Dictator Obama’s Bill Of Rights Destruction For Today

the Obama administration has banned the import of Saiga (Izhmash & Kalashnikov) firearms in the United States.

BREAKING: Obama Bans Import of Saiga Firearms With Executive Order

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Dictator Obama’s Bill Of Rights Destruction For Today

  1. _Jim says:

    This is just a vendetta against Russia. Obama isn’t banning the importation of firearms. Yet.

    Watch his next move though.

    “Ukraine-related Sanctions;
    Publication of Executive Order 13662 Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List”

  2. _Jim says:

    – – – – – – – –
    Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List

    Click to access ssi.pdf

    The Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List (the “SSI List”)

    This publication of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) is a reference tool providing actual notice of actions by OFAC with respect to persons that are identified pursuant to Executive Order 13662. The latest changes may appear here prior to their publication in the Federal Register, and it is intended that users rely on changes indicated in this document. Such changes reflect official actions of OFAC, and will be reflected as soon as practicable in the Federal Register under the index heading “Foreign Assets Control.” New Federal Register
    notices with regard to identifications made under Executive Order 13662 may be published at any time. Users are advised to check the Federal Register and this electronic publication routinely for additional names or other changes to the listings. Entities and individuals on the list are occasionally licensed by OFAC to transact business with U.S. persons in anticipation of removal from the list or because of foreign policy considerations in unique circumstances. Licensing in anticipation of official Federal Register publication of a notice of removal based on the unblocking of an entity’s or individual’s property is reflected in this publication by the removal of an identified name from the list.

    – – – –

    Part 1 of 3

  3. _Jim says:

    Description of the SSI List:

    This Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List includes persons determined by OFAC to be operating in sectors of the Russian economy identified by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Executive Order 13662. The prohibitions on dealings related to the persons identified on this list are described in the directives below. Persons identified pursuant to each directive will appear under the corresponding directive on the SSI List.

    The property and interests in property of persons identified on the SSI List are not
    blocked, but persons sanctioned under E.O. 13662 and on the SSI List may also be persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to E.O 13662 or pursuant to other authorities administered by OFAC. Persons on the SSI List whose property and interests in property are blocked under E.O 13662 or other authorities will appear on OFAC’s SDN list with program tags for relevant blocking authorities.

    – – – – –

    part 2 of 3

  4. _Jim says:

    The following transactions by U.S. persons or within the United States involving the persons listed below are herby prohibited: transacting in, providing financing for, or otherwise dealing in new debt of longer than 90 days maturity or new equity of these persons (listed below), their property, or their interests in property. All other transactions with these persons or involving any property in which one or more of these persons has an interest are permitted, provided such transactions do not otherwise involve property or interests in property of a person blocked pursuant to Executive Orders 13660, 13661 or 13662, or any other sanctions programs implemented by the Office of Foreign Assets Control.

    – – – – –

    Part 3 of 3

    What then follows are a list of companies (and a lot of banks!) against which ‘sanctions’ have been imposed by the US.


  5. Robertv says:

    What could go wrong flying over a war zone.


    Lost and found

    Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 disappeared on 8 March 2014 carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew. The Boeing 777


    • _Jim says:

      No shoulder-fired ‘manpad’ did this, more like one of the Russian self-propelled Buk missile system platforms:



    • _Jim says:

      RT says missile may have been meant for Putin’s plane:


      • Mike D says:

        What a load. If I were a suspicious type of guy, I’d think a former KGB officer is setting up a false narrative intentionally to paint the Ukranians as the one’s who shot down a commercial airliner. Could the Ukranians even pull off tracking his plane from Poland all the way to Ukraine, and at the same time not know that it wasn’t his plane because it wasn’t identifying itself as his plane, but a completely different plane? Easiest way to track the plane is commercial or military radar, which would have told them it wasn’t his plane. There’s no way his plane flies over the Ukraine, so they would not have been expecting it to fly over.

        • _Jim says:

          Could the Ukranians even pull off tracking his plane from Poland all the way to Ukraine,

          Are you familiar with how modern-day civilian transponders work? It makes this kind of tracking trivial … Putin’s aircraft would be similarly equipped (but probably making use of some random A/C ‘identifier’.)

          “Listening to aircraft transponders with a Raspberry Pi”

          Were I Putin I wouldn’t be flying anywhere near a ‘theater’ like this, but that is another issue (as I am not Putin.)


