Long Live Freedom


King Obama Unconstitutional

Justin Smith provides some very legitimate thoughts on President Barack Hussein Obama’s unconstitutional actions with his pen and phone. Just a heads up there is a section in Justin’s essay that addresses the wealthy elites of the late 19th and early 20th using their Capitalistic attained riches to advance socialistic agendas in Great Britain (these days now more often referred to as United Kingdom).
 
The families Justin writes about are the Morgans, Rockefellers and Rothschilds. These three names are high fruit on the Conspiracy Theory tree. The Rothschild family holds a particular venom from antisemitic Conspiracy Theorists. (Debunking the NWO spun by Rothschild family: HERE, HERE, HERE & HERE. Promoting Rothschild family NWO laced with antisemitism: HERE and HERE.)
 
I am certain that the Conspiracy Theorists will come out of the word work with Justin’s post. (Incidentally on a personal level I believe there are some facts involved in the theories, but that the theories too often go off into a ditch on the Left or the Right side of the road.) Justin’s essay is specifically an attack on Obama’s unconstitutional Executive Orders.
 
JRH 3/8/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************
Long Live Freedom
 
By Justin Smith
Sent: 3/7/2015 10:33 PM
 
Es lebe die Freiheit” [Long live freedom] – Hans Scholl’s [Jewish Virtual Library] last words (White Rose opposition to Hitler)
 
American freedom and liberty, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers’ Original Intent, are being rapidly destroyed by Obama and the Progressive Democrat fascists, who are advancing the U.S. government towards autocratic and dictatorial rule. They are destroying our Shining City on the Hill, through statist policies rife with the cancers of economic and cultural Marxism and other insidious tactics that are eradicating our traditions, national sovereignty and the historical memory of the American people, and Americans must find the determination and courage to fight this anti-American Progressive movement through every means available.
 
Too often, the Republican Party advances the Progressive agenda, inadvertently or not, through its own statist propensity and love of protected markets and monopolies, despite its protestations of being completely “conservative” and 100% for free market capitalism. During the 2008 economic crisis, fascism became the rule of the day, and the interests of the American people were sacrificed in order to save huge economic conglomerates like AIG, which were deemed “too big to fail.”
 
In 1920, H.G. Wells explained: “Big Business is in no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger the business grows the more it approximates Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to collectivism.”
 
Many men, such as the Morgans, the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds, funded the socialist takeover of Great Britain, and these very same men helped President Woodrow Wilson create the Federal Reserve Bank (centralized credit) and a heavy progressive income tax, two of the Ten Tenets of Communism; in this context, control of one-sixth of the United States economy through the Affordable Health Care Act by the federal government and future Progressive regimes, like Obama’s, puts us all on an open road to serfdom and a new authoritarian world in America.
 
Mayer Amschel Rothschild often stated, “Let me issue and control a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws.”
 
In this sense, one must question the moral clarity of vision and the political and legal understanding and knowledge of Republicans, such as Representatives Bruce Polinquin (Maine), Bob Dold (Illinois) and John Katko (New York), since they voted against the repeal of the ACA [Obamacare] in February. They were more interested in “fixing” its flaws and having replacement legislation ready. These politicians are symptomatic of the problem America faces.
 
Who do these Republicans represent after all? Certainly not conservative America.
 
Free market economies do not need the imprimatur of any government in order to decide what is acceptable to the people. Consumers must be free to decide on purchases for themselves, and health care providers should supply plans that are acceptable to the free market. If they cannot, the consumers’ purchases will guide the market, without government collusion or coercion.
 
In a July 2012 appearance on Fox News Sunday, Senator Mitch McConnell contradicts his October 2014 assertion that 60 votes would be needed in the Senate to repeal Obamacare, as he states: “The Chief Justice said (Obamacare) it’s a tax. Taxes are clearly reconcilable (in the budget). That’s the kind of measure that can be pursued with 51 votes in the Senate.”
 
Shortly after the House voted to repeal Obamacare (239 to 186) on February 3rd, 2015, Senator Ted Cruz told CNS News: “If it can be passed with reconciliation, it can be repealed with reconciliation. And we need to use every procedural means possible to stop the train wreck that is Obamacare.”
 
Following the G.B. Shaw template to advance a Utopian Hell in America [“Bernard Shaw and Totalitarianism” and “The Language of Degeneration: Eugenic Ideas in…”], Obama has used deception and subverted U.S. law. He has also formed a despotic habit of legislating from the Oval Office, which is not a legitimate and Constitutional function of the Executive Branch.
 
Far from “prosecutorial discretion”, Obama’s most recent executive order grants five million illegal aliens “executive amnesty”, social security cards, three years of Earned Income Credit back-payments and $25,000 each from U.S. taxpayer money, even though they never paid any taxes. This is illegal and unconstitutional, and Obama is breaking U.S. law, as he helps other criminals in the process.
 
Obama’s illegal “executive amnesty” is an overt attempt to change the face of America and legitimize a mass of people, who are greatly inclined to vote Democrat. This is, in large part, aimed specifically at turning Texas into a Democrat majority state, ensuring that Progressives will be virtually unstoppable election after election and far into the future.
 
Where is the aggressive action against Obama’s “executive amnesty” that Senate Majority Leader McConnell, Speaker Boehner and many other establishment Republicans promised?
 
Sadly, America learned on March 3rd that 75 pathetic Republicans had joined 182 more pathetic Democrats to fund the Department of Homeland Security, as the succumbed to the false narrative that refusing to fund DHS and Obama’s executive amnesty would adversely affect national security. This legislation also funds Obama’s executive amnesty, and in the process, it severely damages Congressional power for years to come.
 
Didn’t any of these 75 republicans consider that the large number of crimes committed by these illegal aliens against U.S. citizens is a matter of national security?
 
A brilliant thinker and founder of Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly recently exclaimed: “It’s an insult to everyone who voted to elect the Republicans in the last Congressional election. The American people clearly voted against Obama’s illegal, unconstitutional bills of all kinds … He’s a disaster for our country, and he doesn’t have our national security at heart.”
 
And now, Obama is planning an egregious infringement on our Second Amendment rights by banning 5.62 mm M855 ammo through executive order, because it pierces soft-body armor. This is a deception aimed at the eventual ban on all firearms and ammo, since 168 other rounds (e.g. .308, .223, 30.06) also pierce soft-body armor. If he proceeds, everyone should fill the Oval Office with .223 ammo, by way of UPS or 3000 feet per second muzzle velocity, depending on one’s vision for America – Let Your Conscience Be Your Guide.
 
Even in America vigilance is required to keep freedom and liberty alive. The Progressives of both parties hold, in part or whole, post-Constitutional ideas that advance Obama’s fundamental transformation, which eradicates our Founding Principles and traditional precepts concerning the rule of law. They are advancing this Progressive agenda through illegitimate, extralegal and illegal means, as they assault our American Heritage and place many Americans in an unendurable situation, which will eventually lead to armed rebellion, unless any future Statesmen can successfully repel this tide of fascism: If not, the Sons and Daughters of Liberty will fight once more in order to restore Constitutional governance and the Republic in Our Beloved America.
 
Justin O Smith
_________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Text and/or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.
 

© Justin O. Smith 

Government tells us, ‘Gun Control is for the Greater Good’


Raise Hands to Gun Control - Sieg Hiel 2

John R. Houk

© December 28, 2013

 

Leftists/Liberals have blamed gun ownership for the last decade or so for the tragic massacres that have occurred at schools, movie theaters and public locations in general. Left Wing Elitists used this hysteria over guns as a means to attempt maximum gun control legislation contrary to the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

 

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. (2nd Amendment; U.S. Constitution; via Legal Information Institute [LII] of Cornell University Law School)

 

Leftists argue that a “well regulated militia” implies government control of an organized military perhaps something like the National Guard today. The well-meaning utopian Leftists (as opposed to the Liberty-stealing power hungry Leftists) point to the wording of “being necessary to the security of a free state.”

 

If the 2nd Amendment ended with that which I just quoted they would have a decent argument. BUT the 2nd Amendment DOES NOT END THERE. The rest of amendment clause adds clarification by letting WE The People know are the well regulated militia by saying “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The Revolutionary War that liberated the 13 American Colonies from British rule occurred because citizens from everyday life of the day banded together and organized as a paramilitary group and then received a bit of on the job training as a soldier. Even during the Civil War the Union Army consisted of volunteer militias that would then be organized under the auspices of the U.S. Army but often retaining the name of the State from whence the Army Unit came.

 

The Declaration of Independence gives us excellent reasons as to why Americans should have the right to own and bear arms independent of government control.

 

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

 

READ ENTIRETY (Transcript of Declaration of Independence (1776); OurDocuments.gov)

 

The Founding Fathers did their best to craft a Constitutional government in which the people were not exploited by government despotism. The same Founding Fathers prior to the Constitution laid the potential that good government is not infallible and go down the road of despotism for some or all its citizens. Sometimes the ONLY recourse to throw off the bands of a despotic government is by the citizens rising up by reason of arms to change the power structure of government.

 

AND SO BEWARE, when our government tells you must give up your guns for the safety of the greater good, something nefarious toward Liberty is undoubtedly soon to follow. A Michael Dorstewitz article I found on Right Wing News wrote down reminisces of Katie Worthman a survivor of NAZI occupied Austria pertaining to guns. She warns, “Don’t give up your guns”. Here is the article.

