regardless if individuals or not. Stop with the lies. When you liberals show some common sense and respect for truth, then you'll find many areas of agreement in the firearms argument. Enforce the laws on the books and punish criminals. We fought a war to be free from England, we don't want nor need their ideas of government, except for you liberals who seem to want to be subjects to Obama.
@rdalton60 "to impose YOUR idea of whats right on the rest of us."
The problem is the pro-killing tools movement has imposed their ideas on the rest of us. Even influencing the supreme court to misinterpret the 2nd amendment.
And look where we are today, gamers going ar15 status into kindergarten rooms, and theaters.
@Seth.. now that's classic.. the "pro killing tools" movement.. Do you mean Pro-Abortion tools? Pro-Alcohol? Pro-drugs? You liberals just can't get past that "personal responsibility" thing that is supposed to be at the root of our experiment in self-government, can you? It's always somethings fault, not the user of the tool. IThere was no misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment, otherwise there would never have BEEN a second amendment. It was THAT important to include in a Bill of Rights. Not for the government, but for the PEOPLE, you moron.
for rdalton60:
"The Armalite Division of the Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, Costa Mesa, CA was established in 1954 for the sole purpose of developing military firearms using the latest in plastics and non-ferrous materials. It's team of Eugene M. Stoner – key designer, Robert Fremont – prototype manufacturing supervisor, and L. James Sullivan – who oversaw drafting work had been they key developers of the AR-15."
And after that military version was created (which is a FULL AUTOMATIC WEAPON), a civilian version was produced which is based on 120 year old technology and operates the same as hunting and gaming rifles. Seth, just go away. You've never even shot an AR15 and haven't a clue about firearms.
I see tonight Piers is have Neil Heslin. He is having him on over the "taunting". In all fairness I have you play the whole event. MSNBC edited out about 20 seconds. Neil Heslin asked who need an ar-15. You could hear a pin drop. Neil Heslin then says thats what I though no one can answer the question. He was asking the crowd. That is when you hear someone say the 2nd amendment shall not be infringed.
MSNBC edited out the part where Neil Heslin asked the question.
So Mr. Morgan in honesty, and fairness. I hope you play the whole exchange, and not the carefully edited MSNBC clip
If you want to live under Piers ideas of society, move to England and bow to the Queen. Who needs an AR15? Every able bodied man and woman who is fit and of sound mind. That's who! It works in Switzerland! Has Piers ever asked why the crime rates are so low in Switzerland, a country that requires guns to be owned by it's citizens? Do any of you liberals ever stop to actually THINK?
Tax the bullets!
It does not infringe any bodies rights.
Just like Tobacco and alcohol, add a $1 tax per bullet for secondary damage.
great idea, create a black market for bullets.. allow the ciminals to have easy access to them because all they have to do is steal them then let you liberal judges free them from jail.. great idea Einstein
There's a very simple concept you liberals need to come to grips with. There is NO WAY you are going to win this argument. NO WAY. THere is no way most Americans are going to give control of their lives over to a bunch of elected officials who you liberals want to make our masters. You won't win the argument, you won't win the fight, and you won't win the war that will erupt if you push too far. Start looking for real solutions to crime that have been championed for years but ignored by your leaders, that doesn't require the other half of Americans to give up one of the cornerstones of what makes America free. Like it or not, thats the truth.
Piers, you aren't even an American citizen. We don't want to be ruled by England and we don't want to bow to your Queen. If we wanted to live under your laws we would never have fought a war to not have to do so. We don't need your narrow idea of freedom and we don't need your ideas of decency. We don't need your ideas of fairness nor justice. We are Americans, and if we can get rid of the influences that you and your "isms" bring, we can figure out how to deal with AMERICAN problems all by ourselves. Since CNN gives you the stage to spout your beliefs, you could at least educate yourself on the subject and things on which you spout off about. I
Dear Piers, I greatly appreciate the information that I have gotten from your shows.
However, you need to lighten up a little. I am very interested in politics, gun control etc., but not every night.
Please think about varying your topics.
Thank You
Do you like the fact that he lies and says an assault rifle was used at Sandy Hook?
