Reasons to continue the Impeachment of Trump

There has been some debate with regards to continuing the Impeachment process of Donald J. Trump.

And here are a few reasons why Impeachment of Donald Trump should continue.

Actions that are criminal that should not be allowed.

The actions that Trump has done, are by no means, excusable for any public official.

Within days before January 6th, it has been shown that Donald Trump tried to pressure the Georgia Secretary of State to recant the election results.  This is, by definition trying to rig an election in his favor.

However, this isn't the reason why the Articles of Impeachment were called up.

It is the events of January 6th, which were prompted by him, that should never happen, ever.

Days prior, he encourage all his supporters to come to Washington, DC on January 6th.

His speech and tweets that day, encouraged all his supporters to march on the Capitol, with vague enough direction that can be interpreted as storming the Capitol building.

Even his tweets during the riot, did not tell people to stand down, only not to attack the police (Which they still did).

He endangered the legislative branch of our democracy with said crowd.  This is something that cannot be contested or denied.  The very rioters who were arrested after the fact and confirmed being in the Capitol Building, stated they were there because they believe Trump wanted them there.

Also, said rioters wanted Mike Pense, who he called out in both his speech and tweets, chanting "Hang Mike Pense", with what looks like obvious intent to execute Mike Pense if they caught him.

He stated that he 'called for the National Guard', however, the timeline shows that as it was happening, his focus was NOT contacting the National Guard, but to contact one of his supporters in Congress to keep pushing the objection to the electoral votes.

And now we are getting word that he also intended on replacing the Acting Attorney General with a political appointee to overturn the Georgia vote.

We are now seeing, within the first week of January, Trump had intended to abuse his power multiple times as well as incite a riot with intent to bully or terrorize the legislative branch to katow to his will.

Why should we continue with the impeachment of Donald Trump.

First - Setting a precedent for future public officials.

These actions come within the final weeks of Donald Trump's Presidential Office.

If we do not impeach Donald Trump for these actions, we set a very dangerous precedent to future public officials that it is alright to commit crimes, abuse of power and the like, fail at it, and get away with it because you did not manage to keep the office.

This would allow carte blanche to current and future politicians that it is alright to incite a riot towards the government, to bully our states into bending to his will, becoming a literal American Emperor. (Much like the Roman Empire, or even more comically contemporary of Palpatine becoming the Emperor of the Galactic Empire).

Second - Common sense intention

While some republicans are stating that it would be unconstitutional or it was not part of the constitution, I say that the common sense intention of the Articles of Impeachment was there to hold officials, including the President responsible for their actions.

When the process with regards to impeachment was put up, it was the belief that an official in question would be held accountable for their actions when it was brought up.

In the cases of William Belknap, Secretary of War, he resigned but was still impeached (Same day).  His impeachment trial continued while he was a private citizen, but was acquitted.

Samuel B. Kent (Southern Texas Judge) was impeached 11 days before he resigned and the ruling did not happen until 22 days after he resigned.

Given these two impeachments, while they did not end with conviction, does show that since they were called before the end of their term (Most notably, Kent and Belknap), it isn't necessarily unconstitutional to proceed with the Articles of Impeachment while he is out of office.

Third - We cannot afford Trump to dictate the future of US politics.

While Trump supporters cite he did 'great' things for the US such as:

• Improve the US Economy
• Did not enter a war during his 4 years of his presidency
• Increased employment (including for those of color)
• Brokered peace in the Middle East

A lot of that is undone by his actions since the beginning of 2020.

Economic Downslide

The handling of COVID-19, while no country was able to handle it properly, was still a dismal failure from beginning and to the end of his term.

The reason this is part of the Economic Downslide, is due to his insistence on not heeding his advisor's recommendations due to 'optics'.

The lack of leadership with trying to get ahead of it and then with regards to help getting the vaccinations out as well as telling people that it will 'go away'.  Further to it, by encouraging people to ignore his advisor's recommendations, he furthered the irresponsible behavior with regards to travel and the spreading of COVID-19, which is now straining some cities abilities to handle the cases.

His 'intervention' with the COVID relief in December, while voicing people should have $2000 relief checks seems altruistic, the problem is, his team was involved with the negotiation for the $600 checks to begin with, and his stepping into it and delaying of signing it put those who were under unemployment in dire straights as the unemployment benefits were tied to that COVID relief, which expired days before he agreed to sign it.