      • Mike D says:

        Jim, that’s my point. If the Ukranians were tracking it using a commercial system, they’d have known which flight it was and that it wasn’t Putin’s plane. There’s no tracking Putin’s plane, then confusing it with another plane when they cross an area half an hour apart. No one would have left a gap where they weren’t tracking a specific plane. Even if that point is a handover spot where planes change transponder codes, one plane would have done so over half an hour ahead of the other.

        But social media posts may have given away what really happened. Mistaken shoot down by the rebels, mistaking it for an army transport plane.


        “Shortly before reports surfaced that a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 had crashed in eastern Ukraine, a social media site purported to belong to a separatist leader claimed that insurgents had shot down an aircraft.

        In a post on VKontakte, Russia’s largest social media site, which has since been taken down, separatist leader Igor Girkin, aka Strelkov, wrote: “In the vicinity of Torez, we just downed a plane, an AN-26. It is lying somewhere in the Progress Mine. We have issued warnings not to fly in our airspace. We have video confirming. The bird fell on a waste heap. Residential areas were not hit. Civilians were not injured.”


        “A social media site attributed to a top Ukrainian rebel commander said the insurgents had shot down an army transporter at the location where a Malaysia Airlines plane crashed Thursday near the Russian border.

        The comments by the top military commander of the self-proclaimed “Donetsk People’s Republic” suggest the separatists shot down the Malaysia Airlines plane by mistake, believing it was a large Ukrainian army transport plane.

        “We just downed an An-26 near Torez. It is down near the Progress mine,” said the VK page attributed to Igor Strelkov, which is frequently quoted by Ukrainian media.”

        • _Jim says:

          I think this is all moot; somewhere, a rocket tube is empty (and with recent signs of firing) and a count of inventory will show a missile missing and therefore who fired the missile. Setting up, maintaining and firing a Buk missile battery is most likely _not_ a one man operation, so, there are at least two individuals who know what happened.

          To sum it up, someone who had possession of an operational Buk missile launcher committed this act, and it took a small, trained crew to do so. I don’t know all the specifics of how the Buk missile works, but if it’s like some of our SAM missile systems it also requires an ‘active’ RADAR Illuminator operating on the ground in the vicinity of the missile launcher. The Illuminator ‘paints’ the target the missile then seeks … this means that *two* self-propelled platforms were operating in the area with their respective crews (and supplies, camps/tents etc).

          I prefer to deal from a position of known facts, and the facts are that tangible, physical assets with the necessary supply logistics (like fuel and ‘line’ spares) with associated trained crews are necessary to pull this kind of thing off. This spells ‘Russians’ in my book.


        • _Jim says:

          Kinda hard to hide these from prying eyes:

          “Anti-aircraft missile system “Buk””

        • _Jim says:

          Soviet background on earlier Buk system:

        • _Jim says:

          This is interesting –

          Buk missile launcher being brought in on low-boy trailer, video uploaded May 17, 2014

        • _Jim says:

          Typical deployment of Buk missile system in Ukraine – someone videoed a setup along the road somewhere in Ukraine published on Mar 8, 2014 –

          8.03.2014. UKRAINE Donetsk-air defense missile systems
          “Buk” (NATO classification SA-11 Gadfly)


        • _Jim says:

          And just for fun, SA-11 Missile Evasion! (In a sim)


  6. phodges says:

    Izhmash is on the sanctioned list. You cannot buy and import Saiga’s from Izhmash, or any company doing business with Izhmash.

    I am a serious Saiga advocate, but they have come up so much in price you should just by a higher quality Vepr now anyways…AFAIK Molot is not related to Izhmash.

    The question is, from whom will CIA and State now buy all the arms for ISIS and their various other proxies around the planet?

  7. Robertv says:

    It could be me but this

    doesn’t look like this

    But then freefall is not always freefall.

    • _Jim says:

      You’re conflating 1) the blow-up of an aircraft in the air and then the many non-aerodynamic ‘pieces’ drift or fall down to ground level versus 2) an intact aircraft impacting the ground in an aerodynamically ‘clean’ configuration going about 560 MPH.

      Did Robertv ever take physics in HS or beyond? Ever invest a few kilobucks in some flight training? Ever fly MS Fight Simulator even?

      You’re aware they recovered FLT 93’s cockpit voice recorder, aren’t you?


      The Flight Data Recorder was also recovered at Shanksville PA; were you aware of this as well? Do you know what the FDR showed for airspeed at the time of impact? The aircraft at that time was in a 40 degree nose-down attitude .. that makes for a pretty good ‘dive’, incidentally.

      Click to access Flight_Path_Study_UA93.pdf


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s