|
|
Red Alert: Baboon Plans Executive Actions to Eventually Fully Disarm the American People!
By: Bulov on: 13.01.2013 [02:34 ] (131 reads)
| (4125 bytes) [nc] |
 |
Red Alert: Baboon Plans Executive Actions to Eventually Fully Disarm the American People!
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/red-alert-obama-plans-executive-actions-to-eventually-fully-disarm-the-american-people_012013
The Intel Hub
www.TheIntelHub.com
January 11th, 2013
Reader Views: 6,939
by Alex Thomas
In a move seen by many as a step toward fully disarming the American people, Vice President Joe Biden has publicly announced that President Obama is considering broad executive action to limit the 2nd Amendment rights of American citizens nationwide.
After a meeting with various pro gun control groups and with a plan for more meetings in the days ahead, Biden publicly announced something many have feared long before the horrific Sandy Hook Shooting.
“The president is going to act, there are executives 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.”
“As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.”
In another statement, this time covered by the Weekly Standard, Biden also let it be known that Obama plans to target not only the retail sale of weapons, but also private firearm sales.
“And so the kinds of things that there’s an emerging set of recommendations, not coming from me but coming from the groups we’ve met with,” said Biden today, before a closed door meeting on gun control.
“And I’m going to focus on the ones that relate primarily to gun ownership and the type of weapons can be owned. And one is, there is a surprising — so far — a surprising recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks.
Not just close the gun show loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales.”
The meeting was attended by numerous gun grabbing groups including the Brady Campaign, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and several state gun control groups.
John Feinblatt, an aid for notorious globalist, eugenicist, NYC Mayor, and gun grabber Michael Bloomberg, attended the meeting and, in a report published by the New York Times, outlined what Obama is supposedly seeking.
“Mr. Feinblatt said the general consensus among the representatives of advocacy organizations at the meeting was to seek broad changes to law that could include an assault weapons ban, limits on high-capacity magazines for ammunition, better enforcement measures, a gun-trafficking statute and improved data for background checks.”
Sadly, the fact remains that many of the most prominent voices in the so called gun control movement have publicly stated their belief that most if not all guns should be fully banned.
As we have covered many times in the last few weeks, leading gun control advocate Senator Dianne Feinstein has publicly stated her goal of disarming each and every American.
In a clip taken from a 1995 episode of 60 Minutes, Feinstein is seen and heard making the startling declaration that the only reason she didn’t pass a full-scale gun ban is because the votes in Congress simply weren’t there.
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for anoutright ban, picking up every one of them…. Mr. and Mrs. American turn em all in. I would have done it.”
Now, fast forwarding 18 years later, Feinstein is set to introduce new legislation that includes the banning of over 800 firearms and the registration and fingerprinting of millions of American gun owners.
From Feinstein, to Bloomberg, to Obama, the REAL goal is the full scale disarmament of the American people, complete with plans for gun confiscation for those that refuse to be disarmed.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by The Intel Hub of www.TheIntelHub.com.
by Bulov on 13.01.2013 [04:22 ] |
|
|
The Second Amendment is not negotiable –Distro 1/4/2013 never forget that
h ttp://www.founderstruth.org/Home/tabid/40/EntryId/493/The-Bill-of-Rights-is-NOT-Negotiable.aspx
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms — much like the Right of Free Speech — is not negotiable. Its protections are not subject to the whims of majority opinion, nor the screaming demands of hyperventilating media personalities. All the social media trolls and opinion writers in the world can comment all they want on the Second Amendment, yet the individual right to keep and bear arms remains immutable.
Just like the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment is not negotiable. No Governor, Senator or President has any power whatsoever to banish the Second Amendment, and any who attempt to oppose it only brand themselves as criminal traitors to the United States of America. Any active effort to eradicate the Second Amendment outside of law — without going through the proper process of state ratification for Constitutional amendments — is, by definition, an act of sedition against the United States of America and its people.
Ironically, many who viciously attack the Second Amendment do so by invoking their free speech protections under the First Amendment. Yet they seem blind to the realization that the First Amendment itself is only made possible by the Second Amendment which balances power between the People and the government, ensuring that the individual right to bear arms serves as a check and balance against the monopoly of violence every government inherently seeks.
Disarmament of the populace is always the first step to depriving them of their civil rights and human rights. Without the right to bear arms, there is no right to free speech, no right to due process, no right to trial by jury and certainly no right to be secured against unreasonable search and seizure. A government with a monopoly of force is a government that respects no boundaries and honors no limits.
Grasping this point requires competent thinking, which is why so many who now flourish in America on the popularity of pop culture idiocy fail to understand it. It is intellectually lazy to blame gun rights for violence, requiring no depth of thought or reason. Only someone of higher awareness and possessing the aptitude for multi-layered thinking can realize the critical importance of distributed firepower in stopping government violence against the People. As Ron Paul recently said, "Government security is just another kind of violence."