These two things affected our economy and prolonging our economic downslide, all in the name of 'optics'.

This also affects the employment situation in turn as well.

Foreign relations are strained

Trump has strained all of our foreign relations, such as with Europe and NATO.

While the touting that he brokered peace in the Middle East, in 2020, he may have endangered it by drone striking the Iranian General.

At the beginning of 2021, there was concern on the anniversary of his death the retribution from Iran about the drone strike, which means we are still waiting for the repercussions of his actions.

Steve Pompeo, part of the Trump Administration, as well as Trump, have put a strain with China with regards to COVID-19 and with Taiwan.

Putting 'America First' has literally made us seem 'elitist' and even more arrogant than what we have been accused of in the past.

The "they are laughing at us" which was Trump's rallying cry to get him voted ended up making it a prophecy of the fact they are laughing at us, for all the actions he have carried out since he has been president and the recent events at the Capitol, which made people questioned our democracy.

Lying to the nation

Yes, I know politicians lie.

Everyone lies.

But Trump's agenda of lies is to the point of creating division among us as well as our foreign allies.

The events of January 6th is a result of Trump who insists that the election was stolen.  That there was no way Biden could have won the election.

Yet even his own people have stated that the election was fair.

He pushed several republicans to push that agenda, making people question the validity of votes.

The lie has been pushed for months, culminating to the events of January 6th, making many believe that it was necessary to assault the Capitol to overturn the Election.

His influence will further alienate the US from the world stage

In the last 4 years alone, the 'Make America Great Again' is slowly becoming similar to the touting of the rise of 'The Third Reich'.

The push to 'be great' and insulting our foreign allies will eventually make us isolated, ignoring the fact that some of our 'American' businesses do rely on materials outside of the US as well as Exports to said foreign countries.

Isolationism will, in turn affect our economy as we are not a self-sufficient country nor will we grow by ourselves.

Trump's views and his administration has not allowed a long term view with that in mind.

In the end, his presidential legacy should be remembered, by everyone, what not to do as a president.

When losing the presidency, to lose it graciously, not petulantly or reject the loss by any means possible, even at the cost of lives, which it has done.

While some will continue to believe that this will divide the country, we must show that no one public official should be allowed to do things without consequences, even at the end of of their term.

Trump, Make America Great Again and the odd resembalance of the rise of Nazi Germany.

 Admittedly, I am not a 'good' historian, but I do a little read up from time to time.

However, I find it oddly coincidental, that the beginning rise of Nazi Germany happened around the 1920s and it is 2020-2021.

People I know are still gravitating towards Trump for reasons that are difficult to fathom, purely on his saying that he won the election 'by a lot' and that the election was stolen.

Now why I mention this, is the way people are acting, and the sentiments from November 5th to this day and the similarities to Adolf Hitler's rise.

Now mind you, Adolf Hitler rose to power a second time, and even America supported, initially, the Nazi party for one reason.  Our concerns, at that time, the rise of communism and Nazi Germany at this time, was an Anti-Communist.

But note this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

"Nazism is a form of fascism,^[2][3][4][5] with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system."

Now this part is important.

We are seeing that there is a disdain for democrats and a distrust with Congress (Due to having democrats in it and some republican.)

To add to this, since the Election, Trump has told his supporters, like a cult-like mantra, that the election was rigged, it was stolen, that there is no way Biden could win without rigging the election.

Let's look at that from a high level view.

Trump has put in 62 lawsuits spanning 7 some states.  Of those 62, 1 of them was only successful in making a check for ID confirmation on the votes, but failed to overturn the results none the less.

In those lawsuits and appeals, not all those judges are democrats, but republicans.  Including the ones in Supreme Court, who were appointed by Trump himself.

Now let's also look at the claim of 'won the election, by a lot'.

How much is 'a lot'?  Trump never defined how much for each state, and that is a problem.  By stating 'by a lot', with nothing firm, is begging to be dismissed by any rational person.

Focusing on 'some counties' for 'issues' in the count is also questionable.  While it is true that small amounts adding up to being a whole could tilt the balance, the argument was not going to hold when recounts done, kept coming up as being fairly accurate, even with discrepancies.

While one could say the election is so corrupt that you will not get the numbers in question, the real question is, why not go and verify it yourself?

