Over 16,537,523 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/surveys/GunControl/Should-Obama-Increase-Federal-Gun-Control-/id/64/kw/default.aspx#ixzz2HoZfP2zU
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
The gun grabbers in Congress have made it known that an onslaught of draconian anti-2nd Amendment legislative efforts is in store for Americans. But now gun rights supporters have a plan to fight back by supporting 2nd Amendment rights en masse on Jan. 19 during the newly created Gun Appreciation Day.
A coalition of political organizations, including the Second Amendment Foundation, Revolution PAC, Citizens and Country, Conservative Action Alerts, Women Warriors PAC and others, have popularized the idea to organize against the President’s and Congress’ “post Sandy Hook assault on gun rights.”
“We have never had a president who so callously disregards the Constitution, Congress, the courts and the will of the American people,” said Gun Appreciation Day Chairman Larry Ward.
Organizers have called for supporters to celebrate the day by making gun purchases, visiting gun stores or simply wearing 2nd Amendment-supporting T-shirts and ball caps.
“We felt that there needed to be a swift, strong statement, Chick-fil-A style, to show that we’re not only here but we’re vocal,” Ward said, referring to the outpouring of conservative support for the chicken sandwich chain last year following statements made in support of traditional marriage by its president.
Jan. 19 is the day before Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) likely will introduce legislation for a harsh new assault weapon ban. It is two days before President Barack Obama, who has promised to initiate new gun control measures, is inaugurated for his second term.
Learn more about Gun Appreciation Day here.
I am an independent; outside of the box; conservative thinker. Hate me if you will, however, I will fight to the DEATH for your RIGHT to be FREE in the great nation: AMERICA!!
Conservative, constitutional Americans have a place to ban together and it is called the Tea Parties across America….had it not been for the Tea Parties that got control of the House, we would already be in a 20 trillion debt, gun control would already be passed and your taxes would have gone up even more than they already have.
If you are not a member, find one locally, we are all over the US and we ban together to try to make a difference. If you believe in smaller government, less intrusion into our private lives by government, changes to the IRS code for less taxes and a government that abides by the very law that has made America a great nation (the Constitution), then you are on the right track to make a difference.
Of course, the liberals are demonizing the tea parties because they are afraid of We The People and the changes that we stand for…at first they laughed at us and when we made real change, they decided that we were an enemy that they must demonize by lies and the lame street media. We are just ordinary people who have banned together to make positive changes to try and keep our Republic that is in danger of collasping and becoming a dictatorship. Everyone is invited to join, anyone no matter what your religion or skin pigmentation…we are Americans first and foremost.
I have "WE THE PEOPLE..." tattooed on my shoulder. Next is "3%" and "In God We Trust".... Irish Lovinz to ALL
The recent “fiscal cliff” negotiations are a perfect example of this controlled chaos. Their chaos is the result of ongoing manufactured crises, one piled upon the other.
Political elites love for the public to be whipped into a state of frenzy over thoughts of impending doom. The false two-party left/right paradigm is used to great advantage to keep the “debate” alive.
Carefully chosen words and phrases are used to create a sense of urgency over the crisis du jour. The elites then sit back wait until the midnight hour — or sometimes later — to swoop in and “save” us. They then brag about how their actions have headed off yet another catastrophe. It brings to mind a quote from Captain James T. Kirk in “Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country.” “Once again, we’ve saved civilization as we know it,” Kirk said near the end of the film.
The political elites utter these words or something similar, then pat themselves and each other on the back for their brilliance. The masses lap it up and let out a big sigh of relief that their “leaders” are so benevolent and responsible and “bipartisan,” never realizing they’ve just surrendered more liberty to the state.
The people are taught at an early age to pledge fealty to the state through the public noneducation indoctrination system. Children are taught they must not question authority. Zero tolerance policies squelch free speech and the exchange of ideas. Truths and absolutes are rejected in favor of tolerance, situational ethics and consensus. Immoralities are presented as normal lifestyles. Feelings are elevated above logic.
In public schools the great explorers of the 15th and 16th centuries are described as genocidal maniacs responsible for the destruction whole races. U.S. Founding Fathers are presented as evil, slavery-loving, women-hating bigots. Actual freedom-stealing racist tyrants are presented as role models.