Unfortuntely its most likely that she hasn't bothered to research it further to know that. Like most liberals, they get their "truth" from a few minutes each night of who they like to watch, then are brainwashed for the rest of their life.
Wathing Piers tonight and he ontinues to say that an AR -15 was used to kill Sandy Hook kids and for what I understand that is not true. That gun (AR15) was in the trunk and "all" of the victoms were killed by handuns without high capacity clips. He continues to spred lies.
Mainly because it was a "crisis" and we all know that Obama and friends don't want to let a "crisis" go to waste when they can accomplish some agenda item with it... so what do they do? Lie.
Piers. I think we need to wake up and smell the coffee here. Concentrate on the root cause and that is that mentally unstable individuals should not have guns period. Leave the ar15s alone. We reserve the right to protect ourselves from an unjust and tyrant government if it does someday happen. We will need military style weapons if ever we need to protect ourselves from our government. This was the whole meaning behind the right to bear arms. We had to become independent from a tyrant great Britain and needed guns to do it. Admit this much....that our nation isn't headed in the right direction. I for one quit trusting the government when they stopped listening to the people. Also why isn't the media being blamed for their part in these shootings for putting these lunatics in the spotlight. Haven't you noticed these people become or die famous. STOP showing who is doing these killings and putting them in the spotlight and you just may see it not happen ad much.
I second that.
They cannot and will not ever take our guns away. We the people will not allow it. You think the civil war was bad. This would make the civil war look like a minor disagreement.
Agreed. Too bad libs can't understand this and stretch their imagination to actually consider the root causes of violent crime instead of seeing every "thing" as a cause of bad behavior
I'm sure you are aware that towards the end of his life, Charlton Heston suffered from dementia. Is this who we want to have guns?
As for your comment, fine with me.
To Piers Morgan
I was a victim of a crime here in Louisville, Ky. in 1982, in which I was robbed and shot in the head. One of the people involved in this crime was a convicted felon. He was able to post bail and return to the streets to commit another robbery while I was still undergoing multiple surgeries. Then came the trial, they each wanted to make a plea deal by testifing against each other. Dave Armstrong was the county attorney at the time. When I was told about this I had a meeeting with Mr. Armstrong and informed him that in no way I wanted anypart of a plea agreement. That I would do anything to insure that these men went to prison. I took my chances with the Justice system and ended up with both being convicted of their crimes against me. But thing that upset me the most was that a convicted felon was able to make bail with a second degree murder charge and litany of other charges. Both guns use in the crime were Saturday night specials, a 22cal and a 25cal both revolers.
Then in in 1989 while working for Courier Journal and Standard Gravure I had just stepped off the freight elevator when I heard the shots being fired by Joseph Wesbecker entering area 1 of Standard Gravure leaving a trail of dead and injured victims behind him. I was within 30 feet of him. This was a terible act by a very sick man. I knew everone of the victims but his first victim the secretary. But even though this was a active crime scene we still had to continue to work because of some law requiring the daily paper to be printed. They were taking bodies out until late in the night.
So I have a pretty good idea what a gun in the hand of someone with intentions of doing terrible acts with them. Now with all that being said, I am for certain measures in gun laws that make real since.
1. Enforce the laws that are already inacted.
2. Close the loophole in sale of firearm at gun shows and privite indiviuals.
3. Make owners of guns be held responible for any crime commited with their guns if the weapon was left unsecured.
4. Any person or persons using a gun in a crime should be charged federally and not by the state. (No parole)
Also I be open to any other ideas except the outlawing of all these so called assualt type guns and high capicity magazines. This is a feel good thing only and in my opinion will not stop the carnage that we keep seeing. Also why do keep saying that fully automatic are outlawed, they are not they are just more regulated.
Thank you.
Mark S Taurman
Thanks Mark for your testimony. Sorry for your experience and am glad you are well now..I agree with you on your points. I only wish the idiots in Washington could set aside their agendas to do the same.