The grand lie is saying that there is no way for Biden to win short of cheating.  But then, why is it, Trump harasses a Georgia State Secretary to 'go find him 11780 votes', where the votes were certified 3 times by REPUBLICAN ELECTED OFFICIALS?

Isn't this, by definition, trying to rig an election?  To have people 'find' more votes for him after the vote has been audited three times and the results are returning the same with a small variation.

So question to those who still believe that Trump won the election.  Why is it Trump needs to harass and pressure a state official to decertify their electoral votes in one state?

Why was it necessary to have Trump Supporters push towards to capital to "Hang Mike Pense" when Mike Pense refused to overturn the count?

Is this the democracy of 'Law and Order' that Trump says he supports?  Where if it does not turn out his way, cajoling, harassing or mob rule is necessary to get the results.

Strangely, this is how Hitler's Sturmabteilung (Aka Brownshirts) helped promote Hitler's rise in Germany.  (Reference: https://www.historyhit.com/hitlers-bullyboys-the-role-of-the-sa-in-nazi-germany/)

The startling focus here is that it is 'anti-left' and focusing on 'the back stabbing politicians' (re: Congress).  This is literally an echo of Germany back then, except instead of disgruntled soldiers, it is now Americans who feel the Democrats are betraying America.

So I will leave people with this.  I am not a democrat.  Nor am I a republican.  I will also admit, I have never been a fan of Trump since he became President.

I have resisted posted anything about him, but since January 6th, and the follow up since then, hearing how Trump supporters insist that he won the election, how some of the more radical portion of his supporters act much like the Brown Shirts and made me think of Trump being like Hitler with his 'MAGA Shirts'...  The similarities are hard to ignore overall.

Just remember also, Trump is inciting fear and loathing.  Similar to Hitler's rhetoric of hate and anger that made Nazi Germany rise the way it did back then.

Lastly, as the most often quoted saying:

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

People who see Trump without fault for what happened on January 6th with the Capitol Riot, and not responsible for inciting the actions of the more radical element of his supporters with his rhetoric, or worse yet, still unwilling to not let themselves 'think' and 'verify' for themselves.  Will find themselves much like the Germans who supported Nazi Germany based on the rhetoric, but ignoring the facts of what the Nazi Party truly is.

And at this moment, Trump and his MAGA movement, is echoing the Nazi Party of 1920s Germany, we won't be too far off in following the later concerns if we continue to let the mob rule and actions continue unabated and put reason forth.

Star Trek Discovery

So I have to rant a little about Star Trek Discovery...

I will first admit, I don't hate the series.  But I do have to nitpick on a few things that are just simply wrong about where they claim this series is placed in comparison to established Star Trek.

Tech
So we get to see the ships for Discovery...  Nice, sleek... And contradicts the designs laid out in both Enterprise and The Original Series (TOS).

Nacelles are Post TOS design (IE: 1980s Enterprise/Enterprise A), not sticking with the established 'round' ones.  Even for the 'older' ship, the Shenzon.  Even Enterprise, they made the NX-01 have the rounded nacelles.

Holographic Communications - Never was part of Enterprise or in TOS in Starfleet.  It was 'screen to screen'.  Holographic communication did not get involved until Deep Space 9.

Shielded Bulkhead support - Was also not available until The Next Generation.  The TOS based ships didn't do that until around Generations level.

Transporter Controls - Both Enterprise and TOS transporter controls were still 'manual' switches, not the digital touch pad they showed.

Cloaking - Mostly a Romulan thing, not a Klingon used idea until TOS, and not until the whole Romulan/Klingon alliance came up during TOS.  At the time, Klingons were pretty 'up front' about most of their fighting in both Enterprise and TOS.

Speaking of Klingons...

The drastic change in the Klingons and the pretty much ret-conning of what was established with regards to the Klingons.

Remember, in Enterprise, while it wasn't the GREATEST explanation of the whole "Why do the Klingons look like humans?" part, it at least explained why Enterprise started out with Klingons looking like traditional Klingons, then looked like Humans which was even glossed over in DS9 when Worf was asked why Klingons didn't look like Klingons as they do later on.

But this change is even MORE drastic.  The iconic Klingon battle armor/tunic of either Enterprise or TOS is now a cast off of Vlad the Impaler from Bram Stoker's Dracula movie props.