Ron Paul gets it. He understands that an imbalance of power in the hands of government inevitably leads to mass violence waged against the People. Those who are currently screaming for the population to be disarmed do not realize that in seeking to prevent one kind of violence (school shootings), they are unleashing a far more disastrous and horrifying violence by allowing the government to monopolize physical power over the citizens. This is a mistake that has been repeated throughout history, often at the cost of tens of millions of destroyed lives. Click here to watch my short video documentary that lays out these facts in more detail.
The Second Amendment was put in place precisely for the purpose of making sure that future Americans would not fall for the same mistake yet again. That's why it is the second highest amendment, right after the right of free speech, indicating its crucial priority in the enumeration of sacred rights that must be protected at all costs.
The very politically incorrect truth about the Second Amendment
h ttp://xrepublic.tv/node/1595
“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.”
My note:
The US Constitution was written to restrain the government. No amendment is more important for this purpose than the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment was written so the power could be kept with the citizenry in the face of a tyrannical government. It was well understood the Constitution acknowledged certain rights that could not be limited by government.
Quotes from Founders:
h ttp://www.founderstruth.org/Home/tabid/40/EntryId/502/The-Second-Amendment-Where-s-the-Line.aspx
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
– George Washington
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.
–Patrick Henry.
The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.
–Samuel Adams, debates & Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87.
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
–Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-B.
To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them.
– George Mason
What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.
– Thomas Jefferson
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn’t.
– Ben Franklin
(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
–James Madison.
Senator Dianne Feinstein,
Ht tp://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/30/Marine-Tells-Di-Feinstein-No-Ma-am-Over-Gun-Grabbing
I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.
I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.
I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.
I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.
We, the people, deserve better than you.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012
|
by Bulov on 13.01.2013 [04:23 ] |
|
|
Do you really want to know why I need an assault rifle?
I don't need it for hunting. I don't need it for home protection. So I echo the sentiment of many gun control advocates; Why do I need an assault rifle, with a high capacity 30-round clips no less?
Here is why.
I need an assault rifle because I live under the rule of a government who thinks it has the right to take away my assault rifle; a government that shipped my well paid hi-tech job to China and India and now idiotically wonders what happened to economy google “How Offshoring Has Destroyed the Economy”,
a government that imposes by brutal force massive racist discrimination against me (the European American) in hiring, promotions, scholarships and college admissions called euphemistically “Affirmative Actions”,
a government that introduced forced integration in 1960-present.. goole “busing and white flight”, as a result Blacks rape 36 000 White Women every year. Many of them get infected with aids and die! Google: “African American males committed 36,000 rapes of White women in one year” and “ rape of Hugh Christopher Newsom, age 23 and Channon Gail Christian, age 21”.
a government that removed by force the 10 Commandments from my school , 10 commandments that says “ I shall not kill”,
a government that have committed over 50 million abortions (killing unborn children) since Roe v. Wade in 1973 and does not feel slightest remorse,
a government that promotes euthanasia doctor assisted suicide (killing people by injection)
a government that awards Presidential Medal of Freedom to Madeleine Albright, Jewish US Secretary of State, who just stated that 500000 dead Iraqi Children was : “we think the price is worth it.”..look it up on youtube,
a government that is headed by psychopath called Obama who in Pakistan alone, killed 168 children by way of drones!
a government that uses force to take my money away from me, who charges me rent (property tax) to live in my own home:
a government that commits acts of war without the consent of the people, who murders it's own citizens without probable cause or due process;
a government that has monopolized the currency with which I can trade my goods and services, then devalued that currency through inflation and taxation;
a government that uses the tyranny of “democracy” rather than the freedom of a republic.
To put it bluntly, I need an assault rifle in the event that I might have to declare my independence from a tyrannical government.
I'm statistically unlikely to ever shoot an intruder in my home. I'm statistically unlikely to ever be in the position to stop one of these rare mass killings at a school, as these things happen far less often than the media would have you believe.
So, how likely is it you will use your assault rifle to prevent a school shooting? Not very likely at all. However, how likely is it that you will need your assault rifle for the purpose of protecting your rights from a tyrannical government?
Well, the fact that we are having this conversation not only shows that it is increasingly likely, but it also clearly demonstrates the reason why the right to bear arms is unalienable.
When a tyrannical government uses it's assault rifles to take away my rights, it would be beyond immoral to expect me to defend those rights with my grandpa's shotgun. That is why I need an assault rifle.
Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright when asked on CBS's 60 Minutes (May 12, 1996) in reply to Lesley Stahl's question "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” answered; “think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”
Note: Albright also said that we are in Iraq to defend our freedom way of life, our democracy which is based on our constitution and first and second amendment. This is why we killed those 500 000 Iraqi kids.
so.. if the next year another sick young kid will blast 20 children in one of US schools away with his mom’s rifle or pistol and if you asked me if keeping the second amendment is worth of all those children lives? My answer will be : “— we think the price is worth it.” …I will start second guessing myself if the number of children will go from 20 to 500 000.
|
|
RSS feed for articles and news