The evils and murders of totalitarian regimes have been whitewashed as necessary for the safety and continuation of the state — hence the acceptance of the very uncivil war; the American love affair with the war criminals Abraham Lincoln, U.S. Grant and William T. Sherman; and the dismissal of the deaths by violence, disease and starvation of 850,000 people, many of them noncombatants. The state is presented as right and just, despite a Constitution that is outdated, inadequate and unjust.
Sometime early in the last century, republicanism was recast as democracy. It came about gradually, but purposefully. The idea of American exceptionalism was shoved down the memory hole. Over the course of the past several decades, it has been replaced with democratic exceptionalism: the idea that democracy is a superior philosophy that must be forced upon the people of all nations and that wars to install democracy are just ones.
This benefited moneyed elites. Using money from the Federal treasury (often passed through extra-governmental agencies like the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, etc.), corporate jackals and hit men would bribe and, if necessary, threaten leaders of other nations into accepting deals to build or rebuild their countries’ infrastructure. This saddled those countries with burdensome debt and locked their populations into permanent poverty and deprivation. Those leaders who did not play along were assassinated or their countries invaded by U.S. troops under some created, high-minded justification.
The justification was always cast in a way to make it seem as if the United States was once again saving civilization as we know it. The collateral damage of death and the destruction of property of the innocents was covered up or provided with justification. After all, the United States was always right and just in its international excursions.
This indoctrination has been ongoing for decades and is just one example of the gradualism the elites use to advance their cause glacially. Gradualism is necessary for the elites to retain power. Anything can be accomplished over a long period of time, as people accept this conditioning as normal.
The elites are aided and abetted in their controlled chaos by the Fourth Estate and the entertainment industry, which continue the indoctrination of the masses long after they have exited the public noneducation system.
The Fourth Estate — the mainstream media — long ago ceded its independence and became the Fourth Branch. Six media giants now control 90 percent of what we read, watch and listen to. These corporations are large feeders at the corporatist, government trough, often receiving special dispensation — thanks to the lobbying efforts of former members of the political class — as bills are crafted. Beyond that is the revolving door between Congressional and Presidential staffs and government agencies and the major media outlets. These are primarily statists, progressives and neocons, ensuring that those ideologies are continuously presented as mainstream.
This is the system I mentioned Friday. The purpose of the system is to control the people so that most of what we think about and talk about is noise.
People mimic the system because they don’t have enough information to process or separate fact from fiction or to know reality. The system permanently insulates most people from reality. There is no hope for them unless they seek reality regardless of their inbred convictions.
Those who do seek reality read regularly and long for information outside of conventional wisdom. They question everything, particularly the propaganda disseminated by the elites and their media mouthpieces. They usually converse with others of like mind.
IQ, education, professional background or even financial success in no way provides a special escape hatch from the entrapment of the system. Unless one escapes the parameters of the system, his perception of reality will be distorted one way or the other. And as long as anyone is mentally encumbered by the system, he is subject to being manipulated against his best interests. I have seen many an intelligent person act against his own best interests in order to not buck the system.
But there is enough information for those who read and search to separate fact from fiction. It takes some people a few years and others a lifetime to come to grips with it. That’s because when confronted with a challenge to prevailing or conventional wisdom, the typical human mind closes off. When this happens, the individual employs avoidance behavior, writing off the new knowledge as conspiracy theory and labeling it as “kooky,” “insane” or “stupid.” The information can then be dismissed, never to be considered again, even when presented with facts in support of the new knowledge.
For this reason, the system remains in place. It takes the atypical, curious, discerning mind to step outside the mainstream of thought.
There will be much more controlled chaos ahead. In the coming months, discussions will be on gun control, the debt ceiling and immigration reform, among others. In all of these discussions, usual buzzwords and propaganda will be used to distract and deflect the real nature of the debate.
Those stuck within the system will sit back and wait for the political class to once again save civilization as we know it. Those outside the system will work to awaken the slumbering masses to the ongoing destruction of the Constitution and foundational ideals of the Nation.
The other day, I received an opinion piece from one of our writers, Bailey O’Malia, that discussed the 2nd Amendment. In it, she made many of the same mistakes made by a lot of liberals, “progressives” or whatever they call themselves today to not sound bad.
I thought about how I wanted to post it and then realized I couldn’t let it go without weighing in on the issue.
Frankly, she was wrong. So I posted my response and created a point/counterpoint article. I want you to read her piece and mine and then get in on this argument. If you think she’s wrong, tell her. If you think I’m wrong, tell me. We begin with O’Malia’s argument.