 

 

JRH 12/28/13

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

Nazi survivor’s warning to Americans: ‘Keep your guns and buy more guns

 

By Michael Dorstewitz

December 28, 2013

Right Wing News

 

A survivor of Nazi-occupied Austria who sees parallels between that dark period and the United States of today has a word of warning and advice to Americans: “Keep your guns and buy more guns.”

 

Katie Worthman spoke earlier this year of what she witnessed as a child in Austria during Adolph Hitler’s rise to power, which was followed by Soviet occupation of the country. She said the Nazi takeover happened gradually, as opposed to media accounts to the contrary, according to NRA News, which reported that Worthman said:

 

In 1938, the media reported that Hitler rode into Austria with tanks and guns and took us over. Not true at all. The Austrian people elected Hitler by 98 percent of the vote by means of the ballot box. Now you might ask how could a Christian nation… elect a monster like Hitler. The truth is at the beginning Hitler didn’t look like or talk like a monster at all. He talked like an American politician.

 

Worthman said gun control also began gradually, before the Nazis eventually confiscated every firearm. According to NRA News, she said:

 

We also had gun registration. All the Austrian people… had guns. But the government said, “the guns are very dangerous. Children are playing with guns. Hunting accidents happen and we really have to have total controlled safety. And we had criminals again. And the only way that we can trace the criminal was by the serial number of the gun.”

So we dutifully went to the police station and we registered our guns. Not long after they said, “No, it didn’t help. The only way that we won’t have accidents and crimes [is] you bring the guns to the police station and then we don’t have any crimes anymore and any accidents. And if you don’t do that: capital punishment.”

So that’s what we did. So dictatorship didn’t happen overnight. It took five years. Gradually, little by little to escalate up to a dictatorship.

 

Worthman quoted Thomas Jefferson make her biggest point.

 

“When the people fear the government, that’s tyranny. But when the government fears the people… that’s liberty,” she said. “Keep your guns. Keep your guns and buy more guns.”

_________________________

Government tells us, ‘Gun Control is for the Greater Good’

John R. Houk

© December 28, 2013

________________________

Nazi survivor’s warning to Americans: ‘Keep your guns and buy more guns

 

© Copyright 2001-2012 John Hawkins

 

About Right Wings News

 

John Hawkins runs Right Wing News, Linkiest and is the co-owner of The Looking Spoon. He also does weekly appearances on the #1 in it’s market Jaz McKay show, writes a weekly column for Townhall and his work has also been published at the Washington Examiner, The Hill, Hot Air, Pajamas Media, and at Human Events.

 

Additionally, he’s also the blogosphere’s premier interviewer and has interviewed conservatives like Thomas Sowell, Mark Levin, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Steyn, G. Gordon Liddy, Dick Morris, Karl Rove, Michael Steele, Milton Friedman, Ron Paul, Jim DeMint, Jonah Goldberg, Jim DeMint, Walter Williams, Robert Novak, Ann Coulter, Newt Gingrich, & Michelle Malkin among others.

 

Additionally, John Hawkins’ work has been linked and discussed in numerous publications and on TV and radio shows including READ THE REST

RINOs Look to Dilute Second Amendment


1st-american-rev-gun-rights

John R. Houk

© March 29, 2013

 

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. (Cornell University Law School – Legal Information Institute)

 

I received an email from Dudley Brown of the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) notifying their readers that Republican Senators Chuck Grassley and Mitch McConnell are formulating a Gun Control Lite Bill as a compromise to offer to the Gun Control maniacs of the Obama Administration and the Leftist Dems in the Senate that wish to unconstitutionally nullify Second Amendment.

 

The point of the email is to stir activism for 2nd Amendment Gun Rights by flooding Grassley and McConnell with pro-Gun Rights messages with the hope of changing their mind on any 2nd Amendment-limiting legislation.

 

THE POINT I believe you should begin to perceive though is that RINOs call the shots in the GOP. AND that RINOs lean to Center-Left on issues that Conservatives find abhorrent. RINOs are willing to give up tooooo much in compromises in order pass some Republican-friendly legislation that is compliant to some constituent budget issue but ignores the larger picture of what keeps America good. Thus Leftist ideology creeps more and more into American culture making America more and more ceasing to be good.

 

To keep America good my fellow Conservatives – fiscally and socially – it is time to depart from the Republican and form a political party that does not pander Center-Left weaknesses that continually dilutes the nature of what America is.

 

In the mean time check out Dudley Brown’s email exposing the nefarious compromise being cooked up by Senator Chuck Grassley and garnering the support of Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

 

JRH 3/29/13

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Republican Senators Plotting with Obama?

 

By Dudley Brown

Sent: 3/29/13 1:15

Sent from NAGR

 

Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley has a “gun control lite” bill he’s selling to weak-kneed Senators on Capitol Hill . . .

. . . and what’s even worse, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says, “it might be something I can support.”

You would think ALL Republicans are lining up behind Senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee to support the filibuster of Harry Reid’s gun control bill — S. 649.

But that’s just not happening.

And it appears Grassley and McConnell’s “gun control lite” bill could destroy all efforts to stop Obama’s war on your gun rights when the Senate returns to Washington on April 8.

It’s unclear exactly what Grassley’s gun control bill contains, but it’s clear he’s more than willing to cut a “deal,” especially after he was the lone Republican vote with the gun-grabbers in a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

That’s exactly how we’re going to get gun control — weak-kneed Republicans buckling.

That’s why it’s vital you take action AT ONCE.

Call the offices of both Senators — Grassley and McConnell — RIGHT NOW!

INSIST Grassley and McConnell OPPOSE the motion to proceed on S. 649, SUPPORT the Paul, Cruz and Lee filibuster, and, drop their plans for a “gun control lite” bill.

Senator Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744

Senator Mitch McConnell: 202-224-2541

If you have trouble getting through on those phone lines, please click on the links below to send an email to both Grassley and McConnell.

Click here to email Senator Chuck Grassley

Click here to email Senator Mitch McConnell

Obama’s gun control point man in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid, is on the look-out for just this type of weak-kneed behavior from as many Republicans as he can find.

Grassley and McConnell are two of his top targets.

If Reid manages to pick up the support of enough Senate Republicans, Obama will get what he wants — fictitious “gun trafficking” legislation, so-called “mental health screenings” and “expanded background checks.”

Possibly even more gun control like Feinstein’s so-called “assault weapons ban” and a federal magazine ban will also be on the table.

That’s why Senator Chuck Grassley and Mitch McConnell’s history of “deal-cutting” should be so worrisome to gun owners.

In 2009, instead of whipping Republicans to oppose Obamacare at every opportunity, Grassley worked to a cut a “deal” with anti-freedom forces hell-bent on taking over the American health care system.

I don’t have to go back far to remind you that Mitch McConnell has a history of caving in to the demands of Obama and Harry Reid.

In January, NAGR members fought tooth-and-nail INSISTING Mitch McConnell not cave to Harry Reid’s demands to gut the Senate filibuster.

In the end, McConnell forfeited several of the procedural motions used with great effect by Senator Rand Paul and others to delay legislation that the Majority Leader is trying to jam through, allowing bad legislation to pass more quickly.

And how could we forget McConnell cutting a “deal” with Obama and Reid on the so-called “fiscal cliff” earlier this year?

McConnell’s “deal” gave Obama and Reid $41 in tax increases in exchange for $1 in spending cuts. Yes, you read that right.

So if Senator Chuck Grassley’s “gun control lite” bill looks anything similar to the “deals” he and McConnell have cut in recent years, your gun rights will be on the chopping block in just a matter of days.

The only force standing in the way of Reid’s gun control dreams is the vow of a filibuster by Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz.

By filibustering — opposing the motion to proceed on S. 649 –- Paul, Cruz and Lee can hold the line against gun control for the moment.

And if they hold the filibuster and prevent Reid from getting the 60 votes he needs to break it, gun owners win the first battle in the Obama administration’s war on gun owners.

That’s why it’s vital you call the offices of both Senators — Grassley and McConnell — RIGHT NOW!

INSIST Grassley and McConnell OPPOSE the motion to proceed on S. 649, SUPPORT the Paul, Cruz and Lee filibuster, and, drop their plans for a “gun control lite” bill.

Senator Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744

Senator Mitch McConnell: 202-224-2541

If you have trouble getting through on those phone lines, please click on the links below to send an email to both Grassley and McConnell.

Click here to email Senator Chuck Grassley

Click here to email Senator Mitch McConnell

Thanks — in advance — for taking action.

For Freedom,

 

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

P.S. Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley is working on a “gun control lite” bill that could give Obama much of the gun control he wants. What’s worse, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said it “might be something I can support.”

Call Senators Grassley and McConnell RIGHT NOW! INSIST they support the Paul, Cruz and Lee filibuster and drop any plans they may have for a “gun control lite” bill.

Senator Chuck Grassley: 202-224-3744

Senator Mitch McConnell: 202-224-2541

P.P.S. NAGR has just launched a massive, nationwide grassroots effort designed to mobilize gun owners against gun control. If you can, please consider chipping in $10 or $20 to support NAGR’s efforts.

 

+++++++

To help the National Association for Gun Rights grow, please forward this to a friend.

 

Help fight gun control. Donate to the National Association for Gun Rights!

____________________

RINOs Look to Dilute Second Amendment

John R. Houk

© March 29, 2013

____________________

Republican Senators Plotting with Obama?

 

The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights’ mailing address is P.O. Box 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.