Dear Mark,
your voice is a powerful one and a reminder of everything that is broken in our society, a legal system that fails us and facilitates violent felons and sick individuals to victimize decent people. I have not gone through what you have but I completely endorse what you propose. It is simply common sense and it is unclear to me why a significant proportion of selfish individuals in our society are against it based on a false belief of infringement of individual rights. I also agree that an assault weapons ban may not be as critical as those measures you outline, but I favor it. We don't know for sure if it won't make a difference until we try it in addition to those other measures. Even if it is symbolic: the AR15 has become a symbol for every loser involved in mass shootings this past year and as a civilized society we can stand up to this disgraceful weapon of murder and its magazines.
An interesting and intelligent viewpoint; definitely food for thought.
It's pretty clear to me that the recent antics of Mr Morgan on the gun control debate are having the opposite effect that he might desire. His constant ranting and raving, inability to listen to any fact or piece of information other than what he might offer is not only becoming annoying beyond belief, but it has to be alienating all loyal viewers of this show who must, by now, be yearing for the old days of Larry King. We might have thought Larry was getting on in his years, but even now my bet would be that he'd have more of a capability to be rational and listen to others who don't espouse his particular view than Mr Morgan can. I think it is time for him to GO and to be replaced with a more reasoned, mature and educated host. I am actually on the side of many gun control issues (eg, universal background checks, real assault weapons ban), but find myself so distressed with his idiocy. I really would like the question to be put to him if he understands that he might actually be helping the "other" side. Bring Larry, (or someone, anyone back in this slot.....). I am eliminating this show from my DVR list.
I could not agree more. I'm not a member of the NRA, but do own guns for home protection and sport (including a couple of AR-15's). Nonetheless, I used to respect Mr. Morgan for his ability to create provocative discussions on a number of issues. However, he's obviously gone over the edge–way to emotionally tied to the subject to offer any real productive dialog. On the subject of "Guns in America," he does not allow guest an opportunity to express their opinions, not when they do not align with his. He keeps trying to point to the type of weapon used in the latest series of shootings as the problem, but overlooks the fact that those guns just did not climb out of a case and began shooting people! The folks that committed those horrific crimes too each had similarities; they were nuts and/or disturbed! Rather than trouncing people for their fews on not banning so-called assault style weapons, how about focusing his efforts on keeping guns out of the hands of the nuts out there committing such crimes? Moreover, I'd love to see Mr. Morgan get from behind his desk, go to a gun range, and make some effort to understand the guns he's so against. He often refers to his brother's knowledge of such weapons and is yet to express any hands-on knowledge. I'm really starting to question why does CNN, a network I trust for its world-wide coverage of news, allows this guy to continue what is obviously a personal agenda of his. I'm truly now sickened by his performances on this subject and will no longer tune in to any of his segments!
Background checks should be enforced on all gun sales. It is very easy for gun owners to be off the hook and claim their guns were stolen when in reality they sold them. Why the NRA refuses this just shows they do not care about the welfare of people, they only care about increasing the profits of gun manufacturers.
That's where you're a sipper of the proverbial liberal Tea. The NRA isn't against this.. It's against it when it's tied to other laws that are NOT part of the solution. How about you start telling your elected officials to concentrate on THAT issue and leave the bans and restrictions on law abiding citizens off the table? You libs can't seem to do just one thing, you want to have it all and then separate the issues when someone disagrees with the "package"
If they outlaw these weapons you will see millions of people reporting their guns stolen and burying them in the back yard. "Just sayin" one way or another they will never take our guns. Plus there are a lit of old war veterans out there that would live the challenge if them attempting to take our guns. Away get out the popcorn and enjoy the show if they do.
Well ALL Retail gun sales have to go through a background check, now if i sale as a private owner i dont, but you are saying we should, Why? because of some deaths, remeber these mental cases didnt go buy guns they stole them how will this help?
More people Die by Drunk drivers why dont we ban the private sale of cars right, the way you are looking at it is the GUN killed someone well so did the Planes and Cars. got a poing yet?
IM with you steve , lets start a boycott of piers morgan, regardless which side you are on , i also can not stand his abusing and talking over everyone he disagrees with, What does everyone else think, any host but pers would satisfy me .
