’15:17 to Paris’ Film Review

15:17 to Paris is a true story based on the heroism that three young American men showed while traveled from Amsterdam to Paris while on a European multi-country sight seeing trip. While on the train, an Islamic terrorist attempted to open fire on innocent people in a train car. By some miracle, they managed to tackle the terrorist to the ground and gain control over him, saving only god knows how many lives. And granted that I saw liberals attempting to shit all over this movie, I figured that it must be a gem that I have to see. So I basically grabbed the fiancé and said “We’re going!”

I’ll start out by stating what I really enjoyed. First things first, I’m a fan of Clint Eastwood’s directed movies. I loved films such as ‘Trouble with the Curve’, ‘Hereafter’, ‘American Sniper’, ‘Sully’, and a boatload more. He seems to enjoy bringing lots of true life stories to the screen and giving his audience an emotional impact that other directors often lack. He’s also one of the only directors where if I learn he’s directing, it’s pretty much a done deal that I’ll see the movie. Not only because he called millennials pansies, but also because I truly do love his story telling and directing. And the man ain’t no spring chicken. Yet he’s still going.

I also liked that Clint Eastwood had the original trip who actually lived the experience acting this film in the leading roles to give it more authenticity. He did the same for the rescue crews in boats in his film Sully portraying the airliner that crashed into the Hudson starring Tom Hanks. It’s just a special thing that I think adds a bit to the film. I will admit that at times it did feel a bit flat for this reason, given that none of these men were trained actors, their lines sometimes felt a bit stale, but that’s also the reason I didn’t go in with high expectations. I was prepared for this film to be unmemorable and mediocre because the actors weren’t professionally trained. But oddly enough, that wasn’t a significant drawback.

I also liked that they chose to film in many of the same settings that the young men saw on their trips. If for no more reason than the beautiful European eye candy of architecture and such.

The film starts out with two single mothers having a meeting with a school teacher that seemed to think putting their boys on medications would help them to stop misbehaving in class. The mothers were obviously upset by this and who wouldn’t be? We see three young boys struggling to make it in school, without a father in the home, mothers genuinely trying to make their lives easier, and feeling as though they’re failing because the boys don’t seem to behave while in class. But regardless of struggles during their youth, they all manage to find their way on some level. And as it’s shown later in the film after one of them takes a break from the military, their lives which might have appeared a bit lost and chaotic, all brought them to the same place at the same time, allowing them to take down a terrorist who otherwise would have caused an insane amount of bloodshed.

The pacing of the film did feel quite slow during parts simply because the actual event of them saving the day was only about fifteen minutes of the whole movie and parts of it are spliced throughout before you see the event in its entirety. But I imagine having to create a back story for these characters who were real life figures took a considerable amount of time and effort. It does cause the relatively short film to feel slow in parts, but given that we do see the finale toward the end, we do feel that the plot line is progressing toward something substantial.

Overall, this was a good film. Not my favorite from Eastwood, not even by a mile. But overall, a good film about three Americans who saved countless lives and only managed to do so because they had military experience to back them up. They were in the right place at the right time and it would have been a tragic day for the French and many families had they not been there.

I give this film four stars out of five. It loses a star primarily because the pacing did feel off and the acting was flat at times, but I can forgive these flaws given that the aim was for authenticity in the story telling and through the use of the real life heroes over trained actors. It also pissed off a lot of people because it portrayed the terrorist in an accurate way and didn’t show leniency toward Islam like so many mainstream media outlets would want…so yeah…bonus points there. I recall when ‘Patriot’s Day’ came out many leftists had a similar reaction claiming that it wasn’t sympathetic to terrorists and some had the same reaction to this film. And that’s just another reason why I love Eastwood. He tells it like it is.


Diversity Visa, oh the Irony!

While merit immigration won’t save us and I would of course like a complete shut down immigration, it’s hard to deny that it would be a step up. And diversity certainly isn’t a merit.

President Donald Trump is calling for “Merit Based immigration” following the deadly truck attack in New York City that killed eight people and injured 11.

Trump says on Twitter Wednesday that the driver in Tuesday’s attack “came into our country through what is called the ‘Diversity Visa Lottery Program,’ a Chuck Schumer beauty.”

Officials said the attacker is an immigrant from Uzbekistan who came to the U.S. legally in 2010. They haven’t said whether he came in through the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, which covers immigrants from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S.

Trump tweeted, “We are fighting hard for Merit Based immigration, no more Democrat Lottery Systems. We must get MUCH tougher (and smarter).”

Assimilation is a lie. This man had seven years to “assimilate” even though we know Islam preaches the exact opposite. It preaches to either lie to convert people to Islam or not to assimilate at all.

Bottom line, this attack was completely preventable. And that fact that the man was brought in on a ‘diversity’ visa proves what I’ve been saying all along. Diversity is bullshit.

Chirps Over Gun Control

At first I thought DACA might be the end. But a “discussion” on gun control would certainly put Trump’s presidency at risk.

President Trump reacted to the Las Vegas attack by saying, “We’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes by.”

According to the Washington Times, Trump praised the police response to the attack, saying on Tuesday the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police did an “incredible job.” He added, “How quickly the police department was able to get in was really very much of a miracle. They’ve done an amazing job.”