BHO is Arming Syrian Radical Muslims


Jabhat al-Nusra executes Alawite Shi'ites

Jabhat al-Nusrah Assassinates Alawite Shi’ites

 

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2013

 

Yesterday I posted some thoughts on an article by Greg Campbell about the potential conspiracy of Obama and his Leftist minions in his Administration preparing to terminate the 2nd Amendment gun rights of Americans in order to squash self-protection in an economic collapse scenario. Campbell has discovered that various government agencies have ordered an unreasonable amount of hollow-point bullets without a credible explanation for such an order.

 

Along those lines Theodore Shoebat wonders why the Obama Administration is so hot to restrict gun ownership while evidence is suggesting the President has ordered the arming of al Qaeda-minded rebels against a ruthless dictator in Bashar al-Assad. Assad is an evil enemy of America and Israel as well a minion of Iran, BUT so are al Qaeda-minded rebels.

 

Realistically U.S. Foreign Policy is in the proverbial rock and the hard place. Bashar al-Assad is a genocidal dictator just like his daddy Hafez. Syria is a minion of U.S. hating Iran. As Iran’s minion Syria has been a rogue nation protecting Islamic terrorists of both Shia (Hezbollah) and Sunni (Hamas) persuasions when their agendas are to destroy Israel. Bashar al-Assad’s Syria is definitely NO friend to the USA or Israel.

 

The al Qaeda rebels in Syria is one of many rebel groups yet apparently the current most effective in battling Assad’s Syrian army. This al Qaeda in Syria calls itself Jabhat al Nusra and is affiliated with al Qaeda Iraq (AQI). AQI of course was the central insurgents that fought U.S. troops in Iraq until weakened by the success of The Surge that won over Iraqis to help the U.S. led troops because in their Muslim mind the USA was the lesser of two evils with AQI’s extreme brutality. Radical Islamic rebels in Syria particularly Jabhat al Nusra is again definitely NO friend to the USA or to Israel.

 

AND YET President Barack Hussein Obama is committed to finding back door ways to arm the Radical Islamic rebels that hate America just as much as Bashar al-Assad.

 

For America to maintain an influence in the Middle East our nation is in the unenviable position of helping two evil anti-American entities that hate our ally Israel. Helping the rebels places a monkey wrench in the Iranian agenda in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia recognizes this because it is pouring its Wahhabi money into the Syrian Rebel cause.

 

I hate to tell everyone this. Due to Iran’s hatred of Israel and willingness to help Sunni and Shia Radical Islamic terrorists in an agenda to drive Israel into the sea, the USA will eventually become embroiled in a Middle East war on behalf of Israel. UNLESS …

 

That is unless President Barack Hussein Obama is willing to throw the Jewish State of Israel under the bus disavowing our commitment of defense for whatever lame reason that is supportive of the perception of Middle Eastern peace.

 

This brings us back to Theodore Shoebat’s premise of why is Barack Hussein Obama trying to disarm Americans while arming Islamic terrorists in the Middle East?

 

JRH 2/19/13

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

Obama Wants To Disarm Americans But Arm Terrorists

 

By Theodore Shoebat

February 17, 2013

Shoebat.com

                                             

Obama wants to decree a ban on all assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons, which would apply to rifles and pistols. On this ban, Obama stated clearly:

 

I’m going to be putting forward a package and I’m going to be putting my full weight behind it… I’m going to be making an argument to the American people about why this is important and why we have to do everything we can to make sure that something like what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary does not happen again.

 

Yet, the Obama administration has been involved in providing weapons to rebels who have committed many atrocities throughout Syria. Why must Americans be disarmed and jihadists be given weapons to? Americans are simply observing a right, while the Islamists want guns to force Syria into becoming a Sharia governed state.

 

Leon Panetta, who is now retiring, and General Martin Dempsey, the principle military adviser of Obama, have both revealed that they supported a plan last year composed by Hillary Clinton and General Petraeus that would provide weapons to the Syrian rebels, who are all fighting for a jihadist cause.

 

John Mccain also supported, and still supports, this plan, saying

 

“I urge the president to heed the advice of his former and current national security leaders and immediately take the necessary steps, along with our friends and allies, that could hasten the end of the conflict in Syria”

 

Though Obama is said to have turned down this plan, he still has supported the Syrian rebellion in a very covert and elusive manner. The current administration has instead used a middle-man: Saudi Arabia, to receive American weapons and then transfer them to the hands of the jihadists.

 

Michael Kelley of Business Insider reported last year that in

 

2011 the U.S. sold $33.4 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia and $1.7 billion to Qatar as sales tripled to a record high and accounted for nearly 78 percent of all global arms sales.

 

And where did these weapons go to? Syria, where they were obtained by jihadists who would not hesitate for a second to behead any American, or any non-Muslim.

 

As one American official put it:

 

“The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it”

 

Though the U.S. is not directly sending arms to the revolutionists, it is providing support for shipping small arms such as rifles (which Obama wants to ban in the U.S.) and grenades, and therefore, is nevertheless directly supporting the rebels themselves.

 

So, to Obama Americans shouldn’t have rifles but Syrian rebels should? This dangerous distortion is just more evidence as to how supportive the current administration has been for the Islamists.

 

The American government actually expected an organized plan mapped out by the rebels that would show how Syria will be governed in the future. But they haven’t received any future plans, and the reason is that the rebels are using the Americans for the assistance but refuse to reveal their true intentions for a post-Assad Syria, since what they really desire is a Muslim Brotherhood ruled nation.

 

One Middle Eastern diplomat, who has worked extensively with the C.I.A., has said that there hasn’t been any report by the rebels as to how Syria will be ruled after Assad is removed. In his own words:

 

We haven’t seen anyone step up to take a leadership role for what happens after Assad, … There’s not much of anything that’s encouraging. We should have lowered our expectations

 

Syria is going down the road to become just another state of the future Sunni confederacy that is forming, alongside Egypt and Libya.

 

Obama said to NBC that

 

there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can’t have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids.

 

Yet, his administration is helping ship rifles and grenades to Syria, and is working with the Saudis to provide arms to Islamic renegades who themselves have severe urges to commit some of the most vile violence caught on film.

 

Just to give you a picture of how these rebels use their guns, here is a video of jihadists executing a Syrian police officer:

 

VIDEO: Implementing of the Death Sentence Against a Policeman at the Hands of Criminal Gangs (Title translated by Google Translate)

 

Another film I found shows a sadistic bunch of rebels beheading a man in cold blood while laughing and saying “Allah is greater.” If you have the heart for it, the video is found here:

 

Brutal Beheading Execution Of Prisoner By ‘Free Syrian Army’ *Warning Graphic*

 

Recent footage shows jihadists executing an innocent civilian. The killer even phones his mother to let her know the sinister act he is about to commit:

 

the execution of sunni civilians in syria .

 

In Syria right now, the most armed entity is the military, the second most equipped are the rebels, and the most defenseless are the civilians. In the midst of the fray, the civilians are the ones who suffer the most, since the Islamists have the weapons, and the military is unable to protect all places of the country at once.

 

Now, apply this to America. If a full weapons band was ever decreed, the military, the police, and the lawless would be the most armed, and American civilians helpless. Police and military personal would not be able to protect the entire country, leaving the criminals many opportunities to pick out their victims.

 

Obama and the rest of his Leftist ilk keep promoting the idea that guns are the problem, while neglecting the roots of the issue at hand: violent ideologies. All murderers, be they jihadists or spree killers, reject the philosophical idea that life is sacred. Since the Left is not pro-life, they have refused to confront this issue all together, and so are now giving the way to terrorists. The assistance to terrorists in the Middle East will provide confidence for Islamists here in America. Just take a look at the news now. Just this month, a Muslim named Yusuf Ibrahim shot to death two Coptic Christians (Hanny F. Tawadros, 25, and Amgad A. Konds, 27), decapitated them, severed their hands, and buried them in a randomly picked yard. We’re going to be seeing more of this as Islam is allowed to rise and thrive on our insane obsession on tolerance.

 

As I write in my book, For God or For Tyranny, when the Third Reich reigned, Hitler and his minions established the Nazi Weapons Act of 1938, which prohibited German civilians from owning any firearms. The Left is doing the same thing, but in a ‘nicer,’ ‘gentler,’ more ‘sensitive’ and gradual way. Only those without prudence, foresight, and some historical knowledge on how tyrannies function, would believe that the Obama administration really wants to end crime and protect children (they are all pro-choice).

 

In our Declaration of Independence, one of the stated reasons for the American Revolution was that King George

 

excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

 

If the Second Amendment is ever done away with, the only people that would be helped are the savages amongst us.

 

Theodore Shoebat is the author of the book, For God or For Tyranny

______________________

BHO is Arming Syrian Radical Muslims

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2013

______________________

Obama Wants To Disarm Americans But Arm Terrorists

 

© 2013 Walid Shoebat. All Rights Reserved.

Do NOT Trust a Govt. that Ignores the Constitution


Red Change you will begin to feel - BHO

John R. Houk

© February 18, 2013

 

Distrust of government is one foundational truth that the 13 American Colonies band together to overthrow the then unjust British government for imposing taxation without colonial representation AND a British military enforcing that taxation by stepping on the Liberties on the American colonial citizens that considered themselves equal citizens of the British Empire. Obviously the possession of arms and guns became an important issue for colonials that grew weary of a government imposing law from the rule of law from across the Atlantic Ocean in jolly London England.