Point: The Right to Bear Arms — Within Reason
In the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, Americans and politicians have spent time reflecting on gun control.
We often hear that our Founding Fathers wrote our right to bear arms into the Constitution as a way to protect ourselves from harm — that they wanted us to have that right, even today.
But that’s not something I’m so sure about.
When the Founding Fathers wrote our Constitution, their idea of a weapon was a musket — not an automatic weapon. The gun they had in mind would be used for safety or for hunting.
With this in mind, I wonder what the fathers of our Nation would have said about civilians owning military-grade weapons that can shoot 100 rounds in a minute.
Surely, there is no need for a civilian to hold that kind of power in his hand. In fact, why should anyone have that much power over another human being? Do we really trust each other’s judgment?
I’ve been thinking about this for days, and I can’t come up with one good reason that a person would need anything more than a handgun or rifle for “safety.”
So when the discussion of changing the gun laws is brought up, I think: “What a perfectly simple solution; ban all automatic weapons.” This appeases Democrats because they will have made steps toward gun reform, and it appeases Republicans because they won’t be fully losing their right to bear arms. Do you consider shooting an automatic weapon a fun hobby? They could still be available to rent at a gun range.
But this is a compromise — a concept politicians and Americans are unfamiliar with these days.
If you’re pro-guns, at this point you’re probably saying: “But it’s my right, and they’re taking away all of our rights.”
But it’s also your right to feel safe in this country. And despite the theorists who say, “Arm every person in the country; that’ll scare ’em,” the lunatics who are shooting up movie theaters and schools don’t seem to place much value on their lives or the lives of others.
Before you start spouting your Founding Fathers crap, take a second to think about the core principle that this country was supposedly built on: freedom. I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel very “free” knowing that my neighbor could be housing an AK-47 in his garage.
–Bailey O’Malia
Counterpoint: The Reason for the Right to Bear Arms
As intelligent as I think Bailey is, she’s dead wrong here. I do feel safer knowing that my neighbor could be housing an AK-47 in his garage. Why? Because I know most of my neighbors are honest, hardworking people who aren’t nutcases looking to shoot up schoolchildren.
See, what happens when these terrible tragedies occur is the media blow things out of proportion to spread their leftist views. I generally don’t yell and point fingers about how biased they are; but this time, they really have showed their hand. Somewhere in the middle of all the hype about how access to guns was the issue here, we forget what the 2nd Amendment was really about.
When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, they wanted to ensure that all people were equal — equal with each other and equal with the government. Yes, when this was all written, people had only muskets. But do you know who else had only muskets? The government.
We had just finished overthrowing a tyrannical government in order to become a free nation; and the Founders, who literally helped fight in that war, wanted the American people to have equal footing with whatever government took over, in order to prevent tyranny if necessary once again. These guys were smart; they weren’t thinking inside the box of their time. They were completely aware that technology would change, but they wanted Americans to be able to stand up for themselves. How does one do that? By having the same level of weaponry as the government!
The Constitution was written with revolution in mind, not the peace that we have internally had for about 150 years now. I say 150 years, because we fought ourselves with our armed militias in the Civil War; we have been lucky to have had internal peace since then. But you can’t closed-mindedly say that the 2nd Amendment was for limited weapons. It just wasn’t. It was meant to keep people on the same level as the government so that they could fight for their rights if necessary.
Sure, if my neighbors had rocket launchers, I think I’d be scared just because they could blow up my house. But if the Founders were still around, I think they’d be all right with it.
–Tim Young
Hello, I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. Happy New Year 2013. With a new year comes fresh thinking and creativity. I’ve had a chance to think about our President and all he’s doing to America and our economy.
And guess what conclusion I’ve come to? Barack Obama is a socialist.
That should be pretty clear to anyone with a brain — at least anyone who hasn’t been brainwashed… I mean educated… in public schools by socialist teachers’ union members.
Liberals and the media (I know, I repeat myself) constantly insinuate that anyone who says “Obama is a socialist” is crazy, ignorant, racist or extreme. Funny, a national poll shows that a 55 percent of Americans associate the word “socialist” with Obama. Another poll shows that a majority of Democratic Party members support socialism. A third poll shows that young people (among Obama’s most loyal supporters) now feel more favorably toward socialism than capitalism.
So if the shoe fits, wear it! It’s time for Obama and his supporters to come out of the closet.