But after praising the police, Trump made clear a discussion on gun laws is coming.

During an October 2 press briefing, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders expressed the same sentiment. While dismissing calls to discuss gun control during the briefing, Sanders suggested there will be a time to look at gun policies. The Washington Postquoted her describing Monday as a “day of mourning.” She said, “There will certainly be a time for that policy discussion to take place, but that’s not the place that we’re in at this moment.”

Axios reports that Breitbart News’ executive chairman Steve Bannon observed that Trump’s voting base would react worse to gun control than to an amnesty bill. Bannon said that Trump’s support for gun control would “be the end of everything.

Even though it may make me sound like a typical GOP kinda gal, I love my guns and I’m not ashamed of it. And if Trump goes anywhere near the second amendment, he will lose a ton of voters. As if giving DACA over to Congress rather than killing it like he promised wasn’t bad enough.

Anyone who bothers to actually fire a gun or look into FBI crime stats knows that the vast majority of gun crime is committed by blacks. And the majority of those are black males. Meaning approximately 6% of the population is committing over 50% of the homicides in the country. Most of those are gang related violence with illegally obtained weapons. But every time a white commits a mass shooting, we suddenly need to “have a discussion” about guns again. Guns are not the root of the problem. But claiming that gun control really has more to do with race control will get you in hot water so fast you won’t even know you’re wet until you’re drenched.

Paul Ryan is cucking as usual, saying he has joined HRC in shelving a bill that would allow suppressors for firearms. Suppressors are used in Hollywood movies to make it look like they help to commit the perfect crime. When in reality they are often used for hearing protecting. Anyone who has been to a gun range knows that certain guns hurt the ears more so than others and you often need a suppressor to protect your ears. Not to commit the perfect murder. Even with my hearing protection, I sometimes hear a buzzing for a full day or two after having gone to the range. Suppressors help with this. But don’t tell that to cucks like Ryan who should just call himself a liberal already.

Twitter has been on fire with calls for whites to hand over their guns. Right. Because telling whites they’re at fault for everything then telling them to hand over their guns is a brilliant plan. And won’t raise suspicion about intentions at all.

Just type in “white man guns” and see what you find on Twitter.

John Oberlin @OMGno2trump  Oct 2

The shooter was a radical white man who the NRA wanted to have assault rifles. Americans with guns kill 33,000 Americans ever year.

Most of those are black gang related crimes or suicides, but you know… pesky facts. By the way, why is it okay to say “radical white man” and not okay to say “radical Islam?”

idk @javalina7902  Oct 2

Gun control was a idea, but every old white man already has shit tons of guns& ammo; need to address white culture of violence, IMO.

So any old white man is a threat? Black culture of violence and Muslim culture of violence is far more of a threat than anything whites have done. Did I forget to mention that the shooter converted to Islam? Or so current reports claim.

ℒaura @LaLa_DeadInside  5h5 hours ago
Replying to @Sauce_Reviews @seaneatsandwich @cliffschecter

Jup. Angry white man. Loves guns. Thinks whites are oppressed.

Whites are oppressed because they’re the only group you can legally push down due to affirmative action and diversity quotas. Blacks and Hispanics love guns too. Did I mention that when you see on FBI crime stats that whites commit 44% of the homicides that Hispanics are counting among the whites? I don’t know about you, but those guys who used to mow my lawn where not white skinned. Not even in the slightest. 

If Trump does indeed go after guns, he will piss off the majority of the country, which for the time being is still majority white. And it’s awfully cute to see people all over social media claim that banning guns or “having a discussion” about them will stop all that gang violence given that those weapons aren’t obtained legally in the first place. 

Whatever happened to pleasing your base rather than you enemies? Because nothing comes from trying to please the left. They only take. They never give. Trump apparently hasn’t learned this key lesson yet regardless of how many times the liberals chirp and chirp and chirp.

Las Vegas Shooting

It’s being reported by Israeli sources that the shooter, a retirement home occupant named Stephen Paddock, had converted to Islam prior to the shooting. No word on whether or not this is true. It’s also obvious from the footage being released that the weapon used was an automatic. Regardless of what liberals like to believe, these are extremely difficult to find and obtain. Even on the black market. After every shooting the liberal media enjoys giving us an obnoxious lecture on automatic weapons and how they should be illegal. Which they already are. Kinda like saying we should make cocaine illegal. Which it already is.

Screenshot (109)

Then we have rich elitists like Richard Dawkins lecturing Americans on guns, as if he knows the first thing about guns. Or the crime stats in his own country. The man made his living by dissuading people away from religion, then ceases to realize that his focus would be better spent trying to red pill people on Islam rather than talking about gun statistics he doesn’t understand. A couple weekends ago over thirty people were killed in Chicago with guns through black on black gang violence. This is a regular occurrence there. Maybe race realism would be a better topic of conversation if you’re so worried about U.S. gun crime, eh Richard? Given that black on black crime is the majority of the gun violence in the U.S.

But ‘dem white red necks and day guns, raight?

EDIT: This image was just tweeted out by Tara McCarthy. Does this drive the point home?

Screenshot (110)

UPDATE: ISIS has claimed responsibility and says that the shooter converted to Islam months ago.