 

Now President Barack Hussein Obama and his Leftist minions are using a slew of unfortunate massacres by crazy people to disarm Americans. Or if the denizens of gun control decide to compromise by allowing gun owners to continue, the government intends to know where every gun owner is and what kind of gun they own. Knowing the location and kind of gun an American citizen owns is nearly the same as disarming Americans. All the government has to do is send loyal government police to collect those weapons under some made up national emergency leading to martial law.

 

So here is something you are Americans need to be aware of. Did you know that while Obama tries to eliminate gun owner ship that several national agencies involved in law enforcement are buying ammunition in greater quantities? AND it is not just any kind of ammunition but it is hollow point bullets. Hollow points impact a particular kind of destruction penetrating barriers and ripping flesh.

 

Gregg Campbell writing for the Tea Party News Network (TPNN) asks to the effect: If Obama wants to disarm Americans so badly why are law enforcement agencies arming themselves in greater magnitude with hollow point bullets? Is there a conspiracy of government preparation for the chaos that would follow an economic collapse?

 

Read Campbell’s article and become more active in protecting your Second Amendment Rights to own and bear arms.

 

JRH 2/18/13

Please Support NCCR

******************************

As Government Seeks to Disarm Americans, the Department of Homeland Security Buys 1.6 Billion Rounds

 

Stormtroopers 

 

By Greg Campbell TPNN Contributor

February 17, 2013

TPNN

 

There’s an old saying that goes, “A broken clock is right twice a day.” And while we may be inclined to often dismiss the more conspiracy-minded assertions of political pundits that see a massive conspiracy to explain every rain puddle they step in or red light they encounter, the fact remains that as our government becomes more sinister in nature, Americans are jumping to conclusions that while seemingly outrageous, may very well be correct.

 

For instance, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, prompting much speculation amongst political pundits and casual observers of politics alike.

 

This is in addition to a purchase by the Social Security Administration of 174,000 hollow-point bullets last August. When pushed for an answer as to why the Social Security Administration was purchasing the hollow-points, an expensive round often carried by active-duty police officers for its lethality and resistance to over-penetration of the target, the Social Security Administration claimed that the purchase of ammo was for “training.”

 

At a time when the government is working to disarm the American populace, the Department of Homeland Security is simultaneously arming themselves with an amount of ammunition that could shoot every American around 5 times. Why?

 

Radio host and political pundit Mark Levin claims he knows why. On Friday night’s broadcast, Levin stated,

 

“I’m going to tell you what I think is going on. I don’t think insurrection. Law enforcement and national security agencies — they play out multiple scenarios. They simulate multiple scenarios. I’ll tell you what I think they’re simulating: the collapse of our financial system, the collapse of our society and the potential for widespread violence, looting, killing in the streets, because that’s what happens when an economy collapses.”

 

He continued,

 

“I’m not talking about a recession. I’m talking about a collapse when people are desperate, when they can’t food and clothing, when they have no way of going from place to place, when they can’t protective themselves. There aren’t enough police officers on the face of the Earth to adequately handle a situation like that.”

 

He also discussed his time in the Reagan Administration and noted,

 

“And having been close enough to law enforcement — not in law enforcement, but close enough to it in my days in the Justice Department — I expect that they’re running through these scenarios just in case. … I know why the government is arming up. It’s not because there’s going to be an insurrection. It’s because our society is unraveling… You see what’s going on in Greece, in Spain and Portugal and other parts of the world? That’s what they fear, and yet, they’ve caused it.”

 

As American take notice of the encroachments upon our Second Amendment rights, the government is simultaneously arming themselves and claiming that the purchase of 1.6 billion rounds is a cost-saving measure that buying in bulk provides.

 

Americans have historically been wary of a government working to disarm them. However, doubly as ominous is the arms race between government and the civilian population. As conspiracy theorists hail this as a sign of trouble ahead, it brings to mind another old phrase: “Just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.”

______________________

NCCR Editor: A person left a comment that I really enjoyed and thus I am also cross posting this comment.

 

JRH 2/18/13

***********************

Mac M Comment

2/17/13

 

If you look closely at the picture above, some things should jump out at you in this view, besides the Red and Blue Lights: Full body armor, a fully “up Armored” vehicle and weapons.

 

The first is that there is no Organization Identification on either the Vehicle or the personnel.

 

The weapons that they are holding are the full Military versions, which are not available to the general public. Not the AR-15 that the Government is trying to take away from the public. The AR-15 is actually just a semi-automatic rifle, which looks SCARY. But if the powers that be have their way, and depending on how it is worded, would be made illegal because of its ability to fire more than one bullet without reloading. That would also include my .22 which is semi-automatic. Its tubular magazine holds over 10 bullets, and it was made in 1928.

 

The shotgun on the left is the “Street Sweeper”, designed to deliver 0-0 Buckshot in a horizontal pattern, semi-automatic. The weapon in the middle, although you can’t really see much of it you can see the bore. .223 would be the most logical choice and that would make it an M-4, full automatic. The one on the right is the shorter version, designed for “Urban Warfare” and made to be used inside a building. And that is not counting the “Weapons Systems” of the vehicle itself.

 

I have read in different articles and seen in news programs that the DHS, FEMA, TSA and even the SSA have order[ed] multiple types of Ammo, now numbering in the Billions. It would follow logically that the weapons to fire them would have also been bought.

 

That type vehicle is the same type I saw in IRAQ while I was there. And DHS etc have several. Ask yourself “WHY?” Are they planning to put the private army that is being built in our country into some far off foreign land?

 

If you don’t think there is a Private Army being formed and supplied, you have not been watching. FEMA and DHS are graduating a class of about 250 every two weeks….EACH. It was on national news and shown on the net many times SUPPOSEDLY to assist in times of “national emergency”. How many bullets does it take to kill a Hurricane or a Flood?

 

Do you honestly think that these type weapons systems are going to be parked outside your home to protect you and your loved ones; should the Nation breakdown to roving Armed bands or gangs who are bent upon taking what you have?

 

You can call me paranoid if you wish. I prefer the labels of INFORMED AND PREPARED. That mantle fits me better than “sheeple, victim or SUBJECT”.

_________________________

Do NOT Trust a Govt. that Ignores the Constitution

John R. Houk

© February 18, 2013

_____________________

As Government Seeks to Disarm Americans, the Department of Homeland Security Buys 1.6 Billion Rounds

 

© 2012 Tea Party News Network

 

Comment edited for purposes of blogging – forgive  me Mac M.

Biden: 19 ways to bypass Congress


Obama-gun-measures- with kids present 1-16-13

I heard a clip on Fox News of President Barack Hussein Obama relating a conversation (I am uncertain if it was in person or by mail) with a kid relating to gun control. I also saw four children sitting while the President addressed publically his concept of gun control.

 

Paraphrasing from memory the President said this kid asked something like, “I know you (meaning BHO) have to wait for Congress to enact laws, but can you do something about guns?”

 

Keep in mind this is just a paraphrase. The point though is BHO is using children to justify controlling citizens’ use of guns against the Second Amendment specific Right to Bear Arms.

 

With that in mind check out this email from Matthew Staver of the Liberty Counsel reporting on BHO intentions about guns and the Second Amendment.

 

JRH 1/16/13

Please Support NCCR

*************************************

Biden: 19 ways to bypass Congress

 

By Matthew Staver

Founder and Chairman

Sent: January 16, 2013 12:09 PM

Sent by Liberty Counsel

 

According to published reports, President Obama’s “gun control” measures will include 19 Executive Orders (EOs), as recommended by Vice President Biden’s task force, that he says are within his power to execute.  Already, at least one irate Congressman has threatened to start impeachment procedures if the President follows through with his gun control agenda without regard to the legislative process.

 

Our constitutional rights are being dismantled before our eyes as the Obama axis of power rolls roughshod over the rule of law in America.  I am calling on ALL patriots to join Liberty Counsel in our “I Second the First” campaign to protect our Constitution!

 

Please see my very important update below – Mat.

 

 

John,

 

President Obama must truly believe that the legislative process is too much of a nuisance and just too bothersome to be useful.

 

You know the process I mean…the one mandated in our Constitution as established by the Founders – the process at the heart of the rule of law in our nation.

 

Perhaps the President thinks it just takes too long to establish laws lawfully. Or, maybe he thinks the Constitution is too cumbersome and his Executive Orders are a more efficient and modern alternative way to “get things done.” 

 

More likely, he is fully aware that his proposals would never pass through the lawful legislative process.  Someone on his imperial staff may have noticed that we pesky citizens can sometimes thwart the President’s best Leftist ideas before they have a chance trample all over the People’s liberties! 

 

Judging from his actions, it is even possible the President believes that the checks and balances defined by the Constitution were just fine for a young nation in the 18th Century, but that it has been necessary for the Executive Branch’s prerogatives to “evolve” to have the decisiveness required in the 21st Century.

 

Whatever the President’s thoughts, they are clearly not worthy of the Oath of Office he will renew next Monday!  That oath, laid out in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution, is simple and to the point:

 

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability,  preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

 

John, I’ll leave it to you decide if Barack Obama is fulfilling his solemn oath by undermining and circumventing the Constitution.

 

++A lawless administration in action.

 

The reality of how the Obama administration intends to operate during the President’s second term has dominated the news cycles for several days now.  President Obama, on the recommendation of Vice President Biden, is considering enacting as many as 19 Executive Orders on gun control. 

 

This is Barack Obama’s style of leadership.  Thomas Jefferson, a major contributor to the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution, called it “elective despotism.”  It is an overarching abuse of power. 

 

Barack Obama’s 19 executive power grabs on “gun control” (the number as of today, anyway – there could be a lot more coming) are likely just the beginning of this administration’s attempt to trample on the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms.