But sometimes, you need a little humor to prove your point. So let’s look at the facts up close and personal, Jeff Foxworthy style. The comedian has proven with his humor — and without a doubt — who qualifies as a redneck. I’ve put together a list that leaves no doubt that Obama is a socialist, and we are all in big trouble.
So here goes. Obama might be a socialist if:
If you don’t understand that the reason babies scream hysterically the moment they are born is because they instantly realize they are facing a future of $100 trillion in debt, hyperinflation, 80 percent tax rates and no jobs, you might be a socialist.
If you think it’s a good idea to run America based on big government, big unions, big taxes, big spending and “social justice” — even though Detroit is a one-party Democratic town run with those exact same policies for decades that is now a bankrupt, empty city that leads the Nation in poverty, food stamps, murder, abandoned buildings and broken street lamps, you might be a socialist.
If the only thing you, your cabinet members and czars know about business is from books you read at Harvard or Columbia (all of which were written by Karl Marx), you might be a socialist.
If you want to allocate hundreds of millions of dollars to the Internal Revenue Service to go after tax cheats — even though your Administration is filled with tax cheats, including the guy in charge of America’s taxes (Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner), you might be a socialist.
If you created the name “Cash for Clunkers” yet you don’t realize all the bribes you’ve given to your most loyal Democratic voters should be called “Cash for Flunkers,” you might be a socialist.
If you think food stamps, disability, aid to dependent children and unemployment checks are “economic stimulus,” you might be a socialist.
If you believe it’s greedy for taxpayers to want to keep more of their own money that they earned but it’s not greedy to demand government confiscate other people’s money and redistribute it to those who didn’t earn it (i.e., your voters), you might be a socialist.
If your tax policies are so onerous that even Denise Rich, one of the leading Democrat contributors in America for the past three decades, renounces her U.S. citizenship to move to Austria, you might be a socialist.
If you think George W. Bush adding $4 trillion to the National debt in eight years was an embarrassment, a travesty and a disgrace but you have no problem adding $6 trillion to the National debt in only four years, you might be a socialist — and a world-class hypocrite, too.
If you actually said “You didn’t build that” to business owners because you think bridges, roads, highways, airports, schools and hospitals led to their success but you don’t understand that business owners and taxpayers paid all the taxes that paid for government to build all those things in the first place and government ought to be thanking us, you might be a socialist.
If you call yourself a “champion of small business” while you demonize small-business owners in every speech and media interview, try desperately to raise their taxes and eliminate their tax deductions, and in just your first four years as President passed more than 60,000 new rules, regulations and mandates that make it impossible to run a lemonade stand in America anymore, you might be a socialist.
If you think the “White House party crashers” are terrible people because they crashed your White House state dinner without an invitation but you want to give instant citizenship to millions of uninvited “illegal immigrants” who crashed our border, you might be a socialist.
If you think it’s terrible that a college or law student has to pay $9 per month for her own contraception but you see no problem with colleges and law schools — run by your most loyal leftist intellectual supporters — charging that same student $50,000 per year to attend that school so ultra-liberal professors can be paid $250,000 per year for teaching one course per week, you might be a socialist.
If you think anyone who doesn’t read The New York Times is dumb and ignorant but think it’s OK that the Democratic-controlled Congress passed a 2,000-page healthcare bill without reading it, you might be a socialist.
If you think New York Times columnist Paul Krugman deserves a Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences and you deserve a Nobel Peace Prize even though neither of you ever created a job or did anything to produce one minute of peace in the world, you might be a socialist — and an egomaniac, too.
If you think it’s OK to meet with dictators, bullies, tyrants, communists, American-haters and terrorist sympathizers without preconditions but have no interest in meeting with Republican leaders in Congress, you might be a socialist.
If you think it’s OK to give Constitutional rights to terrorists but not to the bondholders, shareholders and secured creditors of GM and Chrysler when you stole the company from them and awarded it to your biggest contributors (the same unions that bankrupted them), you might be a socialist.
If you think it was a good idea to steal $26 billion from U.S. taxpayers to save the $100,000 pensions of union members at GM and Chrysler but it was just fine to allow all the non-union autoworkers to lose their pensions, you might be a socialist.
If you think the “fiscal cliff” is about actually being forced to actually cut some government spending when the real “fiscal cliff” is the $6 trillion you added to the National debt in your first term, you might be a socialist.