More so, the Klingons here look even 'vampiric', or 'strigoi' (Re: The Strain) looking than either Klingon look we have seen.  In fact, bald Klingons...  Literally lacking even distinction between the genders short of hearing their voice.

As a fan, I am sort of disappointed that they would have us believe that this is set 10 years prior to TOS.  Even when they did Enterprise, even with the Temporal and Borg stuff put in, kept things within reason of the 'time period' given when Enterprise was created in relation to TOS.

I will say, I am not going to condemn the show outright, mostly cause I found, despite my nitpickiness about aspects of it, I found the two episodes interesting for their setting.

However, I strongly suggest that they do consider that this is not part of the 'Prime' timeline.  Definitely not part of the JJ Abrahms revamp timeline either.  At best, this would be another branch timeline.

The whole thing about AR-15, Gun Control and whatnot...

In this week alone, there has been a lot of hoopla about restricting the sale of AR-15s, the NY Journalist who said he got a bruised shoulder and temporary PTSD, Gun Control and the shooting in Orlando.

Sad thing of all of this, is the fact that so much crazed ranting from both sides, that we aren't all sitting down and understanding certain basic things.

Now, mind you...  I'm not a gun owner.  But I do like to fire off guns when given an opportunity.

I probably can't trust myself with a gun, knowing I am a fire cracker at times and I play violent games involving guns.

But suffice it to say, I am not a person who advocates 'disarming' or preventing people from owning guns.

Add to it, I am somewhat in favor of gun control at the level of what it means to procure a gun in the proper way.

So getting to the point here is simply this.

The sale of a rifle, semi-automatic or just single bolt is fine.  Does everyone need an AR-15?  Not really.  The AR-15 is not a 'necessity' for personal defense unless you happen to live in the boonies or we are in a Zombie Apocalypse situation.

For Special Tactics squads like Police, Sheriffs or Specialized Private Security, I can understand it.  For home defense, again, unless it is a Zombie Apocalypse or you are way out in the boonies where someone can't help you easily, perhaps.

Being able to have a shotgun or a hand gun should be a 'reasonable' weapon for self-defense in most urban areas.  Rifles and Semi-automatics are best for non-urban self-defense reasons as you are dealing with ranged intruders more than close and personal.

Gun control being outlined is about making sure a gun is not procured in a way that can be detrimental to the rest of society.  Some of the posts where people are ranting about how Gun Control is liken to things like what Hitler did in Germany or violating their second amendment rights leads me to believe people are fearing for the wrong reasons.

The gun control the US needs is the fact that getting a gun is difficult, not easy, to get.  The second amendment is on the basis that we are not to be disarmed 'for our own sake' as what was the reasoning by the British back when the US was still a colony of Britain.  Colonists were expected to not have any weapons, to allow the British government to hold sway over the colonies.

What has been harped is the belief that gun control means just that...  We are being disarmed for our own sake.  If this was the case, there has been no law or suggestion of a law to say that if you own a gun or a particular gun, you must give it to the government 'for your own sake'.  What has been proposed is the limit to what can be purchased.

Of the current gun control restrictions I have seen so far, the ban on assault rifles and large magazines were to limit the destructive power a person can inflict with said weapons.  It is rare to need an assault rifle for home protection or a need for a large magazine.

One thing I did cringe upon is the lack of informed understanding of a weapon.  Such as the one politician who was arguing anti-gun:

If anything, I would say the State Senator is not familiar with guns and did not have someone assist him in understanding the gun in question or the terminology of what he cited in his discussion.

However, looking at SB 808, with regards to the Gun Control Bill...  Only loosely looking at it, has nothing to do with preventing a person from purchasing a gun or to have a gun.

The bill itself puts several stipulations that are necessary to get a weapon, such as the weapon has to be purchased through a licensed dealer, it has to have identifying marks and serial number.  Much of the information here points to what should be 'common sense' with regards to at weapon with regards to public safety as well as stipulations with regards to the purchaser as well.

Going with Gersh Kuntzman's "report" with regards to the AR-15...  Again, while I have never fired an AR-15, a few things I have fired is a Calico M100 Semi-automatic Rifle (.22), a .22 Pistol and a .38 revolver.