 

Here’s Liberty Counsel’s resolute position on this issue: We must “stick to our guns” and resist this tyranny! 

 

The very purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow citizens to bear arms to protect their hard-won freedom and defend themselves from future tyrants.  Yet today, we seem to have forgotten that the first battle of the American Revolution erupted when the tyrant King George’s forces marched to disarm the colonists by seizing an important powder magazine and armory! 

 

It is now clear that the Obama administration fully intends to shake off all restraint in pursuing its dangerous, “progressive” agenda – even when it infringes on Americans’ right to bear arms, exercise their religious liberties, or hold sacred their rights of conscience.

 

That’s why Liberty Counsel launched our powerful “I Second the First” campaign to tell our elected officials…

 

“We the people” demand that the federal government return to the rule of law as established by the United States Constitution!

 

We will stand together and protect our Constitution and its precious First and Second Amendments, the very heart of every American’s Bill of Rights, against radical attacks!

 

If you haven’t done so already, please click here now to join many tens of thousands of Liberty Counsel patriots in signing this powerful petition:

 

http://www.libertyaction.org/374/petition.asp

 

Whether or not you have already signed our petition, PLEASE forward it to as many like-minded, patriotic Americans as possible!

 

I am now planning to have this petition hand delivered to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, January 23rd.  By then, I would like to deliver this message with 100,000 signers. 

 

Please add your name now: 

 

http://www.libertyaction.org/374/petition.asp

 

++Congressman takes Obama’s power grab very seriously

 

Representative Steve Stockman (R-TX) has threatened to file articles of impeachment against President Obama if he institutes gun control measures through Executive Orders.

 

In a statement, Representative Stockman wrote…

 

“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment.”

 

Steve Stockman should be joined by hundreds of his fellow Congressmen! The way in which the Obama administration is operating mocks the balance of power as set out in the Constitution!

 

John, we simply cannot allow our constitutionally protected rights to be dismantled by a tyrannical president with no regard for the rule of law or the checks and balances of power built into our Constitution!

 

If you haven’t already done so, please click here now to add your name to this important petition:

 

http://www.libertyaction.org/374/petition.asp

 

In appreciation for the stand you are taking, we will send you a complimentary “I Second the First” sticker for you to display on your car, home, or anywhere you feel it will have an impact.

 

This is a citizen action that every freedom-loving American should take. If you would, after signing, please make your circle of friends aware of this campaign and the availability of our complimentary “I Second the First” campaign stickers.  

 

Thank you and God bless America!

 

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman

Liberty Counsel

 

P.S. President Obama intends to enact Executive Orders to limit, or in some cases even eliminate, gun rights. Our constitutional rights must be protected from the assaults of any despot, including this one! 

 

We’ll send your colorful “I Second the First” campaign sticker as soon as we record your signed petition.  May God bless you!

 

http://www.libertyaction.org/374/petition.asp

 

P.P.S. To see more about the work of the Liberty Counsel family of organizations, go to www.libertycounsel.com

________________________

Liberty Counsel, with offices in Florida, Virginia and Washington, D.C., is a nonprofit litigation, education and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and family.  Liberty Counsel. PO Box 540774. Orlando, FL 32854 .800-671-1776

 

 

Valued By Free Men


Bear Arms - Founding Fathers vs Dictator Socialists

Justin O. Smith provides an excellent essay on upholding the Original Intent of the Second Amendment in the face of Leftists making the attempt to circumvent the Second Amendment.

 

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. (Legal Information Institute; Cornell University of Law)

 

JRH 1/15/13

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Valued By Free Men

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 1/14/2013 12:22 PM

 

As cold as it may seem to some in light of the aftermath of the murders of twenty beautiful little children at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut… and I was shaken and my heart was torn along with all America… the facts still show that Our Second Amendment right is sacrosanct, it protects all of our other rights and responsible, sane gun owners have prevented many more crimes and deaths than the number of robberies and murders committed by armed uncaring, sometimes unhinged and mentally impaired, criminal and insane thugs. Unfortunately, Obama and the Democratic Party do not feel the same and never miss taking advantage of a crisis, and these political opportunists did not wait even 24 hours before deciding to once again attempt to infringe upon the right of each and every American to “keep and bear arms.”

Our Second Amendment states: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

How different things might have ended in Newtown if only an armed citizen, an armed teacher or teachers and an armed Student Resource Officer had been nearby on that terrible day. People still may have died, but at least the chances would have been better that the assailant would be the only one dying, rather than twenty innocent and precious children.

Banning semiautomatic rifles just because they look like military weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines will not prevent every future horrific act of violence or eliminate evil from our society. In 1927 an insane former school superintendent killed children in North Carolina by detonating an ammonium-nitrate bomb inside their school. Criminals will always find ways to acquire weapons and use them to commit acts of violence.

Vice-President Joe Biden’s gun control commission is on track to offer proposals to the White House and Congress for new gun control laws and regulations shortly before this piece makes print. With his usual gall, temerity and arrogance, Obama stated that if Congress does not act in a timely fashion on this issue, he will enact gun controls by fiat and executive order. Nowhere is there any authority given to the U.S. President to countermand or modify any amendment to Our U.S. Constitution. Some on the Left, such as NY Mayor Bloomberg, are even counseling Obama to regulate guns through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, which once again, not only bypasses Congress as the Legislative Branch of government but also violates the U.S. Constitution.

No clause in the U.S. Constitution can be interpreted to give Congress, the President, any of the States’ legislatures or the District of Columbia a power to disarm the people or to control guns to the point that many now aspire. This flagitious attempt to abrogate Our Second Amendment Right… God given… is occurring in plain sight through incremental actions and under a general pretense in blind pursuit of inordinate power. This is what men such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John Locke had in mind when they gave the American people the Second Amendment in order to prevent such abuse of power, preserve the rest of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, restrain the federal government and keep America and Americans Free… And in his ‘Commentaries on the Constitution’, Joseph Story, the first U.S. Chief Justice, considered the right to keep and bear arms as “the palladium of liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers…”, which deters tyranny and enables the people to  overthrow their government should it prove necessary!

In the ‘Federal Gazette’ June 18, 1789, Tench Coxe wrote: “As civil rulers…may attempt to tyrannize…and…might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article (2nd Amend) in their right to keep and bear arms.” No writer of that era disputed or contradicted Coxe’s analysis that the Second Amendment protected the people’s right to keep and bear their private arms.

“Swords and every other terrible implement of the soldier are the birth-right of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people,” wrote Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper #29. Hamilton, like many Americans today, did not view the right to keep and bear arms as limited to only active militia members or the National Guard.

Former Tennessee National Guard commander Richard A. Hamblen was closer to the Founding Fathers’ intent than the Supreme Court ruling in the United States v Miller-1939, which provided most of the rationale for all gun control laws since then. As Hamblen answered charges of possessing nine unregistered machine guns in 2009 (6th Circuit Court of Appeals), he stated, “There are no qualifiers on the Second Amendment. There are qualifiers on the Fourth (also the Fifth), so if the Founders had intended to restrict the right to keep and bear arms, they knew how to do it.” Under the Second Amendment each and every single one of us are well within our rights if we wish to carry Mr. Ronnie Barrett’s world renown .50 caliber automatic rifle down Broad St in Murfreesboro, TN.

Debra Maggart failed to retain her seat in the Tennessee House of Representatives after blocking a bill allowing people to keep guns locked in their cars in parking lots; and, while fairly recent Supreme Court rulings, District of Columbia v Heller-2008 and McDonald v Chicago-2010, upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right rather than only a collective militia right, they have failed to address the Framers’ Original Intent to allow all Americans to carry their arms in an unrestricted environment. Regardless of this truth, most states require a “fee” (registration or background) in order to obtain a “license” (concealed carry license) before keeping and bearing a firearm; a federal and/or state “tax” (firearms/ammunition sales “tax”) is always levied at the time of a firearm transaction: A state cannot impose a license, tax or fee on a Constitutionally protected right, Murdock v Pennsylvania-1942, and requiring licensing or registration of any Constitutional right is itself unConstitutional, Follett v Town of McCormick SC-1944. Any citizen’s license to openly carry any handgun or rifle in public is the U.S. Constitution!

As the debate on gun control continues, it will be interesting to hear the Left-Progressive Democrats’ response, as they attempt to reconcile their desire to take our guns with the Darling of the Left and Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s 2010 statement that the individual’s right to bear arms has “binding precedent” in the Supreme Court and “is settled law”. And, as late as December 22, 1012 even Obama mouthed the words of political expediency, “Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms,” but that is not what his record shows, nor is it how the Left has misinterpreted this amendment for a long time.

As an American citizen, I repudiate the Progressive Democrats’ view on the Second Amendment and any attempt to ban semiautomatic weapons that have perfectly legitimate uses, under the guise of conducing (sic) our safety. One does not become something other than American in order to solve American problems, especially once one understands the uniqueness of our free institutions and the freedoms found in America… unknown in any other land. And this is all the more reason to resist any erosion of our individual rights. When our Founding Fathers forged a land “conceived in Liberty”, they did so by “watering the Tree of Liberty with the blood of Tyrants” with musket and rifle. They reacted to attempts to dissolve their free institutions and to keep them from establishing a free nation as a nation of armed men. And… when they sought to record forever a guarantee of their rights, they devoted one full amendment out of ten to nothing but the protection of their right to keep and bear arms against government interference. All Americans should give proper recognition and respect for this right most valued by Free Men!