If you think things are “moving in the right direction” when food stamp rolls are growing 75 times faster than job rolls, you might be a socialist.
If you think Raul Castro, the leader of communist Cuba, firing 1 million government employees by telling them “government can no longer employ or take care of everyone” and promising to fire another million this year isn’t a hint that perhaps America needs to reduce our workforce of 22 million government employees, you might be a socialist.
If you think it was OK for Nancy Pelosi to pass Obamacare so she could benefit from the special clause on page 1,890 that gives free facelifts to public officials, you might be a socialist. (Just kidding!)
If you want to convert America to a “green economy” to create millions of “new jobs” (even though Spain has proven the green economy destroys three times as many jobs as it creates and leads to 25 percent unemployment — 50 percent unemployment among young adults), you might be a socialist — and an idiot, too.
If you claim to have “saved” millions of jobs with your stimulus package but the labor participation rate is the lowest since 1982 (and for men, it’s the lowest since 1948), you might be a socialist — and it’s obvious you learned math from a teachers’ union member in a failing public school.
If you claim you are a fan of oil drilling and you have “dramatically increased” oil drilling during your first term as President while oil drilling permits are actually down more than 60 percent, you might be a socialist – and a liar, too.
If you think denying an American a job, government contract or entry to college because of the color of his skin is immoral and criminal but that giving someone a job, government contract or college admission because of the different color of his skin is “social justice,” you might be a socialist — and a racist, too.
If you want to abandon capitalism and put the economy under the control of government bureaucrats even though virtually every city, county, State and Federal department run by these same bureaucrats is heavily in debt, you might be a socialist.
If you favor taxpayer bailouts of companies who give you campaign contributions and hand out almost $1 trillion in “stimulus” to unions and leading Democratic bundlers and contributors and hide it by refusing to disclose who got the money or how much, you might be a socialist — and a fascist, too.
If you think putting the same government that brought us Amtrak and the U.S. Postal Service in charge of our healthcare will save us money, you might be a socialist.
If your solution to Medicare eating up almost the entire budget and driving the country into bankruptcy within 20 years is passing Obamacare so we can expand Medicare to everyone, you might be a socialist — and I’m betting you flunked out of public school math.
If you claim you can’t find anything to cut in your budget yet you just gave $1 billion dollars to the radical, American-hating, Muslim Brotherhood leadership of Egypt, you might be a socialist.
If you want to take guns away from law-abiding Americans because a mentally ill nutcase went on a killing rampage at a school designated as a “gun-free zone” (which advertised to that same nutcase that he would face absolutely no opposition because everyone inside was a helpless, defenseless sitting duck), you might be a socialist.
If you blame guns for killing children in Newtown, Conn., but it doesn’t occur to you that you sold guns to Mexican drug lords in the “Fast and Furious” scandal that resulted in 300 murders, including a U.S. border agent, you might be a socialist – and a fraud, too.
If want to lower the cost of healthcare but purposely left “tort reform” out of your signature healthcare reform because you, your wife and virtually every member of your Administration are lawyers, you might be a socialist lawyer.
If you think Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar of ABC’s “The View” represent the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, you might be a socialist.
If you’re a Columbia University professor and you ever gave a student named Barack Obama an “A” in economics, you might be a socialist — and you shouldn’t be teaching economics.
And finally, in the 8th year of the Obama Presidency, if Bangladesh is hosting “Aid America” concerts, we definitely have a socialist President.
Ladies and gentlemen, I think it’s safe to say America now has a socialist President.
I’m Wayne Allyn Root for PersonalLiberty.com. See you next week. Same time, same place. God Bless America. We are going to need it!
JeffH says:
The village idiot says “May not have a thing to do with guns [comment has been edited]! I love when Conservatives admit when crime is down because that is another one of there favorite boogie men when crime is up!Crime is down yet the Conservatives bellyaching is still at fever pitch! Generally when the economy of any country is sour crime goes up so I wonder why its different this time. Could it be that the American people (at least normal ones) have a healthy respect for the efforts that Obama has put forth and that has kept crime down.”
Let’s try to break this comment down to an understandable level.
1. “May not have a thing to do with guns [comment has been edited]!” But it does!
2. “I love when Conservatives admit when crime is down because that is another one of there favorite boogie men when crime is up!” Confused and nonsensical…ie right is left and up is down. Note the emphasis on the exclamation mark for effect.
