Army Chief Opposes Private Weapons for Troops

By John Semmens – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent NewsIn testimony before a congressional committee investigating the murders of military personnel at military facilities, Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley told Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) that he was opposed to letting troops carry personal weapons to defend themselves.“Let me assure Congress that our higher ranking officers are well protected by the existing procedures,” the General said. “Base commanders have a contingent of armed guards between themselves and any potential assailant. I am confident that no intruders could get to them without themselves being shot.”“What about lower ranking soldiers?” Lee asked. “They don't have guards assigned to them. Why shouldn't they be allowed to carry their own handguns for self-defense?”“Well, there's a danger that these personal weapons would be inappropriately used,” Milley replied. “Do we really want troops to make the decision to discharge their weapons before being give the order to do so by a commanding officer? Can we afford to break this link in the chain of command just to save a few lives in the lower ranks? Asking a handful of soldiers to sacrifice themselves in order to keep their superiors safer better prioritizes the human assets we have at our disposal.”In 2009, the procedures with which General Milley is satisfied allowed an armed gunman to kill 13 and wound 32 others in the eight minutes before the Ford Hood base police shot the assailant. Nevertheless, Milley insisted that “I am not convinced from what I know that carrying privately owned weapons would have stopped that individual. Clearly, the base's command structure was never seriously threatened. So, I'd have to say that what we are doing is working as it was designed to do.” Cal AG Justifies RaidCalifornia State Attorney General Kamala Harris (D) justified her office's raid on the home of pro-life activist David Daleiden this week, contending that “the actions of Mr. Daleiden constitute a clear and present danger to the State and the values we are trying to protect.”Daleiden was instrumental in the acquisition and airing of undercover videos of Planned Parenthood officers and employees engaged in illegal trafficking of human organs harvested from aborted fetuses. Harris has declined to initiate an investigation of this illegal trafficking because “the evidence gathered by Mr. Daleiden was obtained through surreptitious methods. An invasion of privacy cannot serve as the foundation of a prosecution regardless of the alleged heinous nature of the activities spied upon.”The AG also rebuffed charges of abuse of authority, saying that “my pursuit of a case against Mr. Daleiden upholds the mutual respect between the State and those organizations, like Planned Parenthood, who contribute to the cause of good government. Their investment in the success of my candidacy for my current office and my quest for the U.S. Senate entitles them to a rigorous effort against detractors like Mr Daleiden.”“As former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointed out earlier this week, the unborn person that Mr. Daleiden and his ilk seek to champion has no Constitutional rights,” Harris said. “In contrast, the Planned Parenthood people that were duped into incriminating themselves by Mr. Daleiden do have Constitutional rights. Deciding which side to come down on in this case was not a hard choice.”In related news, the Obama Administration warned Florida against defunding Planned Parenthood. Marissa Padilla, spokeswoman for the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, told Gov. Rick Scott (R) that “defying President Obama on this issue would not be prudent. Planned Parenthood is a major force in the implementation of the Roe vs. Wade decision. Using the excuse that the organization has engaged in the illegal sale of baby parts will not protect the state from consequences at the President's discretion. The question is whether Gov. Scott wants to risk losing federal dollars that might otherwise be headed his way.”Bill Clinton Clashes with “Black Lives Matter”After being mercilessly heckled by agitators from the group “Black Lives Matter,” former President Bill Clinton accused them of “defending murderers and drug dealers.” The BLM protesters objected to the former president's support for 1994's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which they contend disproportionately penalizes minorities.Clinton's argument that “this law puts blacks who prey upon other blacks, who kill other blacks behind bars and saves the lives of countless would-be black victims. Those attacking this law can't really pose as advocates for black lives. They are advocates for criminals.”Concerned that the former president has “drifted off message,” the Hillary for President campaign sought to distance itself from his remarks. “Bill signed that law more than 20 years ago,” campaign manager Robby Mook reminded. “It's understandable that he feels some need to defend it. But that is not Hillary's current position.”Mook sought to establish that “it is Hillary's position that the bigger problem is white cops killing blacks. This is the same position as that of the BLM movement. Blacks killing blacks results from imposing unfair white values on the black subculture. Blacks violently fighting over turf stems directly from our drug laws. It is Hillary's position that the government ought to award designated areas to minority-run drug vendors, much like government has awarded gambling territories to Indian tribes. If this were done, black gangs could take turf