“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves?” -Tench Coxe (Pennsylvania Gazette Feb 20 1788)

 

By Justin O Smith

_____________________

© Justin O. Smith

 

Edited by John R. Houk

Assault on the Second Amendment


1st American Rev - Gun Rights

Mark Alexander very, very much defends the Second Amendment.

 

JRH 1/13/13

Please Support NCCR

************************

Assault on the Second Amendment

‘I Will Not Comply’

 

By Mark Alexander

January 10, 2013

The Patriot Post

 

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” –Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

 

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Patriots, I call on you to pledge: “We, the People, affirm that we will support and defend Liberty as ‘endowed by our Creator,’ enshrined in our Constitution and empowered by its Second Amendment, against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Sign the 2A pledge!

 

Though tens of millions of American Patriots have already said it, the time has come for one of us to go to the mountaintop and shout it so the whole world can hear it.

 

I hereby make this public declaration: In keeping with the oath I have taken in the service of my country, I will “support and defend” Liberty as “endowed by our Creator” and enshrined in our Constitution, “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Accordingly, I will NOT comply with any defensive weapons ban instituted by executive order, legislative action or judicial diktat, which violates the innate human right to defend self and Liberty, as empowered by “the right of the People to keep and bear arms.”

 

What does this mean?

 

I will neither register with, nor surrender to the government, any weapon in my possession. I further declare that I am not in possession of weapon, weapon component or ammunition that has not been lawfully acquired for lawful purposes, including defense of self and family, home and property, and most importantly, defense of Liberty in accordance with the Second Amendment.

 

I have spoken with my family and our Patriot Team about the potential consequences of this public declaration, both for our families and for our company. They fully understand the implications of my very public declaration of civil disobedience in defense of Liberty and Rule of Law. They understand that I have and will abide, first and foremost, by my oath to support and defend our Constitution — the very oath that Barack Obama and his NeoCom cadres have solemnly sworn, but stand in abject violation of same.

 

Since publishing the first issue of The Patriot Post more than 16 years ago, I have made clear that one constitutional prohibition on the central government trumps all others, and that is the proscription against federal infringement of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.”

 

Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote, in his eminent “Commentaries on the Constitution,” “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

 

Story was James Madison’s appointee to the High Court, and Madison himself wrote in Federalist No. 46, “The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.”

 

Just after Obama’s re-election, I warned that he would attempt to render neutral the only substantive obstacle between Liberty and his avowed political agenda of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” — the Second Amendment.

 

I noted that, per their standard political playbook, the socialists and their Leftmedia promoters would wait on some tragic murder spree, and, in keeping with Obama’s game plan to “never let a serious crisis go to waste,” use that event as fodder to seize guns.

 

A month after writing those words, a mentally deranged sociopath used a firearm to kill children and adults in a Connecticut elementary school. Before the bodies of murdered children had even been removed from Sandy Hook Elementary, Obama was, shamefully, stacking their coffins to use as a soapbox for his latest and greatest assault on the Second Amendment — a renewed effort to not only ban the future sale of many defensive weapons, but register them in order to eventually confiscate them.

 

Obama has framed this debate as a contest between “public safety” and the NRA — those who “cling to guns or religion” — and insists that the Second Amendment was instituted to protect “hunting and sport shooting.” He has called for a so-called “assault weapons” ban — I note “so-called” because it would more accurately be described as a “defensive weapons” because such arms are purchased, first and foremost, for defense not assault.

 

Obama claims, “We’re a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We’ve got a long tradition of hunting…” If by “hunting” he means hunting down those who offend Liberty, then he is correct.

 

Some Leftist governors and legislators have already adopted Obama’s “hunting” misinformation memo. New York’s Andrew Cuomo proposed “the toughest assault weapons ban in the nation” this week, asserting, “We respect hunters and sportsmen. This is not taking away peoples’ guns. I own a gun. I own a Remington shotgun. I’ve hunted. I’ve shot. That’s not what this is about. It’s about ending the unnecessary risk of high-capacity assault rifles. No one hunts with an assault rifle! No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer!”

 

If, by “risk of high-capacity assault rifles,” he means risk that they might be used for their intended purpose — to defend Liberty against the tyranny of socialist politicos and those who do their bidding — then I understand his concern.

 

The fact is, these weapons, which Obama and his cadres want to eradicate, account for only a tiny fraction of homicides in the U.S. Obama and Biden know that — which is why they have reframed their gun ban rhetoric around saving a few lives rather than many: “As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking,” said Biden.

 

According to the FBI’s public safety statistics, almost 10 times as many people are murdered annually with knives, hammers and bare hands than are murdered with the type of weapon used in the Connecticut attack. Furthermore, from the time the Senate first banned so-called “assault weapons” in 1994, through the expiration of that ban in 2004 and to the present day, the number of such weapons held by the people has increased by 2.5 million, while murders have dropped by almost 50 percent. In other words, more guns equate to less crime. But Obama is not one to let hard facts interfere with his sacred socialist agenda.

 

So, why all the focus on so-called “assault weapons” — what is the Left’s real agenda? (That question was rhetorical.)

 

Patriots, this contest is most assuredly not between public safety and the NRA, but between Leftists and Essential Liberty.

 

Benjamin Franklin spoke timeless words to this contest: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In the case of those who would give up Essential Liberty for nothing more than the perception of a little temporary safety with more gun prohibitions, they will, ultimately, lose both.

 

In addition to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s renewed “comprehensive” ban on a long list of defensive weapons, which she plans to reintroduce in two weeks, Obama appointed Joe Biden to be his executive branch lightning rod for this subterfuge.

 

Three weeks ago, Attorney General Eric Holder, who once suggested “we should really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way,” implied that Obama might use an executive order to undermine the Second Amendment. This week, Joe Biden confirmed that, saying, “The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required. It’s critically important that we act.”

 

On that note, enough is enough.

 

Liberty is “endowed by our Creator,” not determined by executive decree or congressional legislation or judicial diktat. Liberty is an innate human right. It is a gift from God, not from politicians.

 

I have, herein, publicly declared that I will not comply with any executive order, legislative action or judicial diktat, which violates our Constitution, or the innate human right to defend self and Liberty. I know that there are tens of millions of Patriots who are, likewise, committed. As our Founders affirmed in the last line of the document codifying their rejection of tyranny: “For the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

 

Fellow Patriots, I can handle the consequences of my very public declaration of intent to reject Obama’s assault on the Second Amendment. I am not asking you to make the same public commitment, though I know most of you would step up to the line.

 

However, I am asking you to join me in your pledge to affirm: “We, the People, affirm that we will support and defend Liberty as “endowed by our Creator,” enshrined in our Constitution and empowered by its Second Amendment, against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

 

Please make that affirmation today and encourage others to do the same.

 

Sign the 2A pledge!

_____________________________

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2013 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

 

 

Protect Life, Liberty and Property from the Left


Careful What Wish For - BHO toon

John R. Houk

© January 10, 2013

 

I do not own a gun however I am not pro-gun control. I am a gun rights kind-of-guy along the lines of the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

 

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

 

Leftists like to point out the part that says, “A well regulated militia”. This is as if militia equals a Federal government administered military. The next part brings greater context: “being necessary to the security of a free state”. The implication is that citizens of a sovereign State in the USA can ban together to aid in protecting their State.

 

The Revolutionary War was fought largely by a volunteer army to throw off the oppression of an unjust British government. The British chased that Blue Coat American army all over the place. In the mean time the British deprived Americans of their Private Property as well as confiscating weapons so they could not be used against the British army.

 

The Right to Bear Arms is the right of the “people”. Thus this excludes government control of civilian weapons because those civilian citizens have the right to protect their property from an oppressive government (whether foreign or domestic) or crime.

 

President Barack Hussein Obama is about to use the excuse of crazy people perpetuating massacres as a reason to limit the kinds of arms private citizens can own. Just like everything else this President has down to move the USA slowly to transform into a Socialist society like Europe, this President will eventually confiscate American arms just like the European nations have deprived their citizens to own fire arms.

 

This President is about to take a shot at the Second Amendment by attempting the Presidential power of the Executive Order to begin to take away the gun rights of American citizens to protect themselves from criminal acts  as well as from foreign and corrupted domestic governments.

 

Americans – We the People – need to stand against the intentions to track and disarm citizens depriving of the right to bear arms to protect Life, Liberty and Family.

 

Ann Coulter’s recent article is what started me on the path of indignant thinking concerning our government’s attempt to assault the Constitution.

 

JRH 1/10/13

Please Support NCCR

**********************************

Doing the research the N.Y. Times won’t do

Ann Coulter helps out Old Gray Lady with digging up actual facts on gun control

 

By Ann Coulter

January 9, 2013

WND

 

In Sunday’s New York Times, Elisabeth Rosenthal claimed, as the title of her article put it, “More Guns = More Killing.” She based this on evidence that would never be permitted in any other context at the Times: 1) anecdotal observations; and 2) bald assertions of an activist, blandly repeated with absolutely no independent fact-checking by the Times.

 

There is an academic, peer-reviewed, long-term study of the effect of various public policies on public, multiple shootings in all 50 states over a 20-year period performed by renowned economists at the University of Chicago and Yale, William Landes and John Lott. It concluded that the only policy to reduce the incidence of, and casualties from, mass shootings are concealed-carry laws. The Times will never mention this study.