Given the AR-15 is a .225 Semi-automatic rifle, it is almost similar to the M100 Calico, the round being slightly larger.  The difference between the M100 and the AR-15 is that the M100 Calico uses a much shorter round than the AR-15, meaning it doesn't have nearly as much propellant, and I also believe the muzzle is shorter than the AR-15.  The M100 also sports over 50 rounds in comparison to the 30 round magazine that the AR-15 regularly has.

With this said, I have fired numerous rounds from the M100, with no ear protection, hence my earlier belief that the AR-15's muzzle is shorter and the fact the AR-15 has more propellant due to the round size.

From experience firing the .38 revolver, yes, I was temporarily deafen by the sound, hence my understanding of the 'terrifying' sound and my earlier statement about the AR-15's muzzle and round.  The .38 is a larger round and a shorter muzzle makes the sound much more pronounced at close range.  Compared to the M100's .22 and muzzle, I hardly needed ear protection from the sound.

Which comes back to the report Gersh makes.  He makes himself foolish by claiming its deafening and bruising his shoulder.  This is an over exaggeration, as shown by a few people recanting his story with images of a children firing a gun and one man literally firing the gun from the tip of his nose.

From my own experience, again, firing the M100, even with its short round, there was literally no kickback in comparison to the .38.  And even then, the .38 didn't wrench my wrist and at the time, I was about 19 years old in comparison to 51.

The only 'terrifying' part of a gun is, of course, being on the end that spews the bullets itself.  A fear of a gun is not in holding or using it, it is being on the end of its fury with a user pointing it at you.  The fear invoked by it is the fact that you can die from it and mishandling it is like trying to play catch with a sharp knife, tossing it around carelessly.

The 'PTSD' part of it only comes when you have been hurt by it.  If you are easily started by loud noises, perhaps a little PTSD comes with it, but then, you would be afraid of fire crackers or car backfires as well.

The simplest example of anything is that most people don't realize what a gunshot sound is other than a loud bang sound.  Many guns sound 'different' based on the muzzle and round type they use, and that is not counting the fact that there are silencers that can also alter or mute the sound as well.  Not being the gun fanatic, even I come to the conclusion of this.  What more, many of us mis-identify a gunshot as a backfire from a car, because we are USED to some of those sounds or even with fire crackers, because, strangely enough, they are used more often than gun sounds.

From Gersh's perspective...  His report is flawed simply on the fact that he has not been exposed to the world at large.  Even more so than me, and I am not that exposed to many things.

The thing of it all though is that we have too many people hyping their own agenda, trying to make everyone believe their current agenda, often times going over board on what they believe are 'facts'.

We need people to be less sensational about it and be more factual and accurate about what they are proposing.  While emotions are high about certain situations, in the end, being 'correct and accurate' will go a lot further than 'sensationalism'.

About 'Batman v Superman'...

A while ago, I was about to write a few choice criticisms about the movie...

Jeremy Irons, who was in the movie as Alfred, actually sums up one of my criticisms about the movie here:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/29/batman-v-superman-jeremy-irons-criticism

The movie, in and of itself, was actually a rush and literal mish-mosh of several plot lines in one movie, which was disappointing to say the least.

Some people actually hit on it, but let me go over some of the issues I had with it.

First...  Lex Luthor.

The casting of Jesse Eisenberg, was, in my opinion, not a reasonable one for the movie.  Not so much for his looks, but the acting or what he was directed to act for Lex Luthor in the movie.

Over all, Gene Hackman and Kevin Spacey's version of Lex Luthor was much more adequate for the person, even in the really bad Superman II and IV movies for Gene Hackman.

The Eisenberg version seemed more like he was trying to mix a little of The Joker with Lex Luthor.  While his Lex Luthor was condescending genius, sort of way, his sociopath take on him read a bit too much like the Joker.

Even the Animated version of Superman, voice acted by Clancy Brown and the Justice League, the Lex Luthor in that series was much more composed, even near the end of that series where he is shown to be less than sane.

Next...  Plot points...

Suffice it to say, the original intent of Batman versus Superman is a plot point from one comic, "The Dark Knight Returns" by Frank Miller...  Where an old Bruce Wayne becomes Batman once again, to the point he has to face off against Superman...  The movie also decided to throw a few too many other things to it to 'make it exciting'.