I agree, i would love to be on his show and have a gun Debate with him.
Duke, please remember what Piers Morgan is and where he is from. He is a fraud and lymie and should go back to where he came from. Let him push his lies in his own country
Pierce, maybe I am wrong but a few nights ago you had on a female who was talking about self defense with and AR15 and she gave an example of a woman and child hiding in the attic because someone had broken into her home. She shot the guy several times and was scared. She said "and the guy wasn't even dead". I would think if a guy broke in and was wounded that would be sufficient, seems like she thinks when a burgular breaks into a home he should be dead.
When you have someone break into YOUR home, with YOUR child's life at risk (not to care about your own), then YOU get to say how you would feel better knowing that the intruder isn't a threat to your child anymore. Until then.... SHUT THE F UP!!
Mary, the bad Gould have been dead and what makes you think he has any rights? He brake into my home he would have been carried out, plain and simple and he gave up any rights when he was stupid enough to break in.
You don't have a dog in this fight.
I will to my death defend my right to keep my guns.
We won this right from the Brit's, (you).
If you want to come and take them from me.
Please try,
To be nice, your an arrogant SOB.
You are correct Philip, Piers Morgan is a typical brit, ignorant and arrogant. Those clowns over
there love to push their way of life around and expect us and everyone else to fall in. If that ignorant
lymie wants my weapons then have him come and get them and stop running off with his mouth.
Nothing worse than a socialist lymie.
Hi Phil,
Info you may find useful.
definition of terrorism: the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims.
An ar15 is powerful. How bout a 45 auto pistol with a hollow point. Which packs the biggest punch. I know the answer and its not the one that they are trying to outlaw.
That's the problem, they are ignorant of truth. They just want to control others by deciding what "things" should look like.
....will NOT be taking away these guns. Shouldn't he be charged with a Federal offence if he does this??
Piers... you were very rude and unprofessional to the sheriff your show tonight... it was ridiculous.. you kept interrupting him everytime he was trying to get his point across... he was calm and telling you one side of this gun debate and for some reason... it seemed like u didn't want him to get his point across just because its not what you personally agree with... you have no idea how much people need to be able to protect themselves in this country... if you follow the rules in this society and are educated about weapons and get a certificate to prove you are competent to own a weapon, there is no reason to not be able to arm yourself and protect your family and others in society. Our county jail is so low on funding that they have been sending criminals back on the street as fast as they come in and funding for local police is bad as well... they tell us to be prepared to protect yourself because the police might not get there on time... open yr eyes piers... there are voices that want guns for very good reasons... I agree that many types of guns don't need to be out there... but people like the sheriff you interviewed, make since.. stop being rude and cutting people off that are being respectful to you even though you don't believe the same thing!.. return the respect!..
Because Morgan is one of the most disrespectfull and one side people i have heard.
Not only was Piers rude to the Sheriff, but might we also call him racist?
You know that is what would be said about a conservative host who treated his black guest as Piers did. Not to mention Piers mocking the Sheriff's voice.
I don't believe that the posts on this blog are not pre-screened. Where is my post?
I am not going to say Mr Morgan because that would be respect for those that are respectfull and are open to listen.
First the so called sporting rifles (assult Rifles) are wepons of war or are military grade wepons is false, Second for most of you talking about these types of guns as bad need to do more research, one you probably dont have a gun and never have much less own a sporting rifle like this, they are great fro many reasons:
1) Competion Sports
2) Hunting and yes they are used for hunting and LG distructive varmit control that destroys Farmers crop and land
3) Selfe Defense
4) Gun Collectors
I am very sad for what has happened in the schools and movies but lets face the true facts, the gun didnt do it, the person behind the trigger.
Dont we allready have a law that states you can not take another humal life (Murder) Hmmm didnt help
It is against the law to steal a firearm, Hmmm didnt help
It is against the law to carry a gun on school grounds Hmmm didnt help
well lets make some more laws, Yeah that will help
People die by drunk drivers why are we not trying to ban cars and trucks, because people belive in cars and trucks.