 

Instead, Rosenthal’s column proclaimed that armed guards do not reduce crime because: “I recently visited some Latin American countries … where guards with guns grace every office lobby, storefront, ATM, restaurant and gas station. It has not made those countries safer or saner.”

 

So there you have it: The cock crowed, then the sun came up. Therefore, the cock’s crowing caused the sun to come up. Rosenthal went to Harvard Medical School.

 

Here’s a tip: High-crime areas are often bristling with bulletproof glass, heavy-duty locks, gated windows and armed guards. The bulletproof glass doesn’t cause the crime; it’s a response to crime. On Rosenthal’s logic, hospitals kill people because more people die in hospitals than outside of them.

 

(In any event, the Lott-Landes study didn’t recommend armed guards, but armed citizens.)

 

Rosenthal also produces a demonstrably false statistic about Australia’s gun laws, as if it’s a fact that has been carefully vetted by the Newspaper of Record, throwing in the true source only at the tail-end of the paragraph:

 

“‘After a gruesome mass murder in 1996 provoked public outrage, Australia enacted stricter gun laws, including a 28-day waiting period before purchase and a ban on semiautomatic weapons. … Since, rates of both homicide and suicide have dropped 50 percent …,’ said Ms. Peters, who lobbied for the legislation.”

 

“Ms. Peters” is Rebecca Peters, a George Soros-funded, Australian anti-gun activist so extreme that she had to resign from the International Action Network on Small Arms so as not to discredit the U.N.-recognized organization – which isn’t easy to further discredit.

 

Could the Times’ public editor weigh in on whether unsubstantiated quotes from radical activists are now considered full and complete evidence at the Times?

 

It would be as if the Times headlined an article, “Abortion Increases Risk of Breast Cancer” with the sole support being a quote from Operation Rescue’s Randall Terry. (Except Terry would have evidence.)

 

Whether or not the homicide rate went up or down in Australia as a result of strict gun-control laws imposed in 1997 is a fact that could have been checked by Times researchers. But they didn’t, because facts wouldn’t have given them the answer they wanted.

 

Needless to say, the effect of Australia’s gun ban has been extensively researched by Australian academics. As numerous studies have shown: After the gun ban, gun homicides in Australia did not decline any more than they were expected to without a gun ban.

 

Thus, for example, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology, the homicide rate has been in steady decline from 1969 to the present, with only one marked uptick in 1998-99 – right after the gun ban was enacted.

 

The showstopper for anti-gun activists like Ms. Rosenthal and Ms. Peters is the fact that suicides by firearm seemed to decrease more than expected after the 1997 gun ban.

 

But so did suicides by other means. Something other than the gun ban must have caused people to stop guzzling poison and jumping off bridges. (Some speculate that it’s the availability of anti-depressants like Prozac.)

 

Curiously – and not mentioned by Rosenthal – the number of accidental firearms deaths skyrocketed after Australia’s 1997 gun ban, although the law included stringent gun training requirements.

 

It turns out, until the coroner has certified a death as a “suicide,” it’s classified as “unintentional.” So either mandatory gun training has led to more accidents, or a lot of suicides are ending up in the “accident” column.

 

Most pinheadedly, especially for a graduate of the Harvard Medical School, Rosenthal says: “Before (the gun ban), Australia had averaged one mass shooting a year. (Since then,) there have been no mass killings.”

 

Mass murder is a rare enough crime that any statistician will tell you discerning trends is impossible. In this country, the FBI doesn’t even track mass murder as a specific crime category.

 

After Truman Capote’s “In Cold Blood” killers slaughtered the entire Clutter family in Holcomb, Kan., the murder rate in that quiet farming town went up 400 percent in a single year! Was it Holcomb’s big showing at the 4-H club competition that year?

 

Totally unbeknownst to Elisabeth Rosenthal, Australian academics have already examined the mass murder rate by firearm by comparing Australia to a control country: New Zealand. (Do they teach “control groups” at Harvard?)

 

New Zealand is strikingly similar to Australia. Both are isolated island nations, demographically and socioeconomically similar. Their mass murder rate before Australia’s gun ban was nearly identical: From 1980 to 1996, Australia’s mass murder rate was 0.0042 incidents per 100,000 people and New Zealand’s was 0.0050 incidents per 100,000 people.

 

The principal difference is that, post-1997, New Zealand remained armed to the teeth – including with guns that were suddenly banned in Australia.

 

While it’s true that Australia has had no more mass shootings since its gun ban, neither has New Zealand, despite continuing to be massively armed.

 

The only thing Australia’s strict gun-control laws has clearly accomplished is increasing the amount of violent crime committed with guns immediately after the ban took effect. Of course, Times reporters don’t have to worry about violent muggings, rapes and robberies because they live in doorman buildings.

 

For those who can’t afford fancy doorman buildings, bad journalism kills.

_______________________

Protect Life, Liberty and Property from the Left

John R. Houk

© January 10, 2013

______________________

Doing the research the N.Y. Times won’t do

 

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

 

 

2nd Amendment and Sandy Hook Massacre


2nd Amendment

John R. Houk

© December 21, 2012

 

The Sandy Hook Massacre in Newtown, CT is a tragedy on the magnitude of the Aurora Theater Massacre and the Columbine Massacre. The Sandy Hook Massacre is the worst gun slaughter of people to have happened in America.

 

I personally expected the American Left and the Left oriented Mainstream Media to use the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School as a crisis too large to pass up to remove guns from gun owners. Indeed the call for extreme gun control has arisen strongly. The gun control call has even infected some Conservatives and GOP Conservatives. I understand the outcry. Matricide and the murder of 20 young elementary age students in their school is so heinous any normal American would want some kind of prevention to stop the massacre of children from occurring.

 

Is part of the solution to take away guns from people that have a Second Amendment right to own guns for self-protection in a society in which law enforcement clearly is a bit behind in the axiom of ‘serve and protect.’

 

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. (2nd AmendmentThoughts)  

 

Personally I do not own a gun. The biggest reason for not owning a gun is the lack of training in operating a gun. I would be that person that accidentally shot himself by doing something stupid. However, if or when the time arrives in which civil unrest due to government chaos or the increase of criminal behavior threatened my family or me I would immediately learn how to operate a gun safely and protect the family from any kind of hostile intent.

 

Because of the precarious future that is possible I definitely do not support any gun control that takes guns away from private citizens. America’s citizens still have the Second Amendment right to protect themselves. Taking guns away from gun owners is not a solution. Perhaps Nancy Lanza (Adam Lanza’s mother) should have taken greater care to keep her guns from a mentally disturbed or ill son. She and 26 other people (20 children) would be alive today if she had responsibly locked her guns away from her psycho-murdering son.

 

Gun Rights organizations and individuals have developed a theory on the Sandy Hook Massacre that there must have been a different scenario of the massacre than the one that is becoming to be the official description of events. Frankly at this point the Conspiracy Theory sounds like a bit of stretch to offer plausible deniability for a spontaneous murder spree with unprotected guns. I’ll take a wait and see attitude on the plausibility; nonetheless you should be aware of the conspiracy that is placed out by pro-gun users.

 

The Conspiracy Theory proffered by Niall Bradley with a lot of detail can be read HERE. Bradley believes he has acquired more information that shows the Sandy Hook Massacre may have had foreknowledge before occurrence.

 

The moment it emerged that he was alive and was taken into police custody in Hoboken, New Jersey, many if not all of the statements previously made to the press by anonymous ‘law enforcement officials’ regarding Ryan Lanza and his connections could no longer have been known beforehand.

 

In the following passage of my previous article on the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, I made the following reference to Ryan Lanza being the named second suspect caught armed in the adjacent woods:

 

Perhaps most astonishingly, this suspect arrested in the woods was named in an Associated Press report as 24-year-old Ryan Lanza. The original report has long since vanished of course, but you can see it referenced here. This was despite the fact that Ryan had already been named as the deceased suspect inside the school, lying next to two handguns.

 

I have since found the original Associated Press report, which in fact states that it was “Ryan’s younger brother”, Adam Lanza, who was arrested in the woods. So let’s take a closer look at this revealing report.

 

2:25 p.m. CST — A FoxNews report said:

 

witnesses said a handcuffed man, dressed in camouflage was led out of a nearby woods by officers who reported to the shooting. The individual is Lanza’s younger brother, according to the Associated Press.

 

That Fox News report has since been ‘updated’, but here is the full original text and screenshot of the Associated Press report which places both brothers at the scene, one dead (Ryan), and the other arrested (Adam):

 

AP source: Suspect is 24; younger brother held

Pete Yost, Associated Press
Friday, December 14, 2012

 

AP Article Screen Capture

AP_confirming_Ryan_second_susp

 

© SOTT.net

Washington (AP) – A law enforcement official says the suspect in the Connecticut school shootings is 24-year-old Ryan Lanza and that his younger brother is being held for questioning as a possible second shooter. The law enforcement official says the boys’ mother, Nancy Lanza, works at the school as a teacher.

The official also said Ryan Lanza’s girlfriend and another friend are missing in New Jersey.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official said the suspect is dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because the source was not authorized to speak on the record about the developing criminal investigation.

 

Who exactly is this ‘law enforcement official’ that has access to the premier news agency in the country, and on behalf of which state agency does he/she work for?

How did they even know at this point that Ryan had a younger 20-year-old brother when there are no public records of Adam Lanza since 2009 and the two brothers had not seen each other since 2010, as claimed by Ryan? How could they have known on Friday morning that Ryan had a girlfriend and that she and another friend were missing in New Jersey? How did they even know that Ryan had any connection to New Jersey at all? The Lanzas’ mother was dead at this point and their father only found out later through a reporter asking him about Adam, who had by then become the ‘lone gunman’ in the official narrative.