One of those plot points is 'Injustice - Gods among men'.  A scene plays out where Superman is seen as an Overlord, dispensing Justice in a nightmare that Batman has.  This is literally from not only "Injustice" but also one of the Justice League stories, where the Justice League becomes Justice Lords...

Another plot point shoved into our face is the formation of the Justice League, in this case, the joining of forces with Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman against a powerful foe.

Another plot point is the introduction of Doomsday and the death of Superman...  Again, this is another plot point from one of the more significant events in the Superman storyline around the early 2000s.

Batman's Origin being another plot point sort of shoved in there, and tying the name of Martha Wayne to Martha Kent was a bit of a reach.

A reference to Crisis of the Infinite Earths is also included in there, where you see a brief showing of the Flash trying to tell Batman something, which made Batman almost dismiss it as being a hallucination.

Basically, too many different plot points crammed into one movie to make it exciting, but even in how it was structured, it was almost nonsensical to me, on some of the jumps in logic made on certain information.

Overall, the movie was rushed and tried too many things at once.  The logic behind it all could only be masked by the action, but I think the action itself can't make the movie seem confusing and rather not as good as "Man of Steel".

Obama's Hiroshima Apology and Social Media

So, someone posted the following:

http://www.youngcons.com/obama-says-dropping-bomb-on-hiroshima-was-evil-fiery-tweet-responds-we-owe-no-apology/

What sets me off is the fact that this is actually... INCORRECT.

The original text of Obama's speech is this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/world/asia/text-of-president-obamas-speech-in-hiroshima-japan.html

No where in there does Obama state that dropping the bomb on Hiroshima was evil.

What makes me even more annoyed...  Is this:

Hiroshima? Bataan Death March, Bangka Island Massacre, Sandakan Death March, The Rape of Nanking, Pearl Harbor. We owe no apology.

— WeirdReport (@WeirdReport) May 26, 2016

 Said group didn't look up the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan

A country that is still apologizing to this day for what has happened 70+ years later, and quite possibly will still do so for years to come.

Another argument made was why should we apologize for a bomb that has killed over 100 thousand people killed between the two bombs alone in retaliation for an attack that got us into a war we were partially taking part in and killing 2,403 men, wounding 1,178.  This argument grated at me where they ignored the fact that between the two nuclear bombs dropped, the number of dead is an 'equivalent' retaliation.

This is the problem with Social Media and also Social Engineering...

Social Media, and perhaps media itself, is a way to define a narrative without presenting facts.

That the use of a nuclear bomb on a city is justifiable retaliation for being attacked.  That our retribution is justifiable at any cost.  That we have no reason to be sorry to do what we want because our cause is right.

Sadly, this is what a terrorist or a jihadist would rationalize their belief.  They should not feel sorry for doing whatever it takes, as it is retribution for hindering their agenda.

You say we don't have an agenda?  You are sorely mistaken.  We want our gas prices to be low, our involvement in Kuwait was part of our agenda to keep the oil from the Mid-east flowing to keep oil prices reasonable.  We tolerate some of the social injustices in Saudi Arabia because it suits our agenda for Oil once again.

We still deal with China, a Communist country, and some of its social issues because said electronics you buy, are, made in China...

We all have agendas that is about our immediate comforts, but when it comes to Social Media, we all try to play out that we are 'high and mighty'.  But in the end of it all, it is still following an agenda people want.

Young Conservatives hate Obama, so they spin up a Social Media snafu using people who cite information with only a one side of the coin, not the full side and misquoting a speech to suit their agenda...

In the end of it all, people should take the time to read the actual 'apology' to Japan about Hiroshima...

My take on this, while I don't believe an apology was fully necessary, is that Obama believes that we (Not just the Americans, but everyone in the world) need to remember Hiroshima for the one thing it does point to that some of us who lived our young and teenage years of the 80s feared as well as those who lived through the 50s, 60s and 70s, the fear of a nuclear war...  The potential of a nuclear war is STILL there...  And with other countries now developing Nuclear or Dirty Nuclear weapons, the horrors of what we have learned from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the only cities to be have been intentionally nuked by a country.

What has been repeatedly stated, time and time again, is if we do not learn from the use of Nuclear weapons on our two only know uses of a Nuclear Weapon on actual cities and the moral implications...  How are we, as human race, be able to survive when we don't accept the consequences for our actions, regardless of the reason for those actions?