Last thing just food for thought, for those against Assult rifles (sporting Rifles) and are game for allowing hunting rifles, look at the shooting in DC the sniper shooting out of the trunk of his car could not be caught for many months and every one was scared because they did not know where it was comming from, really this was a deer rifle not an assult rifle, what about JFK.
Really CNN STOP BEING SO ONE SIDED, GET SOME GUN OWNERS ON YOUR SHOW AND HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY, BUT DO THIS ONLY IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A TRUE DFERENCE
Can someone tell piers machine guns are legal !!!!! . He needs to get his facts strait...Orr better yet go back to england
Right Nate, i had to laugh when i heard that, and he does national News, typical false information.
Piers, I have not seen all your gun control coverage. From what I've seen, you are doing an excellent job. Stand tall & carry on. I stand by you, in what you're trying to acheive. I want to also stand by Mr Heslin. The fact that he had to endure anything but compassion is alarming, to say the least. I thought we maybe, just maybe, lived in a civilized society.
I have watched all piers shows since sandy hook and think piers has not been fair with pro gun guest ....
Well we can clearly see you are a follower, half of what he said was false, seriously LOL it is false information and he is only running on his own false judgement, and that is doing a good JOB! holy crap now i know what is going on with this world.
Are you suggesting we watch every night the same narrow minded viewpoint, so that we can get a clue of what he espouses?
Just wondering if anyone is trying to make violent video games illegal...that means about 95% of video games. I live down the road from Thurston High School..one of the earlier shootings. All of these young men that are killing, are addicted to these bloody games. They are so hypnotized that if u try to talk to them they get scary angry!!!o d
If you want to see lobbing power ,forget the NRA , how about the motion picture asso. You will never see violent games or movies banned !!!!
And you will never see Piers take on his buddies in the entertainment industry either.
He likes to make the NRA the scapegoats, but the real money and lobbying power is with the Democrat's buddies in Hollywood.
As a father of a 5 and 7 year old, these proposed gun control laws do not give me piece of mind. They seem like a band-aid solution to make us all feel safer, but they don't make us safer. The truth is that no law can prevent these horrible events from happening. The only thing that gives me piece of mind is having a well trained and armed protector(s) in and around our schools. Until that happens, it will continue to be like shooting fish in a barrel for these crazy people.
P.S. Piers Morgan is the rudest person that I have ever seen. Are all Brits like this?
To answer ur question, yes, most Brits are that way, arrogant and always will be. They think they are above everyone in the world and everyone should bow to them.
I agree on the arrogant brits ,they even irritated our founding fathers ,and as far as the gun control, its like banning whiskey to stop drunk drivers, or should you ban cars to stop drunk driving, or is it the bartenders fault for serving to many drinks, we blame the teachers and label them bad, because students dont do homework and fail, and parents dont enforce study time at home , but its the teachers fault , now we blame not all guns just ar-15s , lets solve the problem and until we do , i second the idea that we put some real security in the schools .
No, Piers, the gun did not kill those kids in Newtown, as you claim.
The lunatic pulling the trigger did.
If it was the gun that killed the kids, then I guess we need to blame the car when someone dies or the knife when someone is murdered with it.
I find it odd that you have spent no time discussing your friends in the entertainment industry and their role in the degradation of our culture, as well as the glamorizing of violence. Your crusade against guns and extreme rudeness to those who don't hold your opinion borders on it's own version of a mental disease.
Wow, Piers, if a conservative host talked to a black guest the way you did tonight, we'd be hearing charges of "racism" screamed from the roof tops.
The idea that you would mock his voice and claim that his PSA was "Hollywood" is absurd. The PSA I heard encouraged people to enroll in a gun safety course, and to take personal responsibility for their safety. Nothing wrong with that. The voice used by Sheriff Clarke in the PSA is his own voice. It can't be helped that you apparently don't like how he talks.
I've seen far worse PSA announcements put out by the real Hollywood types as well as by Barack Obama.