3. “Crime is down yet the Conservatives bellyaching is still at fever pitch!” Emotionally charged comment that fails to acknowledge that increasing legitamate gun ownership has an actual effect on the reduction in the crime rate.
4. “Generally when the economy of any country is sour crime goes up so I wonder why its different this time.” It’s different because of the publics increased gun ownership which is proven to be a strong deterrent against crime.
5. “Could it be that the American people (at least normal ones) have a healthy respect for the efforts that Obama has put forth and that has kept crime down.” The “normal ones” have recognized that neither the government, the states and the local police can consistantly prevent crimes or prevent crimes through legislation. The “normal ones” have also learned from the history of gun control.
Some Gun Control Facts!
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/guncontrol.htm
1911 Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1929 The Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1935 China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1938 Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 6 to 7 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and 12 million Christians who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1956 Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million “educated” people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1964 Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1970 Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to posses arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” -Adolph Hitler 1938
We should NEVER forget that Lenin, the Communist Revolutionist, was an agent of the GERMAN government. What is not commonly known is that Stalin murdered nearly 6 million Jews during the World War II period, as did Hitler.
One has only to learn what really happened to the Christians in Rwanda between April and July of 1994 to imagine what may lie in store for Christians here in America at some time in the not-too-distant future. After the Christian Tutsis had been disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, Hutu-led military forces began to systematically massacre the defenseless Christians.
“Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms
is the goal”–(Janet Reno)
Here’s a question for anti-gun people: “Would you be willing to put a sticker on your car window or the front door of your house saying ‘I am an anti-gun person–there are no guns in this[car/house]‘”
History repeats itself, always has, always will, and those who haven’t learned their history is doomed to repeat with it.
FreedomFighter says:
Totalitarian control is only possible in a disarmed society, as the Nazis and communists demonstrated in the twentieth century.
Obama’s regime starting with the DHS has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition including hollow point “MAN RIPPER” ammo that is outlawed in war due to the horrific wounds these rounds inflict on the human body, fully automatic weapons, semi-auto and sniper, armored vehicles, war type body armor, drones (armed and surveillance) all to be used in America on Americans. In addition, military, police, Russian, Chinese, UN, NATO and other special units over the last several years have been and are being trained to:
CONFISCATE YOUR GUNS DOOR TO DOOR – they will lock down as area and with overwhelming force remove all guns, one area at a time, resistors will be terminated and their families sent to re-education FEMA CAMPS or formed into WORK BRIGADES (slaves).
FEMA has already setup the camps, purchased millions of coffins, trained guard dog, hired personnel to man the camps (recently), have special design rail cars and buses stationed all over America waiting for MARTIAL LAW implementation
“the goal of the 1 percent. It’s total disarmament. That would give the state the long-awaited monopoly on violence.”
Look at the shootings designed to herd the masses thru fear…almost all at GUN FREE ZONES where the easy targets are:
• Congress woman Gifford
• High School mass murders
• Movie theater mass murders
• Elementary School mass murders
Ever notice no mass murders at hospitals? – No a gun free Zone.
Now shootings at Firemen doing their jobs and at police at their homes with police cars parked. All designed to create FEAR and when people are afraid they will jump on the first wagon out of the fire. Guess who is driving the wagon?
The elite psychopaths in the cesspool of Washington, D.C., and their communist cohorts.
Time to make a stand America, the take over is almost complete:
Differance between a slave and his master? The slave owns no guns.
Laus Deo
Semper Fi
December 31, 2012 by Bob Livingston
Whether the gun grabbers orchestrated the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre or just saw it as the perfect opportunity to rip the heart out of yet another Constitutional amendment, before the bodies of those slaughtered babies were even cold the 1 percent were signaling that 2013 is going to be a tumultuous year for gun owners — and liberty.
Senator Dianne Feinstein (Fascist-Calif.) announced on her website on Dec. 17 that she was introducing a bill in January to “stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devises.” It will ban 120 specifically named weapons, including handguns and shotguns, and strengthen the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004.
According to the outline of Feinstein’s bill, it will grandfather in all legally owned weapons, but it will require they be registered and the owner fingerprinted. It will require a $200 per weapon tax be paid. The guns will not be transferable, meaning that upon the death of the owner the guns will become the property of the Federal government. It will allow the sale of 900 specifically named weapons, but none that can accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.