Surely the first point on the timeline at which anyone can even begin to discover these things about Ryan is the moment he piped up on Facebook and said “Hi, I’m alive, I didn’t do it, and I live and work down here in New Jersey!” How could ‘law enforcement officials’ have pieced together details of his life but not known that he was actually still alive in the very location where they stated that his girlfriend had gone missing?

The only way they could have found out all this about Ryan Lanza was if they had 100% positively identified him as the ‘dead gunman inside the building’, then worked backwards from there by investigating who his next of kin were, then questioning family members, then discovering where he lived and worked, that he had a girlfriend and that she and a friend were missing, etc.

Such things take time to investigate, especially as they would involve cross-checking with police and other officials in New Jersey. And even before that, somebody there would first have had to receive local reports of two missing people before any connection could be made to the shooting in Connecticut.

Even if we granted these ‘law enforcement officials’ superfast detective powers, they would not have been able to travel back in time to rewrite the script regarding how they knew what they knew about the Lanza brothers, particularly Ryan. Because from the moment the official line was forced to deviate towards saying that Ryan Lanza was no longer the ‘dead shooter inside the building’, it became impossible for these ‘law enforcement officials’ who “weren’t authorised to speak” (but heck, were telling lots of people lots of things that morning anyway, and whose credentials enabled them to speak through the Associated Press and other media outlets) to have retrospectively discovered all these connections of Ryan.

The only logical conclusion I can draw at this stage is that somebody or some group with high-level media access had FOREKNOWLEDGE of the crime, foreknowledge that is revealed by their ‘anonymously’ leaking to the press things which they could not otherwise have known, foreknowledge that exposes their hand in originally planning to use both Lanza brothers as patsies. (Sandy Hook massacre: Evidence of official foreknowledge?; by Niall Bradley, sott.net, 20 Dec 2012 19:35 CST)

 

Here is a ‘What if?

 

What if Bradley is theorizing accurately? Why wasn’t Adam Lanza stopped? And if Lanza was caught alive in some field outside of the school, why is there an official story Adam Lanza found dead as if he committed suicide? Also, could Lanza have had companion perpetrators in the slaughter?

 

The plausibility of the Conspiracy Theory should be something to think about as this email that was forwarded to me from the National Association for Gun Rights.

 

JRH 12/21/12

Please Support NCCR

****************************************

Obama announces comprehensive gun control package

 

Sent by Christine H

Sent: Dec 20, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Sent by NAGR

 

Yesterday morning, Barack Obama held a press conference confirming our greatest fears…

He’s launching an all out campaign to pass comprehensive gun control:

   1. A so-called “Assault Weapons” Ban,

   2. A “High-Capacity” Magazine Ban, and

   3. A ban on ALL Private Firearms Sales without government permission.

And he wants the legislation on his desk as early as January.

If you haven’t signed your Second Amendment Protection Petition that Dudley sent to you below, please do so right away.

If you have signed, please forward this to anyone you know cares about our gun rights.

— Christine H

_________________________

Obama says “Ban Guns”

 

By Dudley Brown

December 18th, 2012 5:43 PM

NAGR

 

Dear Christine,

Our Second Amendment rights are hanging by a thread.

Anti-gun hysteria is reaching a fever pitch.

And President Obama just announced he’s on the warpath — and he’s not taking any prisoners.

Christine, this is an all-out EMERGENCY.

And unless you act today, I’m afraid we’ll be staring at a gun control nightmare.

At a press conference immediately following the Connecticut shooting, President Obama made his intentions clear: He’s prepared to ram his anti-gun agenda down our throats.

And sadly, the national media is more than willing to help him get his wish . . .

MSNBC anchors are calling for outright gun “confiscation!”

Even prominent Republican backers like Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch is loudly calling for new gun control schemes, and Fox News commentator Bill Kristol is calling for “serious hearings.”

The establishment gun lobby is nowhere to be found, deleting their Facebook page in an effort to run and hide from the fight.

And all their phony “friendships” are finally being exposed for exactly what they are.

You see, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid — who they handed nearly $5,000 to during his last reelection — just announced plans for Senate movement on gun control.

And another NRA “A-rated” Democrat, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, is joining others saying he’s changed his mind on gun control.

Even supposedly “pro-gun” Republicans, like Senator Chuck Grassley (IA), Lindsey Graham (SC) — even Marco Rubio (FL) — are happily playing into the gun-grabbers hands by calling for a total review of our gun laws!

If all this sounds like a recipe for disaster, it’s because it is . . .

Whenever a tragedy — a revolting grave crime — is committed, gun-grabbers ALWAYS rush to “cash in.”

Always.

With the national media as their accomplice, they drive up mass hysteria, fear and IGNORE basic facts that don’t fit their anti-gun agenda, like:

 

>>> “Gun Free Zone” signs do not protect anyone from violent madmen;

Like we saw in the Aurora movie theater and the Newtown, Connecticut Elementary School, all these signs do is guarantee killers never face anyone who can defend him or herself;

 

>>> Guns don’t commit crimes.  Criminals do;

In fact, guns are used 2.5 MILLION times every year to deter or stop crimes.  In fact, at the recent mall shooting in Portland, Oregon, the gunman took his own life after being confronted by a shopper carrying a concealed handgun.  And there are literally dozens of stories of shootings being stopped by legally-armed citizens over the past few decades;

 

>>> Gun Control DOES NOT WORK.  PERIOD.

Anti-gun utopia Mexico — whose anti-gun laws are so harsh it has only one gun shop in the whole country — is virtually owned by violent gangs who don’t beg “permission” from government officials before they get their hands on guns.

 

This is exactly what’s happening right now.

So if you want to ensure your Second Amendment rights are protected into the future, I’m counting on you to act IMMEDIATELY.

Being involved in the fight has never been more important.

First, I need your signed Second Amendment Protection Petition to help drown out the anti-gun spin machine with today.

In the coming weeks I’ll flood Congress with tens of thousands of pro-gun petitions proving you and I are serious about protecting our rights and we’re not backing down!

 

Unfortunately, it gets worse.

After the results of the 2012 elections, the gun-grabbers were already demanding action from President Obama and his anti-gun Democrat allies.

Michael Bloomberg and Sarah Brady went to bat for President Obama in two straight elections, and they want something to show for their efforts.

Now, President Obama believes he’s been handed the perfect “excuse” to enact a laundry list of anti-gun schemes, including:

 

*** The UN “Small Arms Treaty.” This dangerous Hillary Clinton-backed Treaty is nothing more than a massive GLOBAL gun control scheme designed to register, ban and confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens;

 

*** A new so-called “Assault Weapons” Ban.  President Obama loudly supported passage of a new ban during his reelection campaign, and Senator Diane Feinstein just announced she’ll be introducing a new bill in the new Congress;

 

*** Mandatory federal political “mental illness” screening to buy a firearm.  Should such a scheme pass, the federal government would be granted the new power to strip away the Second Amendment rights of any American at will — just because they don’t like your race, your religion or the political candidates you support;

 

*** Sweeping ammo bans or bans on magazines holding just a handful of rounds.  With any one of these schemes, Congress could effectively outlaw many commonly-owned rifles and handguns.

 

That’s why it’s so important you act IMMEDIATELY.

 

Without our action, the ONLY voices the politicians will be hearing will be that of the gun-grabbers and their pals in the media.

If that continues, you and I will lose and lose BIG.  Bank on it.

The good news is, you and I can fight back.

But we must mobilize quickly.

We must ensure every politician in Washington, D.C. understands America does not need new gun control laws . . .

It’s more freedom.

It’s more good guys armed with the power and the ability to stand up to deranged bloodthirsty loons and STOP them.

You know how we’ll make the politicians understand that?

By ensuring every single one of them knows they’ll pay the price with their political careers for voting for gun control schemes.

But to do that I’m going to have to mobilize Second Amendment supporters from all over the country.

I’ve already authorized my staff to begin broadcasting our message across the web on sites frequented by politically-active pro-gun voters.

And we’re expanding from there:

Mail, email, web videos, and even hard-hitting radio, newspaper and TV ads if I can raise the resources.

I want to mobilize up to 14 million Americans.

Not next month.  Not next week.  But NOW.

You see, there’s no time to waste.

Of course, such an ambitious program won’t be cheap.  But it’s our one shot at winning.

So please sign your Second Amendment Protection Petition TODAY.

But also, please chip in just $10, $20, or even $30.

Thanks in advance for answering the call in this tough time.

    For Freedom,

 

   Dudley Brown
   Executive Vice President

 

P.S. President Obama just announced he’s on the warpath — and he’s not taking any prisoners — this is an all-out EMERGENCY.

With politicians from both parties caving to the gun-grabbers, it’s never been more important to fight back.

I’ve already begun a campaign to mobilize up to 14 million pro-gun Americans to prove to the politicians we still stand for the Second Amendment and we’re not backing down!

But such an ambitious program isn’t cheap.

So after you sign your Second Amendment Protection Petition please chip in just $10, $20, or even $30.

Together you and I will weather this storm and continue to stand for freedom.

________________________

2nd Amendment and Sandy Hook Massacre

John R. Houk

© December 21, 2012

________________________

Obama announces comprehensive gun control package

 

And

 

Obama says “Ban Guns”

 

The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation.  The National Association for Gun Rights’ mailing address is P.O. Box 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404.  They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org/

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.