YES, ABSOLUTELY. I would say that I was shocked by Piers' latest demonstration of disrespect that, in the case of the sheriff last night, has escalated to racism. Mocking an African American's voice and mocking his style as creating a holly wood drama, was beyond the pale. Totally unacceptable.
Unfortunately, his style has become commonplace, last week exemplified by totally bypassing a female panelist when asking the remaining male panelists about their views on climate change. At this point, with volumes of voiced complaints by Piers' disrespect, disruptions, and lack of self control, my question is for CNN and Piers' associates (Erin, Anderson, etc.): What do YOU think about Piers? And why do you not either reprimand him or, if that fails to change him, fire him?
Tonight was my first time watching this show. I watched it because I'm from the Milwaukee area and I wanted to see what Sheriff David Clarke had to say. Boy was I surprised by this man's "interview" style. It reminds me of Rush Limbaugh, but on the other side of the aisle.
I used to watch Larry King. Man do I miss him.
Gotta love liberals. They hate god and guns...but when there being robed , the first thing they do is call a guy with a gun and pray to god he get there fast !!!!!!
Are we going to change the minds of people that can't reason and give a good answer why they need assault guns? They can't understand that their hand guns or rifles that are used for protection or hunting are not being taken from them. They can't understand that background checks, closing loop holes in the buying or selling of guns, eliminating high capacity magazines and assault weapons is all we are asking for. They either have something to hide or they are paranoiac, home grown terrorist, haters or mentally ill. These people should not have guns period. Look at the people that influence them. Those that spit out fear and hate (NRA, gun companies, Glenn Beck, Russ Limbaugh, Alex Jones, some in Congress, in the Senate, etc.) We all need to respect each others differences and stop killing each other.
Speaking of spitting out fear and hate, we need look no further than Piers Morgan and his extreme obsession with gun control.
We also saw all sorts of fear and hate coming from our President in the last election cycle, when we heard about the mythical "war on women" and the insane accusations that Republicans were going to take away a woman's birth control.
"We all need to respect each other's differences and stop killing each other" I'll agree with that.
The problem with the question "Why do you need assault rifles?" is that many think that it is the wrong question to be asking. I'm not a gun person so I can't answer that question either, but the question I would like to see being asked is…
What are we going to do when the next wacko enters a school and attempts to do the same thing? I'm hoping that my school district has a better plan in place than to just call 911. I want trained/armed protectors in my kid's school. I can't get the thought out of my head that they are just fish in a barrel to these deranged psychopaths.
J Sams, apperantly you have never went to a gun range and shot a ar-15 , you dont know what you are saying , all guns are deadly and dangerous , they are only safe in the hands of responsible owners, I believe the reason ar-15s have been used in the last few shootings is because they are the popular rifle that young men are shooting, you are missing the point these guns didnt kill people , this was crazy people that did this, you want to make a real change ban crazy people and lock them up, all the propaganda you hear from piers morgan is just that propaganda , let me clue you in on the rest of the shows he does , I t will go like this , he will state they are killing machines, high capacity magazines, military style assault rifles, can fire 100 rounds in 30 seconds, who needs these , he will say that as many times as possible every night , and will interrupt anyone who has a different opinion than him , or talk over them or just cut them off and say its my show.why does he do this to fool you and the other people into joining the cause that doesnt really lknow anything about guns, be an adult go to a gun range and just observe and talk to real gun people , and see how they handle their rifles with care, then ask yourself if preventing them from buying another one will help anything. There are already plenty of guns out there a crazy person will always get one if they want one . dont be so one sided ,do your homework and learn piers says we have to try something, this has been tried it doesnt work.