She and her fascist cohorts in crime — New York’s Senator Chuck Schumer and Representatives Carolyn McCarty and Jerrold Nadler and West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, among others — are calling for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and any weapon that uses high-capacity magazines. Unfortunately, a vast number of the unwashed masses — in a fit of emotionalism resulting from the thought of all those dead kindergartners — are buying into the lie that one more law would have saved those innocents. The above-mentioned 1 percenters all indicated they would steal everyone’s weapons and magazines, placating themselves with the rationalization that it’s a gun and magazine buy-back program, if they thought they could get away with it.
Never mind that purported shooter Adam Lanza broke a half dozen or more laws before he ever shot the first child. Never mind that Connecticut is ranked fifth of the 50 States in gun control laws, according the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence because the State “has strong gun laws that help combat the illegal gun market, prevent the sale of most guns without background checks and reduce risks to children.” And never mind that, according to FBI homicide data, rifles of all types are the least-used guns when crimes are committed.
Of course, Feinstein, Schumer, et al. care not a whit about children, as I explained here. If they did, they’d be weeping over the hundreds of children killed by President Barack Obama’s drone attacks, those killed in car accidents because of corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards and government-mandated air bags, and the 2,000 aborted every day in America.
Instead, they try to turn reason on its ear by equating law-abiding Americans — who own certain semi-automatic weapons — with terrorists. So their answer is to add more layers of laws, bureaucracy and expense on the already burdensome exercise of acquiring weapons for protection (and yes, it can be burdensome in some States).
But you don’t need those scary-looking so-called “assault weapons” to protect yourself, they’ll say. Or, as President Barack Obama reminds us in typical straw man fashion, military-style weapons with high capacity magazines shouldn’t be in the hands of civilians.
Tell that to these men who were left to their own devices during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
When society broke down, law enforcement was nowhere to be found. These business owners armed themselves to protect their property. But had a large crowd braved the guns they possessed and come to loot their stores, the double-barreled shotgun and bolt-action rifle being wielded would have been inadequate, where an AR15 and several 30-round magazines would have been quite a deterrent. As the reporter said at the end of the clip, more than 100 Korean-owned businesses had already been looted. Just not this one.
The gun grabbers will tell you that you no one needs an AR15 because they’re not used for hunting. That would be a surprise to the tens of thousands of deer and other small game felled by them each year.
But the 2nd Amendment was not put in place just for hunters or for self-defense. It was put in place to protect Americans from totalitarians in government like Jerrold Nadler, who told CNS News: “One of the definitions of a nation state is that the state has a monopoly on legitimate violence. And the state ought to have a monopoly on legitimate violence. If the premise of your question is that people are going to resist a tyrannical government by shooting machine guns at American troops, that’s insane.”
Yes, it’s insane because Americans are prohibited from owning “machine guns” unless they first acquire a Class 3 Federal firearms license, an expensive and daunting undertaking. The weapons on the list to be banned are semi-automatic — one trigger pull, one round fired — not fully automatic. That meme is yet another straw man.
If the state has a monopoly on violence, that is full-blown tyranny. Americans would no longer be citizens, they would be subjects. Nadler has revealed the end game.
Folks, the Sandy Hook shooting narrative has more holes than a piece of hardware cloth, as do the Aurora, Colo., theater shooting, the Milwaukee Sikh temple shooting and the 1999 Columbine, Colo., massacre, for that matter. They’re likely all false flag events. And just like previous ones, they will lead to loss of liberty.
The fallout from these shootings is always the same: a call for stricter gun laws. As Nadler’s comment indicates, this time the gun grabbers are emboldened as never before. But why wouldn’t they be. It was just a year ago that they passed the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for the indefinite detention, without charges or trial, of Americans on American soil. And they did so with barely a whimper out of the populace, which is becoming ever more docile and subservient by the day.
The psychopaths in the cesspool of Washington, D.C., realize there is no better time to strike than while Americans are emotionally drained from the visions of grieving parents and the sweet smiles of the dead children.
The truth is that of the 12,664 murders committed in the United States in 2011, rifles were used in only 323 of them. “Knives or other cutting instruments” were used in 1,694 murders; hands and feet in 726; and blunt objects like clubs and hammers were used in 496. A ban on knives and hands and feet would be far more effective in reducing murders, which Nadler claims is the goal.
But, of course, reducing murders is not the goal of the 1 percent. It’s total disarmament. That would give the state the long-awaited monopoly on violence.