America is no longer America anymore...

I may have mentioned a little of my history here...  If not, a small recap.

I am a fourth generation Japanese American.  My grandfather was born and raised in America in the early 1900s.

When World War II started.  My grandfather, his family and even his parents were displaced from their homes in Los Angeles due to the attack at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, for fear that they were all loyal to the Emperor of Japan and would rise up to cause harm to the US.  This displacement was to one of many interment camps in the middle of America.

My grandfather, among many other Japanese Americans men, volunteered to be part of the 442nd RCT, mostly to prove their loyalty to America and were discriminated both on the battlefield and back at home after the war because, sadly enough, they were Japanese.

It took literally almost 50 years before America apologize for this.

Something to note...  The year is now 2015...  Almost 2016.  A presidential election is coming up and of late, the thing that I have seen happen is the following...

One, our fear about muslims is at an all time high.  Since September 11th, 2001, we have steadily been focusing about the middle east, but more in particular, about the muslim faith.  In the last 3 years alone, we have escalated our fear about the religion and sadly, we have even getting closer and closer to the point that we are mirroring our own media.

In this case, I am beginning to liken this to 'The Siege'...  A movie that was put out in 1998...  And beginning to see some disturbing trends that will come to be.

First, while it is rightly so that Islam and the Muslim faith has text that references some deplorable things...  I might want to point out something, being a non-practicing Christian, that faith has always been used as an excuse for deplorable things and has been 'warped' to fit a man's view of how things were to be.

Remember, Christianity was based on Judeaism, its roots are from Jewish traditions and changed a little to say not all things were to be adhered to like it was in the Jewish faith.  At the same time, men who followed the faith of Christianity has also used it to 'convert' people to their interpretation or even made various branches of the Christian faith.  Catholicism, Protestant, Mormonism, and so forth.  Even the cult leaders such as David Koresh and Jim Jones...

What does this have to do with my concerns?

Right now, we are doing exactly what happened to Japanese Americans...  We are blanket accusing a group of people based on the actions of another group.  Not everyone of the Muslim faith will follow all the edicts.  Just as not all Christians are following the purest sense of Christianity because each group sees it done one way or another, but the principle is there.

I will also remind that while the history of Islamic Faith has been that of a conqueror, we also cannot ignore what has been done in the name of the Christian Faith in Europe and also in the Americas by many Europeans such as the Inquisition.  This is against what was intended by the originator of Christianity, or at least, to my belief the intention.

We also ignore the other situation of the fact of what some religions do to encourage ways to continue the faith, such as some old testament text referencing surrogacy.  Or ignoring the fact it is perfectly alright for men to stone other men for using the Lord's name in vain back then, yet we do not do that now.

One other thing I will note...  Is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s

Brigitte Gabriel quotes several interesting numbers...  The fact that it is a small group of people who drove the violent agenda and responsible for millions of death.

What is interesting is something else to note...

The Germans, as a whole, were not blamed for the horrors inflicted upon the Jews and many others who have died over the period of time that the Nazis.  The ones who were blamed, as a whole, were those who were responsible for it.

She ignored the fact that the 'minority' of the Japanese Americans, feared by Americans as being the 'internal threat', were apologized by the United States fifty years later, an ethnic group singled out unlike German Americans or Italian Americans, which, strangely enough some German Americans did answer 'The Call' from the Fatherland...

It is easy to paint a picture of hate and fear and ignoring other things.  The McCarthy Era for the fear of Communism, while the threat was credible, at the same time, many were bullied and accused or threatened because of being 'associated' with it and we also consider those times 'dark' and questionable.

The saddest thing of it all, is near the end of the video, the words she ask to the person she 'lectured'...

"Are you an American?"

I am a patriot...  But I am becoming ashamed to being an American.  My grand father fought in Europe, survived the persecution of being a Japanese American were people did not trust you...  My grand father has even told me, time and time again...  Never to forget.

And right now, I have not forgotten what he has said to me...  And it is sad to see the America is so driven by fear that I am beginning to see the shades of his concerns brought about once again where we have people asking this question...  And making a statement that focuses on all we fear and hate to another group.

We haven't learned from our history...  And while I am not a fan of 'political correctness'...  I am no fan of broad sweeping arguments that does nothing more than promote the worst kind of scenario of human kind.