Dana, again – it appears that you have been brainwashed by the NRA as many others in this country which is obviously full of crazy people. Obviously it is impossible to lock them all up so the best option is to get rid of all the guns so that they don't fall in the hands of crazy people. As it was done in all other civilized countries, unless America does not consider itself a civilized country then of course it should be a Wild Wild West and anybody should be able to get a gun and shoot around whenever he/she becomes a crazy person. In this country it is very easy to become crazy even if you are not crazy in the beginning. Go Piers, continue to point the truth to Americans, they need to see how disgusting this looks from outside as they lack ability to self evaluate and be self critical to see how ridiculous this is. why does this happen in this country so much – because it is a violent country with tons of crazy people and abundance of guns literally sold like hot dogs without proper checks.. so what are the solutions? lock all crazy people and sell more guns? super smart!! this is what the super power/number one democracy in the world decides to resolve the issue – that makes no sense. But what can I say, keep on trying – see what happens at the end...good luck
I've been watching you Mr. Morgan over the past year and i have to finally say that you are an idiot. Your methods of attacking or creating an issue when interviewing,getting your point across and interrupting those you interview. Making your self seem compassionate when it best suits you. So I just wanted to say...Congrats if that is the type of reporting you wish to present. Would expect more for CNN... I don't know if you came from the BBC, but if you did... maybe you should have stayed there.
Jane Brewer needs to retire. Obviously, she is still suffering brain freeze. Closing the loophole to the 14th Amendment will solve the problem and it will be at no expense to taxpayers. Closing the boarders is not the solution to the problem because people are also flying to America from other Countries. Withing years, America will be invaded by China because thousands of Chinese women are flying to America to have babies for the sole purpose of citizenship. And then they are returning to Chine to raise their babies and once of age, those children will be sent to America for college education and jobs because they are citizens. The communist upbringing of those children is frightening in particular since they are smart and will probably be successful in management positions. Once again, China will own us and will expect slave labor from Americans. China is not the only country who is taking advantage of the loophole in the 14th Amendment.
i have been following the show for some time now – can cnn post the proposed actions to be taken for gun control clearly right at the beginning of the show and also in the background, so that we dont waste our whole hour watching people keep on saying dont "disarm americans" or "dont take our guns" or "dont take our second amendment rights" when the proposal is to ban only military semi-automatic guns and high capacity magazines and to have strict background checks. Even a non-american can understand this after watching the show and yet, night after night, guest after guest keep on and on talking the same irrelevant thing. Talk about stupid. The whole world sees.
Junk yard dog. How many kids are killed with alcohol and driving and texting a year
The commonwealth o pa just last year said it is alright totalk and drive but u can't text and drive
They can't enforce that law how r they going to ban a gun
Texting while driving kills 6,000 annually in the U.S.
Noticed on todays CNN coverage of gun laws debate that "straw purchasers" of firearms cannot, currently be prosecuted. Whatever happened to " aiding and abetting a criminal" ?
School Safety and Protecting Our Children (see 3. (c))
Organized crime is using influence of the mind and abuse to commit these acts of terror to advocate gun control, a defenseless population.
1. Piers, organized crime has identified a vulnerability that they can attack through acts of terror, our children and schools. Do you believe that our children need to be protected from organized crime acts of terror?
2. Piers, how will this limit on ammunition clips, 10 bullets, prevent organized crime from targeting schools again to commit acts of terror, and more gun control?
3. a) Piers, how long do you think it will be before the mob abuses another citizen, tries to corner him through homelessness, and manipulates him to "hit back at society" through a rage shooting or massacre to advocate gun control?
3. b) Piers, how long before the mob targets another citizen, abuses him with energy assault weapons, powerful radar aimed at inflicting deadly cancers through bone marrow damage, cell damage, inflammation, lung scars, etc. and manipulate him into killing another Federal judge and Senator to advocate gun control?
3. c) Piers, how long before the mob targets another citizen, convinces him that people are on the Hook in New Jersey following Hurricane Sandy and ignored while they suffer in the cold, and that if he commits a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary with his brothers license from New Jersey it will make this injustice visible, to advocate gun control?
2nd Amendment
"The reason you find so many of us very reluctant to go down this road is we believe each step down this road leads to the next step and the next step and the next step," said the former Speaker of the House. "We actually think the Second Amendment is central to our liberties, .. "
Piers, I think he's on to the British.