interlopers to court rather than trying to enforce their rights through extra-legal means.”In related news, the Obama Administration's Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) threatened action against landlords who refuse to rent to convicted felons, calling it “racist. Blacks are three times as likely to have criminal convictions as whites. Barring lawbreakers from rentals illegally imposes standards favorable to whites on racial minorities.” Similarly, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal immigration officials may not deport “habitual drunkards” because “drunkenness is a disease which society is obligated to treat, regardless of the nationality of the person suffering from the malady.”Hillary Demands She be Prosecuted if GuiltyIn a surprising move said to be aimed at undermining contentions that she is being afforded special treatment, Democratic presidential contender, former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton demanded that “everyone who violates the law anywhere should be held accountable.”Campaign manager Robby Mook argued that “this will take the wind out of the sails of those in the GOP who maintain that Hillary sees herself as above the law. By insisting that everyone who violates the law must be prosecuted, the absence of any prosecution from the Department of Justice will stand as a total vindication of her innocence. In simple terms, no prosecution means no guilt.”Sanders' campaign manager Jeff Weaver called the move “a stunt. This whole unsecured email scandal is like a magician's misdirection. Clinton's real crime is her conspiracy with Wall Street bankers to prevent the people from overthrowing their capitalist oppressors. That is what she'll be prosecuted for and punished under a Sanders Administration.”In related news, the Clinton campaign used “white noise” to block reporters from hearing her speech to a gathering of mega-donors in Colorado. Mook explained that “the going rate to hear Hillary Clinton speak is a minimum of $250,000 per hour. If the members of the media want in, they have to 'pony up.'”Dem Says National Debt Not a ThreatSen. Ed Markey (D-Mass) brushed off fears that a runaway national debt could pose a threat to America. “Look, a debt of whatever amount merely records resources that have already been acquired by the government,” Markey argued. “The government has already gotten and spent that money for the benefit of America. Whether it ever pays this money back is basically irrelevant.”“Let's imagine that, 'horror of horrors,' the government defaults on this debt,” Markey continued. “Who's hurt? The people who lent the money to the government by buying bonds can obviously afford to lose this money. People who need their money don't buy bonds. They buy food. The net result of a default is that funds are transferred from those who can afford doing without the money to the government that spends it for the benefit of all the people. How is that a threat?”Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn) labeled Markey's statement “a crackpot idea. If we don't honor our debts how can we expect anyone to lend to us when we need it?”Markey dismisse4d Corker's doubts as “pedestrian thinking. This is the government we're talking about. If push comes to shove, we can just seize whatever resources we need. No nation, no organization, no individual can stand against the might of the United States. We have the technology and the firepower to take whatever we need to ensure that our government will continue to function.”In related news, Democratic presidential aspirant Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt) defended queuing for consumer goods as “in many ways, a more equitable way of distributing scarce items like bread. While there can be great disparities in the ability to pay money, the amount of time available to everyone is more fairly balanced. Waiting in line exacts an equal amount of time from all. On top of this, it gets people out of doors and into the fresh air. That also has health benefits that are denied in a capitalist system that stocks abundant merchandise and requires no waiting to obtain it.”Obama Promises “Trump Will Not Succeed Me”Calling GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump “an appalling choice,” President Barack Obama promised a frightened nation that “I will do whatever I can to prevent this man from succeeding me as president.”The president didn't rule out “any extraordinary, extra-legal actions that might be needed. Hopefully, it won't come to that. I trust that American voters will opt to continue the progress I've made by electing Secretary Clinton in November. But rest assured, I will not shy away from doing what it takes to keep Mr. Trump out of the Oval Office.”Meanwhile, Obama's preferred successor sought to differentiate herself from her Democratic presidential rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt) by promising to “order all employers to boost the pay of women to equal that of men.” Not to be outdone, Sanders said he would “order all employers to raise all employees' wages—men and women alike. The capitalists have expropriated the labor surplus for too long. As president, I will ensure that all profits are converted into higher wages across the board.”A Satirical Look at Recent NewsJohn Semmens is a retired economist who has written a weekly political satire for The Arizona Conservative since 2005. He says working on his satires is one of the ways he tries to honor the liberties our Founding Fathers tried to protect. Please do us a favor. If you use material created by The Arizona Conservative, give us credit and DO NOT change the context. Thank you.