British regimes subjugate the population through organized crime and corruption, charter of rights are gradually weakened similar to this attempt to weaken the 2nd Amendment, charter of rights are easily dismissed in court as citizens are targeted through organized crime, pushed to homelessness or murdered to prevent exposure of wrong doing or international human rights violations, censorship, etc, tyranny .. "let them eat cake" – Marie Antoinette
They are now using energy assault weapons, powerful radar assaults aimed at inflicting deadly cancers from neighboring homes, public places, at their court house to prevent addressing basic human rights violations in the Canadian Criminal Code 672.12 (1)(3), the right to a trial, the freedom of expression, etc. on the population that they want defenseless. .. dictatorship through organized crime hidden from the general population.
Thank you, I've just been looking for information about this subject for a long time and yours is the greatest I've found out till now. But, what in regards to the conclusion? Are you certain concerning the supply?|What i do not realize is in reality how you are no longer actually a lot more well-appreciated than you may be right now. You're very intelligent.
Simply wanna comment that you have a very nice site, I like the style it really stands out.
Just a smiling visitant here to share the love (:, btw great design and style .
Have you ever heard of second life (sl for short). It is basically a online game where you can do anything you want. Second life is literally my second life (pun intended lol). If you would like to see more you can see these Second Life articles and blogs
This was great! I would like you to clean up all this spam though
This was awesome! I would like you to clean up all this spam though
This was great! I would like you to clean up all this spam though
Have you ever heard of second life (sl for short). It is basically a video game where you can do anything you want. sl is literally my second life (pun intended lol). If you would like to see more you can see these sl articles and blogs
I don't know about you people but I love airplanes. I had a friend in highschool that loved airplanes, so here are some airplane related stuff I don't know about you guys but I love airplanes. I had a friend in highschool that loved airplanes, so here are some airplane related stuff https://www.airlinereporter.com/2009/08/another-naked-guy-on-a-southwest-flight-to-las-vegas/
Have you ever heard of second life (sl for short). It is essentially a online game where you can do anything you want. sl is literally my second life (pun intended lol). If you want to see more you can see these sl articles and blogs


text:
The Voters Have Spoken: EA Is Your Worst Company In America For 2012!
Whether it's on a console, a PC, a smartphone or tablet, hundreds of millions of people play video games every day. Yet most mainstream media covers the industry the same way it treats adult dodge ball leagues and cat fashion shows (both noble ventures, but neither of them multi-billion dollar industries). And the only time you hear legislators discuss video games is when some politician decries them as the death knell for all things righteous in the world (hint: they're not). Now, after years of being ignored and relegated to steerage, game-players have voted to send a message to Electronic Arts and the gaming business as a whole: Stop treating your loyal customers like crap.
After more than 250,000 votes, Consumerist readers ultimately decided that the type of greed exhibited by EA, which is supposed to be making the world a more fun place, is worse than Bank of America's avarice, which some would argue is the entire point of operating a bank.
To those who might sneer at something as "non-essential" as a video game company winning the Worst Company In America vote: It's that exact kind of attitude that allows people to ignore the complaints as companies like EA to nickel and dime consumers to death.
For years, while movies and music became more affordable and publishers piled on bonus content — or multiple modes of delivery — as added value to entice customers to buy, video games have continued to be priced like premium goods.
There have even been numerous accusations that EA and its ilk deliberately hold back game content with the sole intent of charging a fee for it at a later date. It's one thing to support a game with new content that is worth the price. It's another to put out an inferior — and occasionally broken — product with the mindset of "ah, we'll fix it later and make some money for doing so."
New, independent game companies do pop up all the time, but the cost of entering the market has historically been too expensive, making these indie innovators prime targets for acquisition by mega-publishers like EA. Our hope is that the growth of app-based gaming and downloadable games will continue to make it easier for developers to get their products out without the backing of companies that don't care a lick about the people who fork over their cash.
Oh well, Worst Company In America 2012 is officially in the books. All that's left to do is send off the Golden Poo to EA.
Traditionally, the Poo has been delivered on its little red pillow. But this year, we'll give EA three different color options for its pillow, though in the end it's still the same old Poo.
Thanks again to everyone who voted. See you all again in about 49 weeks!
Want more consumer news? Visit our parent organization, Consumer Reports, for the latest on scams, recalls, and other consumer issues.